LRCAP abuse

[HansBolter]

Why is it that no one has ever implemented a house rule to limit the abuse of the design flaw of the 400-500 mile range of effective LRCAP?

I see lament, after lament, after lament over the uber weapon of B17s operating at 6000 feet and repeated mention of standard house rules to limit their effectiveness by forcing them to operate at the historical altitude of 15000 feet. I have never once seen anyone suggest reigning in the single most uber weapon in the game: 500 mile ranged LRCAP. There is no other single design flaw in the game that is as imbalancing as LRCAP at the "normal" range of a given plane type. LRCAP should have a set maximum range for both sides no matter what type of plane is flying it.

Game, after game, after game I see one common theme. Japanese cakewalk bombardment runs on PM covered by LRCAP from Rabaul. The same thing is done with covering bombardment runs on Luganville from Lunga. I've even found myself doing it now since it seems to be the standard Japanese operating procedure. Frankly, I'm starting to feel ashamed of myself for doing it. When, and if, I win a game, I want to have some self respect in tact. I want to win because of my skills and good decision making, NOT because the game designers handed me a cakewalk as a result of a design flaw I could exploit.

Historically, If the Japanese could have covered TFs south of Gili Gili with LRCAP from Rabaul, don't you think they would have. The simple fact of reality is that they couldn't. They had to bring carriers down to fairly close range to be able to cover this kind of move. That is exactly what precipitated the battle of the Coral Sea.

CAP is about maintaining a presence all day long. It's one thing to expect a squadron to be able ot escort a bombing mission, or execute a sweep mission at the limit of their "normal" range, it is completely ludicrous to expect a squadron to maintain a significant enough presence to have an effective CAP ALL DAY LONG at the limit, or near limit of their operational range. The way normal CAP works only a small portion of teh planes allocated to CAP are in teh air at any one time. The remainder are fueld and ready on teh airstrip and are expected to climb rapidly to assist the standing CAP with teh interception. How, exactly, do the planes fuled and ready on the airstrip manage to reach a location 400-500 miles away in time to assist the small numbers of planes flying over the TF? The reality is that shuttles of groups of fighters would be passing back and forth all day long to maintain some SMALL measure of coverage over the TF. In the game, this small percentage of the entire dquadron being present over the TF is sufficient to scare the pants off of bomber squadron commanders so they end up cowering in fear on the airbases and never sorty against the TF.....yet another serious design flaw.

Personally, I do not kow what the actual limits were on the range of effective LRCAP, but it is fairly easy to deduce that it was NOT 400-500 miles. Is anyone who posts on these boards knowledge anough on the subject to be able to assist the player base in establishing some house rules to limit this game breaking design flaw and bring it into conformance with reality?

The other more important question is do any of the Japanes players have sufficient moral integrity to stop abusing and exploiting this design flaw by agreeing to a house rule limiting it. I have chosen to operate B17s at 15000 feet regardless of whether my opponent presses me on it and establishes a house rule mandating it. From now on I will stop abusing and exploiting the design flaw of LRCAP at the normal range of a given plane type regardless of whether or not my opponent presses me on it and establishes a house rule mandating it. I want some self respect in tact when the game ends. Does it mean I won't be able to cakewalk to an easy victory with the Japanese? You bet it does. Guess what, that's what's supposed to happen!

[SuluSea]

You make some good points Hans but playing devils advocate, the Japanese did use Hamps, float planes from the R Area Force and Zekes from land bases as LRCAP, assuredly not at the numbers you're probably seeing.

[Miller]

If the IJN player continually LRCAP fleets heading to PM from Rabaul he will soon have no Zeros left due to high ops losses, plus morale of the pilots will fall making them useless in combat. Therefore I would not be too bothered about it.

I understand your point about LRCAP not being able to cover a target all day, I think the game does reflect this in a way......you will find the further the distance from the home airfield, less firing passes will be made by the CAP due to lack of time over the objective.

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: SuluSea

You make some good points Hans but playing devils advocate, the Japanese did use Hamps, float planes from the R Area Force and Zekes from land bases as LRCAP, assuredly not at the numbers you're probably seeing.

It isn't so much the numbers as the range. Allowing Zeros from Rabul to cover TFs south of Gili Gili means the Japanes nver need to risk their carriers, nor do they need to risk their LBA by operating them from forward bases such as Lae or Buna. The same is true in the Solomons where they can cover bombardment runs from Lunga instead of having to deploy to Irau where they would be subject to having their bases bombed. It's the "I can do this with no risk and complete impunity" that ruins the game.

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: Miller

I understand your point about LRCAP not being able to cover a target all day, I think the game does reflect this in a way......you will find the further the distance from the home airfield, less firing passes will be made by the CAP due to lack of time over the objective.

That has NOT been my experinece. My opponents make endless bombardment runs, day after day after day as if fatigue is somehow "turned off". This has gone on endlessly for weeks and my opponent sstill somehow seem to have plenty of Zeros.

The point is though that the lesser number of firing passes never becomes a factor as the mere presence of the LRCAP prevents the bombers from ever flying against them.

[fuelli]

I would tend to agree that the effectiness of the LRCAP in the game is far below the effectiness of CAP over a Base but still too strong. And I agree with Hans on the fact that unescorted bomber groups will not attack simply becaus of the presence of LRCAP. Max range, numbers and combat effectiness of aircraft taking part related to the range of LRCP is something that could need some more adjustments in my opinion.
But do not forget the other side of the medal. Fighters on LRCAP can become cannon fodder for a well escorted strike.

[Miller]

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

ORIGINAL: Miller

I understand your point about LRCAP not being able to cover a target all day, I think the game does reflect this in a way......you will find the further the distance from the home airfield, less firing passes will be made by the CAP due to lack of time over the objective.

That has NOT been my experinece. My opponents make endless bombardment runs, day after day after day as if fatigue is somehow "turned off". This has gone on endlessly for weeks and my opponent sstill somehow seem to have plenty of Zeros.

The point is though that the lesser number of firing passes never becomes a factor as the mere presence of the LRCAP prevents the bombers from ever flying against them.

I admit that is a problem.

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: fuelli

But do not forget the other side of the medal. Fighters on LRCAP can become cannon fodder for a well escorted strike.

Yes, but that would only come into play if the Japanese player was dumb enough to do it in range of Allied fighter escorts, which is usually not the case. [;)]

[fuelli]

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

ORIGINAL: fuelli

But do not forget the other side of the medal. Fighters on LRCAP can become cannon fodder for a well escorted strike.

Yes, but that would only come into play if the Japanese player was dumb enough to do it in range of Allied fighter escorts, which is usually not the case. [;)]

Good point! Without the P-38 this will really be a rare occasion.

[tocaff]

Well at least I know that Hans isn't relating this problem to our game as my bombardment forces that hit PM had CV support, much to his chagrin.  I do use LRCAP on a rotational basis to cover bases such as Irau or Tulagi from Lunga though.  I even will fly from Lae to cover Dobdura or Buna during landings there after which LRCAP from there to PM I would imagine to be OK.

Otherwise I agree that LRCAP is something that gets abused in the short term, but in the long run it's not sustainable.

[Kingfisher]

Just curious, is there a progressive decline in the number 'on station' the farther the target is from the base?

[DEB]

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

Why is it that no one has ever implemented a house rule to limit the abuse of the design flaw of the 400-500 mile range of effective LRCAP?

I see lament, after lament, after lament over the uber weapon of B17s operating at 6000 feet and repeated mention of standard house rules to limit their effectiveness by forcing them to operate at the historical altitude of 15000 feet. I have never once seen anyone suggest reigning in the single most uber weapon in the game: 500 mile ranged LRCAP. There is no other single design flaw in the game that is as imbalancing as LRCAP at the "normal" range of a given plane type. LRCAP should have a set maximum range for both sides no matter what type of plane is flying it.

Game, after game, after game I see one common theme. Japanese cakewalk bombardment runs on PM covered by LRCAP from Rabaul. The same thing is done with covering bombardment runs on Luganville from Lunga. I've even found myself doing it now since it seems to be the standard Japanese operating procedure. Frankly, I'm starting to feel ashamed of myself for doing it. When, and if, I win a game, I want to have some self respect in tact. I want to win because of my skills and good decision making, NOT because the game designers handed me a cakewalk as a result of a design flaw I could exploit.

Historically, If the Japanese could have covered TFs south of Gili Gili with LRCAP from Rabaul, don't you think they would have. The simple fact of reality is that they couldn't. They had to bring carriers down to fairly close range to be able to cover this kind of move. That is exactly what precipitated the battle of the Coral Sea.

CAP is about maintaining a presence all day long. It's one thing to expect a squadron to be able ot escort a bombing mission, or execute a sweep mission at the limit of their "normal" range, it is completely ludicrous to expect a squadron to maintain a significant enough presence to have an effective CAP ALL DAY LONG at the limit, or near limit of their operational range. The way normal CAP works only a small portion of teh planes allocated to CAP are in teh air at any one time. The remainder are fueld and ready on teh airstrip and are expected to climb rapidly to assist the standing CAP with teh interception. How, exactly, do the planes fuled and ready on the airstrip manage to reach a location 400-500 miles away in time to assist the small numbers of planes flying over the TF? The reality is that shuttles of groups of fighters would be passing back and forth all day long to maintain some SMALL measure of coverage over the TF. In the game, this small percentage of the entire dquadron being present over the TF is sufficient to scare the pants off of bomber squadron commanders so they end up cowering in fear on the airbases and never sorty against the TF.....yet another serious design flaw.

Personally, I do not kow what the actual limits were on the range of effective LRCAP, but it is fairly easy to deduce that it was NOT 400-500 miles. Is anyone who posts on these boards knowledge anough on the subject to be able to assist the player base in establishing some house rules to limit this game breaking design flaw and bring it into conformance with reality?

The other more important question is do any of the Japanes players have sufficient moral integrity to stop abusing and exploiting this design flaw by agreeing to a house rule limiting it. I have chosen to operate B17s at 15000 feet regardless of whether my opponent presses me on it and establishes a house rule mandating it. From now on I will stop abusing and exploiting the design flaw of LRCAP at the normal range of a given plane type regardless of whether or not my opponent presses me on it and establishes a house rule mandating it. I want some self respect in tact when the game ends. Does it mean I won't be able to cakewalk to an easy victory with the Japanese? You bet it does. Guess what, that's what's supposed to happen!

What a rant! Pick up the rattle you just chucked from your pram.

[DEB]

ORIGINAL: HansBolter


It isn't so much the numbers as the range. Allowing Zeros from Rabul to cover TFs south of Gili Gili means the Japanes nver need to risk their carriers, nor do they need to risk their LBA by operating them from forward bases such as Lae or Buna. The same is true in the Solomons where they can cover bombardment runs from Lunga instead of having to deploy to Irau where they would be subject to having their bases bombed. It's the "I can do this with no risk and complete impunity" that ruins the game.

It seems you want to find an excuss to denigh the Japs one of the few advantages that they historically had. If you try hard enough I am sure you could find a similar example for the Allies. Perhaps you need to play the Japs more ( or don't you like losing ). You seem like a bad loser type to me.

[Ike99]

In the game, this small percentage of the entire dquadron being present over the TF is sufficient to scare the pants off of bomber squadron commanders so they end up cowering in fear on the airbases and never sorty against the TF.

Set your fighter groups at Port Moresby on escort with your bombers on Naval attack.

¨...the expected enemy CAP must not be too great for the expected escorts to handle (roughly 1 escort is needed for every 2 CAP, but the ratio is greater for escorts for longer range missions).¨

[Kingfisher]

ORIGINAL: DEB

It seems you want to find an excuss to denigh the Japs one of the few advantages that they historically had.

Care to cite any historical data confirming the Japanese routinley ran LRCAP from Rabaul to GG or Lunga?

Hans is not talking about escort missions, but LRCAP.

[anarchyintheuk]

ORIGINAL: Ike99

In the game, this small percentage of the entire dquadron being present over the TF is sufficient to scare the pants off of bomber squadron commanders so they end up cowering in fear on the airbases and never sorty against the TF.

Set your fighter groups at Port Moresby on escort with your bombers on Naval attack.

¨...the expected enemy CAP must not be too great for the expected escorts to handle (roughly 1 escort is needed for every 2 CAP, but the ratio is greater for escorts for longer range missions).¨

Until you get P38s there isn't a fighter w/ range to escort to the BB or CA bombardment jump off point.

[Ike99]

Until you get P38s there isn't a fighter w/ range to escort to the BB or CA bombardment jump off point.

In early game mine Port Moresby with the Allied submarines and then place the submarines in the bombardment path, deep water.

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: Ike99

In the game, this small percentage of the entire dquadron being present over the TF is sufficient to scare the pants off of bomber squadron commanders so they end up cowering in fear on the airbases and never sorty against the TF.

Set your fighter groups at Port Moresby on escort with your bombers on Naval attack.

¨...the expected enemy CAP must not be too great for the expected escorts to handle (roughly 1 escort is needed for every 2 CAP, but the ratio is greater for escorts for longer range missions).¨

Ike, I appreciate the sound advice from an experienced player, but the way the Japanese players exploit this is to keep the bombardment TF out of range of the Allied escorts so the bombers won't ply against the LRCAP.

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: DEB

ORIGINAL: HansBolter


It isn't so much the numbers as the range. Allowing Zeros from Rabul to cover TFs south of Gili Gili means the Japanes nver need to risk their carriers, nor do they need to risk their LBA by operating them from forward bases such as Lae or Buna. The same is true in the Solomons where they can cover bombardment runs from Lunga instead of having to deploy to Irau where they would be subject to having their bases bombed. It's the "I can do this with no risk and complete impunity" that ruins the game.

It seems you want to find an excuss to denigh the Japs one of the few advantages that they historically had. If you try hard enough I am sure you could find a similar example for the Allies. Perhaps you need to play the Japs more ( or don't you like losing ). You seem like a bad loser type to me.

Grow up. Try siting one example of the Japanese exploiting the "advantage" of effective LRCAP at 400-500 mile range. The Japanese NEVER made bombardment runs on PM covered by LRCAP from Rabaul because they simply couldn't! I AM playing the Japs, and I'm playing them in scenario #16 where they have to live with the horrible handicap of NOT having the Midway carriers. I REFUSE to play the Japs in Japanese Fan Boy Wet Drean scebarios like #17. I don't want a cakewalk. I want to have to work for a victory. Try slinging mud at a target you can actually make it stick to you miscrant.

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: Ike99

Until you get P38s there isn't a fighter w/ range to escort to the BB or CA bombardment jump off point.

In early game mine Port Moresby with the Allied submarines and then place the submarines in the bombardment path, deep water.

Again, sound advice Ike. I do this but have not had much luck with it. The Bombardment TFs are centered around BBs which never enter the minefields. It seems strange that the CAs and DDs also never enter the minefields when they are in a TF with BBs. I keep wondering if they stand off and don't bombard, only serving as escorts for the BBs or if the game engine is giving them a free ride, allowing them to bombard with impunity because only the BBs are taken inot account with regard to bombardment distance and minfield depth.