PLEASE FIX AIR COMBAT!

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson
Once you get P38s ( with trained up pilots ) you will rule the skies ...

But there's the rub, I don't want to "rule the skies" later in the game because of a broken game model. I want a tough dogged attrition battle that will last for months. I want to see air groups left in the front lines for months on end and not see 100% of their planes wiped out in 1 friggin day.

How long did the Cactus Air Force fight at Guadalcanal against desperate odds before being pulled out? Four months at least I think. Had results like we see in WitP been the norm in WWII, the Cactus Air Force would have been decimated in 1 or 2 days.

I don't want tips on how to play within the broken model, I want the model fixed. Being decimated in a few days or decimating my opponent in return later isn't fun, it's frustrating in the extreme.

If we all cry out for a fix, perhaps it will be addressed some day. Yes land combat needs help too, but the air combat routines are more important I think since it affects the naval campaign in a more direct manor.

Jim

ABSOLUTELY RIGHT! The arguement that "it all balances out in the long run" stinks. Just because both sides get to take advantage of the crumby system does not make it less crumby. Whomever mentioned it is correct that the system simply falls apart as the numbers rise. Had the odds been 20 Mohawks to 40 Tony's you would have probably seen a more acceptable result---evidently 2by3 never bothered to test the system with larger numbers. Which is silly as they gave both sides too many aircraft which suffer far too little attrition---and player's being player's they will mass the biggest numbers they can manage.

If they can't fix the upper end of the combat results program, you would think they could at least put a "splitter" mechanism into the process that would chop both sides in to 50 plane chunks to keep the combats from reaching the upper "luniatic fringe" of results.

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson
Once you get P38s ( with trained up pilots ) you will rule the skies ...

But there's the rub, I don't want to "rule the skies" later in the game because of a broken game model. I want a tough dogged attrition battle that will last for months. I want to see air groups left in the front lines for months on end and not see 100% of their planes wiped out in 1 friggin day.

How long did the Cactus Air Force fight at Guadalcanal against desperate odds before being pulled out? Four months at least I think. Had results like we see in WitP been the norm in WWII, the Cactus Air Force would have been decimated in 1 or 2 days.

I don't want tips on how to play within the broken model, I want the model fixed. Being decimated in a few days or decimating my opponent in return later isn't fun, it's frustrating in the extreme.

If we all cry out for a fix, perhaps it will be addressed some day. Yes land combat needs help too, but the air combat routines are more important I think since it affects the naval campaign in a more direct manor.

Jim

Spot on Jim.[&o]

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: treespider

I don't suppose there is any hope of Matrix someday releasing the code...so that those of you that are capable can institute these tweaks.

I'd rather they fixed it themselves.

[Captain Ed]

Curious are you playing with PDU`s on. Your Japanese opponent seems to have a lot of Tony`s. I think having PDU`s on has skewed the game tremendously. In the real world this kind of strike make-up would I think be impossible for the Japanese. I think that PDU`s have such a far reaching effect on this game changing it from a simulation to one of fiction. If you had PDU`s off I doubt your opponent could have put that many Tony`s in the air in one strike, you would most likely have faced a combination of Oscar`s and A6Ms a force you could have had a better result against.

[Jim D Burns]

ORIGINAL: Captain Ed

Curious are you playing with PDU`s on. Your Japanese opponent seems to have a lot of Tony`s. I think having PDU`s on has skewed the game tremendously. In the real world this kind of strike make-up would I think be impossible for the Japanese. I think that PDU`s have such a far reaching effect on this game changing it from a simulation to one of fiction. If you had PDU`s off I doubt your opponent could have put that many Tony`s in the air in one strike, you would most likely have faced a combination of Oscar`s and A6Ms a force you could have had a better result against.

Yes we are playing with PDU’s on and he has been converting all of his air groups to Tony’s across the board. I have recently informed him my only option to combat this will be to switch over to the uber 2E to 4E bomber conversion method, something I have resisted doing up to this point.

The Tony isn’t as good as the zero, but I think he chose to do this to streamline his production so he only has one fighter aircraft type in production. I imagine he is or will be producing soon hundreds if not thousands of Tony’s a month.

With a maneuver rating of only 32, it’s a step down from the zero, but the gun rating makes it an effective bomber killer, so perhaps my 4E conversion will be a wasted effort if his Tony’s shred the heavies the way they are shredding everything else currently.

Hindsight being 20/20 I would never have agreed to PDU’s, but nothing changes the fact the air combat routines are busted with or without PDU’s.

Air losses should be reduced by a factor of 10 or more I think. Perhaps only allowing fighters enough ammo for 1 shot would do the trick. Currently it’s not uncommon to see dozens of aces made in a single engagement. While 5 kills in a single mission happened once in a blue moon during the actual war, it happens almost every other day in WitP.

Jim

[Black Mamba 1942]

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

ORIGINAL: treespider

I don't suppose there is any hope of Matrix someday releasing the code...so that those of you that are capable can institute these tweaks.

I'd rather they fixed it themselves.

You're asking a lot from Matrix![:D]

They can't even nail down the vanishing leader/unit bug.[:@]
Or, have they've just given up and moved on since there's no more "profit" from this title.[&:]

Do you think they will EVER tweek anymore of the mechanics issues?[&:]

[Captain Ed]

You would never have faced Tony`s with that level of experience with PDU`s off. Most likely you would have faced only Oscar`s and you would have had a far different result.
I feel your pain.

[aletoledo]

You would never have faced Tony`s with that level of experience with PDU`s off. Most likely you would have faced only Oscar`s and you would have had a far different result.
I feel your pain.

so Japan should have its hands tied even in 1942? I like PDUs, but I understand that its really an allied advantage in the end. they can convert everything to corsairs and p-38s, so they'll win eventually with PDUs.

I suppose that you could say PDUs and the large air combats both skew results in a similair manner. i.e. it helps the japanese early and it really helps the allies later.

I think there has to be a certain degree of change possible in the historical course of the war (which PDUs does), otherwise we're stuck with very few choices. besides that, the argument that PDUs helps the japanese too much with hinddsight in choosing airframes, can be countered with the argument that the allies have the same hindsight when choosing just about everything else (where and when to attack).

[moses]

I just don't understand the rational for saying that PDU hurts either side.

Oh I forget. The allies actualy had 1000 4E bombers sitting somewhere unused in mid 42 because they couldn't figure out how to put them into squadrens!!!!

[dpstafford]

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker
I'd rather they fixed it themselves.

Not going to happen. Matrix appears to have one programmer in total trying to keep up with all of the support for their rapidly expanding catalog of games. Until Matrix solves their own internal economic model, it seems unlikely that the A2A or LCU models in WITP will get any attention.

[dpstafford]

ORIGINAL: moses

I just don't understand the rational for saying that PDU hurts either side.

Oh I forget. The allies actualy had 1000 4E bombers sitting somewhere unused in mid 42 because they couldn't figure out how to put them into squadrens!!!!

I tend to agree. It is the production numbers that need tweaked. Not PDU.

But it's not gonna happen. See above.

I will have to give the Nik Mod a try.

[Ideologue]

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns

Air losses should be reduced by a factor of 10 or more I think. Perhaps only allowing fighters enough ammo for 1 shot would do the trick. Currently it’s not uncommon to see dozens of aces made in a single engagement. While 5 kills in a single mission happened once in a blue moon during the actual war, it happens almost every other day in WitP.

I wouldn't go as far as to say the air combat model is totally broken, but ammo as well as opportunities to use it do seem to be awfully plentiful in every engagement.



In response to the point about "never seeing a Midway," it happens from time to time, as long as the Allied player masses his carriers and the Japanese player splits his. I stomped a 4-CV KB with two TFs of 2 CVs apiece, without loss, only heavy damage on one of the task forces (which is pretty much the "Midway model," if the second TF had had one CV by itself, ala Yorktown, I guess it would've been sunk).

I did eventually lose them on the way home, but that was because I was stupid and didn't take into account submarines.[>:]

[1275psi]

Playing as japan into the 8th month of 43 in UV, I really, really wish the air combat model there was the one we have in WITP - even the corsairs are OK.

Im still getting strikes through - and experienced pilots are getting kills -but the rookies die like flies

What really seems to make a difference is the moral check - lots of pilots bug out a lot earlier -and subsequently survive for another day
I know Moral is different in WITP - wonder how much this effects losses?

For my next game of WITP I will be house ruling that AF size equals number of squadrons on a base, plus some sort of CAP limit
That might make it less bloody

[Bombur]

I will have to give the Nik Mod a try.

-You win´t regret from doing it. Up to now, Nik´s mod is the best fix to many of complaints about WiTP. I´ve simply gave up playing stock scenarios, only play Nik mod.

[jwilkerson]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson
Once you get P38s ( with trained up pilots ) you will rule the skies ...

But there's the rub, I don't want to "rule the skies" later in the game because of a broken game model. I want a tough dogged attrition battle that will last for months. I want to see air groups left in the front lines for months on end and not see 100% of their planes wiped out in 1 friggin day.

How long did the Cactus Air Force fight at Guadalcanal against desperate odds before being pulled out? Four months at least I think. Had results like we see in WitP been the norm in WWII, the Cactus Air Force would have been decimated in 1 or 2 days.

I don't want tips on how to play within the broken model, I want the model fixed. Being decimated in a few days or decimating my opponent in return later isn't fun, it's frustrating in the extreme.

If we all cry out for a fix, perhaps it will be addressed some day. Yes land combat needs help too, but the air combat routines are more important I think since it affects the naval campaign in a more direct manor.

Jim

ABSOLUTELY RIGHT! The arguement that "it all balances out in the long run" stinks. Just because both sides get to take advantage of the crumby system does not make it less crumby. Whomever mentioned it is correct that the system simply falls apart as the numbers rise. Had the odds been 20 Mohawks to 40 Tony's you would have probably seen a more acceptable result---evidently 2by3 never bothered to test the system with larger numbers. Which is silly as they gave both sides too many aircraft which suffer far too little attrition---and player's being player's they will mass the biggest numbers they can manage.

If they can't fix the upper end of the combat results program, you would think they could at least put a "splitter" mechanism into the process that would chop both sides in to 50 plane chunks to keep the combats from reaching the upper "luniatic fringe" of results.

But interestingly - Scholl and I HAVE been able to get into the "long drawn out" attrition battle Jim is talking about - but because in this game we have both CHOSEN to play with smaller numbers of aircraft .. ( i.e. self imposed "stacking limits" ) .. if both players play this way - you can get what you desire ... but to make the game do that by default will require some changes, this is true.
And btw we don't have any house rules about it .. we just both do it because that is our nature ... now in other games, where players have hit me with 100 4eB .. I have fought back with 100 Tonies ... and so it goes ... but in those games, ultimately the 100 P38s have the last laugh !!

[Oleg Mastruko]

ORIGINAL: Captain Ed

You would never have faced Tony`s with that level of experience with PDU`s off. Most likely you would have faced only Oscar`s and you would have had a far different result.
I feel your pain.

This is 100% correct and is the core of the problem we have here.

PDUs skew the game in many directions - in this case obviously in favor of IJA player. But it didn't have to be so. Since you (the original poster) play with PDU ON and he obviously has some dozens of Tonys how come you didn't upgrade crap Mohawks to something that would rip apart his Tonys, and used it in numbers against his expected strike?

How come you don't have at least 150 heavies ready to level the Tony base(s) and kill hundereds of the aircraft on the ground?

So, excuse me for being too harsh, but you did two stupid things - didn't upgrade crap Mohawks to something better, and didn't carpet bomb Tony base - and you complain when you get clobbered?

I think this is yet another case of player not being a good player/strategist, or thinking he's "just being fair", and turning his anger on the system when things go bad. If you play with PDUs ON (which we all know is a fantasy candyland where all realism goes outta window) and you didn't upgrade your bombers to 4E you're not playing this game as you should. Obviously your IJA opponent didn't have any qualms when it came to mass upgrading Oscar flying coffins to Tonys. You had and you think the game is to blame?

PDUs are fantasy land, on which I think we all agree. Once you're in the fantasy land you better start doing fantasy things to get even, not playing "fairly".

O.

[Sardonic]

What good will it do for Nick to fix anything. If everyone is playing CHS?

[Oleg Mastruko]

ORIGINAL: Sardonic

What good will it do for Nick to fix anything. If everyone is playing CHS?

Who is everyone? [:D]

I wait for new version of Nik's mod, new version of AB map, and new patch of WITP proper to finally give Nik's mod a spin.

Come to think of it that is no less than three new versions to wait - hopefully I'll see them sometime this year [8D]

[Nikademus]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

Nik says this will reduce the kill rate by about 1/3.

Nick says more bombers will get through.

Nik also explained why this would happen; because the game engine is not designed to handle a2a combat with gun devices set to a maximum range of 1. It will still attempt to resolve a2a combat at ranges 2-6 and will display it in the combat animations. (i.e. it will show plane x firing on plane y at ranges 2-6 even if it's guns have a max range of 1)

[Cpt Sherwood]

oops, double post