Utter BS

[Feinder]

Akyab. AF(3), Allied owned.
Level 9 forts.
Not overloaded with support personel.
All LCUS (about 3x Divs of LCUs + RAF HQ), all prepped at 100.
AF is not overloaded (less than 50 aircraft per size)
Large minefield (a DD and CL were damaged on the way in)
Surface group defending (4x PTs torped a DD)

And yet, who knew Japan had nukes in July of '42...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Naval bombardment of Akyab, at 30,29


Allied aircraft
no flights


Allied aircraft losses
P-40E Warhawk: 17 destroyed
T.IVa: 4 destroyed
Swordfish: 3 destroyed
Spitfire Vb: 10 destroyed
Catalina I: 2 destroyed
Wirraway: 1 destroyed
Hurricane II: 1 destroyed

Japanese Ships
CL Sendai
CL Kuma
CA Suzuya
CA Atago
BB Kongo
CA Myoko
BB Kirishima


Allied ground losses:
1800 casualties reported
Guns lost 29
Vehicles lost 7

Airbase hits 15
Airbase supply hits 18
Runway hits 142

---

Thats at long range (escorts not bombarding, I can tell, because there were DDs in the surface combat)).

I make it a point to not complain much.

But sorry, I'm throwing the BS flag on this one. Please, please "review" the bombardment routines.

Flame away.
-F-

[dtravel]

You're not saying anything that hasn't been said many times before over the last two years.  [:(]

[Nomad]

But it is OK because the IJN is doing the bombardment mission. [&:][:(][8|]

[Feinder]

You're not saying anything that hasn't been said many times before over the last two years.

I know. But like my mom used to say, "Boo-hoo. Go on out to the garden and eat worms if it'll make ya feel better."

But it does make me feel better.

[;)]

-F-

[niceguy2005]

ORIGINAL: Feinder

You're not saying anything that hasn't been said many times before over the last two years.

I know. But like my mom used to say, "Boo-hoo. Go on out to the garden and eat worms if it'll make ya feel better."

But it does make me feel better.

[;)]

-F-

Eewww. Your mother made you eat worms? [X(]

[popejoy1]

Hi!

Could there have been a "critical hit" or some such (e.g., hit the ammo dump?)

[Sneer]

good - allied enter in offensive mode in my game 
let's lower bombardment casualties

[Feinder]

Eewww. Your mother made you eat worms?

[;)]

[Tophat1815]

If this is a stock game then you deserve every loss plus 50% more........why? Because you have massed 4E Death at your fingertips and all the poor jap does is pointless................."it just doesn't matter".[8|]

[Sneer]

as far as i know late war allied bombardments also act as nuke 

[Kadrin]

ORIGINAL: Feinder

Allied aircraft losses
P-40E Warhawk: 17 destroyed
T.IVa: 4 destroyed
Swordfish: 3 destroyed
Spitfire Vb: 10 destroyed
Catalina I: 2 destroyed
Wirraway: 1 destroyed
Hurricane II: 1 destroyed

Why are you still operating Wirraways and T.IVa's in July? Are PDU's off or something?

[RAM]

We're talking about a long bombardment by 40 8 inch guns and 16 14'' guns. Long range or not: one hour of bombardment by those things would bring hell to earth.

I would expect the place to be very pretty much torn apart by all that massed fire. 203 and 356mm guns are nothing to sneeze at. The runway would mostly be massacred, the aircraft losses seem to me like quite reasonable.

also remember, those ground losses are not deaths, but suppressed infantry... and I certainly would expect a lot of ground units losing their equipment, having injured men,etc under such a massive firepower. Is a quite high loss rate looking at your fortification level, but maybe they simply got lucky, and let's not forget you've got some massed infantry formations at that base. It's easier to hit more if there is a more dense defensive environment in place (more targets-easier for a shell to hit something important)


The only thing I can see here as questionable is that if the bombardment is a strategic one, that's BS. One of the house rules I always try to enforce in my games is that no bombardment will happen unless it's of tactical nature (the bombarder's side has land units on same hex bombarded), or it's prep bombardment for an incoming seaborne invasion.

usually that's enough to deal with the strategic naval bombarding BS.


Anyway I tend to think that naval bombardments cause too much damage to ground units and I won't complain if it's lowered a bit. But the aircraft losses are to be expected, IMHO, and the runway of a small to medium airfield subjected to that kind of firepower should be closed after such a beating.


just my 0.02€

[Sneer]

it is impossible for any side to carry out strategic naval bombardment to fraction of 4E activity
it is easier to hunt attacking forces
second it is hard to keep tempo of such operation
ship weariness ( sys dmg) is more painful than ops losses
subs , minefields , PTs , TB , and another SC TF can defend base with good result
there is little to do against massed 300+ escorted 4E attacks and they can be kept for much longer time - not realistic too

any such naval action  can be done once or twice against good player later it is high risk for irreplacable assets

i don't see a problem  - such action is considered by me as high risk / unknown result  - sometimes when enemy massed planes it is best solution but there is no way sb will make it on daily basis.

and please stop fanboism it is not japan nuke bombadment as both sides has such ability and usually both use sooner or later
how many allied players decided to strike against early lost Rangoon  ??? - most players I know did it  - often with full might of heavy RN ships

[Feinder]

This is a team game started almost two years ago under v1.21.
There is no such thing as PDUs...  [:)]

I am the UK (hense the origination of my sig).  My brother is in charge of the US.  He's fairly tight-fisted with anything that doesn't actually arrive in India.

I "stole" a single group of B-17s from Mac before he decided to hand over the Philipines.  I "stole" the RAAF Throwaway squadrons, because I knew he wouldn't miss them until they were half-way to Ceylon.

My reinforcement track = what arrives in India and the few obsolete squadrons that I manage to sneak away from Oz.  You'd be surprised how much use you can get out out of Throwaways and T-IVs when you don't have a choice.

If I had 200 B-17s, you better believe I'd blow the he11 out of his AFs in Burma.  But this is a team game, and I'm limited the one group that I have (and I don't get first draw on replacements for it [X(]).  I've got about 40 Hudsons and 30 Wellingtons, plus my 48 B-17s (when I can get them off the ground).  My "retaliatory strikes" tend to be fairly bloody affairs (for me) unescorted against Moulmein.  But every once and a while, the crappy weather gods smile in Burma and ground him, and I get to kill maybe 15 Zeros on the ground.  Chances are I'll lose 30 bombers to his fighters (proabably take 10 with me), but at least it's spitting in his eye.



I think I'm doing pretty d_mn well, all things considered.

-F-

[saj42]

Now this may seem a little radical but how about an option to target EITHER the port, or airfield, or LCUs - much like when doing a City Attack with LBA.
At present the bombardment TF hits the whole of a 60 mile hex - IRL it would be more localised.

This may only be possible in WITP II

Just my 2c

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: Feinder

Akyab. AF(3), Allied owned.
Level 9 forts.
Not overloaded with support personel.
All LCUS (about 3x Divs of LCUs + RAF HQ), all prepped at 100.
AF is not overloaded (less than 50 aircraft per size)
Large minefield (a DD and CL were damaged on the way in)
Surface group defending (4x PTs torped a DD)

And yet, who knew Japan had nukes in July of '42...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Naval bombardment of Akyab, at 30,29


Allied aircraft
no flights


Allied aircraft losses
P-40E Warhawk: 17 destroyed
T.IVa: 4 destroyed
Swordfish: 3 destroyed
Spitfire Vb: 10 destroyed
Catalina I: 2 destroyed
Wirraway: 1 destroyed
Hurricane II: 1 destroyed

Japanese Ships
CL Sendai
CL Kuma
CA Suzuya
CA Atago
BB Kongo
CA Myoko
BB Kirishima


Allied ground losses:
1800 casualties reported
Guns lost 29
Vehicles lost 7

Airbase hits 15
Airbase supply hits 18
Runway hits 142

---

Thats at long range (escorts not bombarding, I can tell, because there were DDs in the surface combat)).

I make it a point to not complain much.

But sorry, I'm throwing the BS flag on this one. Please, please "review" the bombardment routines.

Flame away.
-F-

I can´t see anything here that can´t do a US bombardment fleet too. [8|]

But yes, bombardments are too bloody - for BOTH sides! Yes, air battle is too bloody! Yes, ground battle needs to be looked at! Yes, the supply routines are "not really good"!...

The only thing I see here is yet again PTs that are performing good - too good.

[Feinder]

But yes, bombardments are too bloody - for BOTH sides!
Agreed.

Yes, air battle is too bloody!
Agreed.

Yes, ground battle needs to be looked at!
Agreed.

Yes, the supply routines are "not really good"!...
Agreed.

The only thing I see here is yet again PTs that are performing good - too good.
4x PTs gained surprise put a single torp into a DD. I'm not sure how that would be considered amazing (esp since I lost a flotilla of 4 others the week before, without them even firing a shot - very reasonable in my opinion).

But to each his own.

-F-

[greg_slith]

Man, I must be doing something wrong. I've sent six BB's and assorted CA's against targets on Honshu that recon says has almost 100 a/c and 70+ LCU's and there were less than 10 a/c destroyed and maybe a few hundred casualties. NO DAMAGE to port or airfield[X(]. The only tac-nuke I've had was the first bombardment of Truk. On all turns after (I'm talking for weeks after) there was "realistic" damage: a few a/c and some inf and guns. Doesn't matter how many BB's I put in the TF.

[Sneer]

we discuss one result not statistics and as we all know it has no worth from this point of view
without of bigger amount of data
unfortunately as most discussions at forum

[Oliver Heindorf]

ORIGINAL: Nomad

But it is OK because the IJN is doing the bombardment mission. [&:][:(][8|]

nothing to add.