Aces High Bulletin Board
Special Events Forums => Friday Squad Operations => Topic started by: Nefarious on December 18, 2007, 06:21:54 PM
-
As the ground fighting on Okinawa continued, the air battle above reached its end as the Allies delivered its final blow against a beleaguered Japanese Air Force. The story once again this frame is the slaughter of scores of Japanese Peggy Bombers. 51 Peggy Bombers were shot down in Frame 3.
Although the Axis did manage to destroy 5 Hangars and the Allied Cruiser of TF38 it wasn't enough to surpass the total points earned from shooting down that many bombers.
The Scores of Frame are as follows.
Allied: 1375
Axis: 770
Total Scores.
Allied: 4180
Axis: 2370
Besides the fact of losing Drones on Rearm, It seems the Ki67s were the deciding factor in all three frames. The CMs discussed the scoring after frame 1 and adjusted the scores of the Task Forces. The end result didn't see much difference in the scores of each frame I would have hoped to see.
It seemed to me that the Ki67 would be a pretty evenly matched bomber in this arena. I honestly did not think the losses would be so staggering. The cost in points of 160 Ki67s lost over three frames equaled 1600 Points. Obviously, 100% survival is not going to happen, but 50% (generous still?) would of seen a noticeable difference in the score.
Hopefully, I hope it was a fun and successful event for all who participated, as always, comments are welcome. As a reminder, please join us the Friday after Christmas for Christmas over Germany (http://ahevents.org/western-european-theatre/christmas-over-germany.html).
Merry Christmas Everyone!
-
So in other words, Japanese twin-engine bombers were as much lunchmeat for American fighters in the campaign as they were during the actual war? ;)
and well done Allies! VMF-251 was glad to be a part of this, and look forward to the next campaign.
-
Glad you and your squad could join us! Welcome aboard.
-
Japanese did lose the war last time I checked!
-
well with that attitude why would anyone ever want to fly japanese in these events? i sure as heck never want to see ki-67 duty again or at least not for a long time(we did it twice!).
I don't think I remember one fight where we were not fairly badly outnumbered
-
Originally posted by bongaroo
well with that attitude why would anyone ever want to fly japanese in these events?
Thats exactly why we try to make the events as fair as possible, Evening the playing field for game play is our number one goal. I did not design the event to relive the actual battle of Okinawa, We design the event to be set in a historical atmosphere, but ultimately its for the players to decide the outcome.
I don't think I remember one fight where we were not fairly badly outnumbered
Well, there certainly was a large numbers disparity in Frame 2 and 3. And that is beyond my control, but I will tell you that in the end not all fights will see you on the short end of the stick. You can be sure that there will be some changes to this setup should it be ran again. Ki67 scoring, Axis Numbers.
-
If you put Ki67s in ANY setup, you should expect nearly 100% losses. It's just the way it goes. These things are nearly defensless (save for a narrow window for the 20mm) and are easily shot down by even the earliest of US planes. Okay, the earliest of US planes that can catch them.
Every time I see them in some setup, they're dog meat unless there's some super miracle they never see the enemy.
EDIT: Okay, that came off as a bit grumpy, but I've been there before in the Ki67s. I don't think the scoring should emphasize the Ki67s at all. I think it should lessen their impact on the overall score, because in all fairness they're just free points to the opposing team. It's like flying a formation of 30 C-47s into enemy airspace and then docking the team that flew them for every plane lost.
-
The troublesome thing is she's still probably the most defensively capable multi-engine bomber the Japanese had. If HTC ever adds the Betty I think we'd be looking at about a 200% loss rate. Perhaps next time the setup is run allow a certain number of extra "lives" for the Peggy? Say, half the group gets to re-up or something? Give the Allies more targets. ;)
Although, I suppose it's a good thing for the Axis the setup didn't have Vals and Kates, instead. :D
I disagree with de-emphasizing scoring on them completely, though, as they ARE a primary threat and scoring should probably reflect as such.
-
Allied on the victory, even though the scoring was unbalanced it was still a really fun FSO, and thats really the only part that matters.
-
Originally posted by Saxman
The troublesome thing is she's still probably the most defensively capable multi-engine bomber the Japanese had. If HTC ever adds the Betty I think we'd be looking at about a 200% loss rate. Perhaps next time the setup is run allow a certain number of extra "lives" for the Peggy? Say, half the group gets to re-up or something? Give the Allies more targets. ;)
Although, I suppose it's a good thing for the Axis the setup didn't have Vals and Kates, instead. :D
I disagree with de-emphasizing scoring on them completely, though, as they ARE a primary threat and scoring should probably reflect as such.
The the payload a Ki67 has, and the chances of it surviving to land any of it on target, you could up a flight of N1K2s, Ki61s, or Ki84s with 250lbs bombs on the wings and have a MUCH higher survivability rate, a MUCH higher success rate (more likely to survive in to the target, is my guess) and a much LOWER score penalty because they are not 3x twin engine bombers ratcheting the allied score up, if they lose.
I think there are ways around emphasizing killing the bombers, especially when so ineffective. Or, at least if we KNOW they're totally ineffective, we shouldn't penalize the Japanese forces for being forced to rely on them to get the job done. The fact they can't hit their target should be enough, rather than heaping high score loss (often twin engine planes "cost" more) times each drone in the air.
Oh well, just food for thought.
-
Just want to point out, though, that the inability of the bombers to reach their targets isn't ALWAYS the fault of the bombers. If bombers are getting massacred, then there's a probability of a failure of both tactics, and that the escorts may not be doing their jobs and share at least part of the blame. Even the big Allied four-engined heavies are lunchmeat if unescorted with poor tactics against sufficient opposition.
Case in point: My squadron was flying CAP in Frame 2 in FM-2s. Although we weren't a major factor ourselves (VF-31 catching the rearming bombers was the difference maker) IMO the bomber strikes weren't well coordinated. The formations were spread out so there was no mutually supporting defensive fire. While hitting from two directions simultaneously--and both high and low--forced us to divide our efforts, because the formations weren't supporting each other we were generally able to take on each set of pilot and drones piecemeal. Additionally, I only recall seeing 2-3 escort fighters, defending a relatively scattered attack force.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
If you put Ki67s in ANY setup, you should expect nearly 100% losses. It's just the way it goes. These things are nearly defensless (save for a narrow window for the 20mm) and are easily shot down by even the earliest of US planes. Okay, the earliest of US planes that can catch them.
Every time I see them in some setup, they're dog meat unless there's some super miracle they never see the enemy.
EDIT: Okay, that came off as a bit grumpy, but I've been there before in the Ki67s. I don't think the scoring should emphasize the Ki67s at all. I think it should lessen their impact on the overall score, because in all fairness they're just free points to the opposing team. It's like flying a formation of 30 C-47s into enemy airspace and then docking the team that flew them for every plane lost.
I agree that the scoring on the bombers was a bit off. I think that they were 10 points each as they have twin engines. I think that half that would be fair as they are cannon fodder.
Also, it is hard to make an event competitive when you are outnumbered 30 plus pilots in each frame. I know that is out of the control of the event organizers, but does make it tough to give a good fight. I had fun none the less and am looking forward to the next event.
<>
Spazz
-
Good points, Sax, spaz.
Still, it seems the lesser-capable bombers are worth more than they ought (this just an opinion, only based on my thoughts).
If this were a B-26, B24, B17, capable of defending itself, more likely to kill the attacker than to be killed, I can mentally justify a higher points total for killing it. I think for the lesser bombers, perhaps "normal" scoring should be used. That is, it's worth no more than the most valuable fighter on the same team.
If you've got Ki61s worth 5 points, Ki84s worth 8 points, and bombers worth 20, then the bombers would be dropped down to 8 points.
I haven't tested it, I don't know all the stuff the CMs know, so I honestly can't say I'm right, but that's what I'd like to suggest.
-
S! to the axis.
allies had a numbers advantage and that made things even more difficult for an already difficult position of being in a ki84, ki61 or a6m5 vs fast late war USN planes.
I have no sympathy for the n1k2 pilots though. they all deserved to die dweeby deaths.
-
:rofl
-
Originally posted by Spazzter
Also, it is hard to make an event competitive when you are outnumbered 30 plus pilots in each frame. I know that is out of the control of the event organizers, but does make it tough to give a good fight.
IMHO, this is the "meat" of the issue in this event. If one side ups at it's minimums and the other side ups at it's maximums. You are going to have these kinds of problems.
Sounds like most had fun, and that is the real result we are after.
:aok
-
Just a look at the Ki67 numbers reveals a little bit more.
Frame 1 = 25 x 3 = 75
Frame 2 = 42 x 3 = 126
Frame 3 = 23 x 3 = 69
Total = 90 x 3 = 270
Lets Compare Losses...
Frame 1 = 45 = 60% Destroyed
Frame 2 = 64 = 51% Destroyed
Frame 3 = 51 = 74% Destroyed
Total =160 = 59% Destroyed
-
Is there stats available for the losses of other plane types? You were once able to get very useful info from innomi's site such as these and k/d ratio and such. Alas no more.
We've flown Ki67's quite happily in the past, hitting our targets, defending ourselves, and rearming and going again. Happy to do so in the future. Can't remember any complaints about Ki67 in the past except how "uber" it is and how it can't be used as a sub for early/midwar Japanese planes. Reflecting on that, seems kind of strange to hear it maligned for being too weak. Surely it can't be both?
Always had a good rtb ratio when using them. Only problem has been having to slow right down if a drone lost an engine - you get left behind. Never had a problem getting a defender into the 'painful' quarter simply because of raw speed. More than happy to demonstrate defensive technique in them if anybody wants to learn.
Rgds
-
Originally posted by Saxman
Just want to point out, though, that the inability of the bombers to reach their targets isn't ALWAYS the fault of the bombers. If bombers are getting massacred, then there's a probability of a failure of both tactics, and that the escorts may not be doing their jobs and share at least part of the blame. Even the big Allied four-engined heavies are lunchmeat if unescorted with poor tactics against sufficient opposition.
Case in point: My squadron was flying CAP in Frame 2 in FM-2s. Although we weren't a major factor ourselves (VF-31 catching the rearming bombers was the difference maker) IMO the bomber strikes weren't well coordinated. The formations were spread out so there was no mutually supporting defensive fire. While hitting from two directions simultaneously--and both high and low--forced us to divide our efforts, because the formations weren't supporting each other we were generally able to take on each set of pilot and drones piecemeal. Additionally, I only recall seeing 2-3 escort fighters, defending a relatively scattered attack force.
Ding!!! Sax gets the prize. Properly employed and escorted, any bomber in the plane set can penetrate, drop, and retire intact. I was one of those escorts in frame 2, and I can tell you, it was a tough mission to set up an escort. The other problem was that the CIC had 6 fighters escorting 63 bombers. Had the roles been reversed, it would have been 21 fighters escorting 18 bombers--THAT is a survivable mission, I don't care who you run into...
My $.02
-
didn't mean to sound very upset about it. i was mostly just trying to point out that some people bring the mentality that the allies should and will win because the axis lost in real life. that doesn't make a very fun game if people on the axis are expected to loose all the time.
the ki67s are fairly useless to attack a task group with, I hope the CiCs will take note of this. as someone mentioned earlier, hvy japanese fighters would be much more effective and have a good chance of survival to target and home.
and yes, our escorts in frame 3 seemingly abandoned us, wasn't really happy about that
-
Ace, I think our escorts were bored that it took 45 minutes to get to the Task Force so they kindof left us and went to go fight near the spotted TF. Then they all died soon after they arrived at the TF. Might have been due to them arriving in small groups instead of 1 large group.
Average performance by our escorts in frames 1 and 3 for us. It happens all the time, so it's expected.
Attacking a TF with Ki67s doesn't seem to be a good idea.
Lessons learned from this past FSO.
-
The mongrels were tasked with attacking a TG in the 2nd frame. We consciously chose to hit the cruiser and the destroyer since the poundage to kill them justified the lose of a bomber or two. Where as we would have had to have multiple bomber formations hit the CV to sink it. As stated in this thread, our escorts who had the dubious task of escorting 23 bomber formations with 6 to 10 escorts did a good job. We are not a squad who can fly tight formations of bombers, we are a group who will do everything we can to accomplish our assigned task(s).
In that frame our task was to attack and destroy as much of the TG as we could. We went after the easy points first and unfortunately our re-arm was found and attacked by the Tomcatters. We also chose to have split groups. One low with torpedos and one high with bombs. We hoped the first group with torps and their escort could draw all the CAP down while the 2nd group came in over the top. For my first run, this is what happened.
-
we atacked a taskgroup in part one and we all died from aa fire not to fighters
-
Originally posted by bongaroo
and yes, our escorts in frame 3 seemingly abandoned us, wasn't really happy about that
Yeah they did! I dove in on several formations of Ki67s and not an escort to be found. I remember seeing the first set of kis at around 10 - 12k or less and not one escort. Then a few escorts came in. Way too late. What we expected to see where hi escorts and they were not up there. That was only from my vantage point. For all I know the escorts may have gotten pulled away buy allied fighters in another part of the sector.