AE Air Issues and Air OOB Issues [OUTDATED]

[DuckofTindalos]

Still won't happen, as we've said before.

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Dili

Well the result is too bloody but you have "only" 190 fighters vs almost 400 for Allies. 2 Vs 1 advantage for defender. With Early Warning Radar you will never win that one.

Well, in reality, you would expect to win that one. The advantage of carrier operations over land bases was that the carriers could conduct a surge operation (generating 3x the normal number of sorties) and then move out of the area to catch up on aircraft maintenance. CAP was continuous during daylight, so you couldn't surge it. What American CVTFs did if they could was rotate the responsibility for CAP so that one carrier in the TF provided CAP coverage while the other two handled strike operations and caught up on fighter maintenance. The CAP carrier kept about a third of its fighters in the air, another third on deck alert, and was refueling/rearming the remaining third. 400 Allied fighters were about 50 in the air (and able to be vectored), another 50 on deck alert, and the remaining 50 rearming/refueling. The strike would encounter 100 fighters in two waves, followed by a few at low level. 190 escorts was plenty.

My professional background actually puts me at a disadvantage playing this game: "It's not what we don't know that's the problem, it's what we know that ain't so." (Josh Billings)

[Dili]

The combat data says 2 Vs 1 . I don't know if the allied player had 800 fighters. Neither you know what the allied player decide to do with its fighters.

[tigercub]

This battle report is why i stop playing WITP 2 years ago, Just comic book stuff...

[tigercub]

ill just ask The Alf does the bomber defensive work now Alf because in the old ver Witp it was a very poor show,Sorry if this has been posted before and if so can you point me the AAR.

Thanks Tiger!

[TheElf]

ORIGINAL: tigercub

ill just ask The Alf does the bomber defensive work now Alf because in the old ver Witp it was a very poor show,Sorry if this has been posted before and if so can you point me the AAR.

Thanks Tiger!

Who is Alf?

[Flying Tiger]

ORIGINAL: TheElf

ORIGINAL: tigercub

ill just ask The Alf does the bomber defensive work now Alf because in the old ver Witp it was a very poor show,Sorry if this has been posted before and if so can you point me the AAR.

Thanks Tiger!

Who is Alf?

OUCH!! I think that is you mate!!

[Flying Tiger]

How does it feel to be mistaken for an idiotic, ugly, furry, atrocious acting sitcom character??

[tigercub]

your uncle? Hehe...[:(]

[String]

I'm sure it has been answered before but can the floatplanes fly cap now?

[Long Lance]

ORIGINAL: String

I'm sure it has been answered before but can the floatplanes fly cap now?

What for?[&:]


EDIT: At least what for after ~March 42?

[Dili]

I think so. I would hope that also any Patrol/Bomber plane can employed as an ASW escort. It was very comon.

[Dili]

Btw. Is there anyway to force a floatplane plane in a ship to go to land instead returning for the ship? If i classify such a plane as a patrol will it still return to the ship?

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: Dili

Btw. Is there anyway to force a floatplane plane in a ship to go to land instead returning for the ship? If i classify such a plane as a patrol will it still return to the ship?

?

[&:]

You simply tranfer it to a base.

[Dili]

I know, but i want it to do the patrol and go to land instead of ship, it can be the most nearby base. It is for ships that don't have recover ability.

[Cavalry Corp]

Question
Will disbanded Ships in port with float planes not fly missions ( please I hope so ) or will they have to be turned off manually ??

I assume CV cannot at all

Cav

[Dili]

In AAR's it appears that Ki-51 Sonias, Ki-30 were reclassified as bombers instead of dive bombers. Wouldn't their mission of close air support be better simulated as fighter bomber than level bomber?

[sven6345789]

ORIGINAL: Dili

In AAR's it appears that Ki-51 Sonias, Ki-30 were reclassified as bombers instead of dive bombers. Wouldn't their mission of close air support be better simulated as fighter bomber than level bomber?

yes, they were since they do not have divebrakes.
If i look at the specification of the Ki-51 and Ki-30, they should not be classified as fighter bombers. They were light (very light) bombers, and performed that way

[Dili]

IMO the attack profile of Fighter Bombers is i think much more similar to the atack profile of Sonias and Ki-30's IRL than of Level Bombers.

Specification doesn't matter for this, it is an hack. No one will put them as a fighter.

[m10bob]

Some of the Catalina flying boats had wheels, earlier ones did not..Has the game been able to make a differentiation now?(In vanilla you could not base any of them in an interior strip.)