DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Airbattle Games
HTML https://airbattle.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: IGNORE: Wing Leader Playtest Archive
*****************************************************
#Post#: 298--------------------------------------------------
Rabaul Campaign Feedback
DIR By: pilotofficerprune
Date: October 5, 2018, 6:39 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Use this thread to feed back on the Fortress Rabaul campaign and
discuss any issues.
#Post#: 328--------------------------------------------------
Re: Rabaul Campaign Feedback
DIR By: ScottKey
Date: October 7, 2018, 10:43 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Scenario: Rabaul Campaign, Oct 23
Version: 30_sep_18
Playtesters: Scott Key, solitaire
Report: Heavy bomber raid. Airfield target.
Japanese set up in two wings at lower altitudes with two free
intercept squadrons at higher altitudes . The P-38s set-up as
2wings (high and low) sweeping before tje raid. The other three
P-38squadrons flew Escort immediately above the bombers. The
B-24s were set-up two to a square with the veteran squadrons in
the middle of the formation.
The Japanese spent much pf the game climbing to vectors just
over the raid altitude of 9. The Zekes seemed to have a real
disadvantage in climbing vice the P-38s.
Many more A6M5s were lost than P-38s for two main reasons: the
P-38s often got the bounce on Zekes who had tallies on the
bombers and when involved in fights that included the B-24s the
heavy bomber modifications noticeably upped the number of
possible hits.
In the end bad rolls by the B-24s (made worse by flak
modifications and bombing through wispy cloud) meant that only
two B-24 squadrons scored any hits and these were only 25% and
10% effective.
Victory: Airfield took 7 points of damage.
American bombing inflicted 7 points of damage. 23 Zekes were
downed.
Japanese downed 9 P-38s and 5 B-24s.
Total: +0 CVP
Recommendations: felt like the game was well balanced and
exciting. It will be interesting to see how both sides vary
their strategies. B-25 raids will play out quite differently I
imagine. I am curious why more naval targets weren’t included
but I am just beginning to read my background materials on the
battle (I have read about many different individual actions but
not much about the battle as a whole)
#Post#: 329--------------------------------------------------
Re: Rabaul Campaign Feedback
DIR By: ScottKey
Date: October 7, 2018, 10:48 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
One note:
This was on the large end of the scenarios I usually play. I
tend towards small to medium scenarios. It was cool and helps me
to practice using the Wing rules but this is a different ball of
wax than the campaign in Blitz where I was having to really
watch the German resources....
#Post#: 387--------------------------------------------------
Re: Rabaul Campaign Feedback
DIR By: ScottKey
Date: October 21, 2018, 7:40 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Scenario: Rabaul Campaign, Oct 24
Version:
Playtesters: Scott Key, solitaire
Report:
Weather advanced 1 CW to Good.
Clouds, Wispy at 6 . G,H-I, N, O, R-S
Medium bomber raid. Airfield target (0 damage after repair)
7 B-25 Sqns, (3 Gunships, All Sqns armed with Parafrags, 2
Veteran Sqns)(3 Strafing, 4 Bombing)
6 P-38 Sqns (3 sweep, 3 escort), 1 Experte Wing Leader Veteran
Squadron in the Sweep.
3 A6M5 (CAP) 1 Wing Leader experte Veteran Squadron
4 A6M5 reinforcements (intercept), 1 Experte Sqn
The Japanese set up in CAP in Column N just below the clouds at
N5,N4, N6.
The attack came in at 0 with two bomber squadrons per square.
The Sweep came in at S5,S4, and a non-Wing sweeping squadron
came in at S0 hoping to do some flak suppression.
The P-38 sweep made quick work of the Japanese CAP but took
noticeable casualties. There was a lull as the attack approached
the where one sweeping Sqn broke from flak and returned to base.
The leading two B-25 Sqns took some loss of cohesion from flak
barrages but were able to suppress the first Hvy Flak unit they
came to. They were not so successful with the next Hvy flak unit
only minor damage inflicted.
The main bomber stream entered barrages but though many
“hits” and C results were scored the bombers took
little damage and succeeded at all of their cohesion rolls. The
bombers then scored 26 points of damage from the parafrags of 5
Sqns.
The Japanese reinforcements arrived and set up to attack the
bombers as they exited the barrages. However the remaining sweep
fighters and an escort that tallied and converted to sweep took
on three of them. Equal casualties were scored.
A lone experte A6M5 sqn hunted from higher elevation and
attacked a broken P-38 squadron as it attempted to return to
base. Many P-38s were lost. The same Experte Zeke Sqn then
attacked the trailing bombers inflicting 2 kills. The last
P-38 Sqn (trained, ammo depleted) took on the Japanese Ace and
lost 5(!) aircraft while shooting down 3. Both fighter squadrons
broke and the game ended.
Victory: Airfield took 26 points of damage rounded down to the
max of 24points.
Heavy Flak D (1) took 10 damage, Hvy Flak D (2) took 3 damage
from strafing & bombing. Lead B-25s were tasked with Flak
suppression.
16 Zekes were downed.
Japanese downed 15 P-38s (!) and 3 B-25s.
Total: +2 CVP, P-38s moved to 0 available with three hits still
in the box. B-25s ended at 7 and the A6M5s at 7
Recommendations: Scenario was great. Played fast with lots of
meaningful choices. The B-25s are much more interesting. This
was a game in which experte on both sides inflicted lots of
kills and flak was fairly ineffective. Each side’s
fighters gave as good as they got which hurt the Americans much
more than the Japanese.
One important thing is that the Japanese started deliberately
targeting P-38s and ignoring the bombers (though they
couldn’t get at them anyway) in order to reduce the USAAF
wscort capabilities in yhe fiture. So this is different than how
I might have played if it had been a stand alone scenario.
#Post#: 388--------------------------------------------------
Re: Rabaul Campaign Feedback
DIR By: ScottKey
Date: October 21, 2018, 7:58 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
October 25th was degrading weather. No raid was flown since
there were no escorts available. Airfield repaired to Crippled.
+1 CVP.
October 26th was No Fly. Airfield repaired to Major Damage
October 27th was No Fly. Airfield repaired. P-38s back to 6
available.
October 28th will be Improving a mission will be attempted.
What other info do you need for campaign days like this?
#Post#: 389--------------------------------------------------
Re: Rabaul Campaign Feedback
DIR By: pilotofficerprune
Date: October 22, 2018, 3:41 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: ScottKey link ---
> One important thing is that the Japanese started deliberately
targeting P-38s and ignoring the bombers (though they couldn’t
get at them anyway) in order to reduce the USAAF wscort
capabilities in yhe fiture. So this is different than how I
might have played if it had been a stand alone scenario.
--- End Quote ---
I think these second order effects--doing a thing differently to
a standalone scenario--are part of what makes a campaign so much
more than a collection of scenarios.
I am interested in your response to the heavies as you go
forward. In a campaign you should be conducting more medium than
heavy raids, and yet the heavy raids--while not as powerful or
delivering as much combat--have a different role to play on both
sides.
#Post#: 390--------------------------------------------------
Re: Rabaul Campaign Feedback
DIR By: pilotofficerprune
Date: October 22, 2018, 3:43 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: ScottKey link ---
> What other info do you need for campaign days like this?
--- End Quote ---
Only how they shape your view of future strategy. Obviously,
non-flying turns don't have a lot going on. However, delays
might induce a sense of panic, of time running out. While the
decision to fly on a degrading or improving weather day is
fraught with risk. I'd be very interested in your risk
assessment here.
#Post#: 395--------------------------------------------------
Re: Rabaul Campaign Feedback
DIR By: ScottKey
Date: October 22, 2018, 6:29 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote ---
> I am interested in your response to the heavies as you go
forward. In a campaign you should be conducting more medium than
heavy raids, and yet the heavy raids--while not as powerful or
delivering as much combat--have a different role to play on both
sides.
--- End Quote ---
The temptation will be very high to use B-25s as much as
possible since they seem to be much more effective.
What I am definitely seeing so far is that it has been very
difficult for the interceptors to actually get at the bombers. I
probably should do more head-on attacks, but the P-38 Sweeps
have been very good at doing just that... sweeping the enemy out
of the way. An experten veteran P-38 squadron can really beat up
the Zekes.
#Post#: 456--------------------------------------------------
Re: Rabaul Campaign Feedback
DIR By: ScottKey
Date: November 3, 2018, 9:54 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Scenario: Rabaul Campaign, Oct 29
Version:
Playtesters: Scott Key, solitaire
Report:
Weather advanced 1 CW to Good
Clouds, Wispy at 9 thus they played no role in the battle
Medium bomber raid. Airfield target ( 0 damage after repairs
over multiple days of bad weather)
7Sqn/1Flt B-25s, (3 Sqns Gunships, All Sqns armed with
Parafrags, 4 Veteran Sqns)(3 Strafing, 4+ Bombing), 1 Experte in
a veteran Sqn
6 P-38 Sqns (3 sweep, 3 escort), 1 Experte Wing Leader Veteran
Squadron in the Sweep, 1 Experte in the Escort Wing
6 A6M5 (CAP) 1 Wing Leader experte Veteran Squadron
2 A6M5 reinforcements (intercept), 1 Experte Veteran Sqn
B-25s came in at altitude 3 and worked their way down to level 0
over several turns. The Japanese were stacked from 8 down to
about 3 with the higher wing meant to engage the P-38 sweep and
the lower to attempt to get at the bombers. This was partially
successful as two Zeke squadrons did make attacks on the B-25s
before becoming broken but the best Sqn assigned to the lower
wing was broken very quickly by the P-38s flying the lower
independent sweep. By the time the bombers approached the flak
positions one of the leading gunship sqns was already disrupted.
Most of the P-38s were off pursuing broken A6M-5 squadrons
attempting to cause enough damage for it to matter. (With their
high recovery rate it is very difficult to significantly reduce
the number of Zekes which are available each mission).
The flak put up barrages in layers which actually did cause some
damage and disrupted several squadrons, breaking a leading
gunship squadron. This broken squadron was completely
ineffective in bombing and strafing. Fortunately the other two
squadrons assigned to flak suppression did their job doing heavy
damage to both Heavy Flak D units over the course of two turns.
The parafrags eventually caused 22 points of damage to the
airfield which was not quite as good as hoped for.
The bombers emerged from flak to be jumped by reinforcements in
the last 4 turns which inflicted most of the kills against the
B-25s. A last escort fought it out and did some significant
damage before breaking.
All in all a much bloodier engagement for the bombers than seen
before. I wonder if direct fire flak would have done more or
less damage?
22 (!) Zekes were downed.
Japanese downed 6 P-38s (!) and 9 B-25s.
An American experte was generated.
Total: +1 CVP (target Crippled with 21 points of damage, P-38s
moved to the starred box with three hits still in the box. B-25s
ended at 6 with two hits still in the box the A6M5s at seven
with with six hits still in the box
Recommendations:
Again I cannot see any balance problems here. The game was
challenging for both sides and was interesting both in the air
combat and bombing aspects. Both sides are learning tactics. The
Japanese have a very hard time making it through the Sweep and
escorts. The P-38s are now focusing on trying to down as many
Zekes as possible to get the number of interceptors down for the
next raid but the cost seems too high. It’s a puzzle.
The next game will be an unescorted raid. Probably with B-24s
since they have at least some ability to defend each
other....Also am now having to consider the Port as a target in
anticipation of the CVP set-backs which could occur if I don’t
reduce it’s operational status. I was not part of the initial
playtesting and discussion about the campaign but I have two
questions: why aren’t more attacks on ships in the harbor
included? They seem to have been a significant target during
these raids... secondly, why did you decide to cut the campaign
off before the Navy raids? The Nov 5th raid would be a cool way
to cap things off. Not grousing, just curious.
#Post#: 457--------------------------------------------------
Re: Rabaul Campaign Feedback
DIR By: pilotofficerprune
Date: November 4, 2018, 2:05 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Keeping it to the time period described was more a case of
focus. We'd have needed a lot of rules to manage a one-off
event. I didn't see the bang-for-buck.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 5
DIR Next Page