Ju 87 for RHS-EOS?

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Historiker

How can the Ki-84 protect ships against Vengeance and other LR-bombers, when it's range for LR-Cap is only 6?

Typo for Ki-83. You have always got fighters with a range of 11 hexes (A6M2), or 12 hexes (Ki-43 II - later Ki-83), so to the extend long range land based fighers is the solution - it is in the set now.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Historiker

Moreover, it would be a quite common method to use the Ju 88 NF as destroyer against heavy bombers where it won't face enemy fighters. This was done in history and especially when the enemy doesn't attack at night - why not use NF under day then? This doesn't only make sense, it's historical correct, too.
This isn't "let's put a F-4 or a F-22 in"

Is this really that difficult to understand?

I explained the problems with this - and you said "forget it" - so I did. The Ju-88 can be classified as a fighter bomber - and that means it won't carry any bombs to extended range - that it won't be as effective as a bomber or dive bomber or fighter plane - because of the way code works. I don't think it would be as good as any of the fighters in the present set are - so I am not understanding why you want it in such a role in the first place? But yes - we could classify it as a fighter bomber.

Note that the Ju-88a as a fighter bomber has a range of 30, so an extended range of 10, so a normal range of only 7: hardly what you are advocating anyway. The Ju-88c has a critical role as a night fighter - and I don't think you want to get rid of that. But IF you did, it has a range of 20, so an extended range of 6, so a normal range of only 5. That isn't as good as the planes you complained about with normal ranges of "only 6." The Ju-88 is not a solution to your percieved problem.

And I respectfully submit that to create a fighter of great range which was not historically used is exactly what "put an F-4 or F-22 in the game" would be. You have the finest of Axis aircraft in the EOS set - even those that were not developed to the point of operational. Use em as best you can - within their limitations.

I really think this "problem" is a misunderstanding of modern naval-air operations: there are places surface ships should not sail - in the face of enemy air forces - and those places are those out of range of friendly fighter cover. That should not be possible anything close to 720 miles operating radius - CAP must loiter and fight and fly both ways - in most cases. And planes that have long range trade something to get it: A6M2 deliberately traded armor; Ki-43 II deliberately traded weapons; Ki-83 deliberately traded maneuverability. This is good simulation - and presents player/commanders with realistic options. Since the proposed "solution" - the Ju-88 and Myrt - are not really feasible anyway - I don't see what else can be done. Myrt is not armed to be effective in daylight. Ju-88 lacks the very range you say you want - and I don't think it is effective in daylight either.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Historiker


Moreover:
The Wellington has an enormous range, while I read of not more than 2500km range. Are you sure it has such a long range?

Well - it is more than 2500 km. Bill Gunston gives more than 1000 km more. But for some reason the range is indeed too great - it is credited with 24 hours endurance - a value for some other aircraft. Its RHS range should be 39 or 40 hexes - for an extended range = 13. The weapons load at that distance is only 1500 pounds = 3 x 500 pound bombs. That corresponds to a normal load = 6 x 500 pound bombs. So the load is too great as well: it should either be 6 x 500 pounds or 12 x 250 pound bombs. Indeed, the max load is only 9 x 500 pound bombs (we show 12) - and max load is not used in WITP. I have a confirming source of 2200 miles at 1500 pounds - which yields the same 3000 pounds normal load. Since this would be correct if the load was 12 x 250s - it may be an editor induced error (one value change in the field). Correct data is 680 minutes with 12 x 250 pound bombs = 40/13/10 hexes.

[Historiker]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

ORIGINAL: Historiker


Moreover:
The Wellington has an enormous range, while I read of not more than 2500km range. Are you sure it has such a long range?

Well - it is more than 2500 km. Bill Gunston gives more than 1000 km more. But for some reason the range is indeed too great - it is credited with 24 hours endurance - a value for some other aircraft. Its RHS range should be 39 or 40 hexes - for an extended range = 13. The weapons load at that distance is only 1500 pounds = 3 x 500 pound bombs. That corresponds to a normal load = 6 x 500 pound bombs. So the load is too great as well: it should either be 6 x 500 pounds or 12 x 250 pound bombs. Indeed, the max load is only 9 x 500 pound bombs (we show 12) - and max load is not used in WITP. I have a confirming source of 2200 miles at 1500 pounds - which yields the same 3000 pounds normal load. Since this would be correct if the load was 12 x 250s - it may be an editor induced error (one value change in the field). Correct data is 680 minutes with 12 x 250 pound bombs = 40/13/10 hexes.

So it's a bug that it's range is 84/24/21?

ad Ju 88
you are right. I don't know why, but I expected it's range to be bigger. As a NF it can be used to intercept bombers in daylight by LR-CAP over bases or CAP over it's own base and that should enough.

Where are the guns of the Myrt?
Even if it has Schräge Musik or something like this, this wouldn't be that problem. If one uses it to protect ships that are attacked only by bombers - fine. If there are enemy fighters coming, it's the realistic problem that such a use would have caused.

Moreover:
The I-400 class has room for 2 planes while it's airgroups have three. Intended?

[Dili]

Well Ju-88 should have a bigger range   7x60 miles x2= around 1400km. With 2t bombload A4 should have around 2000km range w/ 2100kg fuel. A1 had 2340km range with 1,5t bomb load and 2100kg fuel.

With 1000kg bombload the A1 with 2609kg fuel had a range of 2900km; A4 can put 2620kg fuel as per chart tough theoretically could get more 500kg of fuel if it finds space for that. 


If you are unhappy with El Cid ranges, sources etc  just change it.


The plane range hex is nautical miles or land miles?

[Historiker]

If you are unhappy with El Cid ranges, sources etc just change it.

Well, not every potential opponent is happy when you begin changing AC data.

Moreover, my cognitations are not without faults. Furthermore this whole mod lives from the thoughts and ideas of many, no?

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Historiker

ORIGINAL: el cid again

ORIGINAL: Historiker


Moreover:
The Wellington has an enormous range, while I read of not more than 2500km range. Are you sure it has such a long range?

Well - it is more than 2500 km. Bill Gunston gives more than 1000 km more. But for some reason the range is indeed too great - it is credited with 24 hours endurance - a value for some other aircraft. Its RHS range should be 39 or 40 hexes - for an extended range = 13. The weapons load at that distance is only 1500 pounds = 3 x 500 pound bombs. That corresponds to a normal load = 6 x 500 pound bombs. So the load is too great as well: it should either be 6 x 500 pounds or 12 x 250 pound bombs. Indeed, the max load is only 9 x 500 pound bombs (we show 12) - and max load is not used in WITP. I have a confirming source of 2200 miles at 1500 pounds - which yields the same 3000 pounds normal load. Since this would be correct if the load was 12 x 250s - it may be an editor induced error (one value change in the field). Correct data is 680 minutes with 12 x 250 pound bombs = 40/13/10 hexes.

So it's a bug that it's range is 84/24/21?

ad Ju 88
you are right. I don't know why, but I expected it's range to be bigger. As a NF it can be used to intercept bombers in daylight by LR-CAP over bases or CAP over it's own base and that should enough.

Where are the guns of the Myrt?
Even if it has Schräge Musik or something like this, this wouldn't be that problem. If one uses it to protect ships that are attacked only by bombers - fine. If there are enemy fighters coming, it's the realistic problem that such a use would have caused.

Moreover:
The I-400 class has room for 2 planes while it's airgroups have three. Intended?

I don't know what you are talking about here? Unless somehow you have I-12 and I-400 mixed up. I-400 has capacity for 3 and air groups of 3, in all cases, no exceptions. [There was actually a 4th aircraft, disassembled as well]

As for Myrt - it is as if it ONLY has Schrage Musik. It will not be able to fend off an attacker from the rear - and won't be able to outmaneuver one either - no rear gun like almost all two engine night fighters have. Nor can it fight normally - and engage with tne front guns it does not have. This plane is really a recon ship adapted to night fighting.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Dili

Well Ju-88 should have a bigger range   7x60 miles x2= around 1400km. With 2t bombload A4 should have around 2000km range w/ 2100kg fuel. A1 had 2340km range with 1,5t bomb load and 2100kg fuel.

With 1000kg bombload the A1 with 2609kg fuel had a range of 2900km; A4 can put 2620kg fuel as per chart tough theoretically could get more 500kg of fuel if it finds space for that. 


If you are unhappy with El Cid ranges, sources etc  just change it.


The plane range hex is nautical miles or land miles?

Dili has not had enough sleep - or something. Aircraft ranges are 4 times normal range - not two. Also, since this isn't an A1, why even look at A1 data? He has forgotten that CAP does not fly to extended range - and that normal range is 25% of range - not half. We actually exaggerate transfer range by 9% - an RHS convention - so bombers get to fly more than 33% of transfer range with some weapons (it is about 42% of what should be transfer range). It is as if the plane has a special ferry tank when transferring - which indeed many do have.

[Dili]

7 hex isnt the radius with 2000kg offensive load?  If it is x4 is too much if it is x2 is too short.  A1 came because is a good reference for A4 loaded ranges.

[Historiker]

I don't know what you are talking about here? Unless somehow you have I-12 and I-400 mixed up. I-400 has capacity for 3 and air groups of 3, in all cases, no exceptions. [There was actually a 4th aircraft, disassembled as well]

Well, then this must be the work of the "phantom of WitP"

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Dili

7 hex isnt the radius with 2000kg offensive load?  If it is x4 is too much if it is x2 is too short.  A1 came because is a good reference for A4 loaded ranges.

Off the top of my head, I think the transfer range = 30 hexes so extended range = 10 and normal range = 7. That should correspond to about 1000 kg and 2000 kg respectively. Transfer range is indeed too great - because we are tricking AI into using a correct operational range - and it INSISTS on 4x - that is hard code and we cannot change it. It is reasonable for fighters but not for most other aircraft. We end up with an extended range about 42% of what transfer range should be - and that means your values are right - in theory - just not in practice here.

[el cid again]

OK - there is a version of I - 400 with only 2 aircraft - the ORIGINAL one. I think it belongs in BBO family. I don't remember if EOS family gets the original or the modified one? But the air group should be in sync - so probably this is an error on the class side.

Nope - it should be BBO type - with 2 planes - and ALL BBO I-400 air groups are wrong - never modified to 2 planes!

Thanks

The BBO type I-400 is slightly faster - and available sooner.

[Historiker]

The screen is from EOS.

[Dili]

Off the top of my head, I think the transfer range = 30 hexes so extended range = 10 and normal range = 7. That should correspond to about 1000 kg and 2000 kg respectively. Transfer range is indeed too great - because we are tricking AI into using a correct operational range - and it INSISTS on 4x - that is hard code and we cannot change it. It is reasonable for fighters but not for most other aircraft. We end up with an extended range about 42% of what transfer range should be - and that means your values are right - in theory - just not in practice here.

 
Yes but my critique concerned usual military mission range ( if all things fail i think the game should be realistic for the most comon missions) that is why i said 7 was too short.  For extended range i dont think it is too much.
 
Ju 88 A1 with 500kg bomb load and 3263kg fuel had 3680km range
Ju 88 A4 could have 4020kg of fuel for no bomb load. I would put ferry range at around 4500km which is more than 40 hexes.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Historiker

The screen is from EOS.

Verstehen. Both BBO and EOS family scenarios were wrong with respect to I-400 air group size, because both elected to use the original design. This issue is corrected in the new update - just issued for Level 7 and issuing now for Levels 5 and 6.

The process of updating is over for the time being. Only EEO remains to be done - and it exists only in Level 7. It is nearly done - and completion of it may not impact other scenarios in Level 7. But it might: and if it does, a courtesy update may be issued together with EEO in its official release form. ETA 48 hours. Even so, except for EEO related matters, we are not considering any more development for the present.

Instead RHS will enter a phase of extensive PBEM and human vs human testing. Problems will be noted - but changes will probably wait until after the next Matrix update. This might occur in December. Levels 5 and 6 may update then as well - but only with respect to matters that must be updated due to the code changes. For the present, development is suspended, and we will try to come to terms with the many changes we have made, and get some sense of their statistical significance.