Playtesters dropped the ball!

[emorbius44]

I just had my first encounter with the "vunder weapon" of the pacific, the B-17. I haven't seen results like this since the rat patrol's jeep took out half of the Afrika corps. I mean 1,000 feet or not these B-17's are hitting about 80% against patrol boats.
This all adds up (IMHO) to skiew this game so badly as to make it almost unplayable. Right now, to quote the legendary admiral Rockwell Torre (from in Harm's way) "put a flock of B-17's in there and you can control the area a thousand miles in any direction.
Any student of pacific warfare knows B-17's scoring a hit (or B-25's until skip bombing came along) was about as common as an American League pithcher hitting a grand slam.
Right now any operations are going to be stymied by the B-17, which is better then an SBD and TBF rolled into one.
Common guys! I was one of the principle playtesters on the old Pacwar and when something so blatantly ahistorical was in the game I at least let Gary know about it. I'm amazed that this kind of target accuracy could have slipped through but this slants the game to make any historical strategy almost worthless.
This needs to be fixed ASAP!!!!!


Bob

[Ross Moorhouse]

The patch 1.10 fixes this as per the readme for this patch..

29) Air groups bombing ports now target significantly fewer ships in port. Port facilities, supply, fuel and base troops are now targeted more often. The greater the number of ships in port, the greater the chance that one or more will be bombed. Also, note that ships in port take a reduced amount of damage from being bombed.

I have norticed the change in this for myself from out of the box to patch 1.10. Now days I am not sinking ships in port with my B-17s. If you have the patch this si the first time its has come up since patch 1.10 was released.

Cheers

[emorbius44]

Originally posted by Ross Moorhouse
The patch 1.10 fixes this as per the readme for this patch..



I have norticed the change in this for myself from out of the box to patch 1.10. Now days I am not sinking ships in port with my B-17s. If you have the patch this si the first time its has come up since patch 1.10 was released.

Cheers

Actually I'm talking about strikes against ships on the open sea (or in this case a beachead.) B-17's hitting patrol boats and destroyers with 75% accuracy. NEVER happened. I stopped counting when the hit total went over 50. Basically this stops my e-mail game cold. A few B-17's from cooktown can shred the Japanese carriers (i.e. an attempted invasion of Port Moresby.)
Reading Mr. Billings comments it would seem 2by3 doesn't find this ahistorical or out of line. I find it a game breaker. To suffer a defeat of much larger proportions then the Battle of Bismarck sea in May 1942 at the hands of Wirraways and B-17's (and a few B-25's) is simply a silly result, as I said akin to the results on Rat Patrol against the Afrika Korps.
I told Gary a few times back in 1991 when I thought things were dumb with pacwar so I'll reprise it hear. This is flat out ABSURD, a GAME BREAKER and much worse then any flaw that I can remember that pacwar had. Right now a B-17 is much more accurate then a Val or Kate. cheez!

Bob

[dgaad]

Originally posted by emorbius44
I just had my first encounter with the "vunder weapon" of the pacific, the B-17. I haven't seen results like this since the rat patrol's jeep took out half of the Afrika corps. I mean 1,000 feet or not these B-17's are hitting about 80% against patrol boats.
This all adds up (IMHO) to skiew this game so badly as to make it almost unplayable. Right now, to quote the legendary admiral Rockwell Torre (from in Harm's way) "put a flock of B-17's in there and you can control the area a thousand miles in any direction.
Any student of pacific warfare knows B-17's scoring a hit (or B-25's until skip bombing came along) was about as common as an American League pithcher hitting a grand slam.
Right now any operations are going to be stymied by the B-17, which is better then an SBD and TBF rolled into one.
Common guys! I was one of the principle playtesters on the old Pacwar and when something so blatantly ahistorical was in the game I at least let Gary know about it. I'm amazed that this kind of target accuracy could have slipped through but this slants the game to make any historical strategy almost worthless.
This needs to be fixed ASAP!!!!!


Bob

*cough* Let me guess. Another Japanese player? Unfamiliar with the historical pioneering use of B-17s as the first skip bombers? Thought so.

[dgaad]

Originally posted by emorbius44



Actually I'm talking about strikes against ships on the open sea (or in this case a beachead.) B-17's hitting patrol boats and destroyers with 75% accuracy. NEVER happened. I stopped counting when the hit total went over 50. Basically this stops my e-mail game cold. A few B-17's from cooktown can shred the Japanese carriers (i.e. an attempted invasion of Port Moresby.)
Reading Mr. Billings comments it would seem 2by3 doesn't find this ahistorical or out of line. I find it a game breaker. To suffer a defeat of much larger proportions then the Battle of Bismarck sea in May 1942 at the hands of Wirraways and B-17's (and a few B-25's) is simply a silly result, as I said akin to the results on Rat Patrol against the Afrika Korps.
I told Gary a few times back in 1991 when I thought things were dumb with pacwar so I'll reprise it hear. This is flat out ABSURD, a GAME BREAKER and much worse then any flaw that I can remember that pacwar had. Right now a B-17 is much more accurate then a Val or Kate. cheez!

Bob

Why is god's name did you move ships into LBA range without cover? Admirals in the real war didn't do that unless they had at least 2 of the following : CAP, FLAK or had bombed the bejeezus out of the enemy's airbases.

Pick up any book that focusses on the air war in the Pacific during WW2, and you will HEALED, brother. Many recommend Fire in the Sky.

[emorbius44]

Originally posted by dgaad


Why is god's name did you move ships into LBA range without cover? Admirals in the real war didn't do that unless they had at least 2 of the following : CAP, FLAK or had bombed the bejeezus out of the enemy's airbases.

Pick up any book that focusses on the air war in the Pacific during WW2, and you will HEALED, brother. Many recommend Fire in the Sky.

That's not the point. the point is a B-17 as the game is presently consitituted is more accurate then any carrier based strike aircraft against small moving targets, especially with 500 lb bombs. Having a few B-17's score a couple of dozen hits against patrol boats and destroyers is rediculous, flak and cap or not. I would recommend you read up on the development of smart bombs. They came AFTER WWII.


Bob

[MatrixFan]

OMG i have to so agree used my first B-17's in a PBEM game as the USN usually im always the IJN and OMG are B-17's ever overpwered some amerikan must of tested them can somebody say way to strong. I mean okay i send 10 away and 8 of those 10 land multiple 500lb pound bomb hits at 1000 feet at PM against transports. in the middle of the sea.

The norten bombsight wasnt this good especially not if your only 1k feet over the ground but i do understand now why a IJN player would quit playing the game.

Now has anybody ever though about the fact that the p[rogram might be messed up and reading the 1000 feet as 100 feet so that they are actually skip bombing but at 1k feet instead of 100 cuz OMG these results are insane.BTW only thing the patch fixed was LBA hittign ships in ports compleatly usless considering B-17's beat any speciually designed Anti Naval aircraft.

BTW after 6 or so B-17 raids against Naval Targets on sea the hit percentage of a B-17 seems to be way over 50% last attack 10 B-17's at 1000 feet, and i managed to score 9 hits on DD's and a couple AP's.

[CynicAl]

Originally posted by MatrixFan
OMG i have to so agree used my first B-17's in a PBEM game as the USN usually im always the IJN and OMG are B-17's ever overpwered some amerikan must of tested them can somebody say way to strong. I mean okay i send 10 away and 8 of those 10 land multiple 500lb pound bomb hits at 1000 feet at PM against transports. in the middle of the sea.

The norten bombsight wasnt this good especially not if your only 1k feet over the ground but i do understand now why a IJN player would quit playing the game.

Now has anybody ever though about the fact that the p[rogram might be messed up and reading the 1000 feet as 100 feet so that they are actually skip bombing but at 1k feet instead of 100 cuz OMG these results are insane.BTW only thing the patch fixed was LBA hittign ships in ports compleatly usless considering B-17's beat any speciually designed Anti Naval aircraft.

BTW after 6 or so B-17 raids against Naval Targets on sea the hit percentage of a B-17 seems to be way over 50% last attack 10 B-17's at 1000 feet, and i managed to score 9 hits on DD's and a couple AP's.

Was Fog of War on or off? Pilot claims are always excessive, it's as dependable as gravity.

[Black Cat]

really it isn`t.

I played a lot ( years worth ) of PW as well Bob, including two complete one year full Campaigns ,41 - ,45 EMails with Jess Norris ( who contributed much to the Game design when the editor was available ) Won one, lost one, and am proud to say as the US I chose Not to use the A Bomb option on the Home Islands.

I understand where your coming from here, on first firing up UV I too thought ..WHAT have they done here !!

But it really is important to understand a couple of things here beside This isn`t PW.

1: The tactics and stratgey the experienced Japanese PW player used against the AI or another person will not work here. Ditto for the US player.

1 A: The Map, weapons effects, and the way the AI employs them are much different. You will note on more play, that unlike PW your B-17 cannot reach Guadalcanal from Espiritu.

2: The Game is, if you use the Campaign Scenarios that shipped, is _alternate history_. You start the Game on a smaller Map with fewer offensive options for the Japanese player. If you look in the Ship Availbility window you see that you will get 4 Yes!, thats Four !! big CV`s in about 30 days......soooo in a short time you too can tool about anywhere in the South Pacific with a killer stack, looking to crush any allied ship afloat...

...As an aside I find it interesting that none of the "B-17 Too Powerful in the Anti Ship roll " school seem to object to that...:rolleyes:

If you don`t care for the Super Duper B-17`s in a H to H game make up some House Rules, in fact I connot concieve playing UV against another person without some HR`s.....

If you don`t care for the SD B-17`s playing against the AI don`t put your ships near PM until you degrade the Airbase.


It is also most interesting that the debate is being framed ( by the Japanese players maybe ? ) on the lines of: " There is a major problem with the B-17 in low level attacks, it`s not Historical, how do we fix it ? " Only dgaad ( up thread ) recognizes this old debating ploy for what it is and challenges the basic assumption.

Give the Game as it stands some time Bob, there is a lot going on under the hood so to speak that is not immediately obvious and enjoy it, it really is an amazing and excellent piece of programming.....

[Ron Saueracker]

You said yourself B 17s were used only briefly in this role and quite late in the time frame covered by UV. If that's the case, why are you crapping on someone with a legitimate issue? I myself enjoy playing the Allies but I don't like Colin Kelly's ghost altering history to prove a point that a B17 could in fact sink the Haruna.

I don't know but you seem to think only you do any reading or that libraries are for something other than homeless people on a cold day. Give the guy a break! He has a legitimate point, regardless of which side he likes.

[Ron Saueracker]

I'm OK with hitting ships in port. It happened alot and that's how so many Japanese ports were neutralized. Rabaul and Truk raids are well documented. They were simply given up as too hot and were rarely utilized for naval or merchant assets after. My one beef is that the AI is not programmed to respond to Allied air superiority and leaves ships in port anyway. Game over!

[emorbius44]

Originally posted by dgaad


*cough* Let me guess. Another Japanese player? Unfamiliar with the historical pioneering use of B-17s as the first skip bombers? Thought so.

Skip bombing from 1000 feet?

"kerplunk!"

[dgaad]

Originally posted by Ron Saueracker
You said yourself B 17s were used only briefly in this role and quite late in the time frame covered by UV. If that's the case, why are you crapping on someone with a legitimate issue? I myself enjoy playing the Allies but I don't like Colin Kelly's ghost altering history to prove a point that a B17 could in fact sink the Haruna.

I don't know but you seem to think only you do any reading or that libraries are for something other than homeless people on a cold day. Give the guy a break! He has a legitimate point, regardless of which side he likes.

The fact that I don't believe the guy has a legitimate point is no excuse for crapping on him, if that is what I did. My apologies.

It seems to me impossible to demand the game be changed if one is aware of the following facts :

1. B-17s pioneered the skip bombing technique.
2. B-17s were used in the skip bombing role for several months before being withdrawn from that mission (except for 3, below).
3. B-17s, assisted by other aircraft, decisively won the Battle of the Bismarck Sea in March 1943 by using these very tactics.

What exactly is supposed to be changed in the game that is not backed up by history and logic?

The only explanation I have for the griping of the B-17 is that people are simply not aware of the history. Simple mistake or oversight which I myself make all too often. The library is in fact the remedy for this, or Amazon and a credit card with a large limit.

BTW, Ron, I know you know all this, but I am restating a non-crapping argument for the benefit of others.

Recounting the Battle of the Bismarck Sea, which may be more "enlightenment" :

Just after midnight of 1 March 1943 an important Japanese convoy cleared Rabaul and set its course along the north shore of New Britain. Packed into eight transports were major reinforcements for the garrison at Lae, New Guinea, an advance base just then coming under serious Allied pressure. On board six army troopships -- AIYO MARU, KYOKUSEI MARU, OIGAWA MARU, SHINAI MARU, TAIMEI MARU and TEIYO MARU -- were 6,000 soldiers of the 51st Division, with provisions, arms and ammunition. A seventh transport, little KEMBU MARU, was loaded with drummed aviation fuel, while the navy's "special service vessel" NOJIMA carried 400 marines.

The convoy's escort was strictly first-rate: eight of the most battle-hardened destroyers in the Imperial Navy were assembled under the flag of Rear Admiral Kimura Masatomi, Comdesron 3. Ringing the transports were SHIRAYUKI, SHIKINAMI, URANAMI, TOKITSUKAZE, YUKIKAZE, ASASHIO, ARASHIO and ASAGUMO, each one a Guadalcanal veteran many times over. Eighteenth Army commander Lieutenant General Adachi Hatazo rode in TOKITSUKAZE, and Lieutenant General Nakano Hidemitsu and staff of 51st Division in YUKIKAZE. SHIRAYUKI, wearing Admiral Kimura's flag at her truck, led the ships out of port and towards Cape Gloucester at an easy seven knots.

Each vessel taking part in Operation 81, as the movement was designated, was carefully combat-loaded for rapid disembarkation at Lae. The threat of heavy air attack en route was acknowledged and accepted: 50 percent losses were expected, but if the rest got through it could all be worth it. Lae had to be held at all costs.

Awaiting Kimura's ships on the airfields of Papua, New Guinea, lay the U. S. Fifth Army Air Force, augmented by several squadrons of the Royal Australian Air Force. It numbered 129 fighters and 207 bombers, many of the latter recently up-gunned with forward-firing cannon and carrying delayed-action 500 lb. bombs. These weapons were to be used for skip-bombing, a novel anti-shipping tactic employing a low-level approach designed to slam a bomb into a ship's vulnerable underside much like a torpedo, while utterly confounding all previous antiaircraft doctrine. The Allied aircrews, well-trained and confident, awaited the call to action.

Allied reconnaissance first spotted the convoy on the afternoon of 1 March, still north of New Britain. But overcast skies shielded the ships from attack until the following morning. The Japanese had high hopes that cloud cover would protect them all the way to Lae, but when the skies began to clear they knew they were in trouble.

Early on 2 March long-range B-17s scored fatal hits on KYOKUSEI MARU, but the big transport remained afloat long enough for over 900 troops to be transferred to YUKIKAZE and ASAGUMO. Those two destroyers then left the formation, proceeded at high speed to Lae, and disembarked their passengers, including General Nakano. They rejoined the convoy early in the morning of the 3rd, by which time the troopships had "turned the corner" south through Vitiaz Strait and were entering Huon Gulf, only 80 miles from their destination.

Japanese clocks read 0755 that morning when the first large formations of enemy aircraft were reported approaching from the south. Flights of Australian Beauforts and Beaufighters joined U. S. A-20s and B-25s sweeping in at low level. Higher up, but still far below their normal bombing altitude, were the B-17s. Over all swarmed P-38, P-39 and P-40 fighters. The Japanese ships -- and some 30 Zero fighters flying combat air patrol above them -- swung to port to meet their attackers head on.

The first 15 minutes of the Allied attack were among the most devastating in the annals of air-sea warfare: no fewer than 28 of the first 37 bombs released are reported to have found their targets. KEMBU MARU exploded in a great ball of fire and was gone. By 0805 AIYO MARU, OIGAWA MARU and NOJIMA had all been hit and stopped. A few minutes later SHINAI MARU, TAIMEI MARU and TEIYO MARU began taking the first of four direct hits apiece. Deck-loads of soldiers -- those who had survived the carnage wrought by bomb explosions and cannon fire -- began going overboard in a hurry.

Nor were the destroyers' speed and maneuverability adequate proof against the onslaught. Flagship SHIRAYUKI promptly had her stern blown off; she stayed afloat only just long enough for SHIKINAMI to come alongside and remove her crew and a wounded Admiral Kimura. ARASHIO, hit by three bombs, lost rudder control and plowed into crippled NOJIMA. TOKITSUKAZE, a bomb in her engineering spaces, was also left dead in the water; YUKIKAZE removed General Adachi and all but a salvage party from her crew.

As the first waves of attackers withdrew, Kimura's five operational destroyers began dredging survivors out of the water by the hundreds. When the count had reached approximately 2,700 (submarines I-17 and I-26 would later rescue 275 more) all but ASASHIO retired up Vitiaz Strait.

Captain Sato Yasuo, Comdesdiv 8 in ASASHIO, chose to remain behind to assist ARASHIO. Thus when Allied aircraft returned in early afternoon, only ASASHIO moved among a sea of cripples. Once targeted, her fate was predictable, and a signal reporting renewed air attacks was the last ever heard from her.

One by one throughout the afternoon the gutted transports tilted and slid beneath the surface, leaving only OIGAWA MARU to be finished by two American PT-boats after dark. Kimura rendezvoused with destroyer HATSUYUKI from Kavieng, exchanged passengers for fuel, and that night returned with SHIKINAMI, YUKIKAZE and ASAGUMO to the scene of battle. They rescued 170 more men from ARASHIO and the last 20 from TOKITSUKAZE, then left the two wrecks for Allied aircraft to dispose of the following day.

The Empire had been bloodied and shocked. Japanese losses totalled all eight transports, four destroyers, 15-20 aircraft, and close to 3,000 men, in exchange for two Allied bombers and three fighters shot down. Orders went out that never again must large convoys be allowed within range of substantial enemy air power. Lae fell to Australian ground forces seven months later. "This defeat was the biggest cause of the loss of New Guinea," related a Combined Fleet staff officer after the war. "Your victory started from there."

[emorbius44]

Originally posted by Ron Saueracker
You said yourself B 17s were used only briefly in this role and quite late in the time frame covered by UV. If that's the case, why are you crapping on someone with a legitimate issue? I myself enjoy playing the Allies but I don't like Colin Kelly's ghost altering history to prove a point that a B17 could in fact sink the Haruna.

I don't know but you seem to think only you do any reading or that libraries are for something other than homeless people on a cold day. Give the guy a break! He has a legitimate point, regardless of which side he likes.

I've read Willmott, Lund, Frank and a slew of other books of the subject. I can't recall any skip bombing being done in the entire guadalcanal comapaign until later. I presume he's going by Murphy's book where then index doesn't start until July of '42.
In anycase Dgaad seems to continually ignore that skip bombing was not done from 1,000 feet in any time period, at least that I'm aware of. If they came in at 100 or 200 feet it's a different story.
My point here is that if B-17's are extraordinarily accurate (especially at that point in time) with LEVEL bombing then as a player what do you do? From reading a few other posts it may be a possibility to bulldoze through a carrier CV and lay a few big ones on the akagi or whatever.
I'm looking for accuracy no matter what side the the game is played on.

[dgaad]

Originally posted by emorbius44



I've read Willmott, Lund, Frank and a slew of other books of the subject. I can't recall any skip bombing being done in the entire guadalcanal comapaign until later. I presume he's going by Murphy's book where then index doesn't start until July of '42.
In anycase Dgaad seems to continually ignore that skip bombing was not done from 1,000 feet in any time period, at least that I'm aware of. If they came in at 100 or 200 feet it's a different story.

1. Guadalcanal did not have the kind of airpower until later in the campaign, by which time the Japanese never attempted open sea movement in the day. Your books apparently do not discuss the New Guinea campaign in any detail. I strongly suggest you read Fire in the Sky.

2. Skip bombing was in fact done from levels below 1000 feet, but I guarantee you the bombers did 99% of their travelling to target at altitudes of 1000 or MORE feet. There is always a "drop down". Skip bombing altitude is 1000 feet in this game, that's the setting. IIRC there was a certain altitude and speed known to all medium and heavy bombers that practically guaranteed a hit if done correctly. (300 feet, speed around 200mph, drop at estimated distance from target of x feet -- I forget). IIRC the aircrew estimated about 75% hit accuracy for an experienced crew in good conditions (low wind, clear).

[Ron Saueracker]

I understand your point but said point needs 1943 facts to stand up to scrutiny. Most of the complaints are made very early on in the game's timeframe, early 1942. Results like the Bismarck Sea battle did not, and probably could not have happened in 1942, as the pilots, planes, tactics, air superiority, training etc. were not at 1943 levels.

Anyone ever check bomber pilot experience levels? They are hitting the high 90's early in 1942. The Marauder and Mitchell pilots, and other level bombers for that matter, have higher values than prewar Japanese pilots. Perhaps this is the root of the problem and it's solution. Lower the exp. ratings and reduce the pilot exp increase rate. That way, these results might not be possible so early on and any high exp. squadrons might be husbanded as elite anti shipping specialists.

I'm more than happy with LBA accuracy heading into 1943. I just don't like the LBA in early/late 42, as it makes the need for the carrier battles and the nail biting teeter totter Guadalcanal Campaign little better than a moot issue.

[dgaad]

Ron : Yes its very clear that high accuracy skip bombing was not used until October, 1942 IIRC. That does not mean that LBA was an ineffective threat until then.

Players play with either historical hindsight or system knowledge. Everyone by now knows that bombing at the 1000 feet level will hash an unprotected TF, whether you call that skip bombing or glide bombing. So everyone does it.

Airgroup experiences will go up rapidly if the airgroup is not taking casualties and nevertheless performing combat missions, or even routine things like supply missions. A good allied commander can get the level bomber experience ratings up to the mid 70s within a month or less if he has them on supply transport missions alot, or if they go into combat has them heavily protected by escort.

I might agree to this :

1. Up the experience levels for enhanced skip bombing accuracy to 85 / 75 / 65.

2. Increase flak ratings against 4 engine bombers at 1000-2000 feet by 15 and 7.5 percent, respectively.

3. Increase the amount of time it takes to repair an aircraft based on load capacity (this would mean B-17s and other heavy bombers might take many days to repair from damaged state). Note : this idea was suggested elsewhere, not by me, and will in fact be in WitP.

I still think people will complain, because as we all know a historical wargame is played by people with the benefit of the knowledge, mistakes and oversights of the historical actors.

[Black Cat]

Originally posted by Ron Saueracker
I'm more than happy with LBA accuracy heading into 1943. I just don't like the LBA in early/late 42, as it makes the need for the carrier battles and the nail biting teeter totter Guadalcanal Campaign little better than a moot issue. [/B]

Hi Sarge, Could you enlarge on that for a Newbie please ?

How does US LBA effects that battle ? There is nothing in reach.

You have to bring the US Carriers up to support & protect the transports from the Japanese CV`s.

FWIW I use the B-17` on PM to airfield attack Rabaul to degrade
it`s AC `s ability to oppose the Guadalcanal landings, seems a far better use then expending them to kill a few of the Japanese Transports.

TIA

[Ron Saueracker]

There are two Marauder squadrons available plus a whole honey wagon full of B 17s in SOPAC. Henderson Field hits size 4 and voila, Shangri La. No need for Marines or Navy air, the Army is here!

If you don't invade Guadalcanal (why bother early when risky, CVs sunk are huge VP pigs). IJN air power is not that overpowering. Wait it out, build up LBA and cream the IJN carrier fleet with low level uber bombers if they try coming too close to Noumea/Espiritu Santo. If they don't, use your massed USN CV force in 1943 to cover one landing at Lunga and voila, the Army takes over.

My point was this, however. Why was there a huge fear of the Japanese invading Australia during 1942? Why was a Japanese base on Guadalcanal such a feared eventuality that Watchtower was launched with no naval or air superiority guaranteed if LBA was so darned effective? The benefit of hindsight is undeniable, but assuming LBA is as effective in 1942 as it was in 1943 ignores reality (flying transport missions and air searches does not make you more capable of flying wavetop level, flying off the Hornet for the Doolittle raid, skip bombing with bombs that don't exist yet, surpassing IJN aviators with years of combat experience from China onwards who were screened more heavily than any other prewar airforce, etc.)! Many more factors were required. Like historical context.

If one wants to argue that gamers use hindsight to their advantage, and this is their perogative in a "what if?" simulation as stated by many, why would a Japanese player bomb Pearl Harbor fully aware of how bad they got their butts kicked? WITP is going to be pretty boring if the Japanese player does not start the Pacific War because he knows better.

[dgaad]

Originally posted by Ron Saueracker
There are two Marauder squadrons available plus a whole honey wagon full of B 17s in SOPAC. Henderson Field hits size 4 and voila, Shangri La. No need for Marines or Navy, the Army is here!

I dare you to leave Lunga unguarded while I hold Shortland in force. I DARE YOU!!! *cough* apds *cough* sasebo marines *cough* night landing *cough cough*.