Strategic Bombing of Japan

[ny59giants]

Has the high effectiveness of Allied strategic bombing been addressed in AE?? In stock and mods it is very easy to hit a base and almost wipe out the HI or another economic asset in just one turn if enough 4e bombers get through.

[Japan]

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

Has the high effectiveness of Allied strategic bombing been addressed in AE?? In stock and mods it is very easy to hit a base and almost wipe out the HI or another economic asset in just one turn if enough 4e bombers get through.

The trick mr. ny59giants... the trick is to never let them get Strategic Bombing range to Japan in the first place... [;)]

But seriously, after Reading Albert Spears Book about the effects, or rather limited effects of the Bombing of Germany, then it is my impression that the Strategic Bombing in WITP is way to powerfully, of course it is B29's and not B17's... but Spear talks about a 3-6% Industrial Loss in a local region, if it was severely bombed over and over for a period of 8 weeks, so If you can do 80% [8|][8|] in WITP then its off the mark by a bit.. But to me that is no problem at all, because it is a lot of things who is off the mark, and I see it a bit as an Alternate Universe..


The games biggest flawed in my opinion, is that you can fly bombers over many bases with 500 fighters without getting intercepted, as long as your target is another base or location.

[Nikademus]

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

Has the high effectiveness of Allied strategic bombing been addressed in AE?? In stock and mods it is very easy to hit a base and almost wipe out the HI or another economic asset in just one turn if enough 4e bombers get through.

Its still pretty easy to achieve hits.

[SuluSea]

ORIGINAL: Japan

The games biggest flawed in my opinion, is that you can fly bombers over many bases with 500 fighters without getting intercepted, as long as your target is another base or location.

Man you're like the Banzai Bunny.......





if the game is so broke why even play it?

Bombers didn't normally pass over well defended airfields [or any land bases if at all possible] unless it was the target plus in WITP the hexes are 60 miles, someone explained that to you just last week

[Nikademus]

actually thats me when i play the Japan side............caution? whats that??

[Charles2222]

ORIGINAL: Japan

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

Has the high effectiveness of Allied strategic bombing been addressed in AE?? In stock and mods it is very easy to hit a base and almost wipe out the HI or another economic asset in just one turn if enough 4e bombers get through.

The trick mr. ny59giants... the trick is to never let them get Strategic Bombing range to Japan in the first place... [;)]

But seriously, after Reading Albert Spears Book about the effects, or rather limited effects of the Bombing of Germany, then it is my impression that the Strategic Bombing in WITP is way to powerfully, of course it is B29's and not B17's... but Spear talks about a 3-6% Industrial Loss in a local region, if it was severely bombed over and over for a period of 8 weeks, so If you can do 80% [8|][8|] in WITP then its off the mark by a bit.. But to me that is no problem at all, because it is a lot of things who is off the mark, and I see it a bit as an Alternate Universe..


The games biggest flawed in my opinion, is that you can fly bombers over many bases with 500 fighters without getting intercepted, as long as your target is another base or location.

So I wonder if AE fixed that problem of no interceptions enroute to the target (or on the bombers return)? It is silly when you think of it, as it's like the Schweinfurt raids with only the locals intercepting. At least in the case of WITP. you don't have that many instances of needing interceptions from other points, as so many targets have no targets directly in the way to the target, but at least it is something that is a neutral omission, as the allies have to deal with being unable to intercept along the way just as much as IJ. I guess the only real problem would be, being unable to intercept raids coming from China towards a very far eastern or western target. Hitting Japan, for instance, at least how the map is drawn, would have little in the way of many of the targets from raids coming from the south anyway (a city or two maybe), so at least there it's more understandable. With later war fuel problems for IJ, it's probably better for IJ that air groups are transported to very likely targets and react as the game allows, as opposed to having very unlikely targets flying over to intercept everything along the way to the larger targets.

If AE will still not have interceptions along the way to the target, then even moving airgroups may prove to be less of a solution, because I have the feeling that the restrictions on the number of aircraft per size of the base is much more strict.

And now a question. Suppose, at least in WITP, you had the allied player hitting the IJ main islands with a good many 4E's groups. Let's assume the IJ player has some sort of KB still functional. Would it be possible to raze such a place with a KB (assuming it to be only one place within range), because the CAP may be fairly small due to excess 4E's? If the allied player would be in the habit of doing that, it could prove an effective use of a defensive KB, but I would imagine the allied player wouldn't let that happen more than a couple of times. If successful even just once, it would to some degree force the allied player into being more honest with those bases within bomber range of Japan and therefore staff a higher fighter ratio. OTOH, since WITP 4E's seem to have no problem hitting ships, perhaps that's more suicidal than anything, even with a heavy fighter CAP that a KB could provide?

[Charles2222]

ORIGINAL: SuluSea

ORIGINAL: Japan

The games biggest flawed in my opinion, is that you can fly bombers over many bases with 500 fighters without getting intercepted, as long as your target is another base or location.

Man you're like the Banzai Bunny.......





if the game is so broke why even play it?

Bombers don't normally pass over well defended targets unless it's the target plus the hexes are 60 miles, someone explained that to you just last week

I have taken those words of advice, as I don't play it, but it's something of a poor omission as I said in reply to him, as both sides suffer from the illogic of no interceptions enroute. It sure would make the game longer if there were, but it would be pretty neat to see raids dwindling away enroute, sort of like they do in BTR or did in USAAF. Besides, the war was full, particularly in europe, with interceptions of bombers coming from every quarter, as unlike flak, they have ability to easily move. Interceptions, enroute and back, along the scale of the Schweinfurt raids couldn't happen in WITP. Raids would try to dodge airfields enroute and back, but in many cases that was impossible since the enemy aircraft do have range as well. It seems that since aircraft in WITP could easily search more than 60 miles, or even LR CAP, then they should be able to not only spot raids enroute, but dispatch some interceptors (60 miles is nothing - just ignoring the fact that IJ intercepting raids from the south wouldn't had been as easily done as with the germans, at least because the Japanese mainland has very little depth, even if they had the best radar equipment).

[Nikademus]

ORIGINAL: Charles_22

So I wonder if AE fixed that problem of no interceptions enroute to the target (or on the bombers return)? It is silly when you think of it,

The problem here, is that WitP has a key fundemental difference from Bombing the Reich. In the latter, air raids are tracked on a minute by minute basis on the map. Hence, raids can be interecepted along the flight path. In WitP...combat is hex based with the target hex (target base) the location where all combat occurs. Things have been fudged a little to allow nearby bases to contribute some CAP to the target base but thats about all that can be done without completely rewriting the code. Remember that AE is an expansion.....not a completely new game.

And now a question. Suppose, at least in WITP, you had the allied player hitting the IJ main islands with a good many 4E's groups. Let's assume the IJ player has some sort of KB still functional. Would it be possible to raze such a place with a KB (assuming it to be only one place within range.

It's possible...but if late in the war, possibly expensive in return.

[ny59giants]

Is there a sub-routine in the code when the target is an economic asset vs. an airfield/port?? If not, why not??

[Nikademus]

not sure what you mean here?

[ny59giants]

Does the AI treat targets differently when it computes the number of hits. It is a lot easier and cheaper to repair the damage done to an AF or port than if HI gets 50 centers damaged in one attack. IMO, there should be a two different series of codes used. One for AF/port/ground and another with economic assets targeted that have a lower percentage of hit achieved. Example - 150 4e bombers should not be able to almost completely wipe out the HI at a base in one day.  
 
In my younger years I worked in electronics (13 years) and took a few courses in programming to become "dangerous" on this issue. [:D] 

[Nikademus]

Thats a question for the coders i'm afraid and given how big the code is, probably not one easily answered. Its not unlikely that industry bombing has it's own sub-routine.

[Flying Tiger]

But seriously, after Reading Albert Spears Book about the effects, or rather limited effects of the Bombing of Germany, then it is my impression that the Strategic Bombing in WITP is way to powerfully, of course it is B29's and not B17's... but Spear talks about a 3-6% Industrial Loss in a local region, if it was severely bombed over and over for a period of 8 weeks, so If you can do 80% [8|][8|] in WITP then its off the mark by a bit.. But to me that is no problem at all, because it is a lot of things who is off the mark, and I see it a bit as an Alternate Universe..

 
Well. Germany was a long developed country with primarily brick/stone buildings. Japan was a just developing country with primarily wood/grass structures. Strangely enough, the wood and grass burned more than the brick and stone.
 
Have you ever heard the story of the three little pigs??
 
BTW Japan, thanks again for the link to your AAR movie. Looking forward to the part II.

[Charles2222]

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

ORIGINAL: Charles_22

So I wonder if AE fixed that problem of no interceptions enroute to the target (or on the bombers return)? It is silly when you think of it,

The problem here, is that WitP has a key fundemental difference from Bombing the Reich. In the latter, air raids are tracked on a minute by minute basis on the map. Hence, raids can be interecepted along the flight path. In WitP...combat is hex based with the target hex (target base) the location where all combat occurs. Things have been fudged a little to allow nearby bases to contribute some CAP to the target base but thats about all that can be done without completely rewriting the code. Remember that AE is an expansion.....not a completely new game.

That certainly makes sense.

And now a question. Suppose, at least in WITP, you had the allied player hitting the IJ main islands with a good many 4E's groups. Let's assume the IJ player has some sort of KB still functional. Would it be possible to raze such a place with a KB (assuming it to be only one place within range.

It's possible...but if late in the war, possibly expensive in return.

I guess such an IJ player would also have to hope none of the allied CV's were anywhere about (not too likely). Even more unlikely if they realize they are overstuffing a place with bombers.

[ny59giants]

Nik,
 
I didn't expect you to be the one to answer my question. I hoping someone higher up the food chain has looked into this and some testing has been done to make it as historically accurate as they can.
 
Thanks!

[Charles2222]

Three little pigs !

[SuluSea]

ORIGINAL: Charles_22

I have taken those words of advice, as I don't play it, but it's something of a poor omission as I said in reply to him, as both sides suffer from the illogic of no interceptions enroute. It sure would make the game longer if there were, but it would be pretty neat to see raids dwindling away enroute, sort of like they do in BTR or did in USAAF.

Flying over Germany or occupied France is much different than flying over the vast Pacific, plus the Germans had better radar than the Japanese. [:)]

I believed when playing UV there should be some coordinated cap but after thinking about it also the benefit of reading Fire in the Sky if the player wants additional cap they could always use the LRCAP feature. JMHO

[Nikademus]

"overstuffing" a base yields less returns in AE....unless you place an Air HQ on the base. Even then, the raid sizes will be smaller vs. the mega raids your used to seeing in stock.

Once Japan is in range of the heavies though....your going to be in for problems....just as in real life. [;)]

Me....i have problems just managing the Japanese economy when it's intact!

[Charles2222]

Going along the Three Little Pigs line of thought, I think the smart pig for IJ would had been the underground facilities I heard they built (but probably nothing like Nordhausen).

[Charles2222]

ORIGINAL: SuluSea

ORIGINAL: Charles_22

I have taken those words of advice, as I don't play it, but it's something of a poor omission as I said in reply to him, as both sides suffer from the illogic of no interceptions enroute. It sure would make the game longer if there were, but it would be pretty neat to see raids dwindling away enroute, sort of like they do in BTR or did in USAAF.

Flying over Germany or occupied France is much different than flying over the vast Pacific, plus the Germans had better radar than the Japanese. [:)]

I believed when playing UV there should be some coordinated cap but after thinking about it also the benefit of reading Fire in the Sky if the player wants additional cap they could always use the LRCAP feature. JMHO

Yes, I knew all of that, but was merely bringing the most recognizable of the raids from both fronts. I was of the thnking that LRCAP wouldn't help in those matters. I'm not sure why, but I recall reading something like that here. I guess the easiest way to know is if you LRCAP a plane type not found at the target hex to that place.