Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: btbw

ORIGINAL: denisonh

Plauisible results given the conditions:

Partly cloudy
No radar
No heavy AA
Negligible CAP
39 B-17s (that is a signioficant amount of ordanance)
Very large ships at anchor
(With nothing to really disturb the B-17s, they could make some really good runs)

The only "bug" is your decision to disband your CVs within range of significant Allied 4Es.

Really i dont understand how base can affect on ability of LB choose target and attack it individually.
Plese stop appeal to history when B-17 damage something. If you want compare with RL then provide example how B-17 attacks only flattops in port with evvectivness of dive bomber.
My opinion is game mechanics in that cause wrong and should distribute damages between ships with may be one flattop as main target and few close stayed or stayed on the way of raid.

@Jaroen
Targetting for raid of LB in port attack wrong. Despite on high accuracy during that bombing. Look into history facts - B-17 can hit AREA.

ORIGINAL: Gräfin Zeppelin

ORIGINAL: Richrd

I wonder how many times the Tirpitz was bombed before it finally rolled over. By the way, is it still there?

Some large parts of her are still there afaik.

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Yes, you have a point. I agree heavies are a bit too accurate. This is no secret just part of the game. It is not a bug though, just one more aspect of the game that you will have to get used to.

ORIGINAL: btbw

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Yes, you have a point. I agree heavies are a bit too accurate. This is no secret just part of the game. It is not a bug though, just one more aspect of the game that you will have to get used to.

Accuracy to high yes, but it not main problem.
4E LB going on targets waves by waves.
See what happen:
Air raid of 4E LB going on port DIVIDED by waves of 1-6 planes. It ridicolus. Usable formation for level bombers was BOX. Only size and dimensions of box varied. No individual attacks for raid. It not Recon flight or Naval strike where 1-2-3 planes free to choose direction for attack and target. How you imagine 40 warbirds crossing course of each other? Or defensive shooting by gunners in chaotic flight of 40 potential victims? Never heard how friendly fire hit ships (from AAA), planes (from defense guns and even bombs)? It because you totally dont understand problem of organisation air raid.

1st wave 7 planes for example - leader see CV Soryu - dive for attack, scoring 1-2 hits.
Really? As i said before accuracy of level bombing was low so for gain 1 hit even in target like CV need more planes then just 6. My calculation is 12-13 planes per possible hit. All funboys who wanna flood here with lucky strike must first find how much planes flied without any hit and compare result. War statistic bad for funboys - 1% in naval strikes or 30% in area bombing (area, not pin-point).

2nd wave 6 planes - same target. 1-2 hits.
Well if 2nd wave follow leader strike it ok. For example recon found CV repairing in certain place, leader planned attack and direct raid via local orientirs. Above target just a few corrections and raid heading on attack course. Now only hig accuracy a problem cuz 1+2 wave must scoring only 1 hits, not 2-4.

3rd wave 5 planes - target CV Kaga. 1-2 hits.
Again too high accuracy. If we have deal with naval strike then ok - open place, good visibility, staying target, no flak, low fighter presence - it all add points to make successful hits. May be even 2, not 1. But port attack it different thing.
Not alone ship - so choosing target hard. Even so big target like CV. Bunch examples when pilots think that destroyer under their feet it battleship and merchant is fleet carrier. In port you can add camo on ships so bomber cannot divide ship from buildings. Some people remembering how Brest attacked by Brits and scoring hits. But do they remember these ships was masced and only weeks of recon + local intel provide them finally place to where target bombs. Same for Tirpitz - only few minutes left before smoke completely close target, but nazi dont got this chance. So how we see port attack it area attack with predefined coordinates of targetted ships. For LEVEL BOMBERS. Tactical bombers like Mitchells of course can strafe, skip-bomb, glide and level bombing everyting in port what they choose. Just because they have maneur for change targets and some surveliance ability over target.
B-17 have only bombsight and low turrets for obscure. And that mean when bomber incoming close to port - he maintain course on predefined target (with correction from visible marks like alone buildings, water tower etc). Yes, LEADER can redirect raid to one of biggest ship or in couple ships for better results. But leader CANNOT redirect sections on individual targets and distribute them between them. Also raid planning have predefined direction and heights of attacks. Broke plan? Got bombs on your plan. No one dont hear about smoke from bomb hits? PH fo example. Initial plan have TB first, DB after it so smoke from bomb hits dont hide targets. It was broken and result was as we know, but it can be better if signal from leader was definitely and correctly translated. And it attack bombers which can close to targets on distance when see what socks wearing captain. What will see LB from 13k feet if raid attack individually on port? First explosion near and in target - viola, smoke close target, good luck with pin-point targetting. I read about effectivness of level bombing - each attack on target lowering chance to hit area for next planes by 1.5 times. So in our example first wave (lol of course this attack cannot be done wave by wave but ok) can make 75% accuracy in 300000sqm or 1 bomb in target like CV, then next wave can make 50% accuracy and may be 1 bomb if dice roll was lucky. It all. All other hits can be random and spread around whole area. And of course NO INDIVIDUAL TARGETTING OF WAVES.

4th wave 5 planes - target CV Kaga, 1 hit if not 2 before.

5th and 6th waves 3+2 planes - target CV Shokaku, 1 hit.

rest of waves - target BB Kirishima and port, 1 hit to BB and 2 to port.

So in 1942 level bombers can divide targets and attacks them with inflicting at least 1 hit when they stayed in port. Many modern bomber pilots drool when see this result. I wonder why we need all this AGM, corrected bombs, huge amout of sensors, phase arrays if this mission can be easy solved by iron-bombing?
What must be in AAR in really?
1-3 hits to main target like CV Soryu (found by recon and targetted by formation fo B-17 with adeguate amount of bombs used on targets for score at least one hit... dammnit any air command officer have methodical papers where these digits printed and he plan attack guided by it)
1-2 hits to random ships (stayed near impact of bomb spot from raid)
2 hits or more to port (cuz it have SAME probability for hits, we remember ship stayed close to port so half of area around ship it harbour water, another pierce.)
And completely different from situation in game rigth now.
B-17 like dive bombers in their attack on Rabaul. Is it fair for wargame make unreal advantage for LB?

ORIGINAL: YankeeAirRat
I would also let you know that in real life level bombers attacking large targets and even small targets in a port attack.

ORIGINAL: YankeeAirRat

I would also let you know that in real life level bombers attacking large targets and even small targets in a port attack. Just look up the USS Sea Lion where Japanese bomber with a less accurate bomb site then the Norden sight were able to score hits on the submarine while it was docked at Cavite Naval Yard in the Philippines.

ORIGINAL: YankeeAirRat

I am sorry but your link doesn't work.

ORIGINAL: YankeeAirRat

Dude,

Your not reading the combat report the right way. The bombers were on a port attack. Your ships were docked in port. Ergo, they were valid targets to be attacked by the bombers in accordance with the port attack routine. All ships docked in port are attacked at some level by aircraft attacking that port. It wasn't like your ships were in a task force in the same location. Rather the game treats ships disbanded in port as being tied up to the pier and basically being extensions of the port. I can tell this since the combat report you posted way back in page 1 states that you also lost 5 men and some supplies in the attack as well. The lost of men only happens when they attack a port and not a task force. So that means to me, that a massive wave of bombers came across the port and just unloaded on the port. It just happened to be that the way they flew a couple vics of bombers over flew your ships in the abstracted yards in the port and were heavily damaged as bombs all fell around them.

ORIGINAL: btbw

Dude, you dont understand. LB attacked not port but ships. And they attacked not ALL ships docked by like in nice carrier battle biggest and best targets. It what make port attacks unadequate.

ORIGINAL: noguaranteeofsanity

ORIGINAL: btbw

Dude, you dont understand. LB attacked not port but ships. And they attacked not ALL ships docked by like in nice carrier battle biggest and best targets. It what make port attacks unadequate.

The B-17s were definately flying port attack, they scored hits on the port and it says 'Port Attack' in the breakdown of attacking aircraft.

But basically what you seem to be saying, is that playing as Japan, you would prefer your first turn attack on Pearl Harbor left the 'biggest and best' ships alone and instead attacked the far less important targets such as PT Boats and Destroyers? Or would that simply mean the start of another thread by you, explaining how port attacks are borked? You do realise you cannot have it both ways? They are both port attacks, after all.

Finally, ask yourself this question, if you were in command of those B-17s, would you attack the port itself, or the half-dozen capital ships that were either anchored or docked in Noumea Harbour? Which do you think would be the more important target?

ORIGINAL: btbw

Level bombers above PH? Something new each day!

ORIGINAL: btbw

ORIGINAL: noguaranteeofsanity

ORIGINAL: btbw

Dude, you dont understand. LB attacked not port but ships. And they attacked not ALL ships docked by like in nice carrier battle biggest and best targets. It what make port attacks unadequate.

The B-17s were definately flying port attack, they scored hits on the port and it says 'Port Attack' in the breakdown of attacking aircraft.

But basically what you seem to be saying, is that playing as Japan, you would prefer your first turn attack on Pearl Harbor left the 'biggest and best' ships alone and instead attacked the far less important targets such as PT Boats and Destroyers? Or would that simply mean the start of another thread by you, explaining how port attacks are borked? You do realise you cannot have it both ways? They are both port attacks, after all.

Finally, ask yourself this question, if you were in command of those B-17s, would you attack the port itself, or the half-dozen capital ships that were either anchored or docked in Noumea Harbour? Which do you think would be the more important target?

Level bombers above PH? Something new each day!