Allied sweep whining

[pontiouspilot]

In light of all of this discussion on CAPs what is the rationale for the sometimes used house rule re use of higher altitude bands? My opponent and I decided we better use that rule....is that a fool's errand?

[Alfred]

ORIGINAL: pontiouspilot

In light of all of this discussion on CAPs what is the rationale for the sometimes used house rule re use of higher altitude bands? My opponent and I decided we better use that rule....is that a fool's errand?

None, like almost all HRs in AE, just a crock for poor players.

Alfred

[geofflambert]

ORIGINAL: Alfred

ORIGINAL: pontiouspilot

In light of all of this discussion on CAPs what is the rationale for the sometimes used house rule re use of higher altitude bands? My opponent and I decided we better use that rule....is that a fool's errand?

None, like almost all HRs in AE, just a crock for poor players.

Alfred

[:'(][;)]

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: pontiouspilot

In light of all of this discussion on CAPs what is the rationale for the sometimes used house rule re use of higher altitude bands? My opponent and I decided we better use that rule....is that a fool's errand?

You just don't need it. When I began the game there were also slightly different mechanics, which over time were improved. I tried low CAP in an early game against the Allies late in game and still got creamed by the P-40N especially. Now I can win against the P-40N max 42k sweeps!

Through the testing thread and later in game I've messed around with a lot of permutations. The key is to stick to a simple layering with not more than 2k between the three bands, all under 10k. I use 9k-7k-5k still. It works. Also, using massed defense works LESS well with the layered CAP. I try to keep bases below 200 planes.

Also, you have to choose the right ariframes for each level and the right kind of pilots. It's a bit of management, but what else are you going to spend your time on in late game Japanese games? [;)]

High defense pilots (70+) with high air (70+) for low band in a maneuverable airframe. Oscars work for me. Or Sams. Sometimes A6M types.

Mid band is the hard one o figure out, but should be your second best interceptor. Usually a J2M5 or an A7M2 or a Ki-84a once the 'r' is available up top.

The top band should be your highest exp pilots (80+) with everything. Here I'd use N1K5 and/or Ki-84r ideally, with J7W1 or Ki-83 possible late as well.

There are counters. I am playing late war Allies now and I've figured out a few things here and there. It's really about surprise though and changing things that your opponent gets used to and lazy with.

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: Alfred

ORIGINAL: pontiouspilot

In light of all of this discussion on CAPs what is the rationale for the sometimes used house rule re use of higher altitude bands? My opponent and I decided we better use that rule....is that a fool's errand?

None, like almost all HRs in AE, just a crock for poor players.

Alfred

lol, best laugh of the month. Wonder if that guy has taken over a Matrix games paycheck.

[mind_messing]

ORIGINAL: castor troy

ORIGINAL: Alfred

ORIGINAL: pontiouspilot

In light of all of this discussion on CAPs what is the rationale for the sometimes used house rule re use of higher altitude bands? My opponent and I decided we better use that rule....is that a fool's errand?

None, like almost all HRs in AE, just a crock for poor players.

Alfred

lol, best laugh of the month. Wonder if that guy has taken over a Matrix games paycheck.

Hate to break it to you, but he's right. Try and think beyond the dive bonus and you'd be surprised what you'll learn about the air combat model.

Almost as if there's some nuance in its design [:)]

[Admiral DadMan]

ORIGINAL: Alfred

ORIGINAL: pontiouspilot

In light of all of this discussion on CAPs what is the rationale for the sometimes used house rule re use of higher altitude bands? My opponent and I decided we better use that rule....is that a fool's errand?

None, like almost all HRs in AE, just a crock for poor players.

Alfred

No HRs in my PBeM games.

Ridin' dirty...

[Alamander]

ORIGINAL: pontiouspilot

In light of all of this discussion on CAPs what is the rationale for the sometimes used house rule re use of higher altitude bands? My opponent and I decided we better use that rule....is that a fool's errand?

For the Japanese... yes. The allies flying sweeps at max altitude is a great thing for Japan. Their pilots accumulate large amounts of extra fatigue for flying at that altitude. Their sweeps are less effective, because they all come in at the same altitude, they are detected earlier because radar effectiveness improves, and low-flying CAP will simply not climb that high. No matter what, you will be hard-pressed to draw much of the CAP above 20K.

If your opponent wants to fly his fighters at their ceiling: more power to him.

I like to layer CAP at 5k, 7k, and 9k too, but with Tojos and Franks, I sometimes prefer 4,6, and 8. With early model Oscar IIs in the 1943 period, I like 4 layers sometimes at 3, 5, 7, and 9 with those 2nd model Oscars on the lowest level.

And double agree on Obvert's point about overdoing it with fighters on CAP. More is not always better.

[RADM.Yamaguchi]

ORIGINAL: Alamander

ORIGINAL: pontiouspilot

In light of all of this discussion on CAPs what is the rationale for the sometimes used house rule re use of higher altitude bands? My opponent and I decided we better use that rule....is that a fool's errand?

For the Japanese... yes. The allies flying sweeps at max altitude is a great thing for Japan. Their pilots accumulate large amounts of extra fatigue for flying at that altitude. Their sweeps are less effective, because they all come in at the same altitude, they are detected earlier because radar effectiveness improves, and low-flying CAP will simply not climb that high. No matter what, you will be hard-pressed to draw much of the CAP above 20K.

If your opponent wants to fly his fighters at their ceiling: more power to him.

I like to layer CAP at 5k, 7k, and 9k too, but with Tojos and Franks, I sometimes prefer 4,6, and 8. With early model Oscar IIs in the 1943 period, I like 4 layers sometimes at 3, 5, 7, and 9 with those 2nd model Oscars on the lowest level.

And double agree on Obvert's point about overdoing it with fighters on CAP. More is not always better.

Thank you for your nicely worded explanations and concrete examples. Again.

[rustysi]

ORIGINAL: pontiouspilot

In light of all of this discussion on CAPs what is the rationale for the sometimes used house rule re use of higher altitude bands? My opponent and I decided we better use that rule....is that a fool's errand?

You'll hear all kinds of opinions on HR's. I say this, pick whatever works easiest for you and your opponent, and go that way. Its your game after all.

[Alpha77]

ORIGINAL: Alfred

ORIGINAL: pontiouspilot

In light of all of this discussion on CAPs what is the rationale for the sometimes used house rule re use of higher altitude bands? My opponent and I decided we better use that rule....is that a fool's errand?

None, like almost all HRs in AE, just a crock for poor players.

Alfred

Good to know I am not a "crock" - we have no sweep/cap altitude house rule, the Allied player who took over a while ago requested it be gone. I agreed to it, as my reading suggested there are counter meassures on the IJ side. However I guess the P47 might change the picture a bit with 42k max alt.

Of course these so called strato sweeps are still quite unhistoric and the "dive bonus" a bit overdone in this game.

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

ORIGINAL: Alfred

ORIGINAL: pontiouspilot

In light of all of this discussion on CAPs what is the rationale for the sometimes used house rule re use of higher altitude bands? My opponent and I decided we better use that rule....is that a fool's errand?

None, like almost all HRs in AE, just a crock for poor players.

Alfred

Good to know I am not a "crock" - we have no sweep/cap altitude house rule, the Allied player who took over a while ago requested it be gone. I agreed to it, as my reading suggested there are counter meassures on the IJ side. However I guess the P47 might change the picture a bit with 42k max alt.

Of course these so called strato sweeps are still quite unhistoric and the "dive bonus" a bit overdone in this game.

sssshhhhhhhhh

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

ORIGINAL: castor troy

ORIGINAL: Alfred




None, like almost all HRs in AE, just a crock for poor players.

Alfred

lol, best laugh of the month. Wonder if that guy has taken over a Matrix games paycheck.

Hate to break it to you, but he's right. Try and think beyond the dive bonus and you'd be surprised what you'll learn about the air combat model.

Almost as if there's some nuance in its design [:)]

yeah and those that claim it the most send their fighters in at maximum altitude. Must have become a dementia forum in the last years as exactly those again don't even know what they are doing. Saying a, doing b. See the dozen combat reports in my AAR that I posted there of people claiming a and due to dementia doing b.

[Alpha77]

@ Castor Troy: I do not even know why this is questioned at all...perhaps those only playing the AI (not much sweeping) or ones with altitude rules. 2 roughly comparable planes+pilots mostly(!) the higher one will win, probably not a Oscar diving on a Corsair or P47 tho, speed/firepower too low. Even early on Oscars vs. the AVG or good RAF pilots suffer more then they deal out (even when higher I believe). At least in my case, but I may be just a bad player not getting the Oscar to work.[;)]

And this is reality being higher than the enemy in A2A is ofc desireable. Just not routinely flying over 30k+ in real WW2 combat, there are too much downsides for plane+pilot at these heights. Another case are special planes built to fly that high eg. Mosquito, Spitfire recon or FW "Dora" / TA152, later P51 too(?)

See more info here:
"Focke-Wulf Ta 152 H-1 Extreme Speed At High Altitudes"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSdYtF2uR3U

Only a bit insight to flying very high:
"One astute viewer (Admiral) has pointed out that the pressurization was also very important for physiological reasons. That's true. There are two factors here. First it reduces the pressure change on the body in a rapid dive. In other words, your body only goes from 26,000 feet down to 5000 or whatever, which is a much smaller pressure change than 45,000 feet down to 5000. Second, at higher altitudes it's more difficult to breath because of the low pressure. This starts to be a problem at about 40,000 feet and by 49,000 breathing is nearly impossible. So an oxygen mask alone, won't do it. The Ta 152 is made to operate in the region, thus the pressurization is super important."

[Sardaukar]

Well, layered CAP helps quite a bit.

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

Well, layered CAP helps quite a bit.

it does, never questioned that. But the dive still results in totally absurd results. And nothing negates that, not even nearly.

[Sardaukar]

Well...Germans had that too with P-47s and P-51s...superior height is superior height.

Better fuel, better turbo/superchargers and more powerful engines.

to add:

Japanese could also use that earlier in war, Zeros could go higher against F4F etc., but not fight there well...but could dive at them. Trouble started when P-38 etc. arrived which could get as high or higher and fight there well too. Because of those facts before.

[mind_messing]

ORIGINAL: castor troy

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

ORIGINAL: castor troy



lol, best laugh of the month. Wonder if that guy has taken over a Matrix games paycheck.

Hate to break it to you, but he's right. Try and think beyond the dive bonus and you'd be surprised what you'll learn about the air combat model.

Almost as if there's some nuance in its design [:)]

yeah and those that claim it the most send their fighters in at maximum altitude. Must have become a dementia forum in the last years as exactly those again don't even know what they are doing. Saying a, doing b. See the dozen combat reports in my AAR that I posted there of people claiming a and due to dementia doing b.

Or because the vast majority of players in AE haven't quite figured out how to properly deploy a strong defensive CAP...?

ORIGINAL: castor troy

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

Well, layered CAP helps quite a bit.

it does, never questioned that. But the dive still results in totally absurd results. And nothing negates that, not even nearly.

That's not been my experience at all. The dive bonus gives an edge, but it's not an automatic "I win" button for air combat.

[mind_messing]

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

@ Castor Troy: I do not even know why this is questioned at all...perhaps those only playing the AI (not much sweeping) or ones with altitude rules. 2 roughly comparable planes+pilots mostly(!) the higher one will win, probably not a Oscar diving on a Corsair or P47 tho, speed/firepower too low. Even early on Oscars vs. the AVG or good RAF pilots suffer more then they deal out (even when higher I believe). At least in my case, but I may be just a bad player not getting the Oscar to work.[;)]

Don't tell castor that there's more variables to the air combat model than aircraft altitude...

[Alpha77]

https://aviation.stackexchange.com/ques ... a-dogfight

"WWI dogfights would generally be between 5-15000 ft. Aircraft could patrol up to 20,000 ft (yes, without oxygen). The Camel had a service ceiling of 19000 ft, the SPAD XIII almost 22,000 ft.

In WWII, generally between 20-35000 ft over W Europe, under 20000 ft over Russia and in the far east. Bomber escorts in W Europe started out hanging with the bomber formations just above at perhaps 25-27000 ft, but later when they were sent to range on ahead, they would patrol at 30-35000. The FW190-A8 had a service ceiling of a bit over 37000 ft, and the Mustang just over 40, but at service ceiling there is almost no spare energy available for maneuvering so you couldn't actually fight at that altitude for any length of time.

In both WW's, once started the fighting aircraft would get lower and lower as they consumed energy, that would normally be available for climbing, in maneuvering for advantage, and in long fights they would end up near the ground.

An interesting aspect of high altitude combat in unpressurized airplanes was the risk of getting the bends from extended exposure to the low atmospheric pressure above 25000."

https://www.quora.com/At-what-altitude- ... 2C000%20ft.

"It depended what period in the war & what theatre of war. In Europe & N. Africa there was an initial escalation of combat height from the Battle of Britain onward to ~ mid 1942, with the heights frequently exceeding 30,000 ft & some interceptions reaching nearly 40,000 ft. That trend reversed in mid ’42 & combat heights fell sharply to the range of 15,000-25,000 ft. Apparently the combatants discovered that the war itself was lower down & the fighters had only been engaging other fighters up high, rather than trying to stop bombing & strike raids in the sea-level-20,000 ft region.

Fighting in the Pacific was at lower altitudes throughout most of the war in that area — typically ranging from near sea level, up to ~20,000-25,000 ft.

There were, of course, recon flights at great heights, but they seldom involved combat."

It is clear flying at max or up to 3-5k under max altitude with fighters was rare up to 1945 especially in the pacific or eastern fronts.
In game flying that high does not have enough downsides like in reality.If it was more realistic the dive issue would be not a biggie I guess. In particular, flying longer than some minutes at this altitude, while in game fighters can fly long distances at eg. 39k without much penality.