Doctrine

[Tuk]

I know this has been mentioned before but I can't find the thread and don't know what came of it.

Setting German interceptors to 'Bounce Fighter' is meaningless. If there's a bomber in sight they invariably go for it. I recall someone suggested using patrols instead of targeting raids directly but this still doesn't resolve the issue and adds the new one of patrols not intercepting and losing their targets when the game suddenly speeds up. Try managing that on a busy map and its not viable.

Which leads me to ask again, is this intentional, to reflect historical behaviour and lack of omnipotence in ground control, or not? If not, it's badly in need of a fix.

[Hard Sarge]

I think you are missing the point of Doc

that is what is the plan, if everything goes according to plan

so, Defending fighters set to bounce fighters, will try and set up a bounce, but if they can not, or if something else comes along, they will go for it

so, a BF setting, if they see what they think is a good attack chance, are still going to take it

(real world, the High Command had to ask Downing, why in the daily reports, Spitfires were shooting down bombers and Hurricanes were shooting down fighters, don't the pilots understand we told them to do it the other way around ? the first time Downing tried to explain how things work in combat, the 2nd time, he got up and left the meeting (muttering something to the effect, he wasn't going to waste his time, explaining something to morons)

the idea with Patrol, you can set up a (ahhh, drawing a blank right now, on what the LW called it) but you can form a mass of attackers, and then, assign them to hit all at once (with in reason) instead of one unit 100 miles away coming in, another 150 miles away following and so on (one unit hitting a raid, by itself, can be hurt and not do much, 5 or 6 units hitting at the same time, got a better chance of getting though and doing major damage)

(that said, I do both, so not one way is best, or better then the other, just based on what is going on at the time)

[Nicholas Bell]

[/quote]

the idea with Patrol, you can set up a (ahhh, drawing a blank right now, on what the LW called it) but you can form a mass of attackers

Gefechtsverbände

[Tuk]

That all sounds reasonable, the way the game should work. But my experience is that it doesn't. I've had a close look at what's happening and this is what I see. The only way I can get interceptors to take on an escort, either by direct assignment to a raid or masssed patrol, is
 
1. if there are no bombers near the escorts, ie.the escorts haven't yet caught up with their bombers or they're heading home.
2. once the escorts have attacked my interceptors.
 
I do not exagerate. My single engine interceptors fly down from above through several layers of escorts they are supposed to strip off to make way for my twin engined planes. They ignore the the escorts every time and instead go for the bombers below. I really mean quite literally EVERY TIME. This is not for lack of fighter targets, inability to gain hight or use of poor quality units.
 
 
 
 

[Hard Sarge]

if that is the case, you are doing something wrong

[Hard Sarge]

and

[Hard Sarge]

and

[Hard Sarge]

and

you can see, I have burned out the escorts fuel, most are headed for home

hassle has been, poor attacks, with a lot of US fighters in the area, that are counter attacking the bounces or attacks

this run, had about 13 bounces, 3 attacks on the fighters, and 1 bounce on the bombers (and that was a 3 plane unit, so a group that broke off from the main unit, they seen a opening and went for it)

everything was targeted on fighters, nothing was targeted on bombers (I didn't bring up anything that wants to attack bombers to confuse things)

so over all, if this is not what you are seeing, we need to figure out what you are doing, that I am not doing (or what I am doing that you are not doing ?)

[Hard Sarge]

I am not that great a LW player, but in that run, I think I did okay, if a real battle, I would of waiting another 50 miles or so, before trying to hit the raid (that is part of the trick, would the raid of went another 50 miles or more)

got hurt pretty good by the Yanks, but I burned out there fuel, and ended up leaving the Raid wide open

[Hard Sarge]

the heavies cleaned house

had a pretty good rocket run, 6 damaged and 5 kills, some of my 109s got 5 and 6 damaged

(got to break up the box)

(think my best ever rocket run was 11 damage and 0 kills)

[Hard Sarge]

just in case, raid was only to the top of the Ruhr, away from any Flak, so Flak damage wouldn't mess up the numbers

[MajorDude]

ORIGINAL: Nicholas Bell

the idea with Patrol, you can set up a (ahhh, drawing a blank right now, on what the LW called it) but you can form a mass of attackers

Gefechtsverbände
[/quote]

Maybe it was:

Schwarm or Jagdflugzeug

It would seem that Gefechtsverbände translates into geezer

[Hard Sarge]

As a consequence, the Luftwaffe was instructed to operate in "Gefechtsverbände" - intended to consist 40 or more fighters, but in reality, due to circumstances often composed of rather only half that number. These became subject to repeated Allied fighter attacks from several units.

[Hard Sarge]

but no, none of those were the term I was thinking of (LOL, I was even thinking of it in English

[Nicholas Bell]

Gefechtsverbände
Maybe it was:
Schwarm or Jagdflugzeug
It would seem that Gefechtsverbände translates into geezer

Well I don't know what translator you're using [;)]

[Nicholas Bell]

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge
but no, none of those were the term I was thinking of (LOL, I was even thinking of it in English

Seemed this is what you were talking about [:)]

[MajorDude]

ORIGINAL: Nicholas Bell

It would seem that Gefechtsverbände translates into geezer

Well I don't know what translator you're using [;)]

I just googled Gefechtsverbände

and this is the first thing that popped up:

http://dictionary.reverso.net/english-g ... b%C3%A4nde

which I found rather funny since it couldn't find a match, so it suggested geezer.

It also suggested: Geiger counter, geisha (girl), gel, and gelatin(e). [8|]

[Hard Sarge]

I did also get a Geezer reply, but I kept looking

[TechSgt]

ORIGINAL: Tuk

...

I do not exagerate. My single engine interceptors fly down from above through several layers of escorts they are supposed to strip off to make way for my twin engined planes. They ignore the the escorts every time and instead go for the bombers below. I really mean quite literally EVERY TIME. This is not for lack of fighter targets, inability to gain hight or use of poor quality units.

Tuk;

Compared to TOH...
My gut feeling is -- in BtR -- the Axis AI is going more for my escorts than the bombers.

TS

[Tuk]

OK, returning to this after examining the game for a while, I'm now officially wondering whether we're playing the same game. The issue is not whether or not the LW can knock allied planes out, clearly they can, but whether or not the doctrine has any meaning in the game.

What I've found is that while 'direct' and 'bounce' MAY impact on a unit's tactics, selecting 'bomber' or 'fighter' most definitely and categorically does not. More than that, if my assertion that it was 100% inevitable exaggerates, it does so only a little. The way the game works, a fighter will chose a bomber target over the fighters it was sent to intercept almost every time. The fighters will latch on to bomber targets at the soonest opportunity even if the fighters they were sent to intercept are close by.

Here's how it seems to be working-

Case 1
Take a raid with bombers at 20 000 and escorts at 18 000. Fighters set to 'bounce-fighter' arrive and 2 000 above their target they find the bombers. They then change target and will not engage the escort until the escort gains hight and generally bounces them.

Case 2
Another raid has the opposite composition with escorts flying 2 000 above the bombers. Maybe there are multi-layered escorts above the bombers, it makes no difference.  The same interceptors approach, trying to bounce the top most escort. What happens? The escorts fly below the level of the bombers, the interceptors  again latch onto the bombers like a baby on a tit and wait for the escorts to gain elevation and bounce them.

Case 3
Any bomber/escort combination you care to mention approaches a LW patrol 10 000 feet higher than the highest escort. Whether you let the patrol decide to intercept or directly instruct it to intercept the escort, as per case 2, the escorts will fly below the bombers and that tit comes out again. They just can't resist.

I cannot explain the handful of cases I've seen in which the interceptors attack their intended targets. I suspect it is down to the escorts manouvreing or not.