Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Dili

A "torpedo bomber" can be used as a sort of Army Cooperation aircraft with recon ability, attack ability and without torpedo? I think the "Dive Bombers" in game have a bonus point for precision bombardment that should not be handed to Ki-36 Ida and other planes that could make light attacks but werent very effective or in my projects some Italian and German aircrafts, but i am not sure if TB is the best way to handle this.

We are not talking about all "Torpedo bombers", but specifically the Grumman TBF/TBM, in its' historical role.
"Recon" in this context is not addressing a "land recon" role, but a sea search role..[;)]

Thanks m10bob i apologise for a light off topic. I also have the reply i needed by Mifune/El Cid Again.

ORIGINAL: Dili

A "torpedo bomber" can be used as a sort of Army Cooperation aircraft with recon ability, attack ability  and without torpedo?  I think the "Dive Bombers" in game have a bonus point for precision bombardment that should not be handed to Ki-36 Ida and other planes that could make light attacks but werent very effective or in my projects some Italian and German aircrafts, but i am not sure if TB is the best way to handle this.

First of all, note that army cooperation aircraft are NOT modeled in WITP and in general are NOT present. It is not part of the game design, there are not enough slots to permit the planes and there are not enough slots to permit the units generally to be listed. There are two exceptions to this principle - both obvious in the orignal Matrix unit/aircraft type mix:
spotter planes that got used for naval spotting (in particular British and Dutch); and the peculiar case of the Ki-36 which was ALSO used as a bomber, in particularly in China. RHS added a new case - with the Indian Air Force - where these planes also performed coastal patrol until relieved by more armed types. In case this is confusing - note that the primary FUNCTION of an "army cooperation aircraft" is spotting the enemy - not attacking the enemy.

Second, game code treats a torpedo bomber in a very peculiar way. It substantially disregards the loadout we list under the aircraft type. IF you list a torpedo at all - it does note the type - but then it wholly ignores the number mounted - so for example the CHS H6K with two torpedoes (very historical) NEVER uses two torpedoes - and it always uses one torpedo when attacking a ship target. Regardless of what we list for bombs - code seems to think there should be a torpedo and no bombs - it then proceeds to "fill in the blanks" for us - ignoring what we put in. It always delivers the same bomb load - probably 2 bombs to normal range and 1 to extended range - probably 250 kg bombs for Axis and 500 pound bombs for Allies - with the exception that a die roll may substitute an 800 kg bomb vice the torpedo for a port attack. None of this is going to get you a good model for a ground attack aircraft.

Third, the Ki-36 (or Ida to those who speak code names vice designations) is classified as a level bomber in most forms of WITP - only RHS classifies it as a dive bomber. This is quite deliberate - because for one thing it IS a dive bomber - and the peculiar bonus you don't like SHOULD apply - for bomb accuracy. Also as a mechanism to prevent gamey behaviors - like substituting heavy bombers for what amounts to armed observation planes - a problem we have if we classify it as a horizontal bomber. And note that the dive bomber attack routine exposes the aircraft to a lot more AAA - which means a poorly protected Ki-36 is going to suffer badly unless it attacks targets with little or no AA defense - true IRL. A GOOD dive bomber has armor - and the Ki-51 is the Japanese case in point. [It was derived from a horizontal bomber with armor added]

Fourth, you have another way to go - classify a plane as a fighter bomber. You can do that for a Ki-36 - it is so awful a fighter it won't gain you a great capability. I prefer the dive bomber route - and note a fighter bomber probably also is considered a dive bomber - so we don't have silly mission options appearing for units with the type.

ORIGINAL: m10bob

ORIGINAL: Dili

A "torpedo bomber" can be used as a sort of Army Cooperation aircraft with recon ability, attack ability and without torpedo? I think the "Dive Bombers" in game have a bonus point for precision bombardment that should not be handed to Ki-36 Ida and other planes that could make light attacks but werent very effective or in my projects some Italian and German aircrafts, but i am not sure if TB is the best way to handle this.

We are not talking about all "Torpedo bombers", but specifically the Grumman TBF/TBM, in its' historical role.
"Recon" in this context is not addressing a "land recon" role, but a sea search role..[;)]

I did not read his post as germane to the thread - but sort of as a branch - a brainstorm - trying to address a different question - his discontent with classifying a Ki-36 Ida as a dive bomber. It was a compromise - and we have gone back and forth on it one full cycle - but in the end players upgrading Ki-36 units directly to four engine bombers made it seem very attractive.

Sid sez:"Second, game code treats a torpedo bomber in a very peculiar way. It substantially disregards the loadout we list under the aircraft type. IF you list a torpedo at all - it does note the type - but then it wholly ignores the number mounted - so for example the CHS H6K with two torpedoes (very historical) NEVER uses two torpedoes - and it always uses one torpedo when attacking a ship target. Regardless of what we list for bombs - code seems to think there should be a torpedo and no bombs - it then proceeds to "fill in the blanks" for us "

Ya know...if having 2 torpedoes were really something wanted/needed to satisfy history...we could just "create" a new torpedo with double the strength of a single torp.
The game already has other abstractions to accomplish a need.??

It would have the same damage value in terms of effect and penetration - but a higher hit probability (that is, effect) - probably about 1.4 times the original weapon (i.e. square root of 2). Catch: we don't have any slots for such things.
But this is one of several reasons we use a different torpedo in EOS on some planes that were wanted to have more punch: we use a Submarine type 21 inch torpedo. [US aircraft used 22 inch torpedoes, so it is not unreasonable. The torpedo exists already - we need no slot for it - and code will use ANY torpedo we specify. And it would be feasible IRL to design it - although the problem of depth would prevent use in harbors that are too shallow. But you can rationalize it represents more regular torpedoes if you prefer that line of thinking.]

ORIGINAL: m10bob

Sid sez:"Second, game code treats a torpedo bomber in a very peculiar way. It substantially disregards the loadout we list under the aircraft type. IF you list a torpedo at all - it does note the type - but then it wholly ignores the number mounted - so for example the CHS H6K with two torpedoes (very historical) NEVER uses two torpedoes - and it always uses one torpedo when attacking a ship target. Regardless of what we list for bombs - code seems to think there should be a torpedo and no bombs - it then proceeds to "fill in the blanks" for us "

Ya know...if having 2 torpedoes were really something wanted/needed to satisfy history...we could just "create" a new torpedo with double the strength of a single torp.
The game already has other abstractions to accomplish a need.??

The quoted paragraph omits that the original goes on to explain how it "fills in the blanks" with specific bombs.

Yeah..but "filling in the blanks" did not give the proper load of two torpedoes..I think your logic of using that larger torp is the best alternative, but likely will be an item for a "read me" file to ward off the nitpickers and sharpshooters 6 months after final release of all things RHS..

Fourth, you have another way to go - classify a plane as a fighter bomber. You can do that for a Ki-36 - it is so awful a fighter it won't gain you a great capability. I prefer the dive bomber route

 
Thanks. Due to restrictions that Torpedo Bombers have, i agree with you. Fighter Bombing prevents recon so it a no go. As you know i am into WITM and there are peculiar problems with some German planes like Me210,Hs129.
 

OK - try this:

1) Reverse Axis and Allies - the Allies standardized on very few plane types - the Axis had a plethora of them - and you have TWO Axis nations - or even three if Vichy counts (and it should) This wil lgive you more plane slots for Axis to mess with.

2) Create different versions of planes - there really were anyway - optimized by mission. Thus you can have Ju-86 transports and Ju-86 bombers. Or Ju-88 night fighters and Ju-88 bombers - and even Ju-88 dive bombers or fighter-bombers. Stuff like that.

It's a good idea and i already tought about reversing but ended always into no production ability, and risking other unknowns.  Also allied equipment are not few by any means.

I meant to a total reversal - so you DO get production. Use unit names to tell players what their side is. But the game controls will be backwards - the "Allied player" must do the "Japanese Turn" and vice versa.

I think Axis will loose the factories and the ability to increase them isnt it?

I believe Cid is saying the Axis plays as the Allies and the Allies play as the Axis.

Yes that is what i understand too. Maybe i making major error but i have read here in the forum that only Japanese have production habilities.

Well - yes - that follows - no Axis production. But that is probably better anyway. The Axis can be pegged to historical production - and the Allies - who really do have lots of options - get to implement them. Further - it is compensation for fewer plane slots etc. It would be a very interesting variation - players who like Allied production might do it for that reason alone.

Thanks so i wasnt  off. I think i'll not go for reverse since the Axis is the looser the what if is more in their side. Second and more important Allies are not only British. There is Americans, Greeks and Yugoslavians and most of Comonwealth from Australians, New Zeelanders and Indians, plus some Free French, Polish and Jewish Brigade. I'll probably make some consolidation for minor ones but the variety is there.