Matrix Games Forums

I'm in the early days of 1942 in my first real campaign, and I'm trying to put the Japanese AI in an iron straight-jacket. I'm developing big bases at the following locations:

Sabang (supported by Ceylon)
Koepang/Timor (supported by Darwin and Perth)
Rabaul (supported by Port Moresby, the Australian bases in the NE, and Noumea)
Midway and Johnston Island (supported by Pearl)

I'm establishing minor bases at the Andaman Islands, the Shortlands, Tulagi, Nanomea, Baker Island, and Wake

My basic goal is to force the IJN to concentrate its forces to punch out of that perimeter and use my big American carriers behind the perimeter in a Midway-style operation.

Does this make sense or am I getting overextended? What would happen with a real opponent?

In a PBEM game, you wouldn't be able to hold Rabaul, and would likely lose Port Moresby if your opponent wanted to take it from you. Also Wake is too exposed to hold against a determined opponent.

The AI will not tax you to much.

A human in PBEM as the IJN can pretty much take whatever they decide to take in the first 6 months to 1 yr of the war. Plus they have a tendency to go where you are weak and cut off your strongholds and pound them to dust.

As the allied player be prepared too be slapped around for along time in a pbem game.[:D]

ORIGINAL: madflava13

In a PBEM game, you wouldn't be able to hold Rabaul, and would likely lose Port Moresby if your opponent wanted to take it from you. Also Wake is too exposed to hold against a determined opponent.

In a PBEM game, I would expect to lose Rabaul--however the land base at Rabaul should give me the same advantage Midway gave Spruance--he knew where the KB was, and they didn't know where he was. Although the game engine may get it wrong, that would have allowed a real American four-CV fleet to knock out two of the Japanese CVs before dealing with the remaining ones. With five CVs, the American fleet would have been able to destroy the KB at the cost of just one or two, accelerating Plan Orange by six months or more. Certainly the prewar analyses were not that wrong.

Wake is just a sideshow to keep the Japanese occupied and give me a reconnaisance advantage. I want to force the Japanese player to get serious early. That creates opportunities for counterpunching.

In the first 6 months of the game, you're going to lose your CVs to KB, no matter what. Don't forget the "Zero Bonus" in the game! I learned the hard way about it - I was using Wake as a means to draw KB out, and my PBEM opponent showed me the folly of my ways - luckily a new patch came out and he was gracious enough to allow a restart.

Those first 6 months should be about preservation of forces and slowing down the Japs as much as possible with delaying actions (Singapore/Phillipines). Offensive action will most likely result in you getting slapped badly.

ORIGINAL: madflava13

In the first 6 months of the game, you're going to lose your CVs to KB, no matter what. Don't forget the "Zero Bonus" in the game! I learned the hard way about it - I was using Wake as a means to draw KB out, and my PBEM opponent showed me the folly of my ways - luckily a new patch came out and he was gracious enough to allow a restart.

Those first 6 months should be about preservation of forces and slowing down the Japs as much as possible with delaying actions (Singapore/Phillipines). Offensive action will most likely result in you getting slapped badly.

What is this 'Zero bonus'? The exchange ratio between A6M2s and F4F3s was approximately 1-1 from the beginning. The prewar USN carrier pilots were up to the standard of the Japanese pilots and used tactics that would be recognizable to a fighter pilot today. They were masters of deflection shooting. Their F4F3s were very manueverable for a WWII fighter (comparable with the Spitfire I) and a good deal more sturdy than the A6M2s.

The A6M2s extreme maneuverability was a defensive feature that made up for its lack of protection, but it didn't give the Japanese pilots an offensive advantage over the USN carrier pilots. A fast rate of turn is not necessarily a tactical advantage if your opponent has an energy advantage. Think 'scissors' and 'yo-yo'. A plane with low wing-loading is vulnerable to energy tactics, and the USN carrier pilots were thinking energy tactics from the beginning.

Interestingly, bats use energy tactics--it's the only way they can deal with the manueverability of their insect prey. They even invented VFFing 60 million years before we did.

The Zero bonus has been debated hotly from the beginning. Without wanting to restart the battles, I'll just tell you that the Zero gets a maneuver bonus from the beginning of the war, fading out at the end of April, 1941 (IIRC).

This is a major reason most allied players (except Rob) will be especially careful with their carriers in the early months of the war. Another reason is that some of the carrier fighter squadrons start out with F3A Buffalo, which had both poor performance and relatively poor reliability. The US carriers get AA upgrades in the spring and summer of '42, which is another good reason to be careful with them in the early going.

Waiting for at least one of the AA upgrades is a must as the Allied player...

The game engine doesn't allow much chance into the equation and 99.9% of the time you attempt to face the KB into at least 7/42, AA upgrades, increased Fighters, Avengers you WILL LOSE ALL of your CV's vs from some slight damage to nothing for the Japs.

You will get them back in over a year (respawn), however they are much more valuable if he knows they are capable of stopping an unprotected landing instead of him knowing they are at the bottom of the ocean. [:D]

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

The Zero bonus has been debated hotly from the beginning. Without wanting to restart the battles, I'll just tell you that the Zero gets a maneuver bonus from the beginning of the war, fading out at the end of April, 1941 (IIRC).

This is a major reason most allied players (except Rob) will be especially careful with their carriers in the early months of the war. Another reason is that some of the carrier fighter squadrons start out with F3A Buffalo, which had both poor performance and relatively poor reliability. The US carriers get AA upgrades in the spring and summer of '42, which is another good reason to be careful with them in the early going.

Interesting. Yes, that would be valid against the air force pilots (who were not that well trained), but not against the US carrier pilots.

your assumption about parity loss in Midway type battle early in war are wrong in Witp - wait till october 42
F4F is a must

ORIGINAL: Sneer

your assumption about parity loss in Midway type battle early in war are wrong in Witp - wait till october 42
F4F is a must

I don't quite understand your point. The air groups were historically at parity, and the American CVs had better damage control from the beginning of the war. Are you telling me the game cheats?

ORIGINAL: herwin

ORIGINAL: Sneer

your assumption about parity loss in Midway type battle early in war are wrong in Witp - wait till october 42
F4F is a must

I don't quite understand your point. The air groups were historically at parity, and the American CVs had better damage control from the beginning of the war. Are you telling me the game cheats?

No. It was designed with a Japanese bias and questionable design in some key areas.

Your misconception is that you see WitP as a "historical" model.

It's not.

Even against all 5 USN CVs, the Japanese CVs will utterly stomp your a$$, even in May 1942.

Expectations of historical performance = Forget about it.

FWIW : Zero bonus (applied to Maneuver rating of A6M2 and A6M3)
12-41 : +5 Maneuver
01-42 : +4 Maneuver
02-42 : +3 Maneuver
03-42 : +2 Maneuver
04-42 : +1 Maneuver
05-42 (and later) : +0 Maneuver

Frankly, the Zero bonus is annoying, but the it's not what's going to kill you. It's Japan's 90 exp pilots that are going to kill you (more than the Zero bonus). Still, the Zero bonus just means you die that much faster (*smile*).

Your first shot at PARITY (not guarenteed victory), is in about July when the 6th USN CV (Wasp) shows up. Even then, you better have the RN CVs at your back.

a. Wait until all your fighter squadrons have F4F4s.
b. Wait until all your torpedo squadrons have Avengers.
c. Wait for the Wasp.
d. Combine with the RN CVs.
e. Wait for at least the 08-42 AAA upgrades.

Then you have a chance. Not a guarenteed success. But you'll have relative parity vs. KB (and all those CVL and CVEs). If you can exchange 1 to 1 with Japan, you're doing just fine.

So Why will Japan kick your butt with almost impugnity during the first 6 months?

a. Mostly their 90 exp pilots. Your Allied at start pilots are pretty good (exp in the 80s). But even then Hornet's pilots are in the 60s. Japanese pilots will dominate any combat vs. you planes. You will lose many more than you take down, and their high exp means many more hits than you could possibly score.

b. Zero bonus doesn't help you. Again, it's not the major factor, but it's just making things tougher for you.

c. Allied CVs suffer a "coordination penalty" (that decreases over time). But in 1942, you pretty much can't have more than 2 CVs in a TF, or you risk launching "uncoordinated strikes". That's where you SBDs launch with no escorts, they get slaughtered, and you end up throwing the family cat out the window.

d. Frankly, WitP's handling of large air combat sucks. If you somehow managed 1 or 2 CVs on 1 or 2, you'd get "relatively historic" results. But most Japanese opponents will keep KB together (or largely so). This compells you to keep your units together (because 2 CVs vs. 6 is just pathetic). So now there are huge air-battles with 150 or more planes on each side. You'll see ten pilots getting 12 kills (WitP does not account for ammo in AtA). And because of Japan's high exp pilots, your Allied planes will fall in droves. Yes, you'll kill some of his, and might even score a few hits. But engaging KB in even April with all five of your USN CVs will probably net 4 sunk USN CVs. 1 badly damaged. Vs. maybe 1 sunk IJN CV, and 1 or 2 moderately damaged. You will NOT get historically expected results.

Now you MAY be able to engage some of the IJN CVs if:

a. KB is not together. If you have 4 on 2 (your favor), I'd take those odds. You'll likely score "equitable" results (both lose 2 CVs, or maybe you lose 1, and other cripped, sinking both IJN CVs).

b. For some reason, Japan's pilots have taken a beating. Maybe he bombed a Flak trap, and you shot down 25 Vals. Maybe a group of B-17 launched vs. KB, and you shot down 10 Zeros. Who knows. But unless you've significantly damaged KB's airgroup (to the tune of about 40% casualties, somehow, don't know how you'd manage this), give it a wide berth.


And as a last note, local land based bombers are nice to have. But don't rely on them. They have to have fighters to escort them (usually). While the B-17s may launch alone, they'll still get chewed up by KB (but they'll take down fighters, a good thing). But your LBA is a 2nd strike weapon. Chances are, they won't launch (or do much good if they do), on the first day. That means your CVs will take the first blows, and once you've damaged the enemy CVs (or taken down some of his CAP), -THEN- your LBA will be more likely to launch.

Of course, you'll do what we all did. You'll sail out your USN CVs in May '42, confident that the Zero bonus has expired, and that your 1:1 aircraft vs. KB will will win the day. You'll get clobbered, and swear you'll never do it again. Then you'll be back to emplore new PBEMers to not make the same mistake you did, and it will once again fall on deaf ears...

[;)]
-F-

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

ORIGINAL: herwin

ORIGINAL: Sneer

your assumption about parity loss in Midway type battle early in war are wrong in Witp - wait till october 42
F4F is a must

I don't quite understand your point. The air groups were historically at parity, and the American CVs had better damage control from the beginning of the war. Are you telling me the game cheats?

No. It was designed with a Japanese bias and questionable design in some key areas.

Yes, I've seen the meeting minutes from the Japanese cabinet planning sessions. They estimated they had a 40% chance of a draw (allowing them to keep the NEI) and 60% chance of losing (which actually happened). They were willing to go for the chance of a draw. Doesn't make an interesting game.

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

ORIGINAL: herwin

ORIGINAL: Sneer

your assumption about parity loss in Midway type battle early in war are wrong in Witp - wait till october 42
F4F is a must

I don't quite understand your point. The air groups were historically at parity, and the American CVs had better damage control from the beginning of the war. Are you telling me the game cheats?

No. It was designed with a Japanese bias and questionable design in some key areas.

Hmmm. My grandfather might have approved. (Greatgrandfather was the Emperor's oil advisor, and the family maintained the connections.) We'll see. The IJN bomber pilots *were* extremely good, but they were soon dead. The other thing about the KB working as a six CV unit was not in the cards. The IJN was as nervous about losing them all to an American strike as the Americans were about the IJN. Pearl was a surprise attack, and they still thought they'd lose a couple of CVs.

ORIGINAL: Feinder

Your misconception is that you see WitP as a "historical" model.

It's not.

Even against all 5 USN CVs, the Japanese CVs will utterly stomp your a$$, even in May 1942.

That would not have been accurate.

Expectations of historical performance = Forget about it.

FWIW : Zero bonus (applied to Maneuver rating of A6M2 and A6M3)
12-41 : +5 Maneuver
01-42 : +4 Maneuver
02-42 : +3 Maneuver
03-42 : +2 Maneuver
04-42 : +1 Maneuver
05-42 (and later) : +0 Maneuver

Well, since maneuverability didn't count for that much, it shouldn't matter. If you tried to turn against an F4F3, the American pilot would have pulled up to convert speed into energy, done a flip turn, and shot you out of the sky. The goal of turning was to get out of the line of fire and so you could dive away. If you got your timing wrong, the F4F3 would eat you alive, and the lower wing loading of the A6M2s meant that they had a lower dive speed anyway--oops.

Frankly, the Zero bonus is annoying, but the it's not what's going to kill you. It's Japan's 90 exp pilots that are going to kill you (more than the Zero bonus). Still, the Zero bonus just means you die that much faster (*smile*).

Well, the Japanese bomber pilots *were* that good. It shows up in the hit stats. The problem for the Vals was that they used a smaller (250 kg) bomb and their lower dive angle was intrinsically less accurate, so it came out in the wash. Torpedo attacks in particular were suicidal, and so the Japanese found themselves getting short of pilots really quickly. You pays your money and takes your choice.

Your first shot at PARITY (not guarenteed victory), is in about July when the 6th USN CV (Wasp) shows up. Even then, you better have the RN CVs at your back.

a. Wait until all your fighter squadrons have F4F4s.

F4F4s were inferior to F4F3s; they just took less deck space.

b. Wait until all your torpedo squadrons have Avengers.

There was that problem...

c. Wait for the Wasp.
d. Combine with the RN CVs.
e. Wait for at least the 08-42 AAA upgrades.

Then you have a chance. Not a guarenteed success. But you'll have relative parity vs. KB (and all those CVL and CVEs). If you can exchange 1 to 1 with Japan, you're doing just fine.

So Why will Japan kick your butt with almost impugnity during the first 6 months?

a. Mostly their 90 exp pilots. Your Allied at start pilots are pretty good (exp in the 80s). But even then Hornet's pilots are in the 60s. Japanese pilots will dominate any combat vs. you planes. You will lose many more than you take down, and their high exp means many more hits than you could possibly score.

b. Zero bonus doesn't help you. Again, it's not the major factor, but it's just making things tougher for you.

c. Allied CVs suffer a "coordination penalty" (that decreases over time). But in 1942, you pretty much can't have more than 2 CVs in a TF, or you risk launching "uncoordinated strikes". That's where you SBDs launch with no escorts, they get slaughtered, and you end up throwing the family cat out the window.

That *wasn't* the reason for the 2 CV limit. Experience in 1942 was that concentrating your CVs into a single target was suicidal. It wasn't until later in the war that a CAP could stop a dive bomber attack--if the VBs could start their dive, there was little that would stop them, particularly the American SBDs with their near-vertical angle.

d. Frankly, WitP's handling of large air combat sucks. If you somehow managed 1 or 2 CVs on 1 or 2, you'd get "relatively historic" results. But most Japanese opponents will keep KB together (or largely so). This compells you to keep your units together (because 2 CVs vs. 6 is just pathetic). So now there are huge air-battles with 150 or more planes on each side. You'll see ten pilots getting 12 kills (WitP does not account for ammo in AtA). And because of Japan's high exp pilots, your Allied planes will fall in droves. Yes, you'll kill some of his, and might even score a few hits. But engaging KB in even April with all five of your USN CVs will probably net 4 sunk USN CVs. 1 badly damaged. Vs. maybe 1 sunk IJN CV, and 1 or 2 moderately damaged. You will NOT get historically expected results.

The key thing in 1942 was finding the target. If a carrier group could get a two hour search advantage on its opponents, it could disable a carrier per deckload strike. (Theory said two carriers, but that was based on prewar experience.) The counterattack could do about the same, and so that's basically what happened in the 1942 battles. That's also why I think Rabaul *should* give me a marked advantage. If the game can't model that, it doesn't model naval combat, and I'm speaking here as a retired systems engineer who ought to know.

Now you MAY be able to engage some of the IJN CVs if:

a. KB is not together. If you have 4 on 2 (your favor), I'd take those odds. You'll likely score "equitable" results (both lose 2 CVs, or maybe you lose 1, and other cripped, sinking both IJN CVs).

American admirals would have jumped at 2 to 1 odds--it was a guaranteed win. 3-2 was a win half the time and a draw the other half. 1-1 was a tie, going to whoever got the search advantage and otherwise a draw. 2 to 3 could still be a win with the search advantage, but 1 to 2 was bad news. Midway was a calculated risk--if Spruance could get the search advantage he had to attack, but if he couldn't he had to abandon Midway.

b. For some reason, Japan's pilots have taken a beating. Maybe he bombed a Flak trap, and you shot down 25 Vals. Maybe a group of B-17 launched vs. KB, and you shot down 10 Zeros. Who knows. But unless you've significantly damaged KB's airgroup (to the tune of about 40% casualties, somehow, don't know how you'd manage this), give it a wide berth.

That was exactly what was happening to the KB in early 1942. They had to hold the Kaga out during the Indian Ocean operation for carrier training. Then they detached the Zuikaku and Shokaku for Coral Sea while they worked up replacements for the other four airgroups. The Z and Sh took a lot of losses at Coral Sea, so the A, K, H, and S went to Midway with depleted air groups. They were always behind the eight ball.

And as a last note, local land based bombers are nice to have. But don't rely on them. They have to have fighters to escort them (usually). While the B-17s may launch alone, they'll still get chewed up by KB (but they'll take down fighters, a good thing). But your LBA is a 2nd strike weapon. Chances are, they won't launch (or do much good if they do), on the first day. That means your CVs will take the first blows, and once you've damaged the enemy CVs (or taken down some of his CAP), -THEN- your LBA will be more likely to launch.

Of course, you'll do what we all did. You'll sail out your USN CVs in May '42, confident that the Zero bonus has expired, and that your 1:1 aircraft vs. KB will will win the day. You'll get clobbered, and swear you'll never do it again. Then you'll be back to emplore new PBEMers to not make the same mistake you did, and it will once again fall on deaf ears...

[;)]
-F-

Well if it's like that, I'll shelve the game as unrealistic.

Good Grief Herwin, who p1ssed in your Corn Flakes this morning?

You can quibble all you like. I'm just telling you the way it works in WitP. I'm not saying I agree with the way it works. But that -is- the way it works.

If you don't like it. Take a number.

-F-

ORIGINAL: herwin

Well if it's like that, I'll shelve the game as unrealistic.

Just remember to dust it every month or two.