Question about the P-51 Mustang

sulup · Post by **sulup** » Mon Aug 28, 2000 1:53 am

Hello everyone!

Has anyone noticed that the P-51 Mustang in PACWAR has a range of 8 and when the date ticks over to 1945 it's range increases to 10 making it able to dogfight Japanese fighters over it's homeland from Saipan. I don't know if I'm wrong but I didn't think the Mustang had a range THAT far even with drop tanks. Wasn't that the reason why the Allies wanted to capture Iwo Jima. (So the mustangs could then have a reach over Japan)

Rich Dionne · Post by **Rich Dionne** » Mon Aug 28, 2000 3:03 am

Yes, I've noticed this also. I believe it is implemented to allow P-51's to escort B-29's attacking Japan from Saipan. Unfortunately, the game does not allow fighters from 1 base (say Iwo Jima) to escort bombers from another base (say Saipan), and the 10 range was the way decided to implement the long range escort.

Personally, I think I would rather see theP-51 range stay at 8. Base them at Iwo and have them attack a Japanese base before the B-29's come in from Saipan. I haven't actually tried this out and am not sure how effective it would be, but P-51's with a range of 10 can reach all over the map.

Regards,

Rich Dionne

babyseal7 · Post by **babyseal7** » Mon Aug 28, 2000 3:30 am

How about an making an "escort" mission available for specified fighters (which actually usd drop tanks extensively) where they'd receive a range boost, no bombs, and would only engage in air-air combat?

Rich Dionne · Post by **Rich Dionne** » Thu Aug 31, 2000 10:20 am

Yes, additional mission capabilities would be a nice feature. When editing the OB'S in the past, it has always been difficult to decide which range and bomb load combination to select for a given aircraft, as there is a spectrum of bomb loads vs. range.

Unfortunately, I think we will be running into a memory limit brick wall on the Pacwar patch if we try to implement additional mission types. Certainly this type of variation should be included in "War in the Pacific".

Regards,

Rich Dionne

babyseal7 · Post by **babyseal7** » Thu Aug 31, 2000 4:57 pm

Do it obliquely and work around memory limit...for the long range/droptank capable fighters have a variation that for all intents and purposes is a escort/air superiority variant with an (E)scort designation. When the P51 comes out for example, have a P51(E) model with extended range and no bomb shackles.

Solves the unrealistic range problem for the standard models and provides a long range escort of otherwise limited utility for game balance.

Major Tom · Post by **Major Tom** » Thu Aug 31, 2000 6:28 pm

Then you come into the problem about not having enough spaces to add new aircraft types

What you see, is basically what you get, there can be up to a maximum of 98 aircraft types, not enought to do escorts for even a small fraction of the planes.

babyseal7 · Post by **babyseal7** » Thu Aug 31, 2000 8:05 pm

You'd be talking about maybe 2-3 variants tops. There weren't that many long range (or extended range) escort fighters that were operationally significant...probably only the P51 (maybe P38 earlier), none for the Jps. (maybe a Zero variant) or Brits. The subject was long range fighters for bombers operating at extended range...not making an escort variant for every fighter in the game. Plenty of "fluffy" A/C types, even in the original game. Give me a useful A/C type over a fluffy one added for mere historical "window dressing" accuracy any day.

As it would be an aircraft "type" and have to be manufactured, as well as having little ground attack value, it'd be of limited utility in any case...but very useful in certain situations like escorting hvy bombers from Saipan. Don't get me wrong, I don't particularily want one...but it's a possible solution to a "problem" that was addressed.

[This message has been edited by babyseal7 (edited August 31, 2000).]

Rich Dionne · Post by **Rich Dionne** » Fri Sep 01, 2000 2:30 am

You could certainly add the additional escort types to the aircraft database in the later scenarios like Leyte, because most of the early war aircraft are gone. But I agree with Major Tom that it would be difficult in the early scenarios; here the database is crammed with early and late war aircraft.

By the way, I tried supporting B-29 raids from Saipan with P-51's stationed at Iwo Jima in the game. The P-51's make two sweeps through the target base before the B-29's arrive on their own. The P-51's are pretty effective at knocking down Japanese CAP before the bombers arrive, although not as good as an escort from Saipan itself. Perhaps a 1945 P-51 range bump to 10 isn't really necessary?

Ed Cogburn · Post by **Ed Cogburn** » Fri Sep 01, 2000 2:41 pm

Originally posted by Rich Dionne:
You could certainly add the additional escort types to the aircraft database in the later scenarios like Leyte

Ok, why are we assuming a few code changes couldn't solve the problem? Idea: A P51 from Iwo Jima could be set to "Day Combat" and directed to "bomb" Tokyo. During combat execution, if the game notices there are both fighters and bombers set to bomb Tokyo, with the mission of "Day Combat", it then merges the air units together as one mission. Just as if the fighter was coming from the bomber's home base, the fighter ends up escorting the bomber groups going to Tokyo, instead of actually bombing.

For now, we can simply "hardwire" the info on what fighter types actually escort rather than bomb (the game would only act this way if the fighter unit is a P51). There may be other methods (like going by the fighter's bomb load capacity), but this solves the major problem, it allows us to use the P51 in its historical role, with the Mustang not having to be at the bomber's base, but merely in (normal - 8) range of the target.

This involves some non-trivial coding, but it doesn't require a new mission type.

Rich Dionne · Post by **Rich Dionne** » Fri Sep 01, 2000 7:13 pm

Ed, I think your coding solution is an ideal one for allowing airgroups from different bases to participate in the same raid, but as you say, this is definitely a non-trivial solution. Pacwar combat currently proceeds from 'attacking' base to 'attacking' base, not 'attacked' base to 'attacked' base. Air strikes from Iwo are long gone by the time Saipan comes around. I think this would be a major restructuring of the air combat routines, but Michael Wood can decide about that. The option you're talking about should definitely be a feature in WitP.

Try actually basing your P-51's at Iwo Jima and setting the same target as your B-29's at Saipan. The P-51's attack first, decimate CAP, and make it a lot easier for the B-29's that come later in the turn. Short of a coding change, I would rather force the U.S. player to do this than give him a Mustang with a range of 10 (15 against bases!) in 1945. I would vote for getting rid of the Mustang range upgrade code.

Regards,

Rich Dionne

Ed Cogburn · Post by **Ed Cogburn** » Sat Sep 02, 2000 1:32 pm

Originally posted by Rich Dionne:
Ed, I think your coding solution is an ideal one for allowing airgroups from different bases to participate in the same raid, but as you say, this is definitely a non-trivial solution. Pacwar combat currently proceeds from 'attacking' base to 'attacking' base, not 'attacked' base to 'attacked' base.

Hmmm, didn't know that. It could still be done, the game would just have to check for fighters and bombers headed for the same base before the combat phase actually occurs. But yeah, it is non-trivial.

Try actually basing your P-51's at Iwo Jima and setting the same target as your B-29's at Saipan. The P-51's attack first, decimate CAP, and make it a lot easier for the B-29's that come later in the turn.

SOP, standard operating procedure. I put all Mustangs on Iwo and let them run wild. Losses are heavy, but the Japanese losses are devastating.

Short of a coding change, I would rather force the U.S. player to do this than give him a Mustang with a range of 10 (15 against bases!) in 1945. I would vote for getting rid of the Mustang range upgrade code.

I don't know, can't remember, can we guarantee the fighters will always go first, before the bombers? If so, then going back to 8 sounds good.

[This message has been edited by Ed Cogburn (edited September 02, 2000).]

Rich Dionne · Post by **Rich Dionne** » Sat Sep 02, 2000 9:41 pm

Which air groups attack first depends upon which base the attacking aircraft is located at. Air combat proceeds as follows:

1) All Japanese air strikes are resolved. They are resolved in sequence by attacking base. The order is the same as the order of bases in the database.

2) All Allied air strikes are resolved. They are resolved in sequence by attacking base. The order is the same as the order of bases in the database.

So, as Iwo Jima is base 16, air strikes originating there will always take place before air strikes from Saipan (base 103).

Regards,

Rich Dionne

sulup · Post by **sulup** » Mon Sep 04, 2000 1:34 am

Hopefully, just as long as it's not too much trouble in typing extra code and delaying the release of the patch.