I have seen quite a few ships damaged by lone bomber aircraft being used in search mode. I have no problem with this except when it happens in hexes heavily protected with CAP. The damage is not usually that great but it is irritatingwhen your CAP is stopping numerous organized strikes each turn and then a single plane flies over and pings one of your destroyers. These aircraft seem to ignore flak and CAP.
So my question is has anyone seen these planes being shot down or engaged by CAP or shot down by flak?
Search aircraft on the attack
Moderators: Joel Billings, wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami
RE: Search aircraft on the attack
I have seen my search planes both shot down by cap and damaged/destroyed by flak...you can look in the aircraft losses screen and it will tell you the amound lost by flak, air to air, operations, etc.......
Quote from one of my drill sergeants, "remember, except for the extreme heat, intense radiation, and powerful blast wave, a nuclear explosion is just like any other explosion"
RE: Search aircraft on the attack
Hi all,
I asked about this time and time again in UV and I was told that those lone "Naval Search" aircrfat were prone to CAP and FLAK (i.e. AAA) but I still didn't like that behavior one bit (I thik you can still find those threads of mine in UV forums)... [:(]
BTW in UV once you had very proficient (EXP vise) squadron in "Naval Search" they were unstopable and the dreaded "Naval Search" attack routine (i.e. where single aircraft would do the sight->identify->attack) happened almost every turn.
Please note that I have yet to see this in WitP (but I am not that much advanced in time in my TEST games vs AI)...
Leo "Apollo11"
ORIGINAL: moses
I have seen quite a few ships damaged by lone bomber aircraft being used in search mode. I have no problem with this except when it happens in hexes heavily protected with CAP. The damage is not usually that great but it is irritatingwhen your CAP is stopping numerous organized strikes each turn and then a single plane flies over and pings one of your destroyers. These aircraft seem to ignore flak and CAP.
So my question is has anyone seen these planes being shot down or engaged by CAP or shot down by flak?
I asked about this time and time again in UV and I was told that those lone "Naval Search" aircrfat were prone to CAP and FLAK (i.e. AAA) but I still didn't like that behavior one bit (I thik you can still find those threads of mine in UV forums)... [:(]
BTW in UV once you had very proficient (EXP vise) squadron in "Naval Search" they were unstopable and the dreaded "Naval Search" attack routine (i.e. where single aircraft would do the sight->identify->attack) happened almost every turn.
Please note that I have yet to see this in WitP (but I am not that much advanced in time in my TEST games vs AI)...
Leo "Apollo11"
Prior Preparation & Planning Prevents Pathetically Poor Performance!
A & B: WitW, WitE, WbtS, GGWaW, GGWaW2-AWD, HttR, CotA, BftB, CF
P: UV, WitP, WitP-AE
-
AmiralLaurent
- Posts: 3351
- Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2003 8:53 pm
- Location: Near Paris, France
RE: Search aircraft on the attack
I am currently finishing an UV PBEM. It's 10 September 1943 and I am IJN. Most of my operationnal fighter units are in Rabaul, that is packed with with Base Forces and my Allied opponent sends no day raid against the harbour.
But he has a high-exp PB4Y Liberator that is able to slip into the CAP and in the last week sinks a MSW, damages a sub and hits a MSW I was obliged to dock and that was destroyed in a night port attack. My CAP (60-100 fighters depending of the day-weather) is unable to shot down these bombers and will lose around 2 Zeroes each week to PB4Y bombers.
On the other hand when PB4Y or B-24D try to attack Rabaul in a normal raid, they suffer enough losses so my opponent stopped this raid, while my CAP lost fewer planes.
So I agree there is a serious problem here, at least in UV but only when units are over 90 exp. SO you have to play a lot before seing it. But it is nevertheless totally unrealistic. I can't see how a single bomber may cross a CAP of 90 planes and bomb an undocked ship in Rabaul.
It seems to me that:
1) patrol plane checks to survive the CAP and AA of the hex
2) if survived, patrol plane tests to see if it attacks something
During the part 2) the CAP is totally ignored. A patrol to arrive in sight of a ship and a naval attack on a ship is not the same thing.
But he has a high-exp PB4Y Liberator that is able to slip into the CAP and in the last week sinks a MSW, damages a sub and hits a MSW I was obliged to dock and that was destroyed in a night port attack. My CAP (60-100 fighters depending of the day-weather) is unable to shot down these bombers and will lose around 2 Zeroes each week to PB4Y bombers.
On the other hand when PB4Y or B-24D try to attack Rabaul in a normal raid, they suffer enough losses so my opponent stopped this raid, while my CAP lost fewer planes.
So I agree there is a serious problem here, at least in UV but only when units are over 90 exp. SO you have to play a lot before seing it. But it is nevertheless totally unrealistic. I can't see how a single bomber may cross a CAP of 90 planes and bomb an undocked ship in Rabaul.
It seems to me that:
1) patrol plane checks to survive the CAP and AA of the hex
2) if survived, patrol plane tests to see if it attacks something
During the part 2) the CAP is totally ignored. A patrol to arrive in sight of a ship and a naval attack on a ship is not the same thing.
RE: Search aircraft on the attack
Hi all,
Yes... we think alike on this (and experienced same thing)...
Here is what I wrote in UV hreads about this (again I am to early in WitP campaigns to see such things yet so the only reason we repeat this is the message from poster):
"Naval Search" deadly sight->identify->attack routine is unstoppable
Explanation:
In my PBEMs (and my single player H2H tests) I almost never intercepted the dreaded "Naval Search" attack routine (i.e. where single aircraft would do the sight->identify->attack).
I tried LRCAP but to no avail (I varied the altitudes as well and in my single player H2H tests I even had the altitudes 100% matched)... [:(]
The aircraft with experienced crews (and Hudson's are extremely known to be that way after some time - and they have the range as well) will attack with 100% impunity using "Naval Search" attack routine.
Please note that I had cases where my MSW was 1 HEX from Rabaul and fully rested, high morale 27 plane elite Zero squadron was doing LRCAP over it (again please note that this is just 1 HEX from their base) but still the single Hudson on "Naval Search" come to do search mission and sink my valuable MSW additionaly.
There is no way of stopping them... [&:][:(][:@]
Also please note that in UV v2.30 we now finally have historic level bomber accuracy vs. moving ships (i.e. that level bombing is inaccurate against moving ships - just as it should be) but this does not apply to "Naval Search" attack routine (i.e. where single aircraft would do the dreaded routine of sight->identify->attack) - they would never miss.
IMHO, clearly a big problem.
Leo "Apollo11"
ORIGINAL: AmiralLaurent
I am currently finishing an UV PBEM. It's 10 September 1943 and I am IJN. Most of my operationnal fighter units are in Rabaul, that is packed with with Base Forces and my Allied opponent sends no day raid against the harbour.
But he has a high-exp PB4Y Liberator that is able to slip into the CAP and in the last week sinks a MSW, damages a sub and hits a MSW I was obliged to dock and that was destroyed in a night port attack. My CAP (60-100 fighters depending of the day-weather) is unable to shot down these bombers and will lose around 2 Zeroes each week to PB4Y bombers.
On the other hand when PB4Y or B-24D try to attack Rabaul in a normal raid, they suffer enough losses so my opponent stopped this raid, while my CAP lost fewer planes.
So I agree there is a serious problem here, at least in UV but only when units are over 90 exp. SO you have to play a lot before seing it. But it is nevertheless totally unrealistic. I can't see how a single bomber may cross a CAP of 90 planes and bomb an undocked ship in Rabaul.
It seems to me that:
1) patrol plane checks to survive the CAP and AA of the hex
2) if survived, patrol plane tests to see if it attacks something
During the part 2) the CAP is totally ignored. A patrol to arrive in sight of a ship and a naval attack on a ship is not the same thing.
Yes... we think alike on this (and experienced same thing)...
Here is what I wrote in UV hreads about this (again I am to early in WitP campaigns to see such things yet so the only reason we repeat this is the message from poster):
"Naval Search" deadly sight->identify->attack routine is unstoppable
Explanation:
In my PBEMs (and my single player H2H tests) I almost never intercepted the dreaded "Naval Search" attack routine (i.e. where single aircraft would do the sight->identify->attack).
I tried LRCAP but to no avail (I varied the altitudes as well and in my single player H2H tests I even had the altitudes 100% matched)... [:(]
The aircraft with experienced crews (and Hudson's are extremely known to be that way after some time - and they have the range as well) will attack with 100% impunity using "Naval Search" attack routine.
Please note that I had cases where my MSW was 1 HEX from Rabaul and fully rested, high morale 27 plane elite Zero squadron was doing LRCAP over it (again please note that this is just 1 HEX from their base) but still the single Hudson on "Naval Search" come to do search mission and sink my valuable MSW additionaly.
There is no way of stopping them... [&:][:(][:@]
Also please note that in UV v2.30 we now finally have historic level bomber accuracy vs. moving ships (i.e. that level bombing is inaccurate against moving ships - just as it should be) but this does not apply to "Naval Search" attack routine (i.e. where single aircraft would do the dreaded routine of sight->identify->attack) - they would never miss.
IMHO, clearly a big problem.
Leo "Apollo11"
Prior Preparation & Planning Prevents Pathetically Poor Performance!
A & B: WitW, WitE, WbtS, GGWaW, GGWaW2-AWD, HttR, CotA, BftB, CF
P: UV, WitP, WitP-AE
-
Oleg Mastruko
- Posts: 4534
- Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2000 8:00 am
RE: Search aircraft on the attack
ORIGINAL: Apollo11
Yes... we think alike on this (and experienced same thing)...
Against the same opponent [:D][:D]
Seriously, personally I don't know what to think of it, it's not just a one-dimensional problem. There is a website somewhere with a detailed day-to-day account of the Pacific war, listing each and every action that happened, however small and insignificant. Reading through that I was VERY surprised to see numerous single plane actions like "single PBY Liberator operating from PM attacked shipping off the coast of New Guinea, sinking two barges and damaging another" or "single Catalina on patrol attacked shipping here and there" etc. Once I checked that particular site I changed my mind as regards "single plane actions" in UV, especially from the Allied side.
So, in general, I consider these attacks realistic. Though, as USN, I never perform them "on purpose". I just need to have many planes on patrol, so as not to be surprised, and if those planes happen to attack a barge or two, or a MSW, I see that as additional bonus, but it's not their primary mission IMO.
ALSO, I played many games as IJN but never was on the receiving end of this "problem" - losing a couple of barges daily at most, but I considered that realistic, and nothing to complain about. I had perhaps 1 or 2 MSWs bombed in this manner in the course of the long campaign. Losing a MSW is very painful in UV, because you can't build any additional MSWs.
But, as I understand, in WITP you're free to build more MSWs so it's not nearly as important as in UV?
Oleg
RE: Search aircraft on the attack
Hi all,
[;)]
I agree that such attacks are possible but they were always (historically) against undefended asset. When you have LRCAP dedicated to protect single ship I don't think any suprise is possible to happen in regular flow of events...
Leo "Apollo11"
ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko
ORIGINAL: Apollo11
Yes... we think alike on this (and experienced same thing)...
Against the same opponent [:D][:D]
[;)]
Seriously, personally I don't know what to think of it, it's not just a one-dimensional problem. There is a website somewhere with a detailed day-to-day account of the Pacific war, listing each and every action that happened, however small and insignificant. Reading through that I was VERY surprised to see numerous single plane actions like "single PBY Liberator operating from PM attacked shipping off the coast of New Guinea, sinking two barges and damaging another" or "single Catalina on patrol attacked shipping here and there" etc. Once I checked that particular site I changed my mind as regards "single plane actions" in UV, especially from the Allied side.
So, in general, I consider these attacks realistic. Though, as USN, I never perform them "on purpose". I just need to have many planes on patrol, so as not to be surprised, and if those planes happen to attack a barge or two, or a MSW, I see that as additional bonus, but it's not their primary mission IMO.
ALSO, I played many games as IJN but never was on the receiving end of this "problem" - losing a couple of barges daily at most, but I considered that realistic, and nothing to complain about. I had perhaps 1 or 2 MSWs bombed in this manner in the course of the long campaign. Losing a MSW is very painful in UV, because you can't build any additional MSWs.
But, as I understand, in WITP you're free to build more MSWs so it's not nearly as important as in UV?
Oleg
I agree that such attacks are possible but they were always (historically) against undefended asset. When you have LRCAP dedicated to protect single ship I don't think any suprise is possible to happen in regular flow of events...
Leo "Apollo11"
Prior Preparation & Planning Prevents Pathetically Poor Performance!
A & B: WitW, WitE, WbtS, GGWaW, GGWaW2-AWD, HttR, CotA, BftB, CF
P: UV, WitP, WitP-AE
RE: Search aircraft on the attack
My concern is not with attacks at sea but with attacks on heavily defended ports or landing sites. I would think that a single hudson on a search mission which even glimpsed an enemy fighter or two would not fly right over the port and try to drop bombs. I would think a morale check would be required for him to even hang around the area and maybe try to report from a distance what he sees in the port.
Of course if a search aircraft encouters a barge, transport, or sub crusing undefended why not attack it?
Of course if a search aircraft encouters a barge, transport, or sub crusing undefended why not attack it?
-
Captain Cruft
- Posts: 3733
- Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 12:49 pm
- Location: England
RE: Search aircraft on the attack
I haven't seen much of this in WitP yet. The IJN has some very elite Patrol and/or Level Bomber units which would exhibit the behaviour. Possibly the fact that naval search is now a lot less effective at long ranges is limiting it.
-
DoomedMantis
- Posts: 1357
- Joined: Sat Aug 24, 2002 4:00 pm
- Location: Sydney, Australia
RE: Search aircraft on the attack
They are affected by CAP and Flak, but it doesnt show up on the combat replay
I shall make it a felony to drink small beer.
- Shakespeare
- Shakespeare
RE: Search aircraft on the attack
I have been playing scenario 15 campaign (Ver 1.21) vs the Allied Hard AI and have seen alot of naval attacks by patrolling Dutch aircraft, often 1 or 2 hits a day. Most of these are in hexes with CAP and once a light CV TF consisting of two CVE's were attacked and the CVE Taiho seriously damaged. This was with good, rested CAP with no other air attacks. If I were the Allies, I'd scrap all my bombers and build more Do-24K2's [;)]. I can see a patrol aircraft finding a TF at sea with no CAP and dropping some bombs and scoring a hit or two but these results are a concern, IMHO.
"I propose to fight it out on this line if it takes all summer."-Note sent with Congressman Washburne from Spotsylvania, May 11, 1864, to General Halleck. - General Ulysses S. Grant
-
Bradley7735
- Posts: 2073
- Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2004 8:51 pm
RE: Search aircraft on the attack
Search planes sank the Kinugasa (or the Furutaka). Sure, she was already damaged, but two SBD search plane bombed and sunk her the next morning.
Search planes very heavily damaged the Zuiho just before one of the major carrier battles (I think it was Santa Cruz). 2 SBD search planes both hit the Zuiho and neither were even attacked, except by light flack after their pullout.
A solo japanese bomber sank the Princeton. (I don't know if it was a search plane, but it wasn't part of a large raid)
Do you still think that search planes can't hit heavily defended targets? I'm not disputing that there may be problems with the game (maybe they hit too often, or avoid CAP too often), but historically, it was possible, especially with US search planes (they were frequently armed searches) Read "Helldivers" (can't remember the author). HE's got a whole chapter devoted to armed searches.
In my game (me vs japan AI), I see PBY's hit ships about once every 10 to 20 days. I lose one to two per week to CAP or flak. It doesn't seem broken to me, but I haven't tested it.
bc
Search planes very heavily damaged the Zuiho just before one of the major carrier battles (I think it was Santa Cruz). 2 SBD search planes both hit the Zuiho and neither were even attacked, except by light flack after their pullout.
A solo japanese bomber sank the Princeton. (I don't know if it was a search plane, but it wasn't part of a large raid)
Do you still think that search planes can't hit heavily defended targets? I'm not disputing that there may be problems with the game (maybe they hit too often, or avoid CAP too often), but historically, it was possible, especially with US search planes (they were frequently armed searches) Read "Helldivers" (can't remember the author). HE's got a whole chapter devoted to armed searches.
In my game (me vs japan AI), I see PBY's hit ships about once every 10 to 20 days. I lose one to two per week to CAP or flak. It doesn't seem broken to me, but I haven't tested it.
bc
The older I get, the better I was.
RE: Search aircraft on the attack
Are we talking about 100% Naval Search ?
I never once saw these squadrons attack anything other than subs in UV.
I never once saw these squadrons attack anything other than subs in UV.
RE: Search aircraft on the attack
Just to agree with the sentiments expressed. In a PBEM my opponents Level bombers 'can't hit a barn door with a shovel' but the DO24K-2s get through and hit ships in ports with large AAA and 50+ CAP! Any single aircraft sent on Naval attack wouldn't get within 30 miles of the target.
I think the Matrix guys need to check if the CAP and AAA is applied in the same way against Naval search as against Naval attack.
I think the Matrix guys need to check if the CAP and AAA is applied in the same way against Naval search as against Naval attack.
The greater the difficulty, the greater the glory - Cicero
RE: Search aircraft on the attack
ORIGINAL: irishman
Just to agree with the sentiments expressed. In a PBEM my opponents Level bombers 'can't hit a barn door with a shovel' but the DO24K-2s get through and hit ships in ports with large AAA and 50+ CAP! Any single aircraft sent on Naval attack wouldn't get within 30 miles of the target.
I think the Matrix guys need to check if the CAP and AAA is applied in the same way against Naval search as against Naval attack.
That is exactly what I am seeing. It is not that single aircraft shouldn't be able to hit ships, it just seems this particular aircraft (Do24k-2's) are VERY good at it, even in heavily defended ports and task forces. It is almost as if they are ignoring AAA and CAP as irishman noted.
"I propose to fight it out on this line if it takes all summer."-Note sent with Congressman Washburne from Spotsylvania, May 11, 1864, to General Halleck. - General Ulysses S. Grant
RE: Search aircraft on the attack
This past turn, 1/5/42, I had four ships hit by Do-24K2's on patrol. All four were in task forces docked at bases with CAP.
Not sure if this is a bug or just very aggressive search aircraft, the AI in on "Hard" setting? Has anyone else besides Irishman seen this or comment? Thanks!
Not sure if this is a bug or just very aggressive search aircraft, the AI in on "Hard" setting? Has anyone else besides Irishman seen this or comment? Thanks!
"I propose to fight it out on this line if it takes all summer."-Note sent with Congressman Washburne from Spotsylvania, May 11, 1864, to General Halleck. - General Ulysses S. Grant
RE: Search aircraft on the attack
Hi all,
So in WitP it is same story as in UV (I haven't gone that far in campaign in WitP to see it for myself though)... [:(]
Leo "Apollo11"
ORIGINAL: brisd
This past turn, 1/5/42, I had four ships hit by Do-24K2's on patrol. All four were in task forces docked at bases with CAP.
Not sure if this is a bug or just very aggressive search aircraft, the AI in on "Hard" setting? Has anyone else besides Irishman seen this or comment? Thanks!
So in WitP it is same story as in UV (I haven't gone that far in campaign in WitP to see it for myself though)... [:(]
Leo "Apollo11"
Prior Preparation & Planning Prevents Pathetically Poor Performance!
A & B: WitW, WitE, WbtS, GGWaW, GGWaW2-AWD, HttR, CotA, BftB, CF
P: UV, WitP, WitP-AE
-
Oleg Mastruko
- Posts: 4534
- Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2000 8:00 am
RE: Search aircraft on the attack
ORIGINAL: brisd
This past turn, 1/5/42, I had four ships hit by Do-24K2's on patrol. All four were in task forces docked at bases with CAP.
Not sure if this is a bug or just very aggressive search aircraft, the AI in on "Hard" setting? Has anyone else besides Irishman seen this or comment? Thanks!
Were they all really hit or was it just FOW? I think it has to do something with everything you mention, certainly with "hard" setting as well.
Also, Do24 carries great amount of ordnance in this game. I believe this has something to do with "hit percentage" while on search as well.
But then again Dutch solo Do24 sunk one of the first IJN DDs in the war, so...
O.
RE: Search aircraft on the attack
ORIGINAL: Hartley
Are we talking about 100% Naval Search ?
I never once saw these squadrons attack anything other than subs in UV.
depends on altitude I think (set them to 1000 feets)
when playing japanese, as counter measure I employed float-fighters (Rufe) => in current game "Yamamoto's Prophecy" (end of Jan 43) they have around 50 kills mostly on naval search airplanes!
--
In WITP I'm at the beginning and no problems with search planes yet
-
Captain Cruft
- Posts: 3733
- Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 12:49 pm
- Location: England
RE: Search aircraft on the attack
Well I've thought about this and decided I rather like this feature. It allows "odd" events to happen rather than the usual "more numbers wins". Also, it's the only non-suicidal way the Japanese are going to sink anything in the later stages of the war.
Anyway, the search planes do have to get through CAP/AA before they get to spot the ships so why is it a problem? CAP = 60% does not mean 60% of fighters in the air at all times. I would guess that in this case the game is only "fighting" the search plane against the 3-4 planes actually in the air. No scrambling the whole squadron for a single search plane ...
Anyway, the search planes do have to get through CAP/AA before they get to spot the ships so why is it a problem? CAP = 60% does not mean 60% of fighters in the air at all times. I would guess that in this case the game is only "fighting" the search plane against the 3-4 planes actually in the air. No scrambling the whole squadron for a single search plane ...