2 Things that should be changed in AE

[pat.casey]

ORIGINAL: TheElf

ORIGINAL: Przemcio231

Hi after some playing i found 2 things really annoying and by my opinion broken.

1) High level sweeps... there is no defense against it[:@]

There was no defense against this in real life either. This why High altitude performance dictated the Air War, and aircraft design reflected a need for higher and higher ceilings and performance. Even today there is a premium on High altitude performance.

Sure there was; you could choose not to engage; we're talking about a fighter sweep here, not defending against a bombing raid which you (arguably) had to try to stop.

[Arimus]

Which is what the Germans did when they told their fighters to not engage enemy escorts and concentrate on the bombers.

The first couple responses to the original poster were not entirely accurate. An experienced squadron equipped with poor high level performance aircraft might simple not engage. Wargames tend to model "glory" and not "cowardice", which is what the players prefer.


Speaking of defense in depth...

Do fortification levels reduce your casualties during a retreat? Historicallly, well planned defenses had several lines of defense which allowed a defender to withdraw in order.
Do units in reserve reduce casualties during a retreat? A well planned defense would have predetermined positions for the reserve to go to and act as a rear-guard for the retreating main force.

Placing a reserve force in the hex behind you may be a good idea for this game, but I don't think corps commanders typically put there reserves 80 miles to the rear.
And the defense in depth your talking about was on a tactical level. Armies did not have the luxury of placing divisions behind divisions to form a defense in depth.
Kursk being a notable exception.
This is from the western point of view, the Japs did not retreat.

[RevRick]

ORIGINAL: JeffK

ORIGINAL: WLockard

ORIGINAL: TheElf




What?!?!?!?! Planning for gorund combat?!?!?! that's crazy talk. Just mass all your unit in one hex and push everything off the map. Tactical Reserves, rearguards, and a well protected flank is for sissies....[;)]

In another forum I participate at, we put sarcasm in green.

Its why the Airdales sit back well behind the frontlines or at sea on their luxury yachts.

What shade of Green should we use?

Be careful talking about airdales. They are a mite touched in the head! After all, I have heard that a night landing on a carrier is the only time in life that you can have a good bladder relief, bowel movement and orgasm at the same time. I prefer mine at the appropriate times, and not trussed up in a silly looking suit by myself in a controlled crash.

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

ORIGINAL: Dili
Also Soviets forced the Luftwaffe to play at low level.

Yes they did to some extent, particularly when they went on the offensive. But the SOV paid dearly for that as well. However, they had both more planes and more pilots as well. Attrition worked in the air and on the ground for them.

Haven't read nor talked with any war vet pilot though who would want to give up elevation...then or now. Elevation equates to energy and energy management is the key for A2A combat theory.

Depends on what you are flying. Bunch of Zeroes come over at 20,000 feet, P-39/P400's are not going to try to climb up and meet them. First, by the time they got there, the Zeroes would be gone. And more importantly it puts them in the worst of both worlds..., badly slowed by the climb, they are also vulnerable if they try to push over and dive away as the diving Zeroes would have a considerable edge in speed to catch them as they did so.

Better to stay at about 5,000 feet, keeping your best performance envelope and protecting your airfield. Sweeps basically force stupidity on the defender.

[crsutton]

Just go high yourself. My opponent is sweeping regularly with zeros. I just put my P40s on max altitude and that seems to work. Both of em suck at hight altitude so I figured I don't have much to lose. My last fight over Manila against a high level sweep cost me 9 P40s but I shot down 7 zeros. Considering that most of my pilots survive, I can live with that. Plus, I figure he is going to be eating death if he tries that against me when I have lightnings. It is early in the war. Zeros are going to own the sky for a while.

[TheElf]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

ORIGINAL: Dili
Also Soviets forced the Luftwaffe to play at low level.

Yes they did to some extent, particularly when they went on the offensive. But the SOV paid dearly for that as well. However, they had both more planes and more pilots as well. Attrition worked in the air and on the ground for them.

Haven't read nor talked with any war vet pilot though who would want to give up elevation...then or now. Elevation equates to energy and energy management is the key for A2A combat theory.

Depends on what you are flying. Bunch of Zeroes come over at 20,000 feet, P-39/P400's are not going to try to climb up and meet them. First, by the time they got there, the Zeroes would be gone. And more importantly it puts them in the worst of both worlds..., badly slowed by the climb, they are also vulnerable if they try to push over and dive away as the diving Zeroes would have a considerable edge in speed to catch them as they did so.

Better to stay at about 5,000 feet, keeping your best performance envelope and protecting your airfield. Sweeps basically force stupidity on the defender.

If you set your Fighters to CAP, they will CAP. They will also try to engage the Enemy, whether it be a sweep, an escorted raid, or unescorted Bombers.

If you don't want them to engage an enemy with a superior perfroming plane at altitude don't set them to CAP. Pretty simple. If you find your position at an AF untenable, and want to avoid large losses on the ground, don't park A/C at the AF. This is a pretty basic concept of Air Warfare. Air Superiority is a nice thing to have.