JFB's Own A/E
Posted: Tue Dec 08, 2009 5:03 pm
It was obvious that A/E was designed to satisfy the JFB crown. I don't have a real problem with this, as I think most of the really hard core WITP prefer to play the Japanese side. However, the Patch 02 Beta has really gone off the deep end. I have the following problems, which really seem outside the box.
1. U.S. pre-war battleships are utterly useless in surface battle. Although this was the case with WITP, then all suface battles were such a complete mess, it was irrelevant. However, surface battles are vastly improved and it is now relevant. Looking at the ship data base, the A/E team has really done it's homework, all looks well. Clearly, the problems have been created by the JFB crowd in the hard code experience. How did the IJN get so experienced? Shooting up junks in the China Sea, I suppose. In fact, the USN was a haven during the depression for thousands of men. The best of these went to the ships of the Battle Force. Gunnery was highly emphasized, with highly prized gunnery awards in annual competitions. Gunnery was excellent. In WW I, the USN thought it proficient in gunnery, but in service with elements of the Grand Fleet, found out it didn't match up with the RN. Things were quickly improved. Battleship range-finders were equipped with analog computers in 1918! Reconstruction was hampered during the inter-war period by lack of funding, but much was done. Granted, much that they wanted to do was not achievable, but the biggest problems were mitigated by blistering and additional armor was added to the decks, much of it STS. The weakest link remained, however, plunging fire, as engagements would be fought at much greater ranges than was possible when these ships were built. This problem could not be fully solved due to treatly limitations and weight problems, which resulted in inadequate free board. These were wet ships. However, the New Mexicos, the Tennessees and the Colorados were OK, if slow by IJN standards. All this, except the advantages of STS perhaps, are in the data base. Note that most surface battles are at night in A/E, where plunging fire is not a factor. The problem is in the experience, particularly night. Although the JFB's will point to the poor USN performance in the Slot as an example of USN night proficiency, that was not these crews. The Slot was torpedo alley, where the Long Lance was king. But I think the biggest IJN advantage was simply their binnoculars! They were far superior. None of this would necessarily apply in more open waters. These crews were very experienced. I think my father's experience was typical. He went to the New Mexico out of boot camp (then in Norfolk) in 1932 as a Seaman and left in 1941 as a Chief Gunners Mate to joint the Atlanta (whoops). Of course, I can't do anything about experience, it's JFB hard code. What I can do is use a ridiculous accuracy factor for the 16/45's and the 14/50's, which seems to help.
2. Submarines are the worst. The latest JFB change has made IJN subs undetectable by anything. Aircraft never hit them and destroyers can't find them. They now hang around major ports with complete impunity. The whole idea of the I-class sub as a first class weapon is a joke and even more preposterous as a commerce raider. Yes, the crews were excellent and the torpedo was superior. But the boat was too large, resulting in a submerged vessel that was noisy, a large Sonar target and a very limited dive depth of only 200 feet. These characteristics would not be a huge problem when attacking warships, which are generally traveling at high speed and zig-zagging. Hydrophones are almost useless and Sonar is compromised. As a commerce raider, the convoy speeds are slow, making a large, noisy boat easily detected and the limited dive depth lethal, as the boat can't get under the thermals, so necessary to avoid Sonar tracking. Most I-class boats from I-6 on carry a seaplane. Talk about noise and limited dive depth. What a farce! Unlike other JFB hard code scams, I can't find a way around this one. I tried reducing the durability from 36, I think, to 5. Very reasonable, I think, considering the limited dive depth. But, what difference does that make, when you can't attack the sub to start with. Next, I went to the DD/DE/SC data base to put late war sonar on the early DD's. What! Sonar isn't a device! We got every damn radar device known to man, but no sonar. The so-called ASW capability is nothing but the sum of the launchers on board. Since I obviously play against the Japanese A/I, the game has become much less a war game and more a game of trying to defeat the JFB hard coders. I've lost this one.
3. I love the new pilot training routines. They are a blast, although I still have no idea what the colors mean. But, somehow, I suspect that this is nothing more than another JFB scam, since they have numerous very experienced pilots to start with and can create numerous training units.
1. U.S. pre-war battleships are utterly useless in surface battle. Although this was the case with WITP, then all suface battles were such a complete mess, it was irrelevant. However, surface battles are vastly improved and it is now relevant. Looking at the ship data base, the A/E team has really done it's homework, all looks well. Clearly, the problems have been created by the JFB crowd in the hard code experience. How did the IJN get so experienced? Shooting up junks in the China Sea, I suppose. In fact, the USN was a haven during the depression for thousands of men. The best of these went to the ships of the Battle Force. Gunnery was highly emphasized, with highly prized gunnery awards in annual competitions. Gunnery was excellent. In WW I, the USN thought it proficient in gunnery, but in service with elements of the Grand Fleet, found out it didn't match up with the RN. Things were quickly improved. Battleship range-finders were equipped with analog computers in 1918! Reconstruction was hampered during the inter-war period by lack of funding, but much was done. Granted, much that they wanted to do was not achievable, but the biggest problems were mitigated by blistering and additional armor was added to the decks, much of it STS. The weakest link remained, however, plunging fire, as engagements would be fought at much greater ranges than was possible when these ships were built. This problem could not be fully solved due to treatly limitations and weight problems, which resulted in inadequate free board. These were wet ships. However, the New Mexicos, the Tennessees and the Colorados were OK, if slow by IJN standards. All this, except the advantages of STS perhaps, are in the data base. Note that most surface battles are at night in A/E, where plunging fire is not a factor. The problem is in the experience, particularly night. Although the JFB's will point to the poor USN performance in the Slot as an example of USN night proficiency, that was not these crews. The Slot was torpedo alley, where the Long Lance was king. But I think the biggest IJN advantage was simply their binnoculars! They were far superior. None of this would necessarily apply in more open waters. These crews were very experienced. I think my father's experience was typical. He went to the New Mexico out of boot camp (then in Norfolk) in 1932 as a Seaman and left in 1941 as a Chief Gunners Mate to joint the Atlanta (whoops). Of course, I can't do anything about experience, it's JFB hard code. What I can do is use a ridiculous accuracy factor for the 16/45's and the 14/50's, which seems to help.
2. Submarines are the worst. The latest JFB change has made IJN subs undetectable by anything. Aircraft never hit them and destroyers can't find them. They now hang around major ports with complete impunity. The whole idea of the I-class sub as a first class weapon is a joke and even more preposterous as a commerce raider. Yes, the crews were excellent and the torpedo was superior. But the boat was too large, resulting in a submerged vessel that was noisy, a large Sonar target and a very limited dive depth of only 200 feet. These characteristics would not be a huge problem when attacking warships, which are generally traveling at high speed and zig-zagging. Hydrophones are almost useless and Sonar is compromised. As a commerce raider, the convoy speeds are slow, making a large, noisy boat easily detected and the limited dive depth lethal, as the boat can't get under the thermals, so necessary to avoid Sonar tracking. Most I-class boats from I-6 on carry a seaplane. Talk about noise and limited dive depth. What a farce! Unlike other JFB hard code scams, I can't find a way around this one. I tried reducing the durability from 36, I think, to 5. Very reasonable, I think, considering the limited dive depth. But, what difference does that make, when you can't attack the sub to start with. Next, I went to the DD/DE/SC data base to put late war sonar on the early DD's. What! Sonar isn't a device! We got every damn radar device known to man, but no sonar. The so-called ASW capability is nothing but the sum of the launchers on board. Since I obviously play against the Japanese A/I, the game has become much less a war game and more a game of trying to defeat the JFB hard coders. I've lost this one.
3. I love the new pilot training routines. They are a blast, although I still have no idea what the colors mean. But, somehow, I suspect that this is nothing more than another JFB scam, since they have numerous very experienced pilots to start with and can create numerous training units.
