Design discussion for October Scenario (Target Rabaul)

[Brooke]

Why limit squadrons to a single model?  Its more realistic to have a mix of Gs and Js within a group, isn't it?

It's much easier on GL's in scenarios to manage his guys (including walkons) if the group is all one aircraft type.  It's easier to brief guys on skins and loadouts, easier to manage them, easier to have them stay with you in formation, etc.  And folks know which type they will certainly have before the scenario so that they can practice in it prior to the scenario.  I very much like to practice in the plane I'll be flying prior to the scenario.

[Brooke]

P-38G's and J's are nearly identical in military speed at all alts.  A main difference is that the J has WEP, but the G doesn't.

[Delirium]

I would still put them all in Gs, it will make side balancing at least a little easier. Considering you can't create settings which accounts for experience, you may want to give the Axis as much of an advantage as you can.

[Spikes]

I would still put them all in Gs, it will make side balancing at least a little easier. Considering you can't create settings which accounts for experience, you may want to give the Axis as much of an advantage as you can.

Generally speaking, players who fly Axis have more experience in the planes that they are flying than the Allies do.

[Guppy35]

OK, 475th FG it is, specifically McGuire's 431st FS, which got P-38J's in March.

We'll have the 80th as G's.

You P-38 aficionados want the 431st be G's or J's?

Make em G models.  Gs and Hs were in the main over Rabaul.    The 38s were over Rabaul in late 43.  If you were talking 44, then the move to Js was really happening.

[Brooke]

v5 is now up.

http://electraforge.com/brooke/flightsims/scenarios/201710_TargetRabaul/rules.html

431st FS/475th FG is now in there.
All P-38's are now G's.
Made small adjustment to proportion of Ki-61's.

[Brooke]

Questions I have for all of you:

-- Do you think the Japanese fighters (with all those Ki-84's) will dominate the US fighters?  Ki-84's are very, very good planes.  They are faster than F6F's and P-38G's, and they handily outturn the US planes.  It is tough when your opponent is faster and outturns you.  Or will the Ki-84's lower robustness serve as enough of a balancing factor?

-- Do you think the B-25's will be able to get to and from targets at times and not be all shot down every time.  Targets are not widely spread; the B-25's are singles; and they are doing attacks on the deck.  Or will the ship separation be good enough?

[Arlo]

-- Do you think the Japanese fighters (with all those Ki-84's) will dominate the US fighters?  Ki-84's are very, very good planes.  They are faster than F6F's and P-38G's, and they handily outturn the US planes.  It is tough when your opponent is faster and outturns you.  Or will the Ki-84's lower robustness serve as enough of a balancing factor?

I think they'll rule the scenario. I also think that's fine. I don't wanna see any post-frame debriefing crying about the F4U-1A.

-- Do you think the B-25's will be able to get to and from targets at times and not be all shot down every time.  Targets are not widely spread; the B-25's are singles; and they are doing attacks on the deck.  Or will the ship separation be good enough?

I think they'll die gloriously over and over. Gloriously. I picture Kirk Douglas flying every single BM.

[Guppy35]

Questions I have for all of you:

-- Do you think the Japanese fighters (with all those Ki-84's) will dominate the US fighters?  Ki-84's are very, very good planes.  They are faster than F6F's and P-38G's, and they handily outturn the US planes.  It is tough when your opponent is faster and outturns you.  Or will the Ki-84's lower robustness serve as enough of a balancing factor?

-- Do you think the B-25's will be able to get to and from targets at times and not be all shot down every time.  Targets are not widely spread; the B-25's are singles; and they are doing attacks on the deck.  Or will the ship separation be good enough?

Seems like 18 Ki-84s might be a bit much.  Not even remotely a historic feel with them being the main Japanese bird.  4 Zekes?  What's the point of calling it Rabaul

Might as well make it a late war somewhere else scenario as this isn't Rabaul even remotely.  Skip G model 38s, make it Js and Ls, take it to the Philippines and make it at least look like a historical match up.  Then the F4U-1As etc all work.  Then the 25Hs make sense and it's all good. 

Nothing about this is Rabaul sad to say

[Devil 505]

Seems like 18 Ki-84s might be a bit much.  Not even remotely a historic feel with them being the main Japanese bird.  4 Zekes?  What's the point of calling it Rabaul

Might as well make it a late war somewhere else scenario as this isn't Rabaul even remotely.  Skip G model 38s, make it Js and Ls, take it to the Philippines and make it at least look like a historical match up.  Then the F4U-1As etc all work.  Then the 25Hs make sense and it's all good. 

Nothing about this is Rabaul sad to say

 

[oboe]

Seems like 18 Ki-84s might be a bit much.  Not even remotely a historic feel with them being the main Japanese bird.  4 Zekes?  What's the point of calling it Rabaul

Might as well make it a late war somewhere else scenario as this isn't Rabaul even remotely.  Skip G model 38s, make it Js and Ls, take it to the Philippines and make it at least look like a historical match up.  Then the F4U-1As etc all work.  Then the 25Hs make sense and it's all good. 

Nothing about this is Rabaul sad to say

This.   

[Arlo]

I respect Dan's opinion as much as I appreciate Brooke's work.

[WxMan]

Seems like 18 Ki-84s might be a bit much.  Not even remotely a historic feel with them being the main Japanese bird.  4 Zekes?  What's the point of calling it Rabaul

Might as well make it a late war somewhere else scenario as this isn't Rabaul even remotely.  Skip G model 38s, make it Js and Ls, take it to the Philippines and make it at least look like a historical match up.  Then the F4U-1As etc all work.  Then the 25Hs make sense and it's all good. 

Nothing about this is Rabaul sad to say

If you're basing your argument on the B-25H, please remember that the point of including the "H" was to give the pilots a tail gun.  My father-in-law who was a pilot in-theatre at the time, flew 26's and 25's. During 1943/early 1944 he participated in the Battle of Rabaul. He mainly flew "B-25D's"  which had a tail gun.  He occasionally flew a "C" early in-theatre, and  "G's" and a "H" (which both had the canon) in the last 2 months he was there early in 1944.

There is not much difference in the C's and H's other than armament. If you think it would be more historical, then the H's could pickle the canon rounds so they would be effectively a D model. Then you would be justified in making the argument for returning to the other historical aircraft.

[Delirium]

Seems like 18 Ki-84s might be a bit much.  Not even remotely a historic feel with them being the main Japanese bird.  4 Zekes?  What's the point of calling it Rabaul

Might as well make it a late war somewhere else scenario as this isn't Rabaul even remotely.  Skip G model 38s, make it Js and Ls, take it to the Philippines and make it at least look like a historical match up.  Then the F4U-1As etc all work.  Then the 25Hs make sense and it's all good. 

Nothing about this is Rabaul sad to say

Agreed.   

I'd rather see Ki61s than Ki84s over Rabaul, unless you're planning on a 'what if' type scenario.

[branch37]

Make them Ki-61s and it will work. They weren't at Rabaul in large numbers but they were there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk