Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

Which version are you guys using that has the squadron insigna???...LOVE IT!

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

Which version are you guys using that has the squadron insigna???...LOVE IT!

ORIGINAL: pditty8811

ORIGINAL: Alfred

ORIGINAL: Richard III

The first Zero Group, 17 AC, with high 70`s & 80 skill drivers, over target at 20,000 feet, get" the bounce "on Warhawks,** still struggling to get off the ground in 1 & 2`s, and from there up to altitude**, shoot down 2 Warhawks, lose 11 Zeros and pilots in a dogfight VS Warhawks with at best 60`s skill pilots.....also what`s up with "1 Zero sweeping" in the combat report.

I fAlfred wants a save he can have one to varify the Combat Report.

And your point is what?

For example what point are you making with "high 70s & 80 skill drivers". That statement has no value for these reasons.

(1) Is it meant to say that the pilots are experienced in the 70s and 80s? If yes they you are clearly wrong because the average pilot experience is only 62. Therefore if some of the pilots are experienced in the 70s and 80s, the unit must also have many pilots whose experience is in the low 40s.

(2) If the alternative meaning you intended is that they have skill ratings in the 70s and 80s, then you would have to specify which skills for they would not have those high ratings in all pilot skills. Or do you seriously expect me to believe that fighter pilots would have transport skills in the 70s and 80s plus naval torpedo skill ratings at those same high levels.

Do not confuse a pilot's experience rating with his various skill ratings. There are many level 70-80 experience pilots who posses an air to air skill rating in the 20s, or even a 20-30 defense skill rating. Use those "experienced" pilots in a sweep and they are almost guaranteed to die in their first sweep.

Even "experienced" pilots can be defeated by less "experienced" pilots, by enemy airplanes which under certain conditions possess better flight characteristics.

Others have given you quite plausible explanations for the outcome. I would particularly draw your attention to the explanation given as to how the Americans could have achieved the "bounce", an explanation which you seem to have not comprehended.

In your various posts, you strike me as one of those players, and there are several in this category, who has a preconceived view of what an outcome should be and if that outcome is not achieved, immediately blame the perceived "wrong" outcome on the engine being at fault. Never does it enter your mind that the fault might lie with you.

Alfred

Rude anyone?

ORIGINAL: jeffk3510

ORIGINAL: pditty8811

ORIGINAL: Alfred




And your point is what?

For example what point are you making with "high 70s & 80 skill drivers". That statement has no value for these reasons.

(1) Is it meant to say that the pilots are experienced in the 70s and 80s? If yes they you are clearly wrong because the average pilot experience is only 62. Therefore if some of the pilots are experienced in the 70s and 80s, the unit must also have many pilots whose experience is in the low 40s.

(2) If the alternative meaning you intended is that they have skill ratings in the 70s and 80s, then you would have to specify which skills for they would not have those high ratings in all pilot skills. Or do you seriously expect me to believe that fighter pilots would have transport skills in the 70s and 80s plus naval torpedo skill ratings at those same high levels.

Do not confuse a pilot's experience rating with his various skill ratings. There are many level 70-80 experience pilots who posses an air to air skill rating in the 20s, or even a 20-30 defense skill rating. Use those "experienced" pilots in a sweep and they are almost guaranteed to die in their first sweep.

Even "experienced" pilots can be defeated by less "experienced" pilots, by enemy airplanes which under certain conditions possess better flight characteristics.

Others have given you quite plausible explanations for the outcome. I would particularly draw your attention to the explanation given as to how the Americans could have achieved the "bounce", an explanation which you seem to have not comprehended.

In your various posts, you strike me as one of those players, and there are several in this category, who has a preconceived view of what an outcome should be and if that outcome is not achieved, immediately blame the perceived "wrong" outcome on the engine being at fault. Never does it enter your mind that the fault might lie with you.

Alfred

Rude anyone?

No. Hes just smarter than you.

ORIGINAL: Richard III

Thanks to all who took the time to respond, both here and in PM`s and Emails, to the initial " neutral" question, with detailed information on how the A2A combat worked in this case, and how the combat reports are generated and interpreted.

The A2A model is very complex, and not always fully understood by those of us who actually play the PBEM game.

Rising questions about "results" are neither indictments of the current AI A2A model or the developers.

I`d like to especially thank my PBEM opponent Marc (Adm. Mitscher) for providing info here on his Fighter groups exp. levels. sadly , he has had to resign the Game due to just received orders for immediate deployment in support of US Army activities overseas.

He is a fine player, good sport and a gentleman.

R.III