Most of my air groups aren't participating in combat

[Nemo121]

I'd agree with Greyjoy. This plays better. If anything it favours the Allies more than Japan because US fighters should have higher a kills per 10 passes rate than IJAAF or IJNAF fighters vs US planes ( especially four-engined bombers ). As such more firing passes will result in significantly more Japanese planes downed whilst still leaving Allied 4-engined raids largely intact.

Overall though I think this plays more like accounts of the air war read. You get lots of passes and as the number of passes increases you begin seeing damaged bombers converted into destroyed bombers. It definitely reduces the incidence of planes just "slipping through".

There will be howls from both sides as the 4-engineds can no longer just push through strong fighter opposition with negligible losses and Japanese strikes vs USN TFs and ground bases get a lot more cut up unless they have sufficient escort but I think it plays more like situations I've read of.


I still would love an explanation of how the "defensive fire" phase of bomber defence works though as it doesn't seem to be linked directly to weapons stats ( reaching out to 600 yards even if the MGs on the bombers have a max range of 100 yards ). It just seems overpowered as though even in a 600 plane mission only 1 bomber box or 2 would be able to fire on an incoming plane the code seems to think that every bomber gets a chance to fire at the incoming plane.

Michaelm, is there any chance you could explain how this defensive fire phase works according to the code? It might help come up with a tweak which makes it slightly less laser-directed.

[michaelm75au]

Updated the enhanced 'more passes' EXE to latest build (r9)

[Nemo121]

Sweet, thanks.

After more play I can say it definitely plays better.

If you go in unescorted you pretty much get slaughtered but every so often if you send 20 or 30 planes in unescorted 2 or 3 will survive to attack. If you add escorts then things get very interesting. Whereas in the past the escorts might 100% protect the bombers by observing all the firing passes now you actually find the bombers getting attrited a bit by the interceptors.

Lastly vs 4-engineds. I'm noticing more bombers being shot down when they are intercepted on the exit from the target. I think this models the buildup of damage gradually leading to something catastrophic happening. It has increased their losses but they can still bull through.

Overall I think it works well and plays more believably.

[n01487477]

ORIGINAL: michaelm

Updated the enhanced 'more passes' EXE to latest build (r9)

Is this the MP version ?

[Dan Nichols]

ORIGINAL: n01487477

ORIGINAL: michaelm

Updated the enhanced 'more passes' EXE to latest build (r9)

Is this the MP version ?

If he hasn't changed things, the MP version is for More Pilots, it has a 70,000 sized pilot array instead of the 50,000 one.

[BigDuke66]

The problem with the defensive fire doesn't come from the changed EXE or does it?
I thought about trying it too, when it really plays more "historical".

[koniu]

ORIGINAL: michaelm

Updated the enhanced 'more passes' EXE to latest build (r9)

Any plans to have it as "official" beta or this is only experimental?

[GreyJoy]

ORIGINAL: koniu

ORIGINAL: michaelm

Updated the enhanced 'more passes' EXE to latest build (r9)

Any plans to have it as "official" beta or this is only experimental?

It's an experiment afaik...but the more of us that test it, the sooner we may have it in the official beta flow

[michaelm75au]

Hi Michael don't want to hijack the thread but one thing I got to ask:

Do you feel the current A2A model for later war have some problem?

If you do, do you have any plan to work on it any time soon?

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm

Just for information before I 'duck and cover'.
I am the one who implemented the code for the air combat based on feedback from Elf.
As part of that, I am the one who pick 200 as the magic number based on a crash course of reading/researching about dogfights. I can't recall (from 2yrs ago) reading lots of instances of 1000 CAP fighters defending against 1000 escort fighters in a single raid from day 1 in the Pacific War.

I personally think that it does to counter the excesses being shown.

No plans to work on it.

[Crackaces]

ORIGINAL: michaelm

Hi Michael don't want to hijack the thread but one thing I got to ask:

Do you feel the current A2A model for later war have some problem?

If you do, do you have any plan to work on it any time soon?

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm

Just for information before I 'duck and cover'.
I am the one who implemented the code for the air combat based on feedback from Elf.
As part of that, I am the one who pick 200 as the magic number based on a crash course of reading/researching about dogfights. I can't recall (from 2yrs ago) reading lots of instances of 1000 CAP fighters defending against 1000 escort fighters in a single raid from day 1 in the Pacific War.

I personally think that it does to counter the excesses being shown.

No plans to work on it.

However, is this change going to be now a part of the unoffical beta moving forward? If I update will I lose this feature?