Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: viberpol

ORIGINAL: castor troy

that´s funny and nothing else because with the given routines or stats (decide yourselve what´s wrong) the Japanese fighters like the Oscar for example works best at 38.000ft and that´s just plain... wrong. And I seriously doubt that anyone here thinks that an aircraft like the Oscar should perform best when being sent in to fight at 38.000ft.

Funny, I have never tried it in our (vs Ross) PBEM, just because I thought Oscar has marvellous mvr rating at altitude set at 9500 feet. [;)]

So as you see, I can't really say from experience which altitude is better. There's just too many factors in play.
What I am just saying is that IMHO high altitude sweeps should miss the enemy if the gap is way too large.
I thought AE works this was? At least TheElf said it works.
If it does not, it's bad.

well, it does not work in the AE version I got to download. Perhaps it does in a special developer´s edition, not in mine though or perhaps I just have not had the one out of four thousand case when a sweep missed the Cap or Cap missed the bombers. Perhaps I should just delete all radar and sound detectors, I don´t know, have never seen it. What I always see is that the bounce is the major factor in fighter vs. fighter the rest is at best secondary. So if Oscars (or even better Tojos like in your examples) bounce Lightnings (that has a 90mph advantage over the Oscar) then it´s mostly a disaster for the Lightnings (or any other ac). And it doesn´t take much to put this together to figure that you should go higher - your opponent goes higher too - you go higher again - etc. etc. you then meet the Oscars and Tojos just below 40k. And I don´t blame anyone to using them that way, would it have been the best way to go in real life they would have done it too. Problem though is that Japanese fighters definetely NOT worked best just below 40.000 feet, I guess this is something we all agree about.

ORIGINAL: castor troy
You don´t have to abandon your airfields due to being in Zero range because you´ve got fighters that can go higher than the Zero and going up high is the only thing that counts which is stated by more and more PBEM players.

But I do have to abandon Japanese airfields battered by fighter immune heavies. I am not complaining. Again, this is the "scissors, rock, paper" game sometimes.
I repeat, I set my Tojos at 29 000 feet sweep. What't the max altitute of P40s? Oh, wait... it's 29000.
Ross, why didn't you set your CAP that high but 14 000 instead? [;)]

I don't want to check every enemy stats before giving orders to play fair, but I want a fair game, and I want the game mechanics to make it impossible for me to play unfair.

ORIGINAL: viberpol

ORIGINAL: castor troy
You don´t have to abandon your airfields due to being in Zero range because you´ve got fighters that can go higher than the Zero and going up high is the only thing that counts which is stated by more and more PBEM players.

But I do have to abandon Japanese airfields battered by fighter immune heavies. I am not complaining. Again, this is the "scissors, rock, paper" game sometimes.
I repeat, I set my Tojos at 29 000 feet sweep. What't the max altitute of P40s? Oh, wait... it's 29000.
Ross, why didn't you set your CAP that high but 14 000 instead? [;)]

I don't want to check every enemy stats before giving orders, bo play fair, but I want a fair game, and I want the game mechanics to make it impossible for me to play unfair.

I guess it´s not a question of playing fair and noone accuses you about playing unfair. [;)] The game shouldn´t make it impossible for you to play "unfair" but to have unreasonable results (which I admit seems to be a pretty hard - if possible at all - task). And Tojos mauling P-40 at 20:1 when the Tojos even are outnumbered is off. But hey, that´s surely just one of those "one out of one thousand" off results. [;)]

ORIGINAL: castor troy
I guess it´s not a question of playing fair and noone accuses you about playing unfair. [;)] The game shouldn´t make it impossible for you to play "unfair" but to have unreasonable results (which I admit seems to be a pretty hard - if possible at all - task). And Tojos mauling P-40 at 20:1 when the Tojos even are outnumbered is off. But hey, that´s surely just one of those "one out of one thousand" off results. [;)]

I think I gonna try to repeat those results. Maybe some day I will make it. I was really astonished when I saw it, because it's really a single result. Previous duels in Burma was rather at 1:1 odds.
But still, there were many factors at play this time. All favoured my side.
Tojos were not outnumbered. Look at the report: 38 to 30 airborne Allied fighters. Clear sky. 15 000 feet difference. Air ratings, less fatigue (the hex CAPped was 2 hexes away from D.Waters) etc...

ORIGINAL: viberpol

ORIGINAL: castor troy
I guess it´s not a question of playing fair and noone accuses you about playing unfair. [;)] The game shouldn´t make it impossible for you to play "unfair" but to have unreasonable results (which I admit seems to be a pretty hard - if possible at all - task). And Tojos mauling P-40 at 20:1 when the Tojos even are outnumbered is off. But hey, that´s surely just one of those "one out of one thousand" off results. [;)]

I think I gonna try to repeat those results. Maybe some day I will make it. I was really astonished when I saw it, because it's really a single result. Previous duels in Burma was rather at 1:1 odds.
But still, there were many factors at play this time. All favoured my side.
Tojos were not outnumbered. Look at the report: 38 to 30 airborne Allied fighters. Clear sky. 15 000 feet difference. Air ratings, less fatigue (the hex CAPped was 2 hexes away from D.Waters) etc...

Well you should repeat it. I know I would if I had those fricking tojos......[;)]

I fly the P40s at 14,000 feet because that is where they are supposed to be and the optimun performance envelope for that plane.
That is where it should fight the best but it does not. Oscars diving from 30,000 feet would have no advantage as the P 40s could evade and dive away at anytime. That is, from those oscars that were still diving and had not shed their wings.

Tojo is obviously another example as it probably could hold a dive but the real point is that air combat should take place at realistic altitiudes for the planes involved, and any fighter at 30,000 feet was just barely responsive to the controls and unable to maneuver much. I think there are some simple solutions but for now, it is a game and you should do what works best.

Btw, you were fighting my top pilots with many aces and a few multiple aces. My planes were rested and only flying two hexes. The survivors are not highly fatiqued.

ORIGINAL: crsutton
Tojo is obviously another example as it probably could hold a dive but the real point is that air combat should take place at realistic altitiudes for the planes involved, and any fighter at 30,000 feet was just barely responsive to the controls and unable to maneuver much. I think there are some simple solutions but for now, it is a game and you should do what works best.

Yup, that's a different problem.
As I remember reading memoires of the Polish aces fighting during the Battle of Britain, many duels, even if started at high altitutes, were brought to the lowest eventually. Our beloved game does not simulate changing altitude after the engaging phase AFAIK... (at least didn't notice that?).

ORIGINAL: crsutton

I fly the P40s at 14,000 feet because that is where they are supposed to be and the optimun performance envelope for that plane.
That is where it should fight the best but it does not. Oscars diving from 30,000 feet would have no advantage as the P 40s could evade and dive away at anytime. That is, from those oscars that were still diving and had not shed their wings.

Tojo is obviously another example as it probably could hold a dive but the real point is that air combat should take place at realistic altitiudes for the planes involved, and any fighter at 30,000 feet was just barely responsive to the controls and unable to maneuver much. I think there are some simple solutions but for now, it is a game and you should do what works best.

Btw, you were fighting my top pilots with many aces and a few multiple aces. My planes were rested and only flying two hexes. The survivors are not highly fatiqued.

I'd just like to see some realism rolled in to the program. If you can (and want to) fly a sweep at 36,000 feet, fine..., but your chance of seeing an enemy 15-20,000 feet below you is quite limited. Problem is that everyone seems to have "lookdown radar". I'd love to watch the face of an opponent sweeping at 30+ thousand feet only to fail to even spot, let alone intercept, his opponent's A/C.

ORIGINAL: topeverest

Agree Altitide is a huge factor in A2A victory, perhaps the largest effect. Certainly larger than airfame type in my experience.

The key to it is that altitude can be traded for airspeed whenn you need to make a quick get away. The higher you are, the more room you have to trade. Also, if the attacker starts at a higher altitude he can gain an airspeed advantage over a target that is flying at a lower altitude or one that is trying to climb up to meet him.

ORIGINAL: Shark7

ORIGINAL: topeverest

Agree Altitide is a huge factor in A2A victory, perhaps the largest effect. Certainly larger than airfame type in my experience.

I so agree here, any aircraft that enters a dogfight with at least 5k altitude, is pretty much given a bonus when it comes to attacking, assuming the flight see's the defenders below. Generally speaking any attacker with an alt advantage has control of the fight, however in a few cases of rarity for example the Zero (which by the way can't dive period in a dogfight) even with an Alt advantage against the P40B would easily slip away using an S-split to get away unharmed. This is of course a perfect situation where the flight wasn't bounced, sun wasn't behind them and the sky is blue without clouds. So in any case if the pilots experience were decent enough to know how to get away from this bouncing attack, they should get away without minimal loses. Of course a few will take hits, but not in the respect of losing 1/3rd a flight.

Well basically yes but not always. For example, if a P40 at 15000 feet saw a zero diving it could itself dive away due to its higher diving speed. P38 even more so.

The zero was a pretty poor plane in a dive. The controls were stiff at high airspeeds and in a sustained steep dives the early zero's skin tended to wrinkle sometimes causing the wing to snap off. I don't think the oscar was any better. Surprise of course is another thing but I don't think you would find many zero fighters attacking in the verticle. Every pilot wanted to get a jump but very few went up to 30,000 feet to do it.

Of course the game does not take into consideration the weather. What if the P40s are flying right over cloud cover at 15,000 feet? They are in the better tactical postion as they can slip into the clouds at any time. What if the clouds are at 17,000 feet? The P 40s would never be spotted by a high flier.

So perhaps as Ark said, the high sweep should just have a very good chance of missing the target and not attacking-especially in any weather that was not clear. Those times when it works then they get a bounce and are good to go. However, with a good risk of failure then many players will keep their planes lower as most sweeps preceed a bomber attack, and we have all seen how ugly that can be when the sweepers don't fly and the bombers go in with little or no escort.

So I say, keep the high sweep but make it more prone to miss. Sort of a high risk, but high gain gamble.

ORIGINAL: viberpol

ORIGINAL: castor troy
I guess it´s not a question of playing fair and noone accuses you about playing unfair. [;)] The game shouldn´t make it impossible for you to play "unfair" but to have unreasonable results (which I admit seems to be a pretty hard - if possible at all - task). And Tojos mauling P-40 at 20:1 when the Tojos even are outnumbered is off. But hey, that´s surely just one of those "one out of one thousand" off results. [;)]

I think I gonna try to repeat those results. Maybe some day I will make it. I was really astonished when I saw it, because it's really a single result. Previous duels in Burma was rather at 1:1 odds.
But still, there were many factors at play this time. All favoured my side.
Tojos were not outnumbered. Look at the report: 38 to 30 airborne Allied fighters. Clear sky. 15 000 feet difference. Air ratings, less fatigue (the hex CAPped was 2 hexes away from D.Waters) etc...

crsutton stated in his first post that 38 Tojos fought 60 P-40.

ORIGINAL: Shark7
The key to it is that altitude can be traded for airspeed whenn you need to make a quick get away. The higher you are, the more room you have to trade. Also, if the attacker starts at a higher altitude he can gain an airspeed advantage over a target that is flying at a lower altitude or one that is trying to climb up to meet him.

Only up to a point. The reason Dive Bombers have "dive brakes" is that without them they would gain too much speed and become uncontrollable. Fighters don't have "dive brakes", so unless you are flying a tank like the P-47, an altitude advantage will soon become a disadvantage..., from which you will have to "spiral down" to maintain control of your A/C---or lose your wings "pulling out".

ORIGINAL: Miller

ALTITUDE. Forget pilot exp, plane stats.........max altitude is the winner. Whichever plane can fly the highest will win most of the time. Needs loooking at I'm afraid.

What...wait...you mean that in a dogfight, the aircraft with an altitude advantage tends to win? Thats unpossible [X(]

Some people on this forum whine way too much...you know who you are. The whole "OMG a fighter sweep with altitude advantage and better pilots shot down my fighters on CAP with inferoir pilots...TEH GAME IS BROKEN!!!111"-routine gets really old really fast.

ORIGINAL: castor troy

ORIGINAL: viberpol

ORIGINAL: castor troy
I guess it´s not a question of playing fair and noone accuses you about playing unfair. [;)] The game shouldn´t make it impossible for you to play "unfair" but to have unreasonable results (which I admit seems to be a pretty hard - if possible at all - task). And Tojos mauling P-40 at 20:1 when the Tojos even are outnumbered is off. But hey, that´s surely just one of those "one out of one thousand" off results. [;)]

I think I gonna try to repeat those results. Maybe some day I will make it. I was really astonished when I saw it, because it's really a single result. Previous duels in Burma was rather at 1:1 odds.
But still, there were many factors at play this time. All favoured my side.
Tojos were not outnumbered. Look at the report: 38 to 30 airborne Allied fighters. Clear sky. 15 000 feet difference. Air ratings, less fatigue (the hex CAPped was 2 hexes away from D.Waters) etc...

crsutton stated in his first post that 38 Tojos fought 60 P-40.

I am telling you, I am his opponent in this PBEM.
Look at the report. I watched the fight.
My 38 against 30 airborne P40 (CAP was set 2 hexes from lvl 3 or 4 base, so the rest of this 60 simply missed the encounter). About 20 shot down mainly because of bounce. And this is FOWed.
IMHO nice results, but not simply impossible IRL.

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid spotted at 31 NM, estimated altitude 32,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 8 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-44-IIa Tojo x 38

Allied aircraft
Kittyhawk IA x 10
P-40E Warhawk x 56


No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
Kittyhawk IA: 2 destroyed
P-40E Warhawk: 19 destroyed



CAP engaged:
No.75 Sqn RAAF with Kittyhawk IA (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 10 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 14000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 3 minutes
49th FG/7th FS with P-40E Warhawk (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 14 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 14000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 33 minutes
49th FG/8th FS with P-40E Warhawk (15 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
15 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 14000
Raid is overhead
49th FG/9th FS with P-40E Warhawk (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 12 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 14000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 2 minutes
28th CG/11th FS with P-40E Warhawk (15 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
15 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 14000
Raid is overhead

And the next raid (the sweep went before) the same the in the same hex went as usual, with just standard results with no "uber Tojo" threat. The results of the sweep done earlier was just a good dice roll. It happens. [:)]

Morning Air attack on 6th Aus Cav Brigade, at 76,129

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid spotted at 21 NM, estimated altitude 9,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 6 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-44-IIa Tojo x 36
Ki-48-IIa Lily x 20

Allied aircraft
Kittyhawk IA x 5
P-40E Warhawk x 8

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-44-IIa Tojo: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
Kittyhawk IA: 1 destroyed
P-40E Warhawk: 1 destroyed

Allied ground losses:
18 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Aircraft Attacking:
20 x Ki-48-IIa Lily bombing from 8000 feet *
Ground Attack: 2 x 100 kg GP Bomb
4 x Ki-44-IIa Tojo sweeping at 8000 feet

CAP engaged:
No.75 Sqn RAAF with Kittyhawk IA (5 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
5 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 14000
Raid is overhead
49th FG/7th FS with P-40E Warhawk (6 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
6 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 14000
Raid is overhead
49th FG/8th FS with P-40E Warhawk (1 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 14000
Raid is overhead
28th CG/11th FS with P-40E Warhawk (1 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 14000
Raid is overhead

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund
What...wait...you mean that in a dogfight, the aircraft with an altitude advantage tends to win? Thats unpossible [X(]

Some people on this forum whine way too much...you know who you are. The whole "OMG a fighter sweep with altitude advantage and better pilots shot down my fighters on CAP with inferoir pilots...TEH GAME IS BROKEN!!!111"-routine gets really old really fast.

While it's generally true that height is an advantage, as I've pointed out it's only an advantage to an extent. A "sweep" at 36,000 feet (7 miles up) has no advantage at all over an enemy at 5 or 10,000 feet---they won't see them at all most of the time. If the game gave an advantage for being 2-8,000 feet above an opponent, that would be fine. But it should also reccognize that being too far above is a disadvantage..., and that's where it falls down.

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

ORIGINAL: Miller

ALTITUDE. Forget pilot exp, plane stats.........max altitude is the winner. Whichever plane can fly the highest will win most of the time. Needs loooking at I'm afraid.

What...wait...you mean that in a dogfight, the aircraft with an altitude advantage tends to win? Thats unpossible [X(]

Some people on this forum whine way too much...you know who you are. The whole "OMG a fighter sweep with altitude advantage and better pilots shot down my fighters on CAP with inferoir pilots...TEH GAME IS BROKEN!!!111"-routine gets really old really fast.

wonder what get´s old faster though, the fact that people are whining about 20:1 kill rates that are completely off, the fact that airwar in the AE Pacific happens near 40.000ft or the fact that there are still people that think both would be correct [:-]

ORIGINAL: viberpol

And the next raid (the sweep went before) the same the in the same hex went as usual, with just standard results with no "uber Tojo" threat. The results of the sweep done earlier was just a good dice roll. It happens. [:)]

Morning Air attack on 6th Aus Cav Brigade, at 76,129

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid spotted at 21 NM, estimated altitude 9,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 6 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-44-IIa Tojo x 36
Ki-48-IIa Lily x 20

Allied aircraft
Kittyhawk IA x 5
P-40E Warhawk x 8

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-44-IIa Tojo: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
Kittyhawk IA: 1 destroyed
P-40E Warhawk: 1 destroyed

Allied ground losses:
18 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Aircraft Attacking:
20 x Ki-48-IIa Lily bombing from 8000 feet *
Ground Attack: 2 x 100 kg GP Bomb
4 x Ki-44-IIa Tojo sweeping at 8000 feet

CAP engaged:
No.75 Sqn RAAF with Kittyhawk IA (5 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
5 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 14000
Raid is overhead
49th FG/7th FS with P-40E Warhawk (6 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
6 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 14000
Raid is overhead
49th FG/8th FS with P-40E Warhawk (1 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 14000
Raid is overhead
28th CG/11th FS with P-40E Warhawk (1 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 14000
Raid is overhead

this doesn´t correspond at all and it´s not one of the "good die roll" thing. First you had a super alt sweep with a 20:1 kill rate and this example is an escort mission that is bounced by the Cap. Not the Tojo is uber, the statospher sweeps are.

ORIGINAL: castor troy

wonder what get´s old faster though, the fact that people are whining about 20:1 kill rates that are completely off, the fact that airwar in the AE Pacific happens near 40.000ft or the fact that there are still people that think both would be correct [:-]

There are a few things that get old. One is the tendency to generalise from single events and talk about them as though they're happening all the time. You wrote "20:1 kill rates" - plural. Has this happened more than once? Has anyone here seen a result anything close to this one? I certainly haven't. This is a singular event, an outlier, the result of rolling the same dice a million times. On it's own it's only evidence that in a big universe strange things happen occasionally.

Second is the whiny tone, complaining - in advance even - that people might not agree with you. Say what you think, but don't assume that everyone who sees the same thing is going to reach the same conclusions as you.

Third is the hyperbole. "Japanese Sputniks", like "nuclear subs" really doesn't convey any useful information. Colourful rhetoric doesn't make your point stronger, it just ratchets a discussion into an argument. Lots of people in this thread have been able to calmly and rationally say what they think the problem is, and why. Try it some time.

ORIGINAL: Mark Weston

ORIGINAL: castor troy

wonder what get´s old faster though, the fact that people are whining about 20:1 kill rates that are completely off, the fact that airwar in the AE Pacific happens near 40.000ft or the fact that there are still people that think both would be correct [:-]

There are a few things that get old. One is the tendency to generalise from single events and talk about them as though they're happening all the time. You wrote "20:1 kill rates" - plural. Has this happened more than once? Has anyone here seen a result anything close to this one? I certainly haven't. This is a singular event, an outlier, the result of rolling the same dice a million times. On it's own it's only evidence that in a big universe strange things happen occasionally.

Second is the whiny tone, complaining - in advance even - that people might not agree with you. Say what you think, but don't assume that everyone who sees the same thing is going to reach the same conclusions as you.

Third is the hyperbole. "Japanese Sputniks", like "nuclear subs" really doesn't convey any useful information. Colourful rhetoric doesn't make your point stronger, it just ratchets a discussion into an argument. Lots of people in this thread have been able to calmly and rationally say what they think the problem is, and why. Try it some time.

If you actually SEE (like you say) that fighters in AE are used near 40.000ft whenever possible and think this is correct, what more do I have to say then? Neither the whiny tone, the hyperbole or anything else helps then.

If you haven´t seen or haven´t noticed that the fighters work BEST whenever they come in like comets when diving from 38.000ft down on helpless fighters at 15.000ft then you either are not looking at the replay at all or can´t figure out what the combat report actually says. The truth is, like Mike Solli says for example, that it´s NOT an advantage for your sweep if you are flying 20.000ft higher than your enemy.

And with the nuclear subs, there sure was nothing wrong with them, the way they killed escorts before the change also was ok. And the change that came with a patch (that still didn´t change the fact that nearly halve of the time escorts are targetted) surely was unjustified. Please note the sarcasm...

and when a hell a lot of PBEM players have figured out that their fighters work best whenever they come in as high as possible (just to go higher than the enemy) then there IS something wrong, no matter whine, hyperbolics or whatever. And in regards to make my point stronger, any book (from the worst to the best) about the Pacific airwar states that fighter vs. fighter combat happened at low to medium alt and NOT around 40.000ft. Strong enough point? Probably not, next thing is to quote 12 books with author, page and paragraph.

Calling an Oscar Sputnik in AE comes closer to what it really is in AE than fighter because the Oscar could NOT fight at 38.000ft even if it could (in theory) climb that high.