Author Topic: having some balance troubles or is everybody cool with this?  (Read 7420 times)

Offline USAFCAPcTSgt

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 211
Re: having some balance troubles or is everybody cool with this?
« Reply #15 on: May 11, 2013, 07:32:32 PM »
The Red Cross was able to tally the numbers for the recent air brawl.  They were able to gather intel from both sides personnel, squadron and hospital records.

United States Navy Squadrons

68th Lightning Lancers (7-10) 3 SBDs and 7 TBMs with 2 on sick call
1841 Sqnd Fleet Arm (4-6) 4 F4Fs with 4 on sick call
325th (7-10) 2 F4Fs and and 5 SBDs with 5 on sick call
412th FS (7-10) 6 F4Fs and 4 SBDs with 2 on sick call
55th FG (4-6) 4 SBDs with 4 on sick call
94th FS (7-10) 6 F4Fs with 6 on sick call
Arabian Knights (11-15) 8 F4Fs and 4 SBDs with 5 on sick call
G3-MF (11-15) 8 F4Fs and 9 SBDs with NONE on sick call
JG2 (7-10) 6 F4Fs and 2 SBDs with 4 on sick call
Nightmares (7-10) 5 SBDs with 7 on sick call
USMC/71 SQN (7-10) 2 SBDs with 10 on sick call
VF-17 (16-21) 10 SBDs and 10 TBMs with 3 on sick call
VMF 216 (4-6) 3 SBDs and 3 TBMs with 2 on sick call
VMF 222 (7-10) 3 F4Fs and 6 SBDs with 3 on sick call
Gunfighters (11-15) 17 SBDs with NONE on sick call
364th (11-15) 9 TBMs and 1 SBD with 7 on sick call

Total

F4F - 43
SBD - 75
TBM - 29

Min - 128 Pilots
Max - 179 Pilots

Total Pilots
150

Total Kills
132

Sick Call
64 including 2 Reserve Aircraft for each squadron


Imperial Japanese Navy Squadrons

Freebirds (7-10) 11 A6M2s with 1 on sick call
162nd (16-21) 15 A6M2s with 8 on sick call
327th (4-6) 4 D3A1s with 4 on sick call
332nd (4-6) 3 D3A1s with 5 on sick call
334th (4-6) 5 D3A1s with 3 on sick call
353rd (7-10) 8 D3A1s with 4 on sick call
367th (4-6) 5 A6M2s with 3 on sick call
416th (7-10) 7 B5N2s with 5 on sick call
49th (11-15) 18 A6M2s with NONE on sick call
9 GIAP (7-10) 7 D3A1s with 5 on sick call
Claim Jumpers (16-21) 11 B5N2s and 3 A6M2s with 9 on sick call
Das Muppets (4-6) 7 A6M2s with 1 on sick call
Duxford Wing (4-6) 4 D3A1s with 4 on sick call
III/JG 11 (16-21) 10 A6M2s with 13 on sick call
JG 54 (7-10) 10 A6M2s with 2 on sick call
Kommondo Notwotny (7-10) 11 A6M2s with 1 on sick call
LCA (11-21) 18 B5N2s with 5 on sick call
Air Raiders (4-6) 5 D3A1s with 3 on sick call
Unforgiven (7-10) 10 A6M2s with 2 on sick call

Total

A6M2 - 100
D3A1 - 36
B5N2 - 29

Min - 152 Pilots
Max - 211 Pilots

Total Pilots
173

Total Kills
105

Sick Call
73 including 2 Reserve Aircraft for each squadron



Just by looking at the stats, you can see that the IJN has numeical supierority between the A6M2 vs the F4F of 2 to 1.  By adding the SBDs, the USN has a slight advantage over the combined Zero arsenal.

In reality, each side suffered from a massive epidemic that kept vital airpower from being untilized.  The outcome of the battle truly hinged on the absent pilots from each side.  Keeping your rosters totally filled from your own squadrons and any pilots sitting in an O'club to pitch in can make the difference tactically and strategically.


This is just from the logs.  Imagine taking this data and adding to the battleplans for both sides.  The outcome would've been different if each squadron was full to the max.

SBD's flying fighter cap over their own carrier? gamey? probably. realistic? rarely.

when you have only a small number of zeros as the only escorts for a bunch of rice paper bombers and you have to try to cover those bombers from not only a full flight of f4fs but from the SBD's that are flying fighter mode...

sorry but I lose all suspension of disbelief not to mention the balance issues of game the game gameplay like this.

we go through all this trouble for historical accuracy by flying ronson lighter aircraft with very small ammo loads vs very durable aircraft with enough ammo to kill about a dozen IJN planes with one clip all in the name of realism and I prefer it that way.

but if im going to take the time and hassle in the name of said realism I'd hope other squads would stay in the spirit of the event.


but fester your just ranting...

check the logs and see how many air to air fighter kills the SBD's got and tell me they have no effect on air to air combat balance. SBD5's had 38 kills many of them on d3a and b5n's.

in short. if your forced to fly SBD's or whatever the reason flying fighter cap with them above your CV to gain a 2 to 1 or more numerical advantage vs any oposing fighters is bad form.


100 Zekes.  What do you mean little fighter cover?


 


Offline Shifty

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9377
      • 307th FS
Re: having some balance troubles or is everybody cool with this?
« Reply #16 on: May 11, 2013, 08:13:33 PM »
Cool!! I did not know that!   :salute

The F2A reference was to early war PTO, in general.. not so much specifically for Coral Sea.

As far as other CAP deployment for SBDs... are you sure that was the only time?  I remember reading something.. I'm pretty sure it was one of the 'First Team' books, that described how, when a Japanese strike was imminent, the SBDs would launch and provide CAP.. and the TBFs would launch and get away from the fleet. It's been a few years, though..



From what I've read it was actually a planned doctrine before the war. They kind of threw it together at Coral Sea despite Vejtasa's success they considered it too costly. I couldn't find any other uses of it but that doesn't mean it didn't happen.  Vejtasa went on to be a fighter pilot. I'm not certain of the actual total but I have read the SBD's air to air kill tally for the whole war was in the 90s.

I was one of those B5Ns that got by the F4Fs protecting the Lexington last night. Our group got scattered by 1841 Sqn F4Fs. The ones of us they didn't get managed to creep away, luckily we could see the Lex burning in the distance. Another squaddie found me and we joined up we watched the activity around the Lexington for maybe a minute two at most. I saw tracers arcing high and some dots swirling above the CV. I told my squadmate I was going to try and sneak in he followed me. In practice we've had better luck launching our torps right around 150 MPH so we slowed our approach a bit. As neared the TF we lined up on the CA's bow using it as our lead to get torps on the CV. We spotted SBDs between us and the CV and they already had their fangs out coming our way. Over vox we heard we had a few more squadmates making another run on the TF. The first pass by Mace was coming into my front left quarter. I got a PW from him. We were just close enough to the TF to where if he was slow to reverse I might still get my torp off with a chance of getting a hit. So I continued to plow towards the TF. I was agonizingly close but just quite to far out to launch my torp when his bullets hit home on his second pass. Long story short...



My squadmate also went down to one of the SBDs right on the heels of my death. However the other group of our B5Ns managed to get close enough to get their torps away before being shot down. One of these sunk the CV which had been damaged by the earlier Val strike.

JG-11"Black Hearts"...nur die Stolzen, nur die Starken

"Haji may have blown my legs off but I'm still a stud"~ SPC Thomas Vandeventer Delta1/5 1st CAV

Offline CAP1

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 22287
      • The Axis Vs Allies Arena
Re: having some balance troubles or is everybody cool with this?
« Reply #17 on: May 11, 2013, 08:21:24 PM »
uumm......100 zeeks? that's 30 over the maximum..........
ingame 1LTCAP
80th FS "Headhunters"
S.A.P.P.- Secret Association Of P-38 Pilots (Lightning in a Bottle)

Offline Butcher

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5323
Re: having some balance troubles or is everybody cool with this?
« Reply #18 on: May 11, 2013, 10:46:07 PM »
uumm......100 zeeks? that's 30 over the maximum..........

Wouldn't that be one huge penalty? I thought there seemed to be way to many zekes defending CV 34....
JG 52

Offline Dantoo

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 965
      • http://www.9giap.com
Re: having some balance troubles or is everybody cool with this?
« Reply #19 on: May 11, 2013, 10:46:26 PM »
Actually eight SBD-3s were used as an add hoc anti torpedo plane CAP during the Battle of Coral Sea. Swede Vejtasa managed to kill three Zekes in his SBD. No Japanese Torpedo Planes were shot down and four of the eight SBDs were lost. Because of the losses the use of SBDs as CAP wasn't attempted again. A hasty last minute addition to the defensive CAP of 8 SBD-3s is a quite different animal than assigning twenty something SBD-5s to your CAP in a 1942 PTO FSO setup. Plus the addition of the F2A Buffalo would make no difference to the setup as Buffalos didn't participate in the Coral Sea battle. The only battle they could be used in would be a Midway setup.

The use of SBD as an anti-torpedo patrol wasn't an ad-hoc single instance.  At times there were more SBDs up for CAP than F4Fs. It was doctrine for that time.  The SBD was used in the role for the Lae-Salamaua raid as well.
Lundstrom details in particular the usage in the Battle of the Coral Sea.

Just one page of his here for a single illustration:
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=tfLTKzIM99IC&pg=PA197&lpg=PA197&dq=sbd+torpedo+patrol&source=bl&ots=hGVE9dQFd8&sig=Hlm3XwcwPU0w9x3YeQfCP9w_x6I&hl=en&sa=X&ei=8wqPUYDOCsaviQfwqoC4CQ&ved=0CE0Q6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=sbd%20torpedo%20patrol&f=false

The whole book is a "must read".

There was another author (sorry forget his name, not as illustrious as Lundstrom) who made a claim that the SBD killed at better than 1:1 ratio during the war.  An extraordinary claim for a plane like this.

I can't readily lay my hands on the numbers of planes fielded by each side.  Anybody got it?

I get really really tired of selective realism disguised as a desire to make bombers easier to kill.

HiTech

Matthew 24:28 For wherever the carcass is, there is where the vultures gather together.

Offline Dantoo

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 965
      • http://www.9giap.com
Re: having some balance troubles or is everybody cool with this?
« Reply #20 on: May 11, 2013, 10:49:47 PM »
Quote
Axis: 55%
 
  A6M2 "Zero" - 70 MAXIMUM
  B5N2 "Kate" - 30 minimum
  D3A1 "Val" - 30 minimum
 
 - All 3 of the carrier-based aircraft types must be used in each frame.

C-32= Light CV Shoho: A6M2, D3A1(250KG GP BOMB ONLY)(with level and dive bomb sights), B5N (TORPEDO ONLY)
C-33= CV Shokaku: A6M2, D3A1(250 KG BOMB GP ONLY), B5N (TORPEDO ONLY)
 
C-34= CV Zuikaku: A6M2, D3A1 (250KG GP BOMB ONLY), B5N (TORPEDO ONLY)
 
Allies: 45%
 
  F4F-4 "Wildcat" - 70 MAXIMUM
  TBM-3 "Avenger" - 30 minimum
  SBD-5 "Dauntless" - 30 minimum

Was that changed?
I get really really tired of selective realism disguised as a desire to make bombers easier to kill.

HiTech

Matthew 24:28 For wherever the carcass is, there is where the vultures gather together.

Offline Dantoo

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 965
      • http://www.9giap.com
Re: having some balance troubles or is everybody cool with this?
« Reply #21 on: May 11, 2013, 10:50:24 PM »
Double post shhheeeshh
I get really really tired of selective realism disguised as a desire to make bombers easier to kill.

HiTech

Matthew 24:28 For wherever the carcass is, there is where the vultures gather together.

Offline CAP1

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 22287
      • The Axis Vs Allies Arena
Re: having some balance troubles or is everybody cool with this?
« Reply #22 on: May 11, 2013, 10:51:36 PM »
Was that changed?

 the f4f max. was lowered, but the zeek max remained at 70.
ingame 1LTCAP
80th FS "Headhunters"
S.A.P.P.- Secret Association Of P-38 Pilots (Lightning in a Bottle)

Offline USAFCAPcTSgt

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 211
Re: having some balance troubles or is everybody cool with this?
« Reply #23 on: May 11, 2013, 11:14:00 PM »
There is no real balance issue based on design of the setup.

The factors that determined the outcome were this:

1) Allied and Axis CICs created the specific orders for each squad
2) Most squads had low turnout if not no substantial turnout in a few cases
3) Axis had 30 more Zekes than allowed from individual Axis squads
4) Fluidity of combat based on first 3 reasons forced the outcome


Low turnout from one side can decrease the effectiveness of any great CIC set of orders.

Offline Squire

  • Aces High CM Staff (Retired)
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7683
Re: having some balance troubles or is everybody cool with this?
« Reply #24 on: May 12, 2013, 04:50:59 AM »
As stated above they were used sometimes in that role.  :salute
Warloc
Friday Squad Ops CM Team
1841 Squadron Fleet Air Arm
Aces High since Tour 24

Offline Shifty

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9377
      • 307th FS
Re: having some balance troubles or is everybody cool with this?
« Reply #25 on: May 12, 2013, 06:43:49 AM »
The use of SBD as an anti-torpedo patrol wasn't an ad-hoc single instance.  At times there were more SBDs up for CAP than F4Fs. It was doctrine for that time.  The SBD was used in the role for the Lae-Salamaua raid as well.
Lundstrom details in particular the usage in the Battle of the Coral Sea.

Just one page of his here for a single illustration:
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=tfLTKzIM99IC&pg=PA197&lpg=PA197&dq=sbd+torpedo+patrol&source=bl&ots=hGVE9dQFd8&sig=Hlm3XwcwPU0w9x3YeQfCP9w_x6I&hl=en&sa=X&ei=8wqPUYDOCsaviQfwqoC4CQ&ved=0CE0Q6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=sbd%20torpedo%20patrol&f=false

The whole book is a "must read".

There was another author (sorry forget his name, not as illustrious as Lundstrom) who made a claim that the SBD killed at better than 1:1 ratio during the war.  An extraordinary claim for a plane like this.

I can't readily lay my hands on the numbers of planes fielded by each side.  Anybody got it?



I was just reading a bunch of stuff from Lundstrom at http://www.j-aircraft.org last night. Like I said in my post use of the SBD was a planed doctrine from pre-war days. Ad Hoc was a bad choice of words on my part.:lol Despite being doctrine every bit of  reading material I've been able to get my hands on describes Vejtasa's CAP flight as an addition or augmentation.  Of the four big 1942 CV battles  Coral Sea/ Midway/ Eastern Solomons/ Santa Cruz this is the only instance I can find of SBDs being assigned CAP during a Carrier Battle.  One reason may be because when they knew they were dealing with the threat of a Japanese CV task force SBDs were too valuable as scouts and attackers. I'm sure there were other instances where they were used as a backup CAP during operations near enemy land bases and I've even read where USMC pilots had used them for CAP. Funny you mention Lundstroms book because I decided I wanted to purchase it a couple of days ago along with Shattered Sword. I have to confess I'm still operating with Gordon W. Prange's At Dawn We Slept and Miracle at Midway era books. Friday night as I was trying to get my B5N snuggled up nice and cozy to the Lexington and saw the SBDs.. My first thought was $#@*&$@!!!! My second thought was Well it is Coral Sea. Dantoo if you have other suggestions of sources on the subject I'd appreciate you steering me in the proper direction. Like I said my library is a bit dated.  :salute
« Last Edit: May 12, 2013, 06:51:35 AM by Shifty »

JG-11"Black Hearts"...nur die Stolzen, nur die Starken

"Haji may have blown my legs off but I'm still a stud"~ SPC Thomas Vandeventer Delta1/5 1st CAV

Offline captain1ma

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 14435
      • JG54 website
Re: having some balance troubles or is everybody cool with this?
« Reply #26 on: May 12, 2013, 07:47:04 AM »
this is from Wikipedia so take it for what its worth;

battle of coral sea excerpt:

At 09:15, the Japanese carriers launched a combined strike of 18 fighters, 33 dive bombers, and 18 torpedo planes, commanded by Lieutenant Commander Kakuichi Takahashi. The American carriers each launched a separate strike. Yorktown's group consisted of six fighters, 24 dive bombers, and nine torpedo planes and was on its way by 09:15. Lexington's group of nine fighters, 15 dive bombers, and 12 torpedo planes was off at 09:25. Both the American and Japanese carrier warship forces turned to head directly for each other's location at high speed in order to shorten the distance their aircraft would have to fly on their return legs.[72]

Yorktown's dive bombers, led by William O. Burch, reached the Japanese carriers at 10:32, and paused to allow the slower torpedo squadron to arrive so that they could conduct a simultaneous attack. At this time, Shōkaku and Zuikaku were about 10,000 yd (9,100 m) apart, with Zuikaku hidden under a rain squall of low-hanging clouds. The two carriers were protected by 16 CAP Zero fighters. The Yorktown dive bombers commenced their attacks at 10:57 on Shōkaku and hit the radically maneuvering carrier with two 1,000 lb (450 kg) bombs, tearing open the forecastle and causing heavy damage to the carrier's flight and hangar decks. The Yorktown torpedo planes missed with all of their ordnance. Two U.S. dive bombers and two CAP Zeros were shot down during the attack.[73]
Shōkaku, at high speed and turning hard, has suffered bomb strikes and is afire.

Lexington's aircraft arrived and attacked at 11:30. Two dive bombers attacked Shōkaku, hitting the carrier with one 1,000 lb (450 kg) bomb, causing further damage. Two other dive bombers dove on Zuikaku, missing with their bombs. The rest of Lexington's dive bombers were unable to find the Japanese carriers in the heavy clouds. Lexington's TBDs missed Shōkaku with all 11 of their torpedoes. The 13 CAP Zeros on patrol at this time shot down three Wildcats.[74]

With her flight deck heavily damaged and 223 of her crew killed or wounded, Shōkaku was unable to conduct further aircraft operations. Her captain, Takatsugu Jōjima, requested permission from Takagi and Hara to withdraw from the battle, to which Takagi agreed. At 12:10, Shōkaku, accompanied by two destroyers, retired to the northeast.[75]
Attack on the U.S. carriers

At 10:55, Lexington's CXAM-1 radar detected the inbound Japanese aircraft at a range of 68 nmi (78 mi; 126 km) and vectored nine Wildcats to intercept. Expecting the Japanese torpedo bombers to be at a much lower altitude than they actually were, six of the Wildcats were stationed too low, and thus missed the Japanese aircraft as they passed by overhead.[76] Because of the heavy losses in aircraft suffered the night before, the Japanese could not execute a full torpedo attack on both carriers. Lieutenant Commander Shigekazu Shimazaki, commanding the Japanese torpedo planes, sent 14 to attack Lexington and four to attack Yorktown. A Wildcat shot down one and 8 patrolling Yorktown SBDs destroyed three more as the Japanese torpedo planes descended to take attack position. Four SBDs were shot down by Zeros escorting the torpedo planes.[77]
Lexington (center right), afire and under heavy attack, in a photograph taken from a Japanese aircraft

The Japanese attack began at 11:13 as the carriers, stationed 3,000 yd (2,700 m) apart, and their escorts opened fire with anti-aircraft guns. The four torpedo planes which attacked Yorktown all missed. The remaining torpedo planes successfully employed a pincer attack on Lexington, which had a much larger turning radius than Yorktown, and, at 11:20, hit her with two Type 91 torpedoes. The first torpedo buckled the port aviation gasoline stowage tanks. Undetected, gasoline vapors spread into surrounding compartments. The second torpedo ruptured the port water main, reducing water pressure to the three forward firerooms and forcing the associated boilers to be shut down. The ship, however, could still make 24 kn (28 mph; 44 km/h) with her remaining boilers. Four of the Japanese torpedo planes were shot down by anti-aircraft fire.[78]

The 33 Japanese dive bombers circled to attack from upwind, and thus did not begin their dives from 14,000 ft (4,300 m) until three to four minutes after the torpedo planes began their attacks. The 19 Shōkaku dive bombers, under Takahashi, lined up on Lexington while the remaining 14, directed by Tamotsu Ema, targeted Yorktown. Escorting Zeros shielded Takahashi's aircraft from four Lexington CAP Wildcats which attempted to intervene, but two Wildcats circling above Yorktown were able to disrupt Ema's formation. Takahashi's bombers damaged Lexington with two bomb hits and several near misses, causing fires which were contained by 12:33. At 11:27, Yorktown was hit in the center of her flight deck by a single 250 kg (550 lb), semi-armor-piercing bomb which penetrated four decks before exploding, causing severe structural damage to an aviation storage room and killing or seriously wounding 66 men. Up to 12 near misses damaged Yorktown's hull below the waterline. Two of the dive bombers were shot down by a CAP Wildcat during the attack.[79]
Tamotsu Ema, leader of the Zuikaku dive bombers which damaged Yorktown

As the Japanese aircraft completed their attacks and began to withdraw, believing that they inflicted fatal damage to both carriers, they ran a gauntlet of CAP Wildcats and SBDs. In the ensuing aerial duels, three SBDs and three Wildcats for the U.S., and three torpedo bombers, one dive bomber, and one Zero for the Japanese were downed. By 12:00, the U.S. and Japanese strike groups were on their way back to their respective carriers. During their return, aircraft from the two adversaries passed each other in the air, resulting in more air-to-air altercations. Kanno's and Takahashi's aircraft were shot down, killing both of them.[80]

Offline APDrone

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3384
Re: having some balance troubles or is everybody cool with this?
« Reply #27 on: May 12, 2013, 07:50:11 AM »
...
 Funny you mention Lundstroms book because I decided I wanted to purchase it a couple of days ago along with Shattered Sword. I have to confess I'm still operating with Gordon W. Prange's At Dawn We Slept and Miracle at Midway era books.
..

There are 2, btw.. The First Team and The First Team and the Guadalcanal Campaign.

You will LOVE them.
AKDrone

Scenario "Masters of the Air" X.O. 100th Bombardment Group


Offline Dantoo

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 965
      • http://www.9giap.com
Re: having some balance troubles or is everybody cool with this?
« Reply #28 on: May 12, 2013, 07:53:16 AM »
Quote
Dantoo if you have other suggestions of sources on the subject I'd appreciate you steering me in the proper direction.

Lundstroms "The First Team" is a good read.  "Shattered Sword" is compulsory!

That link I gave to a page from the "The First Team" shows that at 11.00 am on the 7th May there were 14 SBDs up on anti-torpedo patrol, 10 from the Yorktown and 4 from the Lexington.  There are plenty of other examples just in that book. Another quick one. 1st February, Page 79, "Yorktown at 0903 launched VS-5s fourteen SBDs as anti-torpedo-plane patrol".  That's fourteen up on CAP from the Yorktown alone, months befor the Coral Sea battle.  It wasn't a one-off or two-off or whatever.  SBDs were used as bombers and scouts.  They were also used as fleet air defence in the normal course of operations.

There is perhaps another issue in that I think there were only 36 wildcats between the two carriers.  In FSO we have more planes than were available in the battle itself.  I'm sure the CMs took all this and much more into account when they initially allowed 70 F4Fs.  Haven't got time to firm up the numbers from reality but they're moot anyway.  FSO is not a historical recreation.  Can't be or there wouldn't be any fun. :)
« Last Edit: May 12, 2013, 08:13:43 AM by Dantoo »
I get really really tired of selective realism disguised as a desire to make bombers easier to kill.

HiTech

Matthew 24:28 For wherever the carcass is, there is where the vultures gather together.

Offline mbailey

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5677
Re: having some balance troubles or is everybody cool with this?
« Reply #29 on: May 12, 2013, 08:00:25 AM »
Im cool with this  :D
Mbailey
80th FS "Headhunters"

Ichi Go Ichi E
Character is like a tree and reputation like its shadow. The shadow is what we think of it; the tree is the real thing.

When the game is over, the Kings and Pawns all go into the same box.