DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Airbattle Games
HTML https://airbattle.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: IGNORE: Wing Leader Playtest Archive
*****************************************************
#Post#: 1519--------------------------------------------------
Re: O25 The Great Raid
DIR By: Peter_Wagner
Date: February 6, 2019, 2:19 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Ah hah! And just spotted a problem. The Surface Units section
states Airfields/Lt Flak in G0 and J0. The Order of Battle lists
Chaikas and I-16s taking off from airfield in E0. In my above
playtest report, I was playing with Airfield in E0 and those
units NEVER took off. I feel like the Japanese would be wise to
focus all their resources on just one of the airfields.
Pete
#Post#: 1526--------------------------------------------------
Re: O25 The Great Raid
DIR By: pilotofficerprune
Date: February 7, 2019, 2:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Oopsie! I'll take a look at that. Not sure what's, going on
there.
I was surprised the Japanese were crushed. At first glance it
looks like it would go the other way.
#Post#: 1532--------------------------------------------------
Re: O25 The Great Raid
DIR By: pilotofficerprune
Date: February 7, 2019, 4:38 am
---------------------------------------------------------
So, some thoughts from this first AAR:
(1) The 'E0' squadrons should be 'G0'.
(2) I'm concerned about the lightness of the Japanese bombing
attack. I may need to go back to my sources on this and see what
can be done to beef up the Japanese. (I onloy have Nedialkov's
book In the Skies of Nomonhan, but I shall see what it says.)
(3) I'm concerned if there's no incentive to trigger the far
fighters.
I may need to rearrange this scenario at bit at the weekend.
#Post#: 1570--------------------------------------------------
Re: O25 The Great Raid
DIR By: Peter_Wagner
Date: February 8, 2019, 10:57 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Scenario: O25 The Great Raid (Game 2)
Version: v0.1
Playtesters: Peter Wagner (Solo)
Report: Excellent Japanese bombing rolls and superior fighters.
What a drastic difference from my last playtest. In this game,
only the high flying sweep wing used strafe to get down low and
then successfully tallied. The Soviets never had a chance with
each I-16 squadron having 2 tallies on it with one Japanese
squadron just hovering waiting around if needed. Flak accounted
for 2 kills on Japanese. Japanese got 10 VP from first airfield
and the Ki-30 got an additional 5 VP from the 2nd airfield. When
the Ki-30 bombed, both the Chaikas and the I-16 squadron were
taking off and took 2 LOSSES EACH!!!! 10 Japanese air kills to
only 3 Soviet Air Kills. I ended the scenario early since there
was realistically no way Soviets could hope to increase air
kills while avoiding more.
Victory: Japanese Victory
Japanese bombing 15 VP + enemies shot down 14 VPs (4 of these
from bombing)
Soviet enemies shot down 5 VPs (2 from flak)
Total: +24 VPs, Japanese Victory (Felt like a Japanese victory)
Recommendations: Well I would have to say that the first
playtest was not a good one since I utilized a horrible Japanese
tactic of trying to strafe ground targets. To be fair, had the
Japanese rolled poorly on the bombing rolls, this would have
been a much closer game. I think it wise to limit Japanese VP
from bombing. Just wish the Soviets had better odds against
those Nate's. Maybe giving the Soviets 1 squadron already in the
air would help. If there was a chance for Soviet fighters to
engage bombers BEFORE their bombing run. But not sure if this
would be historically accurate. There needs to be an incentive
for the Soviets to face the Japanese onslaught. If they had just
taken off and run for the hills, the Japanese would get a draw.
Pete
#Post#: 1605--------------------------------------------------
Re: O25 The Great Raid
DIR By: pilotofficerprune
Date: February 10, 2019, 3:54 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Okay, I went back to Nedialkov, whose account of this action is
reasonably detailed, to help develop the next iteration:
(a) Start the Japanese raid further to the right so that bombing
does not commence until the final squadron at J0 is taking off
(b) Reduced the number of Soviet Green markers by 2
(c) Clarify take-off locations for the Soviets
(d) Set the Soviets to a takeoff schedule rather than being
triggered by enemy proximity
(e) Turn the CAP I-16 to intercept
(f) I’ve removed the cloud as it has no effect on the battle
(g) I’ve added a special rule making the Soviets immune to small
arms barrage fire (which helps with taking off)
(h) Reduced the Japanese Veteran markers by 1
#Post#: 1731--------------------------------------------------
Re: O25 The Great Raid
DIR By: Gordon Christie
Date: February 15, 2019, 2:55 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Andrew (VVS) & I (IJAAF) have now had 2 runs at this:
First run as written in scenario book at end of last week:
Run 1
Japanese: 7 hits on J0 for 10 VP; 1 hit on G0 for 1VP 9 VVS
fighters shot down for +20
VVS 4 fighter kills for +4 VP
Nett +16
Draw but felt like Japanese win (fighter losses 2:1+, 1 AF
heavily damaged). Difficult to see bombers doing better than
this. Fighters will have the better of the combats but ,VVS
fighters are tough,
Ki27s have low firepower.
The initial set up felt a bit odd. The obvious Japanese tactic
is to climb the Ki21 s to altitude 5 above the light flak (as
Elias pointed out earlier) & circle the lead Ki21s to allow the
fighters to get out ahead & deal with the Soviet fighters while
bringing the bombers together. I even climbed again to alt 6 to
hold the Soviet fighters off fro another turn & allow the
Japanese fighters to whittle down then potential interceptors
some more.
The high Japanese sweep is *very* high. The only way they'll get
into action is by coming down to strafe. This is certainly
possible but feels a bit odd as the Japanese can telepathically
optimise the timing of this to catch any climbing Soviet
fighters that the lead sweepers fail to deal with. Strafing is
probably also a losing proposition for the Japanese in the face
of the light flak & barrage small arms using fragile low
firepower fighters unless the Japanese really need an extra VP
to shift damage to an airfield up a category.
For our second run we tweaked the setup to move the Ki21s to P5
& Q5 with the Ki30s in T5; the Japanese fighters were in N7, O7,
S7, T7 & P11 & Q11. we had 1 I-16 in L2 which could just catch
the bombers before they bomb in L5. another in J0 & the
remaining Soviet fighters taking off as in the current scenario.
This felt a bit better. The Japanese setup felt more logical & I
spent less time sorting the Japanese bombers into a sensible
attack profile. The high fighters still felt bit odd as they
piled in at (almost) exactly the right moment.
Run 2
12 VVS fighter losses (1 friendly fire from flak) vs 2 IJAAF
(both flak)
1 bombing hit +1 VP
Nett +11 to Japanese; felt like Japanese win
Setup better-fewer contrived moves to get into sensible
parameters.
Hard on the Russians-always hit in the climb. Vectoring towards
the left edge is a tactic we haven't tried (next time out...)
but it is hard for the Soviets to make much impression on the
bombers & they are constantly being hit by peter fighters from
above & defending with rigid doctrine.
VC need tweaked-thoughts at present
Bombing assume -1 DRM (altitude – no flak) so 3-4 hits assuming
average rolls will give +5 VP from bombing
If median bombing outcome 5 VP then
2 runs 9 +12 VVS fighter casualties so assume 10 median??
Japanese lost 4 +2 fighters so assume 3?
Assume Japanese 5 bombing VP +6-7 nett from AtA so +11 or 12
Japanese victory (our +11 certainly felt like a Japanese victory
although bombing was poor)
So suggest:
VVS victory +7 or less
Draw 8-10
Japanese win 11+ (possibly 12+)
Once again I don't know the history well & it sounds as though
the Soviets were caught pretty fast footed but it night be a
less masochistic experience for the Soviets if the Japanese
started 2 columns right. I'd also be inclined to bring the high
IJAAF fighters down from 11 to 9- it just feels odd for the
Japanese high cover to barrel down from 20000 feet to strafe the
airfield as a mechanism for getting into fighter combat they
would otherwise have no chance of engaging in.
We plan to give it another go without these modifications
probably at the beginning of the week but they are definitely in
my mind.
Overall though it is interesting; the combination of aircraft is
unusual but I do think there needs to be a slightly different
setup to give the Soviets more of a chance. I'd also be inclined
to fix the Japanese bomber altitude as otherwise they also have
the option to keep climbing to alt 6-8 to bring the high
fighters into play-which again just feels a bit odd.
Cheers
Gordon
#Post#: 1756--------------------------------------------------
Re: O25 The Great Raid
DIR By: pilotofficerprune
Date: February 16, 2019, 12:54 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Changes for next iteration:
(1) Brought the high Japanese sweep down lower but a fraction
further away
(2) Adjusted the sweeps to bring them closer to the bombers and
discourage the bombers from climbing
(3) Adopted Gordon’s suggested victory levels
(4) Adjusted the threshold for bombing to cause a ground loss
from 2 to 3 hits
#Post#: 1971--------------------------------------------------
Re: O25 The Great Raid
DIR By: Andrew Brazier
Date: March 1, 2019, 10:21 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Gordon (IJAAF) and I (CAF) finished our 3rd pass of The Great
Raid last night. I'll leave Gordon to write up the detail but
the result was a draw at 11VP. CAF losses were about twice that
of the IJAAF but poor bombing handicapped the Japanese.
One aspect we discussed at length was how much fun there was in
it for the CAF player with the IJAAF almost always having the
upper hand and being able to attack at +3 or +4 most of the
time. This isn't as bad as it seems as the Il15s & Il16s are
relatively tough and the Ki27s have 0FP so the IJAAF scoring
lots of hits does not always equate to lots of kills, however,
the Il16s FP of 1 means that their chances of converting a hit
to a kill is rather better even against the bombers.
Also, there is a puzzle to be unpicked as to the best tactic for
the CAF to use; try and reach the bombers before they bomb? Give
the bombers a free pass for bombing but reach altitude far to
the left to improve the odds in a late game stab at the bombers?
Do both?
The IJAAF need to be careful of losses, especially bomber losses
as 2VP for a downed bomber can easily swing the game one level
in favour of the Chinese. This means the pressure is on the
IJAAF to score well in the air and in bombing but without
conceding losses and although they might do great execution in
the air they may still come unglued from a couple of good
Chinese die rolls.
#Post#: 1973--------------------------------------------------
Re: O25 The Great Raid
DIR By: pilotofficerprune
Date: March 1, 2019, 1:00 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I assume you mean Soviets rather than Chinese. Look forward to
the AAR.
Any recommendations, or will those be in the AAR?
#Post#: 1974--------------------------------------------------
Re: O25 The Great Raid
DIR By: Gordon Christie
Date: March 1, 2019, 1:18 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
As Andrew says we have run through this again. This time the
Chinese/ Soviet side climbed the fighters away from the bombers
in order to attack at relatively equal altitude. Overall the
effect was limited although here ere a couple of attacks on the
bombers but none were lost.
Air to air losses split 11:5 in favour of the Japanese (all
fighters)
Bombing scored 5 hits for 5 VP; painfully close to the 6 hit
threshold for heavy damage & 10 VP & I weighed the odd of going
down into the flak to strafe but decided against it. Low FP &
fragile fighters didn't seem like th ideal strafing situation...
Overall thoughts:
Setup:
The bombers in P4 are very vulnerable in this setup. They can
just bomb before the last VVS fighters take off but they have to
stay at altitude 4 & risk the flak & they will be caught by the
climbing Soviet fighters later unless they reverse course & run
for the R map edge (which is a potentially awkward tactic I
didn't try....). I'm tempted to suggest that the Japanese have
to exit the L map edge. If they stay at alt 4 & bomb on GT3 then
reverse course the GT2 scrambling G0 fighters catch them on GT5
in M4 into the teeth of a cloud of Japanese fighters. The J0
fighters can't catch them before they bomb (but can catch them
on the turn of bombing-GT3 if the bombers don't climb or on GT4
if the bombers climb to get above the flak).
I can't see why the lead Japanese bombers wouldn't climb to alt
5 on GT1. It delays bombing to GT4 but the fighters can't catch
them before they bomb in either event (climb/ stay level). To me
it makes more sense to set the 2 lead Japanese bombers up in
either Q5 & S5 and R5 (depending on interpretation of the
history as to whether then Japanese attacked in one or more
formations). The current setup seems to me to penalise the
inexperienced player who neither climbs nor reverses course
after bombing who will probably see the lead Sallys monstered
before the fighters can support them & feel the scenario is
consequently "broken".
Similarly the lead IJAAF fighters are strangely far back & can't
support the bombers-to me this seems ,like an invitation to
circle the bombers for a turn (or two) & get the fighters out
front & the bombers into a more cohesive formation better
protected by the fighters. I'd suggest moving the lead fighter
wing to column Q or R. they might end up as a formation with the
bombers depending on the exact setup though that might not be a
bad thing in scenario balance terms by giving the Soviets a
tallying edge.
In general though it is an interesting scenario. The contract
between the light & agile but vulnerable Ki27s & the I-16s &
I-15s which are more powerful & have greater firepower &
represent the future is intriguing. The Soviets are caught flat
footed & scrambling so they are always going to be at a tactical
disadvantage. As Andrew says they are always on the wrong end of
+3/ +4 attacks but the low firepower of the Ki27s makes kill
hard to come by. A lot depends on the bombing outcomes as is
usually the case in small scenarios with bombers. The median
bombing result is likely to be 3-4 hits for +5 VP & it seems
reasonable that victory should be based around this &
intuitively the current thresholds seem fairly reasonable though
my only thought is that Soviet victory may be difficult in the
face of good bombing rolls in particular.
I'm inclined to perhaps shift the VP thresholds by +1 across the
board.
Otherwise I'd tweak the setup slightly as above (P4 bombers to
R5 ideally) & lead sweepers to R6/S6 or even R7/S7 to avoid
formation effects.
Overall though, happy
cheers
Gordon
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 8
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page