Matrix Games Forums

Diliwitm wrote: Fri Mar 06, 2026 6:27 am Matsu class DD the 4 DC are forward...Tachibana 5.

Thanks. I will change the DC facings to rear. I am also revising some of the CA and CL class tonnages to make them more consistent.

I haven't posted here in a while as I have been busy with other stuff, but I have also been working on the scenarios some more, cleaning them up. I will post updates once I have finished a couple of further cleanup tasks.

Andrew Brown wrote: Mon Jun 15, 2026 10:14 am Thanks. I will change the DC facings to rear. I am also revising some of the CA and CL class tonnages to make them more consistent.

I haven't posted here in a while as I have been busy with other stuff, but I have also been working on the scenarios some more, cleaning them up. I will post updates once I have finished a couple of further cleanup tasks.

Thank you Andrew. Just want to let all you guys on the team know I appreciate the effort involved and the long term commitment.

Andrew Brown wrote: Mon Jun 15, 2026 10:14 am

Diliwitm wrote: Fri Mar 06, 2026 6:27 am Matsu class DD the 4 DC are forward...Tachibana 5.

Thanks. I will change the DC facings to rear. I am also revising some of the CA and CL class tonnages to make them more consistent.

I haven't posted here in a while as I have been busy with other stuff, but I have also been working on the scenarios some more, cleaning them up. I will post updates once I have finished a couple of further cleanup tasks.

Thanks should be 2 DC racks to the rear and 2 Y throwers at center.

Andrew Brown wrote: Mon Jun 15, 2026 10:14 am

Diliwitm wrote: Fri Mar 06, 2026 6:27 am Matsu class DD the 4 DC are forward...Tachibana 5.

Thanks. I will change the DC facings to rear. I am also revising some of the CA and CL class tonnages to make them more consistent.

I haven't posted here in a while as I have been busy with other stuff, but I have also been working on the scenarios some more, cleaning them up. I will post updates once I have finished a couple of further cleanup tasks.

Thanks for working on some of the data fixes posted here not included in the patch!

1 - Why the barge/landing craft code that make it is impossible to be hit by aircraft except at 100ft was not implemented to PT´s too? we have torpedo bombers going after PTs...

2 - Bug i have an A6m5 stationed in Tavoy in a LRCAP with a maximum 5 hex range for a TF, it is leaking to Prome at 10 hex range which is more than 8 hex range it has without drop tanks. Drop tanks are not on.

If a new patch is coming that updates some ship errors---my understanding is the Akagi and Kaga both still had the 8in guns in place when sunk but I have read the Akagi was scheduled for a refit later in 1942 and all its guns were supposed to be upgraded to 12.7cm AA guns...typically in the upgraded each 8in gun turret was replaced with 2x 12.7cm AA guns...and in the case of Akagi its 10cm I think there are guns were supposed to be upgraded to 12.7cm AA guns as well.

Not a huge change but if they survive to refit it would give both slightly better AA capability.

I think many of the hypothetical upgrades for ships sunk dont appear to be really well researched.

Diliwitm wrote: Fri Jun 19, 2026 5:00 am

2 - Bug i have an A6m5 stationed in Tavoy in a LRCAP with a maximum 5 hex range for a TF, it is leaking to Prome at 10 hex range which is more than 8 hex range it has without drop tanks. Drop tanks are not on.

LRCAP needs a target, what is it? Are you sure there's no other group doing it. Picture needed.

here it is.


several things wrong,

a6m5 restricted to a 5 range to cover a TF when passes a certain area(edited)

how magically it got drop tanks to reach Prome.

how 4 min warning can lead to an interception if it was even over the said TF at 7 range not 10 range to Prome.

I have another bug (graphic?), in some squadrons with long roster of pilots, scrolling do not show all. I dont think this occurred at game start. I am in mid 43 PBEM.

The units target is TF 530 (7) this will override your max range setting. Where is TF 530?

A little appreciate fact about LRCAP is they also have a patrol range of 3 hex centred on their target, just like CAP does. So wherever TF530 is your LRCAP may intercept anything within 3 hexes of it. It doesn't happen often and there won't be in any great numbers (1 in your case) but it can happen. Without knowing were TF 530 can't say for sure but I'd guess its in Bangkok range 7, Prome is three hexes away.

The DT thing is a concern however. It should not be able to reach Prome but I've never seen it happen before.

The other thins is it could be be FOW and it is a different unit doing it.

TF is in Rangoon.

When i do a LRCAP and TF is outside range it warns me it is.

CAP/LRCAP 3 hex should not override aircraft capable range.

There is no other unit with this model nearby.

There is also the issue of 4min warning.

FOW never seen a combat report wrongly ID's own air unit, and the unit itself has damaged planes typical of air combat.

Diliwitm wrote: Mon Jun 22, 2026 3:50 am witpbug-4.jpgwitpbug3.jpgwitpbug1.jpg

here it is.


several things wrong,

a6m5 restricted to a 5 range to cover a TF when passes a certain area(edited)

how magically it got drop tanks to reach Prome.

how 4 min warning can lead to an interception if it was even over the said TF at 7 range not 10 range to Prome.

You have 10% of the squadron unassigned and that could be your leak....GP

FOW can and will miss identify your own ships on occasion....GP

I can't vouch for the accuracy of it but this 2023 thread
https://forums.matrixgames.com/viewtopi ... ilit=lrcap

Includes the claim
Also, If you set LRcap on a task force that is outside the fighter groups normal range
the group will automatically fit drop tanks if they are able to for increase in it's range.

This is how I see it after many, many test etc.

Diliwitm wrote: Mon Jun 22, 2026 6:27 am TF is in Rangoon.

I made an error in the post, I got Bangkok and Rangoon mixed up. Rangoon range 7 from Tavoy, Prome range 10, within 3 hexes.

When i do a LRCAP and TF is outside range it warns me it is.

I come back to what I said earlier, LRCAP will engage anything within 3 hexes of it's target (patrol radius). The target is 7 hexes away, 7+3 = 10, the range of Prome from Tavoy.

Max range setting is used by the AI and as such any AI targetting will not exceed it. It also control the patrol radius.
Patrol radius is between 0-3 hexes from the target. Any range over 3 hexes is automatically limited to 3 hexes. If you want a smaller patrol radius, hence patrol area, you need to adjust the max range after the target has been selected. E.g. Set to 0 to protect just the target hex.

TF are a moving target and any LRCAP has to adjusts it range to target. It does not adjust it's max range setting. In the image the TF started two hex away, it's now at 7 hexes but the max range setting has not changed.

Yes you will get a warning at the time of setting but it does not prevent you setting it. It's assuming that when the TF moves it will come into range and/or you can set extend the range using DT. You get no warning if the TF moves out of range afterwards.

CAP/LRCAP 3 hex should not override aircraft capable range.

Sorry but manually settings a target will override whatever max range setting you have. Normally it is automatically adjusted upwards but you are targetting a moving target so there is no auto-adjustment.

FOW never seen a combat report wrongly ID's own air unit, and the unit itself has damaged planes typical of air combat.

You can and it's not rare.

Diliwitm wrote: Fri Jun 19, 2026 5:00 am You have 10% of the squadron unassigned and that could be your leak....GP

Prome is 10 hexes from Tavoy, the AG max range is 5. This 10% is under AI therefore Prome is out of reach. And then, I'm not all that sure here, only a/c currently on patrol ever intercept. Unlike CAP, there are never any a/c on stby and none ever scramble. I’m assuming they spend most of their none patrol time flying to and from the patrol area. This is why LRCAP produces substantially more fatigue than CAP.




Only pointing this out, but how many aircraft are actually flying at any one time with your settings? You have 9 ac, only 5 ready. A setting of 50% means only 3 ac are available.
The further the patrol area is from the unit’s base the less time the unit has over target and the fewer aircraft over the target at one time. This appears to range between all to 1/3 target range and 1/3 at max range. Here it's max range (7) so you only have one ac flying LRCAP over the target at any one time.

I should have added. Maximum Range of an aircraft is fixed by design. The maximum range setting is really a mission range.

Type 286 AS radar has range of 6000.

It should be:

instrumented range: 25 NM (≙ 46 km)

Chris21wen wrote: Tue Jun 23, 2026 8:58 am I should have added. Maximum Range of an aircraft is fixed by design. The maximum range setting is really a mission range.

Not sure what you mean by 'mission range', but max range in the aircraft details screen means the transfer range without armament - i.e. the furthest base hex it can reach to re-base.
'Extended range' is maximum mission range - usually with reduced payload or minimum patrol time.

BBfanboy wrote: Fri Jun 26, 2026 12:54 pm

Chris21wen wrote: Tue Jun 23, 2026 8:58 am I should have added. Maximum Range of an aircraft is fixed by design. The maximum range setting is really a mission range.

Not sure what you mean by 'mission range', but max range in the aircraft details screen means the transfer range without armament - i.e. the furthest base hex it can reach to re-base.
'Extended range' is maximum mission range - usually with reduced payload or minimum patrol time.

You are perfectly correct but I'm not talking about that, I'm talking about the miss named buttons in the bottom right. Maybe a pic along with would have been better than using Max range setting. But this confusion does highlight how confusing this settings is. .

You are right - that is confusing and I should have known you are aware of the basic aircraft ranges and their meaning. Thanks for showing the screenshot - haven't used the new .1128 yet so can't always follow the discussion well. I am holding off on using the new version because I have a game in progress using .1126 and I would like to see most of the wrinkles ironed out of .1128 before I try it.