FSO Proposal

[Saxman]

Anaxagoras,

True. Unfortunately Zeros and Tonies vs. Hellcats, Corsairs and P-38s would probably not be much fun for the Axis. Additionally, the Peggy wasn't encountered until a year later.

I agree, Fencer. It'd be useful to have Oscars and Nicks as well, but it wouldn't help the Axis plane set except for variety

In the interest of accuracy, the revised matchup would look something like this:

United States

F6F-5 Hellcat (from carriers only)
F4U-1A Corsair (from Bougainville bases only)
P-38J Lightning (all land bases)
P-39Q Airacobra (all land bases)
SBD Dauntless (carriers and Bougainville)
TBM Avenger (carriers and Bougainville)
B-24J (all land bases)
B-25H (limited numbers, all land bases)
PT Boat

Japan

A6M2 Zero
A6M5 Zero
Ki-61 "Tony"
D3A "Val" (2nd life in fighters)
B5N "Kate" (2nd life in fighters)

The Ki-84, N1K2 and Ki-67 have been removed since they were not yet in service. I've also removed the FM-2, as they were primarily operating from the "jeep" carriers, so would not be seeing heavy service in the Pacific until the following year (at this time most of them were in the Atlantic). The P-40E has also been removed, as by this time the P-40N was in use and the P-40E doesn't adequately substitue.

Side distribution would ideally be set to 60/40 in favor of the Axis to make up for the performance advantages of the American fighters and bombers. The Kates and Vals would have second lives in fighters as they are essentially cannon fodder for mid-war American iron. Minimum numbers can also be set for TBMs and SBDs, to ensure the Allies don't overwhelm the Axis with large numbers of Jabo Hellcats and Corsairs. Maximum could also be set for B-24s, depending on whether or not formations are allowed.

[Anaxogoras]

If you're worried about the competitiveness of axis aircraft, why not leave the P-40E in?

[Saxman]

It could be put back in, true. I'm not sure if it would have all that big of an impact, though.

[Fencer51]

I would suggest that you look at the use of the B-25C/D against Rabaul and consider the reduction of the number of B-24s.

[Saxman]

Ok, based on these recommendations:

US Set

F6F-5 (CV only)
F4U-1A (Bougainville)
P-38J
P-40E
P-39Q
SBD (minimum number, Bougainville and CV)
TBM (minimum number, Bougainville and CV)
B-25H (limited numbers)
B-25C (minimum number)
B-24J (limited numbers)
PT Boat (optional)

[Anaxogoras]

It's not that the B-24 is so hard to down with e.g. the Ki-61, it's the formations with "fire-all" that are unbalancing.  It's a feature that's supposed to help bombers survive in the main arena when they are unescorted and lack the defensive help of other bombers.  Disabling formations would be an effective way to add balance to such a setup, which looks very promising btw.

[Saxman]

So allow formations for the B-25s, but not for the B-24s?

Restricting the allowed bombload on the Liberators (say, no larger than 500lbers or something) could help further.

What would be really interesting would be to have at least one frame where the Allied objectives are all centered around the Port of Rabaul itself for one massive battle (maybe as the third frame in the series?). If the entire Japanese CAP is concentrated in one area the Allies would need to coordinate properly, otherwise they'll arrive piecemeal and be slaughtered. Granted, that may be a little too MA.

[daddog]

Fencer is right about the B-24’s. With formations they would own the sky. Shoot, just forget all the Allied fighters and IMHO the Allies would win if they flew with 100% B-24’s.

Your first list of a plane set was more balanced than what you have now Sax. FSO at times has a trend that is moving toward ‘historical accuracy’ as opposed to balance game play.  Sure we all want things to be historically accurate, but not at the sacrifice of ‘fun’. Many don’t consider the ‘fun’ factor or put it on the back burner with historical accuracy the being the paramount concern.

Yes the A6M2 was in operation then, but it is a piece of paper. Just a few rounds of .50’s and it is over for that pilot. 2nd life for the Val’s and Kate’s helps, but you needs something that can stand a chance against the 38’s and F4U’s. Ki84 and N1K2 would help balance the plane set and make it much more enjoyable for the Axis players.

As far as limiting the payload, that is not a tool the CM’s have.  They wisely avoid having rules or regulations that they can’t control.

It is a good initial write up Sax and reasonably balanced. It is really tough to balance a mid to late war Pacific event. One is often forced to put in Axis AC that were not in service, drop and or limit the Allied AC. Tough choices.

<S>

My two cents.

[Odee]

Pfffffff!

Ohhhhhhh yeah, a good 'ole USMC slug fest, I so hope we're allies when that one rolls around, oohrahhh

Good old 5th USAAF, 49th FG kick butt time you mean.  Get out Dick Bong, and Tommy Lynch, boys!  The Japs they are a coming!
 

[Saxman]

daddog,

I did include the A6M5. The A6M2 COULD be dropped and replaced entirely with this model rather than having them operating side-by-side. It may be a little later than this period, but is a closer match to the A6M3 we're missing than the Ki-84 and N1K2 are to the Ki-43 and Ki-44.

There's also the 60/40 balance which should help as well. B-24s can easily be limited to no formations, limited to a maximum number of airframes. Minimum numbers for the SBDs, TBMs and B-25C with restrictions on the number of Liberators and 25Hs would require the bulk of the Allied strike to be made up of bombers more easily handled by the Axis. More would also be required because of their smaller loadouts, as well (the 75mm of the 25H really compensates for the B-25's limited bombload).

[daddog]

I did include the A6M5. The A6M2 COULD be dropped and replaced entirely with this model rather than having them operating side-by-side. It may be a little later than this period, but is a closer match to the A6M3 we're missing than the Ki-84 and N1K2 are to the Ki-43 and Ki-44.

Oh I know. I saw the A6M5. I just mentioned the A6M2 because it will be hurting in that setup against any bomber and will be of little use against any Allied fighter that is smart and stays fast.

Good write up Sax, but as I said with the Pacific Theater, mid to late war, a balanced play set is tough, let alone keep the historically minded happy. 

[Shifty]

Another option would be to go with limited Allied aircraft.

Focus on a USAAF vs IJ scenario with P-38H, P-39D, and P-40E
vs
Ki-61, A6M5, and use A6M2 as a KI-43 sub.

Then a few months later turn around and run the same scenario using USN/USMC aircraft
F4U1 and F4F land based with F4Fs and limited F6Fs off CV's vs the same Japanese planeset.

Throwing both Army and Navy birds at the Japanese planeset at once may be a bit overwhelming. Limiting the scope of the battle might make it play a bit more even.

Just a thought.

[shreck]

Manchurian Madness scenario    KI84s, n1ks vs LAs and Yaks    <-----Now that would be a HOOT.

[Saxman]

Problem with limiting it to AAF on one, and USN/MC on the other is that the Rabaul assault was heavily coordinated. USMC escorting USAAF bombers, etc.

Updated, with possible restrictions indicated:

US

F6F-5 (30 Max, CV only)
F4U-1A (25 Max, Bougainville only)
P-38J (25 Max, all land bases)
P-39Q (20 minimum, all land bases)
P-40E (20 minimum, all land bases)
SBD-5 (20 Minimum, Bougainville and CV)
TBM-3 (20 Minimum, Bougainville and CV)
B-25C (20 Minimum, no formations, all land bases)
B-25H (10 Maximum, all land bases)
B-24J (10 Maximum, no formations, all land bases)
PT Boat (Optional, no second life, 10 Maximum)

Japan

A6M5 (no restrictions)
Ki-61 (no restrictions)
D3A (second life in fighters)
B5N (second life in fighters)

Balance: 60/40 in favor of Axis

Special Optional Mission: "Black Sheep One," as in the original write-up.

[Shifty]

You could still have the Army bombers in both sets. However it's your idea so roll with it.