Aircraft Loads

[topeverest]

Having extensively modded a number of game elements, I understand all too well how play balance can be severly damaged - or enhanced - by making such fundemental changes (like ordinace loads). I am trying to get my head around what is worth changing so that I can ponder what the effect might be. For example, I am not terribly interested in adding power to mid and late war allied bomb loads, because I view the net effect to be more or less in balance.

Are their air frame candidates that jump out at the group as needing enhancement that could avoid a somewhat lengthy review on my part?

[Symon]

ORIGINAL: topeverest

Having extensively modded a number of game elements, I understand all too well how play balance can be severly damaged - or enhanced - by making such fundemental changes (like ordinace loads). I am trying to get my head around what is worth changing so that I can ponder what the effect might be. For example, I am not terribly interested in adding power to mid and late war allied bomb loads, because I view the net effect to be more or less in balance.

Are their air frame candidates that jump out at the group as needing enhancement that could avoid a somewhat lengthy review on my part?

Holy Perspicacity, Batman! Do I see an intelligent statement, here? Ya think someone is actually getting it? Woof !!!

Way to go Top!

[n01487477]

I'm having problems with the 1.0.0.7 editor copying the new bomb filter data from the aircraft data to the airgroups units. Sometimes it carries the data, at other times not. Is this the latest editor? Is it better just to use witploadAE ? Is there any plan to re-do the editor ?

[edit] Tested with witpload and it works no better. There is a glitch here and I'm not sure what it is yet. I'll post some screen shots tomorrow after some Zzzzz.

[Herrbear]

ORIGINAL: n01487477

I'm having problems with the 1.0.0.7 editor copying the new bomb filter data from the aircraft data to the airgroups units. Sometimes it carries the data, at other times not. Is this the latest editor? Is it better just to use witploadAE ? Is there any plan to re-do the editor ?

[edit] Tested with witpload and it works no better. There is a glitch here and I'm not sure what it is yet. I'll post some screen shots tomorrow after some Zzzzz.

I am just wondering if you are not going to the Air Groups tab and then resetting your groups using the Tools/Set Air Groups?

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: n01487477

I'm having problems with the 1.0.0.7 editor copying the new bomb filter data from the aircraft data to the airgroups units. Sometimes it carries the data, at other times not. Is this the latest editor? Is it better just to use witploadAE ? Is there any plan to re-do the editor ?

[edit] Tested with witpload and it works no better. There is a glitch here and I'm not sure what it is yet. I'll post some screen shots tomorrow after some Zzzzz.

I've experienced similar issues with the editor, not consistently though so nothing to share with Michael. I've been using witploadae since and manually taking care of it in the spreadsheets. Have not had any issues with that so really surprised you are having problems.[&:]

[oldman45]

ORIGINAL: Symon

ORIGINAL: Shark7

This also begs the question, can a Depth Charge device now be used with code 64 on the ASW mission. One that certianly comes to mind is the Ka-1 which did carry DCs.

Yes.

However, the Air ASW routine is different from the Naval ASW routine, so don't expect the same results. I would think twice about using technical suggestions from people who have no clue how the game engine works.

This then begs the question,

I was about to start working on my mod again, is it worth putting DC on aircraft for asw patrol or should I just stick with bombs?

[inqistor]

ORIGINAL: Herrbear

ORIGINAL: n01487477

I'm having problems with the 1.0.0.7 editor copying the new bomb filter data from the aircraft data to the airgroups units. Sometimes it carries the data, at other times not. Is this the latest editor? Is it better just to use witploadAE ? Is there any plan to re-do the editor ?

[edit] Tested with witpload and it works no better. There is a glitch here and I'm not sure what it is yet. I'll post some screen shots tomorrow after some Zzzzz.

I am just wondering if you are not going to the Air Groups tab and then resetting your groups using the Tools/Set Air Groups?

Yup, that should fix the problem, but in most cases you just need to select different mission in game, and filters will kick-in.

ORIGINAL: oldman45

ORIGINAL: Symon

ORIGINAL: Shark7

This also begs the question, can a Depth Charge device now be used with code 64 on the ASW mission. One that certianly comes to mind is the Ka-1 which did carry DCs.

Yes.

However, the Air ASW routine is different from the Naval ASW routine, so don't expect the same results. I would think twice about using technical suggestions from people who have no clue how the game engine works.

This then begs the question,

I was about to start working on my mod again, is it worth putting DC on aircraft for asw patrol or should I just stick with bombs?

Technically those were not ship-borne DCs, but modified bombs. Lots of explosives, but they had quite low depth setting. So in-game probably bigger effect/better accuracy would be enough, as it will not be carried on other types of mission.

[dwg]

ORIGINAL: topeverest
Are their air frame candidates that jump out at the group as needing enhancement that could avoid a somewhat lengthy review on my part?

For aircraft data, the best source I've found is Ryan Crierie's collection of scans of original Airplane Characteristics and Performance datasheets, which go right down to not just loadouts, but performance with specific loadouts. See:
http://www.alternatewars.com/SAC/SAC.htm

I haven't gone through them to match against the database, but it's probably on my list of things to do at somepoint.

And don't miss his WITP pages while you're there if you haven't seen them before.

The major change I'd personally make is (semi-)independent of the armament filters and that's adding rockets to late-war allied (particularly Commonwealth) strike aircraft. While I'm primarily thinking of fighter-bomber and coastal strike missions, it does cross over into the ASW discussion as the RAF used the solid-head 25lb 3" RP-3 rocket* as an anti-submarine weapon to punch holes in the pressure hull of surfaced or diving submarines, deliberately designing a double-ogive head to ensure they held course on entering the water. How best to implement that is left as an exercise for the user

My personal taste is that historical flavour has as much a place as game balance, but I'm someone who prefers to play solitaire rather than head-to-head. And, coming out of that, Beaufighters without rockets is just wrong!

* Exactly the same weapon as the better known HE 60lb 3" RP-3 rocket - the different heads simply screwed on to a common body. Ironically the explosive head designed for anti-shipping use proved better at land attack, while the solid head intended for AT use turned out to be better as an anti-shipping weapon.

[oldman45]

A little follow up.

I added the Mk VIII depth charge to a single squadron of Sunderland's and put them in my game. They are flying out of Sydney and have a pretty target rich environment. I have run 100 turns and found no kills by the Sunderland's with their DC. They have had numerous "attacks" but the PBY's flying out of San Diego have had similar luck and there has only been 2 sub kills to date, none of which were done by the Sunderland's. While its not conclusive, I am wondering if the air dropped DC are working. When I get to the end of 42 I will look again to see if they have been successful.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: oldman45

A little follow up.

I added the Mk VIII depth charge to a single squadron of Sunderland's and put them in my game. They are flying out of Sydney and have a pretty target rich environment. I have run 100 turns and found no kills by the Sunderland's with their DC. They have had numerous "attacks" but the PBY's flying out of San Diego have had similar luck and there has only been 2 sub kills to date, none of which were done by the Sunderland's. While its not conclusive, I am wondering if the air dropped DC are working. When I get to the end of 42 I will look again to see if they have been successful.

As you imply, the lack of a hit does not mean the DC code failed. So one thought - if you have a save where it appears that the DC was used, Michael might be able to look at it and determine if the DC code worked.

[packerpete]

I am attempting to use depth charges on aircraft too. I am curious how you set up the device's stats. Did you just use the ship version stats and did you use the extended range load outs versus full load for ASW aircraft.

[oldman45]

Look in this thread for sharks posts, he lays out the DC that I used and then how to set it up in the editor.

[packerpete]

Thank you sir. That is what I was after. Now back to the editor.

[packerpete]

In your mod was the charge/effect weight modified for the torpex filler? Torpex is 50% more powerful than TNT.

[packerpete]

Found some more info. with sink rates.(British) http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WAMBR_ASW.htm

American http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WAMUS_ASW.htm

[oldman45]

I did not take into account torpex. I will have to look at that. Also thanks for the links.

[packerpete]

Ok now I am perplexed, which by the way is 100 percent less effective than torpex. I think I missremembered that US airborne depth charges were modified ship depth charges ie. mk-7=mk-17/mk-47 and the mk-9=mk-29 but cannot confirm that and cannnot find the sink rates for the airborne weapons or the proper info for the airborne depth charges at all.[&:]

Any one have any better info?

[oldman45]

I have not looked at the US yet because the information was easier to find for the Brits. If push comes to shove, I would just make them similar to the Brit's.

So far in my game, I have not had one hit with the air dropped DC. I looked at the AI side and in fact the two I thought I had sunk they were not listed. It could be the exp of the air crews and I may have to wait till both the US and Brits air crews have higher exp with ASW.

[LargeSlowTarget]

Has someone made progress on alternate bomb loads and the concept of "bomb sticks"?

I have goofed around a bit but can't get it to work - forgive me my poor understanding of the game mechanics.

First of all I can't get sticks to work in the game with the bomb load filters.

I am also unsure about the number of sticks and how to adjust accuracy and effect (probably opening a can of worms here).

And finally "typical" alternate bomb loads are open to debate unless one has access to historical data.

But as long as the "sticks" don't work, the last two points remain secondary for the moment.

So back to the filters.

As you can see in the screenies, for testing I have set up "sticks" for the Nell in the ground attack role - 2 sticks of 4x60kg GP bombs on normal range and 2 sticks of 3x60kg for extended range. I also gave her 2 sticks of 2x100kg SAP bombs for naval and port attack and 2 sticks of 4x(60kg)Type 99 Depth bombs for ASW.

When the air group is in training mode (A), all bomb loads show up as desired with sticks.

But when in ground attack mode (B) or port attack mode (C), there are no sticks but just 2x single bombs. [&:]

However, in ASW mode (D) the depth bombs the sticks are showing up. [&:]

What's wrong with the ground and port attacks?

I have set 'Alt Device' and 'Alt Use' for the sticks to "0".

Load costs for the 4x60kg stick is 528, for the 2x100kg SAP stick 440 and the 4xType 99 stick 600 i.e. the total load for two sticks stays well below max load of the Nell.

Need help from the experts!

[Gaspote]

I'm not an expert but 372-100kg SAP bombs(2) are set in weapon 15 but 1881-250kg SAP bomb are set in weapon 6.
I think weapon matter to link reduce and normal load, so 372-100kg should be in the weapon 16.

For the B case, I think order for filter is important, so you can't have filter 08 after 33