Carrier Battles for Guadalcanal est désormais compatible avec l'extension FastNews.kiwi disponible pour votre navigateur. Avec cette extension, vérifiez s'il y a des nouveaux sujets sur ce forum en un clic depuis n'importe quelle page !Cliquez ici pour en savoir plus.
Posted: Tue 3 Oct - 08:21 (2017) Post subject: Extreme Damage
This is tied in to the Fighter post.
As I said in that post. I attacked Guadalcanal with a 22 Zero fighter sweep with the intent to thin out the CAP. Instead I destroyed 15 aircraft (12 on the ground). This is way too much damage and seriously needs to be toned down. Especially in a 2P game. You want to avoid a single knock blow. A single major knock out blow pretty much ends the game and the fun.
My guess is that the damage chart goes from 1 to 100 and the game is rolling a 1-100 dice. The game instead should roll 10 1-10 dice. That would make extreme rolls even more unlikely.
Anyway, however the chart works, the extreme damage need to be turned down.
Posted: Tue 3 Oct - 20:53 (2017) Post subject: Extreme Damage
I fully agree, this is way too much.
On the other hands, i think part of the problem may come from the size of the raid. Getting 22 Zeros air units means actually getting 88 Zeros that is the equivalent of two Kokutai (IJN Naval Air Group) at full strength. I think this never happened for at least two reasons: the Japanese did not have so much planes (maybe it happened once or twice they had this number in Rabaul but not available for a single raid to Guadalcanal) and it was just impossible for them to manage such a strike (especially the Zeros alone, remember they did not have radio). I think they never engage more than 3 chutai (more or less the equivalent of a squadron) that is some 27 fighters (in escort duties). Raids with 27 fighters and 27 bombers were really very big raids according to IJN (and IJA) standards. Strikes from carriers were different matters and the Japanese managed to engage tens to hundreds of plane (e.g. Pearl Harbor but not only).
It was more or less the same on the US side. They also had some control & commands concerns but more over they just did not have enough planes at this period of the war.
So i suggest that we may think to limit the size of air strikes just as we limited the size of TF. Actually i am in the process of collecting information about the strikes (both carrier based and land based) both sides actually launched during this period of the war just to have an idea of what was done. I hope i will have some figures within a few days but it takes time since i need to read various sources...
As a consequence, i am somewhat less available for playing and testing (plus i currently have several professional trips and i generally do not take my ipad) but i will be soon online and i plan to test the new version 1P and 2P (this was a personal message to Archerfish ).
Posted: Wed 4 Oct - 02:28 (2017) Post subject: Extreme Damage
You bring up a good point Larsenjp. While Rubal, let say had 88 Zero, not all 88 Zero would be dedicated to escorts mission to Guadalcanal raids. A portion of them would be held back for CAP and other airstrike. While Guadalcanal was a major target at the time it wasn't the only one. I know Bombing were raids were being flow being against Papua New Guinea
Maybe limits on airstrike size might be helpful as well. Or maybe Rubal forces should be trimmed a little to simulate fighters and bombers being used in other air strikes.