FSO: A Mindanao Sunset, The Fall of Mindanao (1942) Setup

[ghostdancer]

A Mindanao Sunset
The Fall of Mindanao (1942)

PLAYBILITY NOTES
Several non-historical adaptations have been made to this campaign to make it playable for 500+ players.

1) Obviously the U.S. forces have more planes involved in the battle than were historical available and involved in the battle for Mindanao in 1942.

2) Historically the U.S. had dispatched 52 A-24 Banshees (the army version of the SBD) to reinforce the Philippines but they were diverted to Australia instead. In this setup I am assuming the A-24 actually were delivered to the Philippines.

3) The Japanese invasion of the southern Philippines was not really contested initially with any air assets. the Surviving aircraft were concentrated on Luzon and only redeployed to Mindanao after Bataan fell. In this setup we are assuming the U.S. had sizable forces in place to contest the invasion of the southern Philippines and for the fight for Bataan.

4) We don't have the Japanese Betty bomber for this event so we will substituting the JU88 for the Betty as we have done in previous early Pacific War FSOs.

5) B25Cs will be available in Frame 2 and Frame 3 because historically Australian B-25s staging out of Mindanao conducted attacks on Japanese positions including attacking Cebu on Cebu Island.

6) A very, very limited number of B17s will be available in later frame again because historically B-17s were flown out of Australia to Mindanao and operated for several days in April before returning to Australia.


DESCRIPTION
While the Japanese battle plan put an emphasis on taking the island of Luzon and neutralizing MacArthur's force there they also conduct several advance landing on other Philippine Islands. These landings were of limited scope and size but targeted key positions in a hope of cutting off MacArthur's supply routes to Australia and also preventing him from withdrawing into the Southern Philippines . A position that could be much more easily supported by bases in the Dutch East Indies and Australia.

The attack on Mindanao occurred on 19 December when, after a day of bombing, Japanese troops staged a night landing at Davao that met little resistance as the badly outnumbered 2d Battalion, 101st Infantry, withdrew. A few American planes, including B-17s stationed in Australia, attacked the beachhead on 22 December, but they could do little to delay the Japanese advance. Jolo Island was then invaded on December 24th.

However, as long as the battle raged on Luzon the Japanese did not have the forces available to expand their holdings or conduct extensive operations in the southern Philippines. This all changed in April as the Bataan campaign drew toward a close. Also surviving aircraft started to redeploy from Bataan to Mindanao on April 8th.

April 10th the Japanese invaded Cebu, the same day Bataan finally fell, and most of the island was under Japanese control by April 12.  

At the same time the Japanese put into motion their plan for taking subjugating all of Mindanao. While the allies conduct operations with Australian based B25s, staging through Mindanao in conjunction with B17s also temporarily deployed to Mindanao, against Japanese positions in the Southern Philippines for several days until withdrawn to Australia.



PLANESET FOR THE FSO

USAFFE PLANESET
A-24 (Army version of the SBD)
B-17G (not available frame 1, very limited numbers)
B-25C (not available frame 1)
P40B
P40E

JAPANESE PLANESET
A6M2
B5N
D3A1
G4M (JU88 substituting for the Betty, not available frame 1)


 
COUNTRY PERCENTAGES
The sides will be divided into roughly 50% USAAF and 50% Japanese.

 
SCORING

AIRCRAFT
05 pts - Single Engine AC with 1 crew
10 pts - Single or double engine AC with 2 crew
15 pts - Double Engine AC with 3+ crew

BASES
288 - Small Airfield
396 - Medium Airfield
572 - Large Airfield
219 - Vehicle Base

SHIPS
CV - 120 points
CA - 60 points
DD - 30 points

NOTE: When a base is attacked the attacker gets the points for objects destroyed at the base while the defender gets the points for all objects not destroyed at the base.

 
 
ARENA SETTINGS
- mindan09
- Fuel 1.00
- Icons --> Friendly and Enemy 3K at all altitudes
- .5 Ack
- Radar: none
- Fighter and Bomber warning range 26,000 (about 5 miles)
- Tower range set to 26,000 (for display only to match the above setting)
- Clouds / visibility
  Frame 1, 9 miles
  Frame 2, 11 miles
  Frame 3, 8 miles
- Radar off
- Friendly collisions off
- Enemy collisions on
- Kill shooter off
- Calm winds
- Time: 11 AM
 
 
SPECIAL RULES
 
NOTE: special rules sent out with the objectives trump these special rules.

1. B5Ns get a second life.

2. Bomber formations are disabled for B-17s.

3. Bomber formations are enabled for B25Cs and JU88s.

4. Partial damage is awarded for CV damage. If the a CV suffers 2000 lbs of damage  40 points are awarded. If a CV suffers 4000 lbs of damage another 40 points are awarded for a total of 80. If the CV is sunk the full amount of 120 points is awarded (the last 40 points is added to the previous 80).
 
5. A minimum and maximum number will be assigned to each aircraft type. The CiC of each side must deploy the designated minimum per aircraft type and can not more than the maximum per aircraft type. Outside of that the CiCs can deploy the aircraft types anyway the want (i.e. can have squads fly 2 aircraft types and in split they wish as long as squads are assigned same objective).

6. If both CiCs agree they may have the setup CM end the frame early. This is usually done if one side wipes out the other side (i.e. 60 versus 5).

7. Dead pilots may gun bombers. They may not man the guns of airfields or ships.

8. Ships can maneuver by the their side during the frame as long as they stay in their containment area. Ships must stay in containment area defined in the objective orders. If they go outside of the containment area a penalty will be assessed.

9. All targets must be attacked within the first hour of the event. Both CiCs should include sending their battle plans to me so that I have proof that they planned to attack their targets by T+60.

10. All attack targets assigned must be attacked by a credible force. I define a credible force to be at the very least 3 x 4-6 squads (so 12-16 planes) or 1 7x10 squad and 1 4x6 squad or 1 11x15 squad. Obviously CiCs can deploy a larger force per target as their plan dictates but no defending or attacking with just 1 x 4-6 squad.

11. All defense targets must be defended by a credible force. I define a credible force to be at the very least I define a credible force to be at the very least 3 x 4-6 squads (so 12-16 planes) or 1 7x10 squad and 1 4x6 squad or 1 11x15 squad.Obviously CiCs can deploy a larger force per target as their plan dictates but no defending or attacking with just 1 x 4-6 squad.

[TUK]

Calibration for bombers?

[daddog]

Why did you put the icon settings in bold?                                           

[ghostdancer]

MA style, not manual calibration.

As for the icon settings in bold just trying to make sure that nobody says "oh, I didn't see them" or was not aware of the setting. There seems to be some comments of people saying I didn't realize what the setting was until after a frame or in the frame. So just trying to do what I can to point it out from the very beginning.

[Dantoo]

Just want to make a point on your "credible force" concept.  You may in fact at times be creating the very problem you seek to solve.  With a minimum of 3 X 4-6 squads required to carry bombs to each target, and trios being available, you are generally looking at 36-54 bombers arriving over a target and in theory up to 18 more (72).  Throw in an escort and any squad, even a large squad, will be overwhelmed.  Defenders armed with lightweight early war firepower will make little impact.

It's certainly not an unreasonable concept to present this scenario as part of a historical background, but I'm not certain that is your full intent.  If you further try to control the situation thus created by limiting numbers of airframes then you might find you end up with conflicting rules (saying you have to have a minimum number of guys flying a maximum number planes).

Just to give an expanded explanation of how these thoughts arose in my mind:
In the just completed FSO, where your limits weren't in play, there was a requirement in one frame to attack about five targets.  If I remember correctly, small or medium squads were used to deploy Ju88s against each target.  My squad flew Ju88s.  Our escort didn't role (sic) up (another story) so we split our small/medium squad into bombers -escorts.  We flew about 6 trios and 4 fighters I think from memory.  For the defenders, I am sure we were a credible force and we carried enough ord to do the job 10 times over.  Both defenders and attackers broke contact bruised but happy enough.  Had the full force been available we would have overwhelmed the defenders. The full force might just have scraped into your credible force requirement.

You could ease the problem and keep the requirement by reducing the number of targets but again you create the problem you seem to be trying to resolve.  Perhaps there is a way of producing a credible force requirement that is complementary to the size of the target that could produce your required outcome.

[ghostdancer]

Dantoo I have used the same credible force requirements for a very long time now. This is nothing new from me. The exact numbers are also tweaked depending on past stats. This particular level is based on 480 or higher turnout. Once squads commit to event I could adjust it depending on participating (lower it if less possible pilots are involved).

Assigning min and max plane type is also nothing new from me. I am not changing anything here or introducing anything new or that I have not used before in many previous FSOs. The only new thing here is that instead of short icons (enemy 3K and friendly 6K) I am having both enemy and friendly icons at 3K.

As for targets I usually specify 5 to 6 attack targets and defense targets per frame. Lets say 5 so each side will have 10 objectives, 5 defense and 5 offensive. I have given a wide range of combinations of credible force but basically I but to simply things let say 1 11-15 squad for each. So basically each CiC now has about 150 his pilot committed. Lets say each side has 250 pilots. This would leave each CiC 100 pilots to deploy as he wishes. The credible force and amount of targets are used to spread the fight out to try to prevent a massive force from hitting a small force. In the way past CiCs would assign 1 4x6 person squad to defend a target. This usually got steamed rolled and nobody was happy.

In the supposed scenario above (250 pilots per side, 5 attack and 5 defense targets) you have say 15 defenders at a target (yes, maybe 11 which is why I give a range to cover a squad having low numbers ... also I look at the battle plan so if the CiC tasks a 11-15 squad but only 5 turnout I don't punish the CiC for that). Anyway 15 defenders and lets say the CiC divides his remaining 100 equal so 10 more to each attack and defense target. This would give 25 defenders. The attacker could also task 25 pilots or maybe their CiC decides to go heavy on the0  offense and assigns 75 to offense (15 more per attack target and 5 to a defense target). So then a defender force of 25 could face 30. Now maybe the defending CiC does to go all offense so he assign no additional defenders. Now on paper it 15 defenders versus 30 attackers. Heck lets say they both go all offensive and add no additional defenders .. that would result in 15 versus 35.

Other factors also go into me trying to balance things. Basically this is the min and max numbers.

Obviously we could go through all the scenarios but it comes down to the CiC design of how to deploy his forces. More on the offense? More on the defense? More attacking this target than that target? More defending this target than that one? etc., etc. However, the range or I should the extremes of a range are narrowed to something more manageable.

If I reduce the amounts of targets the range increases. If I reduce the credible force the range also increases unless the overall number of participating pilots is less. Say we still have 10 targets (5 offensive and 5 defensive) and say now a credible force is roughly 7-10 squad ... so the CiC now has 100 pilots he has to commit and now has 150 he can commit anyway he wants. Just a 4-6 squad and now he has 60 committed and 190 he can deploy how he wants. Which increases the possibility of a massive force hitting a massively inferior force.

Reduce the range and it can still happen but the scale is reduced .. maybe 2 to 1 or 3 to 1 in very unlucky situation. But not 4, 5, or 6 to 1.

I am not limiting the number of airframes as you think. The allies will have a minimum number of B25Cs they must deploy. The Japanese a minimum number of JU88s. Right now the only airframe that has a limit on will be B17s. Only a few were involved, flown in from Australia. They are very special birds but are also very hard for A6M2s to take down. Outside of the B17 the both sides have medium bombers and also dive bombers.

Now for your example a credible force was tasked to hit a target. Your squad and another squad (7-10) and another squad were assigned (at least a 4-6 squad). So a force of 11-16 was tasked by the CiC. You and your side would not be penalized that the escorts didn't show since the battle plan tasked them this way. Now on the other side the defending CiC would have also had about at least comparable size force to defend if this was my design and these things in place. So things should not be out of balance. However, both sides CiC could decide to deploy more forces. Maybe the attackers double up on this target but to do so he can't deploy as heavily somewhere else.

The whole goal is prevent a CiC from planning massively unequal fights by constricting the range of pilots they can deploy as they will while still giving them flexibility and the possibility of winning a battle or losing a battle based on their planning decisions.

[Dantoo]

I don't think any post I have made ever has been misunderstood as much as this one.
I thought I had made it clear that I was already on board with all that.
I'm not sure I can add any-more for fear of greater confusion about the subject I was raising.

[pez]

I doubt anyone knows me but I have 2 points to make about this set up.

First I would like to acknowledge the fact that since the max-min requirements for the available airframes where not posted my concerns may be diminished to an extent, but here they are and they apply to most PTO FSOs.

1. As stated in the setup there should be more Japanese planes then allied forces yet the split is at 50 50. Considering the historically lower turn out for the squads assigned to the Japanese side in almost all PTO FSOs it is likely to turn out 60 40 in favor of the allies.

2. Based on the air frames listed it is likely the allies will have a massive advantage in the area of fighter numbers. As I previously mentioned this can be partially remedied by max-min airframe assignments but it doesn't cover the point that most people that play this game simply don't know how to turn fight and have very little experience in a A6M2. this is more a problem with the player base and less to do with the set up but is something that also points to the side split needing to be 60 40 in favor of japanes because by the end of frame one half the allied fighter pilots will have films of zeros trying to E fight P 40s.

Those are just some points to consider. I have faith in the CMs as they have always given me good fun flying in FSOs but it seems the scales are always tipped against the japanes and even when flying in from the allied side I find that sad.

[ghostdancer]

Dantoo, sorry I didn't read your post as an affirmation of why targets numbers and credible force were being done. I guess I simply just misread it.

Pez I considered doing a 48% to 52% split. I went against that because the IJA/IJN have 2nd life B5Ns. So they do have the possibility of regenerating part of their forces later in the frame. Also in several past PTO FSOs I have run the Axis have actually done quite well. But of course after the first frame is done adjustments will be made if things are out of whack.

I still might go back to 48% to 52% for frame 1. I am still deciding on that but needed to post an initial number.

Also as for the A6M2 and turn fighting. As you point out that is more a pilot issue. I have had players on the other side of the fence argue that P40B and P40E were at a disadvantage against of the A6M2. So it subjective and as you state partially a pilot issue as it with any plane. Good tactics, good team fighting, and knowing your plane strengths and enemies weaknesses is key.

[Bino]

Rule #1 should be amended to read:

"B5Ns get a second death."

 

[ghostdancer]

So Bino you are a glass is half empty type of guys I see.

[Nefarious]

I can't seem to find the link to update our squad info... Has that been opened?

[pez]

I would like to make clear that I don't by any means think the setups are unfair in the PTO it was just an email about playability that made me actually comment. I also concede that the axis can win as I have proven both the times I CiCed in the PTO as Japan (pats self on back fallowed by a quick ego massage)

I definitely see the point of the other side as i would rather be in a zeke over a P-40b any day. the zero is in fact simply a Superior aircraft. the only concern i had was that depending on the max min airframes required to be used you could end up with (assuming 500 players) 100 zero vs. 200 p-40s. I've never been one to back down from a fight but those numbers are just cruel.

Still if it ends that way I'll happily (and hopefully) take 2 down with me!

I've been playing since I was a squeaker and now I'm 29 and at this point i almost exclusively fly in the SEA and I realize it's thanks to you guys and you hard work, and thank you sincerely.

<S> Pez

P.S. as you can see I've been on these boards for 4 years and only made 13 posts before these two. I only comment when I think it's important to the fun of everyone.

[Nefarious]

Any idea on when we can update our squad info?

[Edgar]

I updated mine already, its open.