Strange CAP results

This new stand alone release based on the legendary War in the Pacific from 2 by 3 Games adds significant improvements and changes to enhance game play, improve realism, and increase historical accuracy. With dozens of new features, new art, and engine improvements, War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
invernomuto
Posts: 942
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 4:29 pm
Location: Turin, Italy

Strange CAP results

Post by invernomuto »

While I appreciate the dev's effort to eliminate the Uber CAP problem in AE,
some CAP results does not sound right to me, expecially for the japanese.
(Scenario 1, latest patch, PBEM game, I'm using the Allies)

An example:


Japanese CAP:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Kragan at 54,103

Weather in hex: Light rain

Raid detected at 40 NM, estimated altitude 15,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 11 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 47



Allied aircraft
B-17D Fortress x 3


No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
B-17D Fortress: 1 destroyed, 2 damaged

Japanese Ships
CV Soryu



Aircraft Attacking:
2 x B-17D Fortress bombing from 10000 feet *
Naval Attack: 4 x 500 lb SAP Bomb

CAP engaged:
Tainan Ku S-1 Det B with A6M2 Zero (1 airborne, 4 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 10000 , scrambling fighters to 14000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 24 minutes
3rd Ku S-1 Det A with A6M2 Zero (1 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 9000
Raid is overhead
Akagi-1 with A6M2 Zero (1 airborne, 5 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 13000 , scrambling fighters to 10000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 7 minutes
Soryu-1 with A6M2 Zero (1 airborne, 5 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 7000 , scrambling fighters between 7000 and 16000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 10 minutes
Shokaku-1 with A6M2 Zero (1 airborne, 4 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 9000 , scrambling fighters to 9000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 7 minutes
Zuikaku-1 with A6M2 Zero (1 airborne, 6 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 10000 , scrambling fighters to 10000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 7 minutes
Ryujo-1 with A6M2 Zero (2 airborne, 6 on standby, 0 scrambling)
2 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 10000 , scrambling fighters between 11000 and 12000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 25 minutes
Shoho-1 with A6M2 Zero (1 airborne, 5 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 11000 , scrambling fighters between 3000 and 14000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 9 minutes
Hiryu-1 with A6M2 Zero (0 airborne, 3 on standby, 0 scrambling)
Group patrol altitude is 10000 , scrambling fighters to 10000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 7 minutes

3 B17 against 47 zero at 10,000 feet and only one downed? I know that B17 were hard to fight for japanese plane, but in this case they were facing the entire KB and they were outnumbered by 15 to 1.

In general, to me (but it's just an impression) Allied cap seems more perfoming than Japanese one even in the early stages of the war.
User avatar
Miller
Posts: 2227
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 10:14 am
Location: Ashington, England.

RE: Strange CAP results

Post by Miller »

This is par for the course against allied 4E bombers. Most Jap fighters are not heavily armed enough to bring them down. At least when they are attacked their bombing accuracy seems to go right down......
User avatar
Sardaukar
Posts: 12577
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Finland/Israel

RE: Strange CAP results

Post by Sardaukar »

It is also quite historical, IJN fighters had big problems with B-17. In "Fire in the Sky", IJNAF staff officer responsible of Rabaul air operations said in after-war interrogations that they just could not find any effective solution against Allied heavy bombers. And these were just about best pilots IJNAF had, apart from carrier pilots.
"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-

Image
User avatar
jomni
Posts: 2827
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 12:31 am
Contact:

RE: Strange CAP results

Post by jomni »

I've come to accept the fact that zeros cannot shoot down the B-17 that easily.
They weren't built to be bomber interceptors anyway.
Just hope that the remaining damaged B-17 don't reach home and become op losses which does happen.
User avatar
Sardaukar
Posts: 12577
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Finland/Israel

RE: Strange CAP results

Post by Sardaukar »

ORIGINAL: jomni

I've come to accept the fact that zeros cannot shoot down the B-17 that easily.
They weren't built to be bomber interceptors anyway.
Just hope that the remaining damaged B-17 don't reach home and become op losses which does happen.

Indeed.

That happens quite often..and is also quite historical. Problems that Zero had against B-17 were basically 2-fold. First was inadequate firepower, since even when Zero had 20mm cannons, round velocity, ammunition and effective firing distance were quite limited. This augments the second shortcoming, which was that Zero was horribly vulnerable to B-17 defensive armament.

It is no surprise that Germans went for 4x20mm cannons or for bigger 30mm cannons against B-17. While in no way invincible, it certainly had unmatched ruggedness in WWII.
"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-

Image
User avatar
Sardaukar
Posts: 12577
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Finland/Israel

RE: Strange CAP results

Post by Sardaukar »

In addition, seems that most likely not all of those 47 Zeros managed to intercept. Combat text shows only 9 planes with message "intercepting now".
"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-

Image
bklooste
Posts: 1104
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2006 12:47 am

RE: Strange CAP results

Post by bklooste »

Youd think at least some of those high agg pilots would ram the things before they attacked the ship. They certainly dived into the water to stop torps.
Underdog Fanboy
User avatar
invernomuto
Posts: 942
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 4:29 pm
Location: Turin, Italy

RE: Strange CAP results

Post by invernomuto »

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

In addition, seems that most likely not all of those 47 Zeros managed to intercept. Combat text shows only 9 planes with message "intercepting now".

Those 9 where the the A/Cs airborne. Others scrambled and get the bombers in time before they reach the target.
User avatar
Wittmann30
Posts: 43
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 2:25 pm
Location: Germany

RE: Strange CAP results

Post by Wittmann30 »

Hmm...i don't see any of that planes scrambeling...pls check Cap enganged. Also check the time to make the Interception. I think 9 planes were in the air, some arrives not or after the raid dropped their payload...

“God grant me the courage not to give up what I think is right even though I think it is hopeless.”

- Chester W. Nimitz -
User avatar
freeboy
Posts: 8969
Joined: Sun May 16, 2004 9:33 am
Location: Colorado

RE: Strange CAP results

Post by freeboy »

regardingramming, I am in jan 44 scen 2 pbem as allies and the most effective means of taking down my b24s is ramming, most of the time I fly in and enemy gets dasables, and perhaps 6-10 times I have seen; "Pilot X gives life for the Emperor"
"Tanks forward"
User avatar
Misconduct
Posts: 1851
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 2:13 am
Location: Cape Canaveral, Florida
Contact:

RE: Strange CAP results

Post by Misconduct »

Lets consider this, Each A2m Zero has 120 rounds of 20mm total, between 9 planes thats 1080 20mm rounds total, assuming accurate aiming you'd look around 450 shells actually hit, The germans averaged it needed 25 rounds of MG/151 in a vital area to bring down a B-17 or on average 75 hits per 250 rounds fired.

So assuming the germans had a hard enough time bringing them down with a Fw-190 with 4x20mm's with way more then 750rounds each aircraft, I think its pretty accurate to say those 9 Zeros give it their best shot and could of at most nailed 2 bombers with the ammo given.


ASUS Maximus IV Extreme-Z Intel Core I7 2800k Corsair Hydro Heatsink Corsair Vengeance DD3 24GB EVGA GTX 580 Western Digital 1.5TB Raid 0 Windows 7
User avatar
CarnageINC
Posts: 2208
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 2:47 am
Location: Rapid City SD

RE: Strange CAP results

Post by CarnageINC »

Should be thankful that you didn't loose any fighters, you could of lost at least 3-4 easy.
User avatar
TheElf
Posts: 2800
Joined: Wed May 14, 2003 1:46 am
Location: Pax River, MD

RE: Strange CAP results

Post by TheElf »

another force at play here is relative force allocation. A CAP will not expend it's entire strength against a smaller force. It may. It may not. There is a line of code in there that will keep an entire Escort of 45 fighters from trying to engage one lone interceptor.

The idea that 47 Zeros would all engage 3 B-17s simultaneously is ludicrous.
IN PERPETUUM SINGULARIS SEDES

Image
User avatar
castor troy
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 10:17 am
Location: Austria

RE: Strange CAP results

Post by castor troy »

ORIGINAL: TheElf

another force at play here is relative force allocation. A CAP will not expend it's entire strength against a smaller force. It may. It may not. There is a line of code in there that will keep an entire Escort of 45 fighters from trying to engage one lone interceptor.

The idea that 47 Zeros would all engage 3 B-17s simultaneously is ludicrous.


interesting, thanks for the info
User avatar
invernomuto
Posts: 942
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 4:29 pm
Location: Turin, Italy

RE: Strange CAP results

Post by invernomuto »

Hi, thanks for the infos. I have to say that I am not whining, but I'm trying to understand how the CAP in AE works. It's really different than WITP.

Here is another result for you to comment.
Morning Air attack on TF, near Kragan at 54,103

Weather in hex: Heavy cloud

Raid detected at 40 NM, estimated altitude 11,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 11 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 15



Allied aircraft
139WH-3 x 8
75A-7 Hawk x 4
B-25C Mitchell x 4


No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
139WH-3: 3 destroyed, 1 damaged
75A-7 Hawk: 1 destroyed

Japanese Ships
xAK Sugiyama Maru
xAK Oigawa Maru



Aircraft Attacking:
4 x B-25C Mitchell bombing from 10000 feet
Naval Attack: 6 x 500 lb SAP Bomb
1 x 139WH-3 bombing from 10000 feet
Naval Attack: 3 x 300 kg SAP Bomb

CAP engaged:
Tainan Ku S-1 Det B with A6M2 Zero (5 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
(5 plane(s) diverted to support CAP in hex.)
5 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 10000
Raid is overhead
4 planes vectored on to bombers
Ryujo-1 with A6M2 Zero (6 airborne, 4 on standby, 0 scrambling)
(6 plane(s) diverted to support CAP in hex.)
6 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 10000 , scrambling fighters to 11000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 26 minutes

The Zeros performed quite well against Dutch fighters, downed 3 dutch bombers and then began to battle the heavier B-25. There were 5-6 Zeros against 4 B-25. Suddenly, one after another, all the zeros left combat for "technical trouble" (engine cut, out of ammo, etc). Has anyone see anything similar? It's not the first time I see this in combat replay, it seems that the program has to end the combat replay because it was lasting too long...

Bye

User avatar
invernomuto
Posts: 942
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 4:29 pm
Location: Turin, Italy

RE: Strange CAP results

Post by invernomuto »

ORIGINAL: TheElf

another force at play here is relative force allocation. A CAP will not expend it's entire strength against a smaller force. It may. It may not. There is a line of code in there that will keep an entire Escort of 45 fighters from trying to engage one lone interceptor.

The idea that 47 Zeros would all engage 3 B-17s simultaneously is ludicrous.

Thanks for your reply, these are really useful infos.
So the 47 Zeros in CAP are not all engaged in combat.
Could you also confirm that if CAP outnumbers the escorts part of the CAP could be reserved for bombers only?
Thanks in advance!
User avatar
AcePylut
Posts: 1487
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2004 4:01 am

RE: Strange CAP results

Post by AcePylut »

Weather in hex: Light rain

Not hard to imagine that 3 lonely B-17's ducked in and out of clouds over the target.
User avatar
LoBaron
Posts: 4775
Joined: Sun Jan 26, 2003 8:23 pm
Location: Vienna, Austria

RE: Strange CAP results

Post by LoBaron »

ORIGINAL: AcePylut
Weather in hex: Light rain

Not hard to imagine that 3 lonely B-17's ducked in and out of clouds over the target.


Well put.
Image
User avatar
castor troy
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 10:17 am
Location: Austria

RE: Strange CAP results

Post by castor troy »

ORIGINAL: bklooste

Youd think at least some of those high agg pilots would ram the things before they attacked the ship. They certainly dived into the water to stop torps.



none of above was usual though and far from the norm
FatR
Posts: 2522
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 10:04 am
Location: St.Petersburg, Russia

RE: Strange CAP results

Post by FatR »

In RL, these B-17s would have died horribly. Examples of low-to-medium altitude daylight unescorted 4E attacks in the Pacific aren't numerous. Because these attacks ended up like the raid on Hankow on 20 August of 1943, when 14 B-24D (unescorted because fighters failed to connect with the raid) were met by a sentai of Ki-43s, lost two planes, with ten more damaged (so that the unit as a whole was effectively disabled for weeks) and failed to inflict any damage on the enemy; or the raid on Haiphong on 15 September, when five B-24Ds (not expecting fighter opposition) were intercepted by 35 Ki-43s and only one Liberator survived, while Japanese lost just one pilot in return. Note, that these examples involve the most undergunned Japanese fighter of the war (barring those that already were phased out of the units at the war's beginning).

4E Allied bombers probably were made uber-tough in the game, because AE does not really model difficulties of high-altitude interception. Against ground targets this model works passably, because, in my experience, unescorted 4E units become disabled very fast and replacement rates are too slow to afford losing even a handful of planes per average raid. However, when 4E bomber are used on low-level (6k) haval attack, never mind when they skipbomb, they can be game-breakingly potent.
The Reluctant Admiral mod team.

Take a look at the latest released version of the Reluctant Admiral mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/
Post Reply

Return to “War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition”