Fighter Sweep bug

[Damien Thorn]

Hello,

This was posted in the general forum but I want to post it here to make sure it gets noticed.

Fighters on a Sweep mission are only supposed to strafe after the sweep if they are set to 100 feet altitude. Unfortunately, a bug exists. If any of the defending CAP groups are set to 100 feet altitude the Sweeping fighters will strafe after their sweep, regardless of their set altitude. This can results in gamey tactics of setting one CAP group as bait to draw the sweeping group down into killer amounts of AA. Since this is a repeatable bug I hope it can be fixed in the next patch.

[witpqs]

I wonder if this is really a bug or just good tactics?

[Mike Wood]

Hello...

So do I. Not sure what to do about this.

Bye...

Michael Wood

ORIGINAL: witpqs

I wonder if this is really a bug or just good tactics?

[Halsey]

They are only suppose to strafe if there is no CAP when set on sweep.
So the rule says.[:D]

[Damien Thorn]

ORIGINAL: Mike Wood

Hello...

So do I. Not sure what to do about this.

Bye...

Michael Wood

ORIGINAL: witpqs

I wonder if this is really a bug or just good tactics?

Well, it means most players will never use sweep missions at bases that have decent AA guns.

Perhaps this bug can be fixed by ignoring CAP at 100 feet. If the only cap is at 100 feet then no combat will occur (and a mussage will be shown so that the player knows there is cap there but it is too low to intercept). In any event, fighters on a sweep missions shouldn't drop down to strafe unless the player orders them too.

By the way, I've NEVER had a fighter destroy anything when strafing... and that's when hitting airfields that are loaded with bombers and patrol planes.

[Yamato hugger]

ORIGINAL: Damien Thorn

Well, it means most players will never use sweep missions at bases that have decent AA guns.

Most players dont use sweep missions or it would have been noticed by now [;)]

Edit: Actually I did notice this once, so I stopped doing it.

[pauk]

this should be fixed!

[Mike Wood]

Hello...

What would constitute a fix? Please, think, before you answer.

Thanks...

Michael Wood

ORIGINAL: pauk

this should be fixed!

[michaelm75au]

I think the enemy CAP at 100' should be ignored, unless sweeping at 100'.

Fighters flying at 13,000' aren't going to dive on the CAP at 100' over a base.( unless they have good air brakes[:D]) Too risky.

Michael

ORIGINAL: Mike Wood

Hello...

What would constitute a fix? Please, think, before you answer.

Thanks...

Michael Wood

ORIGINAL: pauk

this should be fixed!

[Yamato hugger]

ORIGINAL: michaelm

I think the enemy CAP at 100' should be ignored, unless sweeping at 100'.

Fighters flying at 13,000' aren't going to dive on the CAP at 100' over a base.( unless they have good air brakes[:D]) Too risky.

Michael

Seems to me thats a question of agressivness of the flight leader. Dont forget, at Midway the reason the DBs had a clear shot is because the CAP was down "on the deck" chasing TBs.

[michaelm75au]

True. But did the escorting fighters (the ones that made it there) dived down to the "deck" to engage the enemy CAP?

Michael

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

ORIGINAL: michaelm

I think the enemy CAP at 100' should be ignored, unless sweeping at 100'.

Fighters flying at 13,000' aren't going to dive on the CAP at 100' over a base.( unless they have good air brakes[:D]) Too risky.

Michael

Seems to me thats a question of agressivness of the flight leader. Dont forget, at Midway the reason the DBs had a clear shot is because the CAP was down "on the deck" chasing TBs.

[Mike Wood]

Hello...

Ok. That will mean by setting my CAP at 100', they will be imumme to sweeps, but still available to attack incoming bombers.

Bye...

Michael Wood

ORIGINAL: michaelm

I think the enemy CAP at 100' should be ignored, unless sweeping at 100'.

Fighters flying at 13,000' aren't going to dive on the CAP at 100' over a base.( unless they have good air brakes[:D]) Too risky.

Michael

ORIGINAL: Mike Wood

Hello...

What would constitute a fix? Please, think, before you answer.

Thanks...

Michael Wood

ORIGINAL: pauk

this should be fixed!

[Yamato hugger]

ORIGINAL: michaelm

True. But did the escorting fighters (the ones that made it there) dived down to the "deck" to engage the enemy CAP?

You know, I dont believe I have ever read anything as to what the escort did while the DBs and TBs were doing their thing. Interesting question.

[Slaghtermeyer]

How about simply prohibiting CAP at 100 feet (make minimum CAP altitude 1000 feet)? Or treat CAP assingned at 100 feet as if it were at 1000 feet?

[Apollo11]

Hi all,

ORIGINAL: Slaghtermeyer

How about simply prohibiting CAP at 100 feet (make minimum CAP altitude 1000 feet)? Or treat CAP assingned at 100 feet as if it were at 1000 feet?

This is interesting compromise!


Leo "Apollo11"

[tabpub]

ORIGINAL: Mike Wood

Hello...

Ok. That will mean by setting my CAP at 100', they will be imumme to sweeps, but still available to attack incoming bombers.

Bye...

Michael Wood

ORIGINAL: michaelm

I think the enemy CAP at 100' should be ignored, unless sweeping at 100'.

Fighters flying at 13,000' aren't going to dive on the CAP at 100' over a base.( unless they have good air brakes[:D]) Too risky.

Michael

ORIGINAL: Mike Wood

Hello...

What would constitute a fix? Please, think, before you answer.

Thanks...

Michael Wood

I wouldn't say that they were immune to sweeps, but at least there is some revenge for their loss. Right now, if you fly cap, then a sweep can come looking for you when they want; been hit by sweeps in the 100+ range and they can clean up. Now, you can fly one wirraway on 100 ft, it gets killed and then 25% of the fighters come down to strafe, with 25% of them destroyed. If anyone wants to avoid this, bomb the place and set the fighters to escort. Then no problem. Hell, if I was flying CAP and was outnumbered 5-1 by fighters, I think I would head for the deck and the AAA and hope the boys see my stars clearly!

[LargeSlowTarget]

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

ORIGINAL: michaelm

True. But did the escorting fighters (the ones that made it there) dived down to the "deck" to engage the enemy CAP?

You know, I dont believe I have ever read anything as to what the escort did while the DBs and TBs were doing their thing. Interesting question.

Enterprise and Hornet sent 20 Wildcats as escorts, but Hornet's fighters stayed with the SBDs who didn't find Nagumo's carriers and finally turned south to land on Midway. Can't find what Enterprise's F4F were doing. Yorktown sent only six escorts for Torpedo-3. The remaining Wildcats of the three carriers provided CAP.

Yorktown's six Wildcats weren't enough to protect the Devastators, but those six fighters were led by Thach and here it was the first time that the famous 'Thach weave' was used in combat - although outnumbered by defending Zeros about 5-to-1, Thach and his men managed to shoot down six Zeros and damaged two more for only one Wildcat lost.

Considering the fact that Thach&Co were tasked to protect Torpedo-3, and that Zeros were after the low-flying Devastators, I would think that the escorting fighters also went down to the deck in order to engage enemy CAP.

[tsimmonds]

Can't find what Enterprise's F4F were doing.

I believe they erroneously formed up with Hornet's VT. They followed them to KB, but the radios being on different frequencies made it impossible for them to coordinate and cover their attack.

Course I could just be making this up; I wouldn't know.[:D]