Lambs to the slaughter (Lowpe (J) vs Jocke; BillBrown (A)) Finished

[ny59giants]

Obvert,

When it comes to HQs the leader is important, but what about the number of HQs present and whether or not the air groups involved are assigned to that HQ or not? Playing Allies it's hard to get more than one air group to sweep at a time and if there is anyway to increase that probability of happening, I want to know.

[Lokasenna]

...having an air HQ defending at a base (or presumably within command radius) affects your A2A results?

[tiemanjw]

ORIGINAL: obvert

ORIGINAL: tiemanj

A quick note about sweeps from an AFB perspective (sorry, I know I'm a bit late - just getting caught up).
If you are referring to our game at all, most of my sweeps are between 15k-25k. Strato sweeps may require different settings.
And the reason I do this is because it seemed like my strato sweeps were getting beat up. I tried lower sweeps and seemed to have more success. I ran some tests that strongly suggest this isn't a fluke or imagination. I can post the details if anyone is interested.
Now I'll go work on my turn [:)]

I'm doing some tests in a late war situation, where speed differentials are greater. I'll post these soon too.

One factor in all of this has nothing to do with the planes or altitudes, and that is radar/detection. If raids are detected earlier, planes will not be in the band you set them in, but they'll be adjusting to the incoming strikes. Japanese planes tend to have a better climb rate, on average, than Allied. So setting low doesn't men they stay low, and testing strato sweeps with and without decent radar at the base could provide very different results.

Just so I base my tests on useful situations, here is a list of factors I think I'd want to be aware of, and please let me know if I'm neglecting something;

[font="Trebuchet MS"]altitude settings (putting airframes within their better maneuver bands for CAP, sweepers higher than CAP to get dive)
%CAP setting (at zero hex distance, noticing how many actually take part in combat vs those set to active CAP)
layering of CAP (or not)(keeping 3-5k between layers of CAP)
radar (for Japanese make sure to have multiple sets per base)

weather (noticing what effect weather has on tests)
distance to target (keeping in normal range for tests)

airframe(s) sweeping (choose fast with good armament for high sweeps, maneuverable and durable for lower sweeps)
airframe(s) defending (choose fast with good armament for high CAP, maneuverable and durable for lower CAP)

airframe fatigue (make sure it's consistently low)
numbers of planes for each side (how much numbers matter)

pilot fatigue/morale (low and consistent between tests)
pilot quality (aiming for equal between sides and consistent between tests of different airframes/situations)

air group leaders (high leadership, inspiration, air, aggressiveness)

HQ present in defending base with good leader (high air)
[/font]

the planes or altitudes, and that is radar/detection. If raids are detected earlier, planes will not be in the band you set them in, but they'll be adjusting to the incoming strikes. Japanese planes tend to have

Nothing I can disagree with here, though I didn't test all of these conditions. I was looking for the best sweep settings for a '44 allied campaign... for example I can't control (or really even know) weather when I set the sweep, so I never bothered to look at its impact.
Also, we all know (or at least suspect) you are better off with low fatigue, high moral, good leaders, etc - but I didn't attempt to isolate any of those variables in testing. I just used "good" for all of that, and reset the turn after each attempt so I was starting with the same every time. I used "custom" airframes with "average" early '44 stats, and varied a variety of them (maneuver, speed, climb rate) up to a high allied rate. The Japanese custom fighter was approximately the Frank-A (and always the defender)

You mention radar - and its impact is HUGE. If the place you are attacking has no radar, strato sweeps are the way to go. If it does have radar (even if the detection time is only a few minutes), strato sweeps where never the way to go. You where (as allies attacking Japanese) better off in the 15-20k maneuver band (though I didn't test the 20k-32k one).
You are better off with maneuver, than speed. Strangely, climb rate had a negative associated (better climb rate, poorer performance). In game terms this means get your spit VIIIs in first, followed by the jugs. It does seem that "time to climb" is factored into "time to target", so all things being equal, lower flying A/C seem to arrive before higher flying A/C more often than not. I did not explicitly test this though. (It also seems sweeps below 20k seem to arrive before my bombers way more often than when I did strato sweeps)

Playing Allies it's hard to get more than one air group to sweep at a time and if there is anyway to increase that probability of happening, I want to know.

This happens so rarely, I just ignore its possibility from a planning perspective. If it happens, great, but don't count on it. It does seem to happen more often when using like airframes from CVs, though still not regularly enough to plan for.

[Lokasenna]

I'm having no problems in either of my Allied games just doing stratosweeps always and forever. The only plane that gave me some problems, before I got the P-51D in action, was the Ki-102a Randy: it was the only thing that could reliably put down Jugs in any numbers, presumably due to its 44K ceiling.

Edit: yes, the P-51D only goes to 41900, but the pilots/leaders are not appreciably different from the P-47D25 units that were having trouble. My personal sample size is small thus far but I've stopped having problems, and it coincided with the P-51D arrival at the front.

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

...having an air HQ defending at a base (or presumably within command radius) affects your A2A results?

As far as I understand how they work, an Air HQ can affect how may planes get up into the air to fight (inspiration, also affecting morale) and how well they fly their missions (air). I may be off base, but if not, why would an air HQ need a commander with a good air rating?

I've always assumed (I have a sheet somewhere that someone respectable put together on how to choose leaders) that it's like the affects of having an Army HQ in range of ground forces. Increases in effectiveness occur if certain checks are passed.

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: tiemanj

Playing Allies it's hard to get more than one air group to sweep at a time and if there is anyway to increase that probability of happening, I want to know.

This happens so rarely, I just ignore its possibility from a planning perspective. If it happens, great, but don't count on it. It does seem to happen more often when using like airframes from CVs, though still not regularly enough to plan for.

I find multiple group sweeps allow the defenders to be overwhelmed and yet low numbers are shot down. This actually seems a less effective tool than wearing the CAP down with many groups arriving in the same phase. You may want to tweak which groups you hope to arrive first (fly them from closer, and according to Tiamanj, fly them lower) so you choose what to lose, but the smaller individual group battles seem more decisive and deadly in my experience.

[Lokasenna]

ORIGINAL: obvert

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

...having an air HQ defending at a base (or presumably within command radius) affects your A2A results?

As far as I understand how they work, an Air HQ can affect how may planes get up into the air to fight (inspiration, also affecting morale) and how well they fly their missions (air). I may be off base, but if not, why would an air HQ need a commander with a good air rating?

I've always assumed (I have a sheet somewhere that someone respectable put together on how to choose leaders) that it's like the affects of having an Army HQ in range of ground forces. Increases in effectiveness occur if certain checks are passed.

Maybe? I know that they affect coordination for strike purposes, but for defensive purposes I wasn't aware of anything. But I've never read the manual as a reading exercise, I just learned as I went and looked stuff up as needed, so...

I don't know about them affecting how many planes are in the air, or morale. They might. But it's not been mentioned anywhere that I've seen.

ORIGINAL: obvert

ORIGINAL: tiemanj

Playing Allies it's hard to get more than one air group to sweep at a time and if there is anyway to increase that probability of happening, I want to know.

This happens so rarely, I just ignore its possibility from a planning perspective. If it happens, great, but don't count on it. It does seem to happen more often when using like airframes from CVs, though still not regularly enough to plan for.

I find multiple group sweeps allow the defenders to be overwhelmed and yet low numbers are shot down. This actually seems a less effective tool than wearing the CAP down with many groups arriving in the same phase. You may want to tweak which groups you hope to arrive first (fly them from closer, and according to Tiamanj, fly them lower) so you choose what to lose, but the smaller individual group battles seem more decisive and deadly in my experience.

A few turns ago, I had no less than 5 groups of P-51s sweep together at a distance of 13 hexes. Extreme luck, I think, but it hasn't been that uncommon for my really fast planes (P-47s, P-51s) to sweep together in "batches" of 2-4 groups at once.

[Lowpe]

The real killer is letting Spitfires sweep you first. They have better maneuver than most/all Japanese planes, plus faster with great armament.

[tiemanjw]

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

The real killer is letting Spitfires sweep you first. They have better maneuver than most/all Japanese planes, plus faster with great armament.

[;)]

now if only I can convince the RAF to swap out those damn cannons for some 50s!

[witpqs]

I've not had success sweeping with Spitfires.

[tiemanjw]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

I've not had success sweeping with Spitfires.

really? They are far and away my favorite allied A/C. Use them at medium altitude (and lower than your Jugs), and they tend to arrive first, have good staying power (driving up fatigue for the CAP), and get back with minimal damage. I think the most I lost was 2 in a sweep. Their 3 down sides are 1) their guns suck - so they never kill anything... just damage a bunch of bad guys, and 2) they have a high (for allied) service rating (2 I think), so in a protracted campaign your air groups will have several in repairs and (3) the replacement rate isn't that good.
Once the spits do their job, the Jugs come in and insta-kill a bunch of worn out pilots in beat up planes. (follow it up with 4Es for some real fun)

[Lowpe]

Last week of September, 1942

More raids on the West Coast. I am finally doing a lot better here as I understand Japanese strategic bombing better.

[Lowpe]

Bombing in China...

[Lowpe]

I want destroyed units here...but another nice raid above Allied effective AA.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: tiemanj

ORIGINAL: witpqs

I've not had success sweeping with Spitfires.

really? They are far and away my favorite allied A/C. Use them at medium altitude (and lower than your Jugs), and they tend to arrive first, have good staying power (driving up fatigue for the CAP), and get back with minimal damage. I think the most I lost was 2 in a sweep. Their 3 down sides are 1) their guns suck - so they never kill anything... just damage a bunch of bad guys, and 2) they have a high (for allied) service rating (2 I think), so in a protracted campaign your air groups will have several in repairs and (3) the replacement rate isn't that good.
Once the spits do their job, the Jugs come in and insta-kill a bunch of worn out pilots in beat up planes. (follow it up with 4Es for some real fun)

Thanks, I'll try it.

[Lowpe]

Getting to be the end of another month, October 1942 is looming.

A damaged Iboat gets sunk by the Allies....

I get a very poor roll at Sian knocking my AV down by a factor of 10, and suffer a 1-3 attack. Not sure why as prep is almost all at 100%; no shock attack, fatigue and disruption under 5%. The tides of war...

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Getting to be the end of another month, October 1942 is looming.

A damaged Iboat gets sunk by the Allies....

I get a very poor roll at Sian knocking my AV down by a factor of 10, and suffer a 1-3 attack. Not sure why as prep is almost all at 100%; no shock attack, fatigue and disruption under 5%. The tides of war...

Do you have the report from Sian? What are the numbers and fort levels?

[Lowpe]

Here you go Obvert. Defenders have been taking over 1,000 losses per day to air assault but there are so many troops there (well over stacking limit if recon is to be believed).

[Lowpe]

Should be some fireworks in the Pacific this next turn...

[Lokasenna]

ORIGINAL: tiemanj

ORIGINAL: witpqs

I've not had success sweeping with Spitfires.

really? They are far and away my favorite allied A/C. Use them at medium altitude (and lower than your Jugs), and they tend to arrive first, have good staying power (driving up fatigue for the CAP), and get back with minimal damage. I think the most I lost was 2 in a sweep. Their 3 down sides are 1) their guns suck - so they never kill anything... just damage a bunch of bad guys, and 2) they have a high (for allied) service rating (2 I think), so in a protracted campaign your air groups will have several in repairs and (3) the replacement rate isn't that good.
Once the spits do their job, the Jugs come in and insta-kill a bunch of worn out pilots in beat up planes. (follow it up with 4Es for some real fun)

Why wouldn't you just use them at their maximum altitude? They'd perform even better.