Air Superiority is worthless UNLESS used properly

[DeletedUser1769703214]

ORIGINAL: Zovs

Yes, I think that AS is now working, at least from what I can tell. I do notice a small difference in the RTM and the C41 CG, in RTM I did not see any OP but in the C41 I do. On turn one that is.

Tricky bits to test, hence the RTM for sanity reasons.

Working in the latest BETA version on the BETA forums correct? That is great to hear

[AlbertN]

So 'high specialized' means on a very few hexes, assuming front is static and one has amazing forecasting skills.

Given it can work for the naval interdiction, and maybe to hinder air supply in special zones. But then we have a potential situation where let's say one wants to do air superiority to clean the enemy of a zone instead of just escorting - dang, the massive Ops losses come.

Still think the way Hyla has shown - for how it seems workable - is disfunctioning. Especially as these thing sare before your mundane movement and cannot really command them from new bases or over where your troops factually arrived.

[jubjub]

ORIGINAL: AlbertN

So 'high specialized' means on a very few hexes, assuming front is static and one has amazing forecasting skills.

Given it can work for the naval interdiction, and maybe to hinder air supply in special zones. But then we have a potential situation where let's say one wants to do air superiority to clean the enemy of a zone instead of just escorting - dang, the massive Ops losses come.

Still think the way Hyla has shown - for how it seems workable - is disfunctioning. Especially as these thing sare before your mundane movement and cannot really command them from new bases or over where your troops factually arrived.

I think they should let you modify your air directives during / after the ground phase.

[jubjub]

I found an exploit with the air superiority directive and achieve 0 ops losses with over 1000 sorties. All the ops losses are from interceptions. I'll let you figure out how I did it for now (hint, the developers did not account for takeoff/landing accidents).

[jubjub]

All you have to do is make the target, staging base the same and put the planes in the same airbase. With fuel tanks, your fighters can cover 81 hexes with this mission. I haven't tested this from anything besides a lvl 3 airbase, so maybe losses will go up. In this situation, a causality rate of .09% seems a little low. Triple it to .3% and I think it'd be fair.

[DeletedUser1769703214]

ORIGINAL: jubjub

All you have to do is make the target, staging base the same and put the planes in the same airbase. With fuel tanks, your fighters can cover 81 hexes with this mission. I haven't tested this from anything besides a lvl 3 airbase, so maybe losses will go up. In this situation, a causality rate of .09% seems a little low. Triple it to .3% and I think it'd be fair.

DAMN! I just tested this on LvL2 and just WoW! Thanks for the great info & really turns AS around. WoW. Thank you for sharing.

[jubjub]

DAMN! I just tested this on LvL2 and just WoW! Thanks for the great info & really turns AS around. WoW. Thank you for sharing.

Gonna be changing this thread to 'Air superiority is totally overpowered' soon lmao.

[DeletedUser1769703214]

I just tested with 40 fighters making the Airbase the target with range of 8 & had 0 ops losses. Going to run the test with a different group.

[DeletedUser1769703214]

ORIGINAL: jubjub

DAMN! I just tested this on LvL2 and just WoW! Thanks for the great info & really turns AS around. WoW. Thank you for sharing.

Gonna be changing this thread to 'Air superiority is totally overpowered' soon lmao.

Yes, I would agree

[DeletedUser1769703214]

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

ORIGINAL: jubjub

DAMN! I just tested this on LvL2 and just WoW! Thanks for the great info & really turns AS around. WoW. Thank you for sharing.

Gonna be changing this thread to 'Air superiority is totally overpowered' soon lmao.

Yes, I would agree

You never know where the conversation will lead but now we know! What an amazing turn of events.

[DeletedUser1769703214]

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

I just tested with 40 fighters making the Airbase the target with range of 8 & had 0 ops losses. Going to run the test with a different group.

Ya, zero OPS losses on another group to fly the mission targeting the airbase with an 8 hex radius. I hate to say this but now I wonder if this is WAD?

[jubjub]

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

I just tested with 40 fighters making the Airbase the target with range of 8 & had 0 ops losses. Going to run the test with a different group.

Ya, zero OPS losses on another group to fly the mission targeting the airbase with an 8 hex radius. I hate to say this but now I wonder if this is WAD?

Probably not, I think it's an exploit of how distance is calculated in the model (i said so in the op). However, the model gives casualty rates that are absurdly high imo.

I'm in the middle of deconstructing the model, but so far, a certain percent of damaged aircraft are destroyed based on the calculated distance from the staging base. It seems like setting the staging base, takeoff base, and target to be the same hex basically makes the engine calculate zero miles flown.

[jubjub]

ORIGINAL: jubjub

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

I just tested with 40 fighters making the Airbase the target with range of 8 & had 0 ops losses. Going to run the test with a different group.

Ya, zero OPS losses on another group to fly the mission targeting the airbase with an 8 hex radius. I hate to say this but now I wonder if this is WAD?

Probably not, I think it's an exploit of how distance is calculated in the model (i said so in the op). However, the model gives casualty rates that are absurdly high imo.

I'm in the middle of deconstructing the model, but so far, a certain percent of damaged aircraft are destroyed based on the calculated distance from the staging base. It seems like setting the staging base, takeoff base, and target to be the same hex basically makes the engine calculate zero miles flown.

My question is: why the hell are planes taking damage at a rate of 5% every sortie when they are just flying around an empty hex??? And why is this enough to write the plane off 60% of the time??

Also, some of the most common ops losses occur during taxiing, takeoff, and landing. Where on earth are those losses? I'll have a full post about this in due course.

[DeletedUser1769703214]

ORIGINAL: jubjub

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

I just tested with 40 fighters making the Airbase the target with range of 8 & had 0 ops losses. Going to run the test with a different group.

Ya, zero OPS losses on another group to fly the mission targeting the airbase with an 8 hex radius. I hate to say this but now I wonder if this is WAD?

Probably not, I think it's an exploit of how distance is calculated in the model (i said so in the op). However, the model gives casualty rates that are absurdly high imo.

I'm in the middle of deconstructing the model, but so far, a certain percent of damaged aircraft are destroyed based on the calculated distance from the staging base. It seems like setting the staging base, takeoff base, and target to be the same hex basically makes the engine calculate zero miles flown.

Yes, I agree with you here. I am sure this will get a look and the powers in charge will chime in for sure. Nice catch here Jubjub!