Torpedo Ordnance

This new stand alone release based on the legendary War in the Pacific from 2 by 3 Games adds significant improvements and changes to enhance game play, improve realism, and increase historical accuracy. With dozens of new features, new art, and engine improvements, War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
Icedawg
Posts: 1613
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2006 8:55 pm
Location: Upstate New York

Torpedo Ordnance

Post by Icedawg »

I just want to make sure I'm reading the manual correctly on this one, because I think something I just read sounds to good to be true.

p 165 "Command HQ's can directly supply torpedoes to groups by expending supply. It does not need to keep a torpedo reserve."

p 166. "If no HQ or BF is found, then a HQ with the base within the HQ's command radius is checked for. If one is found, then torpedoes are expended from it."

I read this to mean that command HQ's can supply torpedoes to any group within their range. If this is true, then in my plan to capture Malaya, I could take Kuantan, move the Southern Army HQ there (range of 9) stock the base with supply and expect to fly torpedo-armed Betty's out of any size 2 or greater airfield I capture on the Malayan peninsula. This sounds too good to be true, so I expect I am missing something.

Can anyone a) confirm my JFB dream about this strategy or b) shoot my plan down and send me back to the drawing board.

Also, from the p 166 quote, can anyone decifer this? "If no HQ or BF is found, then a HQ with the base within the HQ's command radius is checked for. If one is found, then torpedoes are expended from it." I expect it is just a typo and should be deleted to read "If no HQ or BF is found, then a HQ within the HQ's command radius is checked for. If one is found, then torpedoes are expended from it." That "with the base" makes no sense to me (although as I have posted elsewhere, manual writers seem to have their own odd way of saying things, so maybe it does have meaning).
User avatar
Brady
Posts: 6083
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 12:48 pm
Location: Oregon,USA

RE: Torpedo Ordnance

Post by Brady »


I thought it had to be an Air HQ.
Image


SCW Beta Support Team

Beta Team Member for:

WPO
PC
CF
AE
WiTE

Obi-wan Kenobi said it best: A lot of the reality we perceive depend on our point of view
User avatar
EUBanana
Posts: 4255
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2003 3:48 pm
Location: Little England
Contact:

RE: Torpedo Ordnance

Post by EUBanana »

I think the OP may be correct, because in the Guadalcanal scenario IIRC its possible to have Catalinas loaded with torpedoes from Noumea, and the only special thing about Noumea, far as I can tell, is that it has SOPAC HQ - which doesn't have torpedo ordnance.

Yet the 5th Airforce HQ you get later on (command radius 1 air HQ, no torpedo ordnance) does not let you load torpedoes.

As torps are not my main weapon anyway I've not really hassled with it too much, beyond retire the Beauforts at PM for Mitchells, as I assumed 5th Airforce would be good enough and it isn't.
Image
User avatar
EUBanana
Posts: 4255
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2003 3:48 pm
Location: Little England
Contact:

RE: Torpedo Ordnance

Post by EUBanana »

Yup, just doublechecking now.

At Port Moresby (airfield 5, 10k supply, 5th airforce air HQ), my Catalinas cannot load torpedoes.

At Townsville (15k supply, SWPAC HQ) my Beauforts can load torpedoes.

There are no other HQs in range.  None of the HQs specifically hold torpedo ordnance.

However when I move my Beauforts to Cairns (airfield 4, 2k supply, no HQ but in range of SWPAC HQ at Townsville) they cannot load torpedoes.

So I'm not quite sure whats going on here.  [&:]  As I find Dauntlesses to be the best antiship weapon I've got anyway I've not really stressed about it too much.
Image
User avatar
Brady
Posts: 6083
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 12:48 pm
Location: Oregon,USA

RE: Torpedo Ordnance

Post by Brady »


Whats true for Guad Scenario is not nescessarly true for the GC.

Image


SCW Beta Support Team

Beta Team Member for:

WPO
PC
CF
AE
WiTE

Obi-wan Kenobi said it best: A lot of the reality we perceive depend on our point of view
jazman
Posts: 369
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 8:03 am
Location: Crush Depth

RE: Torpedo Ordnance

Post by jazman »

ORIGINAL: Brady


Whats true for Guad Scenario is not nescessarly true for the GC.


Do you mean game mechanics? If game mechanics, then maybe we should cast a moderately skeptical eye towards the Guad scenario as a training scenario.
BS, MS, PhD, WitP:AE, WitE, WitW
User avatar
michaelm75au
Posts: 12457
Joined: Sat May 05, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

RE: Torpedo Ordnance

Post by michaelm75au »

A Command Hq (with sufficient supply) can act as an Air Hq for torpedo supply purposes if no Air Hq is in range.
Michael
User avatar
Sheytan
Posts: 811
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2006 11:53 pm

RE: Torpedo Ordnance

Post by Sheytan »

So once again betty abuse is going to be too easy to effect...wow. Now im really disappointed with the game. Wasnt enough said about IJ torpedo bomber abuse in WITP?
[:@] in essence there IS NO limitations at all here.
ORIGINAL: michaelm

A Command Hq (with sufficient supply) can act as an Air Hq for torpedo supply purposes if no Air Hq is in range.
User avatar
tigercub
Posts: 2026
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2003 12:25 pm
Location: brisbane oz

RE: Torpedo Ordnance

Post by tigercub »

you will just have to do what the allies did during the war sink the transports and bomb the supply bases you are not going to do it over night but you can do it.But its harder for the japs now maybe not as hard some would like.

Tiger!
Image
You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life
User avatar
Brady
Posts: 6083
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 12:48 pm
Location: Oregon,USA

RE: Torpedo Ordnance

Post by Brady »


Nettys are far less efective in AE than they were in stock for a number of reasions, particularly for the Human player. The more you play the game the more aparent these become.
Image


SCW Beta Support Team

Beta Team Member for:

WPO
PC
CF
AE
WiTE

Obi-wan Kenobi said it best: A lot of the reality we perceive depend on our point of view
User avatar
michaelm75au
Posts: 12457
Joined: Sat May 05, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

RE: Torpedo Ordnance

Post by michaelm75au »

ORIGINAL: Sheytan

So once again betty abuse is going to be too easy to effect...wow. Now im really disappointed with the game. Wasnt enough said about IJ torpedo bomber abuse in WITP?
[:@] in essence there IS NO limitations at all here.
ORIGINAL: michaelm

A Command Hq (with sufficient supply) can act as an Air Hq for torpedo supply purposes if no Air Hq is in range.

I can't see the abuse.
There are not that many Air or command hqs on either side, and they tend to be spread around the map.

Plus you need the supply available at the base:
for AF 4+, you 2 times (or 1 time with an air/command hq present) base's required supply
for AF 3, you 5 times (or 1 time with a air/command hq present) base's required supply
for AF 2, you 6 times (or 2 times with a air/command hq present) base's required supply
for AF 1, you 7 times (or 3 times with a air/command hq present) base's required supply

Michael
User avatar
EUBanana
Posts: 4255
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2003 3:48 pm
Location: Little England
Contact:

RE: Torpedo Ordnance

Post by EUBanana »

ORIGINAL: Sheytan
So once again betty abuse is going to be too easy to effect...wow. Now im really disappointed with the game. Wasnt enough said about IJ torpedo bomber abuse in WITP?
[:@] in essence there IS NO limitations at all here.

They aren't as good as in stock when in the air, as they die like flies up against fighters, even small numbers of them. One Beaufighter VIC squadron in my game has four aces in it after just one week of combat with Betties.

That said I do think this is a sorry state of affairs, if only because now the buggers can be anywhere. I think that makes some of the CENTPAC island chains unbelievably defensible. No longer is Kwajalein the key to an island chain, you have to suppress every single atoll with an airfield 2 which is basically impossible, and with leaky CAP - would you want to risk it?
Image
User avatar
EUBanana
Posts: 4255
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2003 3:48 pm
Location: Little England
Contact:

RE: Torpedo Ordnance

Post by EUBanana »

There are a dozen air HQs in the Japanese OOB more or less in the early war, plus all the command HQs on top.

How many do you need?  [&:]  Thats loads.   You're essentially swapping the scarce resource of level 4 airfields in WITP for the scarce resource of air HQs in AE (not so scarce at all, in fact, when you consider command radii).

I'm more receptive to the supply argument which might at least be in an issue in some CENTPAC island chain, but somewhere like, say, Malaya, or Burma, or Java, or even Timor, thats practically a non-issue.
Image
herwin
Posts: 6047
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 9:20 pm
Location: Sunderland, UK
Contact:

RE: Torpedo Ordnance

Post by herwin »

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

ORIGINAL: Sheytan
So once again betty abuse is going to be too easy to effect...wow. Now im really disappointed with the game. Wasnt enough said about IJ torpedo bomber abuse in WITP?
[:@] in essence there IS NO limitations at all here.

They aren't as good as in stock when in the air, as they die like flies up against fighters, even small numbers of them. One Beaufighter VIC squadron in my game has four aces in it after just one week of combat with Betties.

That said I do think this is a sorry state of affairs, if only because now the buggers can be anywhere. I think that makes some of the CENTPAC island chains unbelievably defensible. No longer is Kwajalein the key to an island chain, you have to suppress every single atoll with an airfield 2 which is basically impossible, and with leaky CAP - would you want to risk it?

HISTORY

All Japanese attack aircraft needed an escort in 1942 to survive the Allied fighter defences.
Harry Erwin
"For a number to make sense in the game, someone has to calibrate it and program code. There are too many significant numbers that behave non-linearly to expect that. It's just a game. Enjoy it." herwin@btinternet.com
User avatar
Brady
Posts: 6083
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 12:48 pm
Location: Oregon,USA

RE: Torpedo Ordnance

Post by Brady »


Thier are several practile limatations as well-

-They must have fighter escort to operat agasnt CV's, or defended targets.

-In AE the chance of a strike going in without fighter cover even if one is present is prety good, meaning their toast.

-Stacking limits at bases mean something in AE, so you cant have a lot of them at small bases and have fighters their as well.

-Base sizes also dictate the range they will fly with torps.

-Target type also determines if they will actualy carry torps, if they have them available.

-Dection and trigering of an atack beyone 12 to 14 hexes is more or less imposable from the point of orgine.

-Range efects dramaticaly efect their abality to function with regard to putting ordance on target.

- A varity of factors make them almost usless agasnt fast warships

- They cant hit anything at night prety much all the time no mater what.
Image


SCW Beta Support Team

Beta Team Member for:

WPO
PC
CF
AE
WiTE

Obi-wan Kenobi said it best: A lot of the reality we perceive depend on our point of view
User avatar
Shark7
Posts: 7936
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 4:11 pm
Location: The Big Nowhere

RE: Torpedo Ordnance

Post by Shark7 »

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

ORIGINAL: Sheytan
So once again betty abuse is going to be too easy to effect...wow. Now im really disappointed with the game. Wasnt enough said about IJ torpedo bomber abuse in WITP?
[:@] in essence there IS NO limitations at all here.

They aren't as good as in stock when in the air, as they die like flies up against fighters, even small numbers of them. One Beaufighter VIC squadron in my game has four aces in it after just one week of combat with Betties.

That said I do think this is a sorry state of affairs, if only because now the buggers can be anywhere. I think that makes some of the CENTPAC island chains unbelievably defensible. No longer is Kwajalein the key to an island chain, you have to suppress every single atoll with an airfield 2 which is basically impossible, and with leaky CAP - would you want to risk it?

I think it makes it very historical. No longer can the AFB put everything into taking a single base and cripple the Japanese player in the area. You're going to have to actually provide air cover to defend Kwajelien, and take Eniwetok and Wotje to secure it. You can still bypass the little dot bases, but you aren't going to be able to control the entire Marshall Islands chain just by taking one base.
Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'
User avatar
Brady
Posts: 6083
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 12:48 pm
Location: Oregon,USA

RE: Torpedo Ordnance

Post by Brady »

ORIGINAL: Shark7

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

ORIGINAL: Sheytan
So once again betty abuse is going to be too easy to effect...wow. Now im really disappointed with the game. Wasnt enough said about IJ torpedo bomber abuse in WITP?
[:@] in essence there IS NO limitations at all here.

They aren't as good as in stock when in the air, as they die like flies up against fighters, even small numbers of them. One Beaufighter VIC squadron in my game has four aces in it after just one week of combat with Betties.

That said I do think this is a sorry state of affairs, if only because now the buggers can be anywhere. I think that makes some of the CENTPAC island chains unbelievably defensible. No longer is Kwajalein the key to an island chain, you have to suppress every single atoll with an airfield 2 which is basically impossible, and with leaky CAP - would you want to risk it?

I think it makes it very historical. No longer can the AFB put everything into taking a single base and cripple the Japanese player in the area. You're going to have to actually provide air cover to defend Kwajelien, and take Eniwetok and Wotje to secure it. You can still bypass the little dot bases, but you aren't going to be able to control the entire Marshall Islands chain just by taking one base.


Except this doesent realy work that way in practile terms, for a Human in a PBEM game as the Japanese they will nead to move an HQ in with suficient range to cover all those isalnds, most HQ's have short ranges and basicaly cant cover much more than their own hex.

Thier are other factors that compound the problem of defending the Mandates as well, some of which I illuted to above, non the least of which is spoting enemy TF's at ranges beyond 12 hexes.

Stacking is an obvious one as most of the Mandates are limited to 6K for stacking, you put a big HQ their and you have used up a lot of stacking space.

Human Japanese players nead to wory over the mandates, particluarly in PBEM games, that is if keeping them is something their interested in doing.
Image


SCW Beta Support Team

Beta Team Member for:

WPO
PC
CF
AE
WiTE

Obi-wan Kenobi said it best: A lot of the reality we perceive depend on our point of view
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: Torpedo Ordnance

Post by witpqs »

Are you guys actually saying that in AE a Betty level bomber (for example) can carry torpedoes when operating out of a size 2 airfield?
User avatar
Brady
Posts: 6083
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 12:48 pm
Location: Oregon,USA

RE: Torpedo Ordnance

Post by Brady »

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Are you guys actually saying that in AE a Betty level bomber (for example) can carry torpedoes when operating out of a size 2 airfield?

Yes, this aplys to all bombers though, the airfield restrictions in stock are not the same as AE, AE is more realistic in this (and overall) than stock was.

A Betty with a Torp (full load) had about the same Take Off run as a fully loaded P-38.
Image


SCW Beta Support Team

Beta Team Member for:

WPO
PC
CF
AE
WiTE

Obi-wan Kenobi said it best: A lot of the reality we perceive depend on our point of view
User avatar
Sheytan
Posts: 811
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2006 11:53 pm

RE: Torpedo Ordnance

Post by Sheytan »

The HQ Radius needs to be 1 hex for this purpose...

The HQ needs to be a AIR HQ for this purpose...THAT Air HQ needs to have ready torpedos available as per the new air support units/hqs with them stocked. Not simply...sufficent supply. I thought that was the entire PURPOSE of those new units.

The recon to strike issue is a NON issue, I would simply park subs in impending target hexes where I knew the allies are massing...

Why would you need to put the entire unit hq there? I would bet you can probably effect the same thing with a HQ fragment no?

This really is a very bad compromise to what people had been saying about the IJ torpedo bomber mania from WITP, as I said its easier now, not harder. I can set up a torpedo bomber overlap that would span the areas from tarawa all the way to india under this system now.

Further the escort comment is a no issue as well, since allied CVs are few and far between for a consideralbe portion of the game, meaning...and uncapped TF is going to get murdered by these bombers.

Very disappointed...

ORIGINAL: Brady
ORIGINAL: Shark7

ORIGINAL: EUBanana




They aren't as good as in stock when in the air, as they die like flies up against fighters, even small numbers of them. One Beaufighter VIC squadron in my game has four aces in it after just one week of combat with Betties.

That said I do think this is a sorry state of affairs, if only because now the buggers can be anywhere. I think that makes some of the CENTPAC island chains unbelievably defensible. No longer is Kwajalein the key to an island chain, you have to suppress every single atoll with an airfield 2 which is basically impossible, and with leaky CAP - would you want to risk it?

I think it makes it very historical. No longer can the AFB put everything into taking a single base and cripple the Japanese player in the area. You're going to have to actually provide air cover to defend Kwajelien, and take Eniwetok and Wotje to secure it. You can still bypass the little dot bases, but you aren't going to be able to control the entire Marshall Islands chain just by taking one base.


Except this doesent realy work that way in practile terms, for a Human in a PBEM game as the Japanese they will nead to move an HQ in with suficient range to cover all those isalnds, most HQ's have short ranges and basicaly cant cover much more than their own hex.

Thier are other factors that compound the problem of defending the Mandates as well, some of which I illuted to above, non the least of which is spoting enemy TF's at ranges beyond 12 hexes.

Stacking is an obvious one as most of the Mandates are limited to 6K for stacking, you put a big HQ their and you have used up a lot of stacking space.

Human Japanese players nead to wory over the mandates, particluarly in PBEM games, that is if keeping them is something their interested in doing.
Post Reply

Return to “War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition”