PDA

View Full Version : Midway Returns



Firelok
09-10-2006, 15:17
In response to (System=M='s)queries as to where Midway is, I've tinkered and put it up on the server for testing. Some changes have been made by me that might not work but it seemed worth trying. Alterations include providing the Divebombers/Torpedo Bombers with an airstart over their respective fleets.Added landbased bombers to Midway Island (in limited numbers). Blues now have only Midway island to attack as a target, Red's target is IJN fleet. Blues have a wide spread of soft targets all over Midway suitable for their smaller bombloads.Red's have to kill 80% of the IJN fleet (which includes the aircraft carriers.)
Hopefully this might encourage a bit more dive/bomber action from the Val's and Avengers etc.
Perhaps another 'Pacific' scenario might be good too with only the fleets attacking each other and no land-based planes at all :eek:
My current pet Pacific project is 'Guadalcanal'/ 'Savo Island' which in general terms is similar to Midway in that Red's have land/sea aircraft to attack blue fleet and blues have carrier A/C plus long-range Betty's to attack Henderson Field on Guadalcanal.

Firelok
09-10-2006, 18:11
The problem I personally have with carrier attacks is once you sink one, the enemy gets an airstart turning any attack into a suicide run. So I am fairly glad that the number of cv attack missions is limited.

Looking forward to give your Midway a try. :)
Yep, totally agree with this point. This is why I'm not a fan either. We have a few however including... Tirpitz,ChiChi,Leyte, Marianas2,Malta,Okinawa maybe some others that I've forgot.Perhaps given that the opposing bombers have an airstart option to begin with this might make it a little better.
My tactical suggestions are twofold however,
1..Kill everything that's not a carrier first,
2..Damage all the carriers first, then kill them.(this is a real evil tactic whose possible end result is preventing any fighters from launching at all.)

System-M-
09-10-2006, 20:13
Cool!

I also suggested to Ice to try and put the Iwo Jima map to good use.

Firelok
11-10-2006, 18:15
Ok had a little tester of this this afternoon, were a few problems with spawning red bombers on Midway but I've edited it again and this should sort it out i think. Other changes are tweaked the fleet AAA down a notch for both fleets. (Ace level destroyer fire every two seconds was a little strong for me.) Added some lighter fleet support vessels to blues and a dedicated landing carrier for reds. i'll put lights on the carriers as soon as I've sorted out some FMB issues I've got, but I'l put this adjusted version up on the server this evening.

ForkTailedDevil
11-10-2006, 18:15
Just finished flying this map and I loved it. A few problems that Firelok is aware of and will be fixed. One thought was it seemed very easy for red to win. But I didn't see very many blue bombers either. I am curious to see what would happen if they made a major raid. I flew 2 TBF raids with torp's and took out 2 DD's and never saw a A6M not sure if they were distracted by all the SBD's? It seemed over really quick with red victory maybe we should add a few blew supply and transport ships for the invasion forces??

MrAsh
12-10-2006, 00:29
The Battle of Coral Sea was a good carrier to carrier battle, or is there anyway we can fly Gladiators off of a carrier somewhere, maybe a mediterrainian type thingy with early Italan planes? We need a swordfish for team england though :(

looking forward to the new midway though, I really like all pacific maps.

Yellow 2
12-10-2006, 09:07
The Battle of Coral Sea was a good carrier to carrier battle, or is there anyway we can fly Gladiators off of a carrier somewhere, maybe a mediterrainian type thingy with early Italan planes? We need a swordfish for team england though :(

looking forward to the new midway though, I really like all pacific maps.

You may get away with both Gladiators and Mk1 Hurricanes flying from carriers on a 1940 Norway map but the opposition would be 190E4s, Stukas etc.

Firelok
12-10-2006, 09:44
Just finished flying this map and I loved it. A few problems that Firelok is aware of and will be fixed. One thought was it seemed very easy for red to win. But I didn't see very many blue bombers either. I am curious to see what would happen if they made a major raid. I flew 2 TBF raids with torp's and took out 2 DD's and never saw a A6M not sure if they were distracted by all the SBD's? It seemed over really quick with red victory maybe we should add a few blew supply and transport ships for the invasion forces??
I'm interested to hear that reds won quickly, as far as i know reds never won the original midway map ever that i saw, however blues have more ships for reds to kill now so that may be better. Blues have a lot of dispersed soft targets on both midway islands (not just the airport one) so bombs and strafing zeroes should work well here. I was encouraged to see the number of Vals,Kates SBD's and TBF's flying yesterday a lot more variety than the usual F4F vs Zero brawl low over Midway atoll. anyway give it time.



The Battle of Coral Sea was a good carrier to carrier battle, or is there anyway we can fly Gladiators off of a carrier somewhere, maybe a mediterrainian type thingy with early Italan planes? We need a swordfish for team england though
Very true about coral sea but it's core planes and layout are so similar to Midway there seems little point in pursuing it really.
As for Sea Gladiators vs Italian planes well yeah a real unusual scenario (for us) but liable to get voted off or abandoned in droves by the 'Where's my Spit/La7' crowd, shame i mean four wings are better than just two, surely?
:rolleyes:

MrAsh
12-10-2006, 13:34
Very true about coral sea but it's core planes and layout are so similar to Midway there seems little point in pursuing it really.
As for Sea Gladiators vs Italian planes well yeah a real unusual scenario (for us) but liable to get voted off or abandoned in droves by the 'Where's my Spit/La7' crowd, shame i mean four wings are better than just two, surely?
:rolleyes:

Its a shame but your probably right, we could have based it around taronto harbour or sommat, they had a bit of a barney round there i remember. ahh well...

Zorin
20-10-2006, 16:22
From the old "Reworking the old maps ...." thread:

Algore:

I always thought that the whole point of Midway was the destruction of Japanise carrier force. I do agree on the blue target issue, what propose is that the Midway atoll is left with little or no AAA allowing blues get the advantage over it and the bulk of the red air force is send from the carriers as in real battle, so to get the few medium bombers from midway to safely attack the fleet you'd need to bring in fighter cover from the carriers.

Zorin:

You might be correct here Al, but again, this setup doesn't suit the ideal of a balanced dogfight map. Blues lost half their aircraft to bomb hits, nearby impacts or take off accidents, most caused by freezes and lag created by the carrier AAA firing at all the enemys around them. This can't be kept this way, especially if we want to restrict plane numbers.

Were these problems adressed in your new version Firelok?

Firelok
20-10-2006, 17:11
Before (as in the version these quotes are talking about.) blues had both the Island and Red's fleet to take-out now they have just to attack the Island. Blues fleet still has AAA but not Ace level or Veteran Destroyer AAA with an ROF of 1.0 No blue cruisers or aircraft carrier fire now, they are set to sleep for over three game hours. My opinions about AAA are to have it present but it shouldn't be the deciding factor on the success of a bombrun, that's the job of defending fighters. When we did test this there were actual squads of dive/torpedo bombers flying for both sides, it might have been novelty factor but I thought it encouraging.

Zorin
20-10-2006, 17:31
Well, as long as the game stays smoothly I won't mind, but spawning, bomb blasts, AAA and water splashs of crashing planes or hitting bombs do simply require lots of resources and therefor we get lag and freezes. That is a fact and so I don't see why we would want to have missions that emphasize on these effects.

You get the idea?

It is not like I wouldn't love these missions, but with the current tech they are just impractical. Or at least for me, as I can't afford a high-end system...

Chatanooga
26-11-2006, 14:14
Just logged on to UKD2 and this map is on. I try to fly the A-20 and no matter which loadout I try I get warning points. It does not appear as restricted on the <planes command.

NS-IceFire
26-11-2006, 15:52
Yep...I think that will be fixed with the A-20C which I believe is slower, and is armed with 4 .30 cal forward and 2 .30cal in the back (one in the upper decking and one in the lower). That'll be much less of a defence against the Zeros.

Firelok
26-11-2006, 18:31
Yep 12 A20G's and 8 B17's, this is a candidate for the A20C doubtless. Though it's quoted at being exactly the same speed as the A20G.
Unfortunately this isn't something there is a lot of room for manouver on by my thinking...
1. Part of the Midway battle involved the IJN fleet being attacked by land-based bombers (B17s) from Midway.
2. We haven't got a flyable B-17 and we need a flyable red multi-engined bomber and a B25 is even worse than A20 (for speed/defensive fire)
3. So we get the A20G to be replaced IF we ever get 4.07m

NS-IceFire
26-11-2006, 23:13
Not sure how many B-17s were at Midway but most of the bombers were Martin B-26 Marauders. Apparently one of the B-26s managed to skim the deck of the Akagi barely being able to break away after a torpedo drop.

Firelok
26-11-2006, 23:18
B-26 Marauder was one of my fave planes as a kid. It's a damned shame we don't get to fly that one either.

Zorin
27-11-2006, 01:33
Yep 12 A20G's and 8 B17's, this is a candidate for the A20C doubtless. Though it's quoted at being exactly the same speed as the A20G.
Unfortunately this isn't something there is a lot of room for manouver on by my thinking...
1. Part of the Midway battle involved the IJN fleet being attacked by land-based bombers (B17s) from Midway.
2. We haven't got a flyable B-17 and we need a flyable red multi-engined bomber and a B25 is even worse than A20 (for speed/defensive fire)
3. So we get the A20G to be replaced IF we ever get 4.07m

I hope the reargunner in the A20C isn't a sniper like the one in the SBD. Shot several of them down tonight and was only killed by the rear gunner or some dumb blue players who would have been kicked by me if I only would have had the rights for it. ;)

irish
07-11-2007, 13:12
***TOP SECRET***

From: COMAIRPAC
To: BF Map Maker [Midway]
Re: Adjustments.


1. /CAG OOB is incorrect (STOP) ... Fighting 6 (VF-6), Fighting 3 (VF-3) and Fighting 8 (VF-8) all outfitted with F4F-4's for Midway Ops (STOP).....F4F-3's should be replaced with F4F-4. Contact BUORD for clarification./ http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq81-5.htm

2. /Positioning of TF 17.5 (Yorktown plus escorts) incorrect (STOP)....TF 17.5 should be north of TF 16.5 (Enterprise, Hornet plus escorts) acting independently(STOP).....

Algorex
07-11-2007, 13:20
Originally the carriers were in the north hence the bulge in the map, but the action was too dispersed so the current scheme was put in to use. Playability when ahead of pure historical accuracy.

As for the wildcats, personally i like the -3 more due it's longer firing time, but then again the difference between the marks is quite minute.

irish
07-11-2007, 13:49
Originally the carriers were in the north hence the bulge in the map, but the action was too dispersed so the current scheme was put in to use. Playability when ahead of pure historical accuracy.

As for the wildcats, personally i like the -3 more due it's longer firing time, but then again the difference between the marks is quite minute.

VMF-221(USMC) was fitted with a total 7 -3's. They operated out of Midway. No change there.
The USN should get the -4's unlimited and pull the -3's from list:cool:


As for the map, the US CV's are not targets....Midway is. Shifting "Yorktown" north will make the Game more interesting as it gives Red another avenue for attack on Blue instead of the usual "fly 300deg. NW till you see the Zekes above you" slaughter you see for the SBD's.

Firelok
07-11-2007, 16:34
Is making it more real making it a better map to play?
Last changes I made were to put in B17D's flying from Midway, realistic but often win the map easier than is really healthy perhaps...

It's a map Reds do well on because they generally have to cooperate using F4Fs
(I prefer the F4F3 too.) Blues tend not to cooperate (dunno why.) in the Zeroes but they would do better if did.


1. /CAG OOB is incorrect (STOP) .

So are ALL of the distances and the ALL compass directions of ALL the fleets here compared to actual Midway battle too. So shifting the US Fleet looks like handing even more of an advantage to reds to me.

As for the F4F4s it's easily changed (there are 25 F4F4s and unlimited F4F3s ATM.) lets see what else gets written here on the forums about it before i make a change.:)

MajorDamage
07-11-2007, 20:07
I'd suggest losing the B-17's. There's nothing especially historical about divebombing in a 4 engined heavy :D , although apparently one flight that was in transit en route to Midway, (and bombed up just in case), was ordered to attack and bombed from it's cruising altitude of 3600ft to save fuel. Most of the B-17 sorties were at about 10,000ft.

The problem with the B-17 is it makes all the other Red bombers redundant because it's so effective. Losing it would give more scope to the SBD's and stop it being won too easily by reds.

As regards the F4F, Irish is right but I'm not sure it specially matters. Perhaps it's a good idea to remove the restriction on the F4F-4, most folks prefer the -3 anyway.

Firelok
07-11-2007, 21:43
most folks prefer the -3 anyway.
So if we did unrestrict the F4F4 from the carriers and not have any F4F3s spawn there, this means more folks spawning from Midway.

But i agree about the B17's removal, was a nice idea but....

Zorin
07-11-2007, 23:09
"Reduce to the max" is quite a good way to treat certain maps, IMO.

irish
07-11-2007, 23:16
So if we did unrestrict the F4F4 from the carriers and not have any F4F3s spawn there, this means more folks spawning from Midway.

But i agree about the B17's removal, was a nice idea but....

That assumes the F4F-3 is more popular than the F4F-4 and I'm not so sure thats the case. You could line up 3 or 4 people on either side of that argument within the forums and it still wouldn't "solve" it (not that i think it's an issue to be fixed per say)

If you were to decide to revise this one....I would suggest basing a limited number of F4F-3's at Midway (maybe 10 total), removing the B17 entirely, allowing unlimited F2F-2 spawns at Midway and have unrestricted spawns of SBD-3's and F4F-4's at the Red Fleet.

Firelok
08-11-2007, 06:13
Well that's pretty much the way I've altered things irish...
No B17s
No carrier F4F3s
F4F3s limited (but not near as limited as 10 planes tho.)

lets see how it goes...

irish
08-11-2007, 18:08
Well that's pretty much the way I've altered things irish...
No B17s
No carrier F4F3s
F4F3s limited (but not near as limited as 10 planes tho.)

lets see how it goes...

thanks:p :)

FlyingFinn
14-10-2008, 19:47
Is this the most recent thread of this map?

Could you please remove the TBF-1 and add the Avenger instead? The TBF-1 doesn't have a cockpit in the AAA pack.

Sonko
14-10-2008, 20:37
Will do so later.

Kang
03-11-2008, 22:10
Today I noticed that on the map itself there is no indication concerning which of the carriers in red fleet is safe for landing (read: hasn't planes taking off). Would be great if a green light on the mast or a short note in the briefing to land on the Essex could be added.

Sonko
18-11-2008, 21:42
Alright, I put the TBM-3 to the red airstart and green lights to the blue landing carrier.