Why no interception?

This new stand alone release based on the legendary War in the Pacific from 2 by 3 Games adds significant improvements and changes to enhance game play, improve realism, and increase historical accuracy. With dozens of new features, new art, and engine improvements, War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
dr.hal
Posts: 3570
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 12:41 pm
Location: Covington LA via Montreal!

Re: Why no interception?

Post by dr.hal »

[/quote]

Max range for CAP is 3.
[/quote]
Chris, what is your source for this as I've never seen this limit before. Thanks.
Panjack
Posts: 487
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 2:08 am
Location: Southern California

Re: Why no interception?

Post by Panjack »

"CAP may react to defend a target as far as 2 hexes away" says the manual (7.4.1). But perhaps this was changed in the game at some point.
User avatar
Moltrey
Posts: 428
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 2:11 pm
Location: Virginia

Re: Why no interception?

Post by Moltrey »

At the risk of irritating the vets here panzer51, I will pull out my well-worn nugget of WITP:AE wisdom:
Try your damnedest to "Embrace the Suck".
In other words, the game will not let you micromanage outcomes, so it tends to piss off folks new to the sim who come from other games where that is more the norm.
You will set units up, give them orders with alternate targets at times, but after you press GO, the local commanders take over along with input from weather and all the other factors.

Does it kind of stink? Yeah, I suppose. But try to put yourself in the senior commander's shoes and appreciate you can only sit back and wait. The elders were right, no plan survives contact with the enemy.
Another thought, would all of us still be here if it wasn't a great experience at the end of the day?
The payoff is long and the persistence and perseverance level is high.


"Welcome stranger, the paths are treacherous today." - from an old book of mine
"Chew, if only you could see what I've seen with your eyes." - Roy Batty
User avatar
RangerJoe
Posts: 18284
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:39 pm
Location: Who knows?

Re: Why no interception?

Post by RangerJoe »

Moltrey wrote: Mon Sep 15, 2025 8:59 pm At the risk of irritating the vets here panzer51, I will pull out my well-worn nugget of WITP:AE wisdom:
Try your damnedest to "Embrace the Suck".
In other words, the game will not let you micromanage outcomes, so it tends to piss off folks new to the sim who come from other games where that is more the norm.
You will set units up, give them orders with alternate targets at times, but after you press GO, the local commanders take over along with input from weather and all the other factors.

Does it kind of stink? Yeah, I suppose. But try to put yourself in the senior commander's shoes and appreciate you can only sit back and wait. The elders were right, no plan survives contact with the enemy.
Another thought, would all of us still be here if it wasn't a great experience at the end of the day?
The payoff is long and the persistence and perseverance level is high.


"Welcome stranger, the paths are treacherous today." - from an old book of mine
I have seen some people post this time of meme elsewhere, I presume that they are veterans, so is this what you mean?
Attachments
embrace the suck.jpg
embrace the suck.jpg (20.05 KiB) Viewed 276 times
Last edited by RangerJoe on Wed Sep 17, 2025 12:53 am, edited 1 time in total.
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing! :o

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
:twisted: ; Julia Child
Image
panzer51
Posts: 237
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2021 10:27 am

Re: Why no interception?

Post by panzer51 »

Well, the game is really poor at communicating the reasons.

In this case, Ryujo squadrons were set 10%CAP, 60% LRCAP over the TF, and 20%rest. So, I would say the majority should've been over the TF. So interception should've happened.
Chris21wen
Posts: 7528
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2002 10:00 am
Location: Cottesmore, Rutland

Re: Why no interception?

Post by Chris21wen »

dr.hal wrote: Mon Sep 15, 2025 12:58 pm
Max range for CAP is 3.
[/quote]
Chris, what is your source for this as I've never seen this limit before. Thanks.
[/quote]

Here back in 2022
https://forums.matrixgames.com/viewtopi ... P#p5032961

Also this from a recent combat report extract. The fighters (Tojo and Zero) are based in Rabaul and set to CAP range 3 and 9 with no target, The FF are also in Rabaul set to LRCAP 7 with Kavieng as a target and they will also engage over Rabaul or anything else within 3 hexes.
Chris21wen
Posts: 7528
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2002 10:00 am
Location: Cottesmore, Rutland

Re: Why no interception?

Post by Chris21wen »

panzer51 wrote: Tue Sep 16, 2025 12:19 am Well, the game is really poor at communicating the reasons.

In this case, Ryujo squadrons were set 10%CAP, 60% LRCAP over the TF, and 20%rest. So, I would say the majority should've been over the TF. So interception should've happened.
No it shouldn't. You need to put some numbers to your setting.

Assuming you have 30 fighters on the CVL, close to the max number of aircraft for the CVL. Using your settings for CAP, LRCAP, REST, idle results in there being 3,18,6,3 aircraft available for each. Actually flying you get 1 cap and 6 lrcap the remainder, apart from those at rest (6) are available to scramble if they have time.

Those flying CAP will protect anything within their range (max 3) of their target, which is usually their own hex.

https://forums.matrixgames.com/viewtopi ... p#p5075092

LRCAP requires a target overwise it behaves like CAP and will protect anything within 3 hex of it target. LRCAP usually has less number involved than CAP. See here
https://forums.matrixgames.com/viewtopi ... p#p5094565

If you have CAP set to 3 hex range in has 37 hex to cover and with 1 a/c aloft.....
User avatar
Moltrey
Posts: 428
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 2:11 pm
Location: Virginia

Re: Why no interception?

Post by Moltrey »

RangerJoe wrote: Mon Sep 15, 2025 9:41 pm I have seen some people post this time of meme elsewhere, I presume that the are veterans, so is this what you mean?
RJ:
No, I only meant vets of the board and WITP.
"Chew, if only you could see what I've seen with your eyes." - Roy Batty
panzer51
Posts: 237
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2021 10:27 am

Re: Why no interception?

Post by panzer51 »

LRCAP requires a target overwise it behaves like CAP and will protect anything within 3 hex of it target. LRCAP usually has less number involved than CAP.
Ok, LRCAP is set over the TF, so TF is target, so majority of planes should be over the TF. I don't expect all 18 planes to be intercepting, but at least 1 should be.
User avatar
RangerJoe
Posts: 18284
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:39 pm
Location: Who knows?

Re: Why no interception?

Post by RangerJoe »

Moltrey wrote: Tue Sep 16, 2025 11:36 am
RangerJoe wrote: Mon Sep 15, 2025 9:41 pm I have seen some people post this time of meme elsewhere, I presume that the are veterans, so is this what you mean?
RJ:
No, I only meant vets of the board and WITP.
Oh, I understand now.
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing! :o

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
:twisted: ; Julia Child
Image
Chris21wen
Posts: 7528
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2002 10:00 am
Location: Cottesmore, Rutland

Re: Why no interception?

Post by Chris21wen »

panzer51 wrote: Wed Sep 17, 2025 12:08 am
LRCAP requires a target overwise it behaves like CAP and will protect anything within 3 hex of it target. LRCAP usually has less number involved than CAP.
Ok, LRCAP is set over the TF, so TF is target, so majority of planes should be over the TF. I don't expect all 18 planes to be intercepting, but at least 1 should be.
There's no problem here just your expectations.

You say 18 a/c but is that group total or is 60% of the group total. If it's the later you've only got 11 or 12 a/c for LRCAP.

You have never said how far away the TF is. The further away it is the fewer a/c there will be over the target as time to target becomes important and the endurance of the a/c becomes really important.

Below is an extract form the Air War Guide on LRCAP. They all affect possible interception plus many more.

Notes:
• Maximum Range setting controls two things, target range and patrol radius. It is restricted to the max combat
range of the aircraft.
• Target range is the standard distance from base to target and can be anything between 0 - max range of the
ac. Selecting a target automatically sets max range to this distance if it’s currently less.
• Patrol radius is between 0-3 hexes from the target. Any range over 3 hexes is automatically limited to 3 hexes.
If you want a smaller patrol radius, hence patrol area, you need to adjust the max range after the target has
been selected. E.g. Set to 0 to protect just the target hex.
• The further the patrol area is from the unit’s base the less time the unit has over target and the few aircraft
over the target at one time. This appears to range between all to 1/3, with 1/3 being at the aircraft max
range! Aircraft endurance play a huge part in this.
• The further LRCAP has to fly to intercept the less likely it will.
Post Reply

Return to “War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition”