Sweep vs Escorts

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

Got me there. Peace. [;)]

Although a combat report is a fairy tale on its own.
The truth about actual things are in the combat replay but thats a bit hard to post...

agreed

[Nikademus]

combat reports are permanently FOW'd and will consistantly show less losses than actually occured. (even if you turn FOW off) You have to check the loss screen the turn after for the accurate result.

[Chickenboy]

A question to those of you that have given this topic some thought:

If I were to have a house rule that my opponent and I adhered to regarding altitude maximums / airframe type-would this make results more realistic?

For instance, Nates cannot fly >15,000 feet elevation (same as P-39s), whereas Zeroes, Hurricanes, etc. may fly up to 25,000. Beyond that is off limits, for the most part to avoid stratospheric sweep / CAP complications.

Have any of you personally tried a similar HR? If so, what were your results?

[pompack]

Well, I last posted on this subject about this time last year. Now a year has passed, I am playing another PBEM and I am still waiting for the uber-Tojos and the sweep bonus. I send Tojos out on a sweep at max altitude or at best altitude or at staggered altitudes in between the two. I send them out one group at a time or in multiple groups from both single and multiple bases. I train them to 72+ or I train them to only 60+ or to everything in between. I send them against P40's or against Hurris or even against Buffs. And none of it makes much difference except to make things even worse.

I AM STILL WAITING FOR THE UBER-TOJO AND/OR THE SWEEP BONUS. On a good day I inflict as many losses as I suffer but I rarely have good days.

Once again: Are you guys really playing AE? Is there some secret patch I am missing? What am I doing wrong that I never get the benifit of this broken system everyone gripes about? Am I going to have to switch sides and play as the Allies in order to see this? [:D]

[Nikademus]

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

A question to those of you that have given this topic some thought:

If I were to have a house rule that my opponent and I adhered to regarding altitude maximums / airframe type-would this make results more realistic?

nope.

[dr.diplodocus]

I've been playing Guadalnalcanal scen for the past 4 months now. Sweeps and dogfights have normally been taking place from 10-15k, sometimes lower and usually higher when escorting bombers. There have been no strato sweeps nor have we been playing the altitude game. From my experience, the main factors are Air skill, Defense skill, speed of fighters, fatigue and luck. My Zeros have put a beating on my opponents P-39s, Wildcats, and P-40s, but it has never been a walk-over on my side.

If there is some bonus that some how magically makes fighters flying at higher alts all supreme unstoppable gods of the air, then I have seen no trace of it. Flying at altitudes where my planes have high MVR ratings have worked for my Zeros and his fighters alike. A number in the 30s or 40s is and will always be greater than a number in the low 10s. but then again, none of that matters that much if the pilots are green.

[Shark7]

ORIGINAL: dr.diplodocus

I've been playing Guadalnalcanal scen for the past 4 months now. Sweeps and dogfights have normally been taking place from 10-15k, sometimes lower and usually higher when escorting bombers. There have been no strato sweeps nor have we been playing the altitude game. From my experience, the main factors are Air skill, Defense skill, speed of fighters, fatigue and luck. My Zeros have put a beating on my opponents P-39s, Wildcats, and P-40s, but it has never been a walk-over on my side.

If there is some bonus that some how magically makes fighters flying at higher alts all supreme unstoppable gods of the air, then I have seen no trace of it. Flying at altitudes where my planes have high MVR ratings have worked for my Zeros and his fighters alike. A number in the 30s or 40s is and will always be greater than a number in the low 10s. but then again, none of that matters that much if the pilots are green.

The problem is two-fold:

1. Some aircraft are naturally more manueverable at higher altitudes. This gives them an advantage. These happen to be early war IJA/IJN aircraft while their allied counterparts are better at lower altitudes. This of course reverses by war's end.

2. The planes at higher altitude get 'the bounce' which is in essence a free-shot surprise attack.

Add to this the additional bonus a sweeping aircraft gets and you can see the problem.

I finally reinstalled and started playing against the AI (got a new gaming rig). When I set Oscars and Zeros to 20k+ on sweep I slaughter everything the AI throws up with at least 5:1 kill ratios. I've actually been purposely keeping mine between 10k-20k to keep the game a bit more interesting.

Incidentally, it appears that the average altitude for bomber raids and dogfights centered between 15k to 20k feet of altitude...not the 30k that most people are sweeping at in game.

[dr.diplodocus]

1: if you mean max altitude as in higher altitude, then there are no planes in the game that fly better at max alts than lower alts.
Most planes MVR rating drops around 20k, therefore there's really no reason for planes to be at 30k+. doing so must be trying to cheat knowing no plane flies the best at max alt.

2: Free shot doesnt mean free kill. I have seen plenty of instances where planes that are being dove upon maneuver and shoot down the attacking plane. All I'm saying is that the plane at the higher altitude doesn't always shoot down the plane at the lower alt.

the problem is that people send their planes at max alt expecting to shoot down every plane they encounter. but when one single plane type seems to have less than the exact historical numbers out of hundreds of others that weren't checked to verify the correct amount, then the game becomes unhistorical and unplayable.

[FatR]

ORIGINAL: Shark7

1. Some aircraft are naturally more manueverable at higher altitudes. This gives them an advantage. These happen to be early war IJA/IJN aircraft while their allied counterparts are better at lower altitudes. This of course reverses by war's end.

That's wrong. The maneurability difference between Allied and Japanese early-war planes decreases as altitude increases. Zero has 17-points MVR advantage over P-40E at ground level and only 8-points one at max altitude. If not for the ability of Zeros and Oscars to fly higher than nearly all early Allied fighters, stratosphere battles would have benefitted Allies exclusively.

This dynamics persists until the war's end. P-47N is 9 MVR behind Ki-84b at ground level and actually exceeds it by 3 points at the highest altitude band.

[witpqs]

It's my understanding that the maneuver ratings are not pure for apples to apples comparisons. The max speed is considered, too.

[Kwik E Mart]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

It's my understanding that the maneuver ratings are not pure for apples to apples comparisons. The max speed is considered, too.

speaking of speed "being considered", isn't the AAR between FatR and Yubari a modified scenario? i.e., aren't the japanese fighter speeds adjusted up?

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: Kwik E Mart

ORIGINAL: witpqs

It's my understanding that the maneuver ratings are not pure for apples to apples comparisons. The max speed is considered, too.

speaking of speed "being considered", isn't the AAR between FatR and Yubari a modified scenario? i.e., aren't the japanese fighter speeds adjusted up?

No idea.

I meant that they considered how the game engine uses the maneuver and speed ratings when they set them. I believe that the maneuver ratings somehow take into account the differences in speed.

[EUBanana]

Well, I just had a play, 18 sweeping P40s (turns out to be 16 usually) vs 18 Zeroes on 60% CAP (which means about 11 up normally and the rest on standby), range 5, Zeroes at 25,000'. Zeroes had an experience advantage, average 74 vs average 54 for the P40s - but the P40s are the ones doing the sweep. Thousand Mile War scenario as its small and quick, with the Rufes at Kiska Island turned into A6M2s.

With the P40s at 29,000' the tally, taken from air losses and so presumed accurate, was

4 - 1, 4 - 1, 3 - 1, 4 - 1, all to the P40s. So lets say 4 to 1 in the Allied favour.

Then I ran a set with P40s at 25k feet, 20k, 15k, 10k, 5k and 100'. I only ran it once at each altitude.

25k feet = 4 losses each
20k feet = 3 losses each
15k feet = 3 losses each
10k feet = 3 losses each
5k feet = 2 P40s lost, 3 Zeroes lost
100' = 8 P40s lost, 0 Zeroes lost

I think the 100' one which I think is a special case as the combat report talked about strafing, so perhaps ignore that one. So lets say 1:1, at all altitude bands.

Interestingly even when the P40s were sweeping at low altitude, like 5000', almost all if not all the actual kills happened after 'P40 dives on Zero' and they were all after the initial collision which makes me think the P40s were shooting down the Zeroes that were on standby and scrambling and that those particular fighters tended to be below the P40.

Conclusion - stratosweeps work. If alt bands work I'm not really seeing it.

[Kwik E Mart]

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

Well, I just had a play, 18 sweeping P40s (turns out to be 16 usually) vs 18 Zeroes on 60% CAP (which means about 11 up normally and the rest on standby), range 5, Zeroes at 25,000'. Zeroes had an experience advantage, average 74 vs average 54 for the P40s - but the P40s are the ones doing the sweep. Thousand Mile War scenario as its small and quick, with the Rufes at Kiska Island turned into A6M2s.

With the P40s at 29,000' the tally, taken from air losses and so presumed accurate, was

4 - 1, 4 - 1, 3 - 1, 4 - 1, all to the P40s. So lets say 4 to 1 in the Allied favour.
this was 4 different runs of a single turn, or 5 consecutive days of same settings? did you restart the game for each run, or load the save each time? i thought i read something about having to restart to get different RNG's for each run...also curious if CAP had radar assist

Then I ran a set with P40s at 25k feet, 20k, 15k, 10k, 5k and 100'. I only ran it once at each altitude.

25k feet = 4 losses each
20k feet = 3 losses each
15k feet = 3 losses each
10k feet = 3 losses each
5k feet = 2 P40s lost, 3 Zeroes lost
100' = 8 P40s lost, 0 Zeroes lost

I think the 100' one which I think is a special case as the combat report talked about strafing, so perhaps ignore that one. So lets say 1:1, at all altitude bands.

Interestingly even when the P40s were sweeping at low altitude, like 5000', almost all if not all the actual kills happened after 'P40 dives on Zero' and they were all after the initial collision which makes me think the P40s were shooting down the Zeroes that were on standby and scrambling and that those particular fighters tended to be below the P40.

Conclusion - stratosweeps work. If alt bands work I'm not really seeing it.

[dr.diplodocus]

Conclusion: In that case it'd be better to send P-40s in at 5k where you loose less planes then send them in at 29k just so you can get 4 kills. The object in war is to loose less than your opponent not to get highest kill tally.Even if you lost 0 planes and shot down 1 at 5k, you'd still send them in at 29k, even if that meant loosing 60 planes and shooting down 60. but if you want to use your fighters just for the sole reason to get a 5:1 ratio, then nobody's stopping you.

[FatR]

ORIGINAL: Kwik E Mart

speaking of speed "being considered", isn't the AAR between FatR and Yubari a modified scenario? i.e., aren't the japanese fighter speeds adjusted up?

No, in Scen 70 they aren't.

[FatR]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

It's my understanding that the maneuver ratings are not pure for apples to apples comparisons. The max speed is considered, too.

The max speed is static at all altitudes, AFAIK.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: FatR

ORIGINAL: witpqs

It's my understanding that the maneuver ratings are not pure for apples to apples comparisons. The max speed is considered, too.

The max speed is static at all altitudes, AFAIK.

Yes - I suspect that the maneuver rating is adjusted with the max speed in mind. In other words, if the Zero was 50mph faster, I believe its maneuver would get adjusted downward. Guesswork on my part.

EDIT to Add: I could be more clear. Consider that if the Zero were 50mph faster that it would actually be less maneuverable at its max speed. I suspect that maneuver ratings are all 'at max speed'. Airplanes can, for example, turn tighter when going slower than they can at max speed.

[Shark7]

ORIGINAL: FatR

ORIGINAL: Shark7

1. Some aircraft are naturally more manueverable at higher altitudes. This gives them an advantage. These happen to be early war IJA/IJN aircraft while their allied counterparts are better at lower altitudes. This of course reverses by war's end.

That's wrong. The maneurability difference between Allied and Japanese early-war planes decreases as altitude increases. Zero has 17-points MVR advantage over P-40E at ground level and only 8-points one at max altitude. If not for the ability of Zeros and Oscars to fly higher than nearly all early Allied fighters, stratosphere battles would have benefitted Allies exclusively.

This dynamics persists until the war's end. P-47N is 9 MVR behind Ki-84b at ground level and actually exceeds it by 3 points at the highest altitude band.

Stats taken from the official DB from Scenario #1

Altitude Band 21k-30K

P-40B Warhawk: Manuevre 11
P-40E Warhawk: Manuevre 6

A6M2 Zero: Mavuevre 21

That is a BIG difference...the Zero has twice the Manuevre at High Altitude Band.

Ki-43 Ia/b/c Oscar: Mauveuvre 28
Ki-43 IIa Oscar: Manuevre 31


Again a HUGE advantage for the Japanese early war planes in terms of high altitude maneuverability.

Ironically:

P-36 Mohawk: 12 Manuevre at High Altitude...its better than the Warhawk for high level fights, though only marginally.

Now when you bump that up to Very High, yes there is only a 8 point manuevre diffence between the Zero and the Warhawk, but the Warhawk has manuever of 2! I've seen bricks with more manueverability. The heavy bombers can almost match it at that altitude.

With my Zeros and Oscars I would probably sweep at 28k...inside the high altitude band. Keeping my big altitude advantage as well as giving me a good chance for the bounce.

You have to keep things in perspective...sure the difference isn't that big, but the Zero or Oscar can actually still turn, the P-40 is severely restricted. The P-40 was a rugged, excellent mid altitude fighter, but it was not designed to fight at very high altitudes. The Zero and Oscar were built for manuevre with no defense, so they keep a turning radius edge at all altitude bands. It's all in the design, or more specifically what the planes were designed to do.

[Shark7]

ORIGINAL: dr.diplodocus

Conclusion: In that case it'd be better to send P-40s in at 5k where you loose less planes then send them in at 29k just so you can get 4 kills. The object in war is to loose less than your opponent not to get highest kill tally.Even if you lost 0 planes and shot down 1 at 5k, you'd still send them in at 29k, even if that meant loosing 60 planes and shooting down 60. but if you want to use your fighters just for the sole reason to get a 5:1 ratio, then nobody's stopping you.

Exactly. For early war Japan, go in high. Early war Allied, hug the deck. Unfortunately the game mechanics simply can't mimic and actual dogfight or intercepts where discretion is the better part of valor.