Matrix Games Forums

I'm playing an RHS scenario. PBYs are getting one or two hits a turn on my submarines and one or two torpedo hits a week on my surface vessels. Vildebeasts are performing like Betties in torpedo attacks--a strike of 4 aircraft gets 1-2 hits reliably. Cid, did you play with aircraft values?

To a very great extent...

ORIGINAL: herwin

I'm playing an RHS scenario. PBYs are getting one or two hits a turn on my submarines and one or two torpedo hits a week on my surface vessels. Vildebeasts are performing like Betties in torpedo attacks--a strike of 4 aircraft gets 1-2 hits reliably. Cid, did you play with aircraft values?

I only WISH my Cats could hit surface ships, as IRL!

This is very odd - since patrol planes do not use torpedoes! I took the torpedoes off Mavis (H6K) and Emily (H8K) from CHS - since we could not show the torpedo attack routine works with them - and then were told they really can not.

Now ASW attacks are different. I TRIED to make ASW aircraft - and ASW loadouts for aircraft in certain units when it was not the default - but it is not yet absolutely clear that these worked? [It APPEARS they work] You will find that flying boats in general have ASW loads - and that some bombers (with the suffex AS for the Allies - or a K in the unit name for the Japanese) - have ASW loadouts. These will always include depth charges - but may also include things like MAD gear, radar, or in a very wierd case, sonar - tricky since the sonar model is abstract.

Anyway - it takes controlled testing to figure out what happens? It takes understanding what was seen to set that up.

ASW attacks should be better than before - in particular for the Allies because

a) code gives a bonus to the Allies in ASW
b) the Allies have heavier DC which are more effective
c) the Allies get electronic detection sooner

But torpedoes - if they happen - are a function of hard code. Why do you think PBYs can torpedo? Can we have some details?

While Terminus is correct we changed aircraft data - and also air unit data - having learned that in many cases the air unit data is used we can make it different for certain units - we cannot make code work for torpedoes with types not defined for them. We are not sure if we can affect ASW either? Like torpedo attacks, it may be pretty much hard wired. For example, I have seen transport flying boats with NO DC or bombs score a "hit" on a patrol mission. Now that DID happen IRL - it is literally "kick the thing out the door" or jury rig a release mechanism - but I would not have predicted it in WITP. Since it happens - clearly ASW attacks can be reported without regard to loadout!

It is my understanding that torpedo attacks are made only by torpedo bomber or horizontal bomber type aircraft. It appears that the loadout is checked - but if ANY torpedoes are listed - only the TYPE information is used - and the COUNT is always one weapon per plane. That is wrong for flying boats - which in general could carry two.

ORIGINAL: Terminus

To a very great extent...

I looked carefully through my records for the RHS scenario and note:

1. The PBYs aren't launching torpedoes. It's the Vincents that are doing the damage.

2. On the other hand, the Vincents/Vildebeests are extremely effective. They're getting about 25-30% hits per sortie, which is better than the Japanese G3Ms and G4Ms did historically.

3. Both side's search aircraft are very effective. Search aircraft are getting about two hits a day.

We'ren't the Vincents army cooperation aircraft, modified for tropical operations and without torpedoes?

ORIGINAL: herwin

ORIGINAL: Terminus

To a very great extent...

I looked carefully through my records for the RHS scenario and note:

1. The PBYs aren't launching torpedoes. It's the Vincents that are doing the damage.

2. On the other hand, the Vincents/Vildebeests are extremely effective. They're getting about 25-30% hits per sortie, which is better than the Japanese G3Ms and G4Ms did historically.

3. Both side's search aircraft are very effective. Search aircraft are getting about two hits a day.

We'ren't the Vincents army cooperation aircraft, modified for tropical operations and without torpedoes?

The Vincents were put into RHS at my suggestion. The plane is identical to the Vildebeest except the Vincent carried a large gas tank under the fuselage,(not droppable) and carried bombs under its' wings. Yes, it could be used for army co-op, or anything else a bomber aircraft might be used for.
While in game the plane(s) are given a range of "7", this was (to me) a good compromise for both aircraft, in that the Vildebeest might really have a range of 5 and the Vincent a range of "9"..
BTW, to me, 2 hits per day in a theatre that large with multiple squadrons in use, and maybe 20-30 planes does not seem such a large number to me?

As for ALL torpedoes, how exactly might a "chance per hit" be toned down??
Does the size of the torp matter, or can the amt of damage be altered??
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To Sid:
Yes, we know PBY/Emily/Mavis types IRL carried 2 torps, but since the game does not allow this to be represented, maybe a single torp might be created to replicate the damage and hit potential of 2????

This is good news: we are not confused, patrol planes do not use torpedoes. I wish they did - but they don't - so we don't have to worry about it. They would not use them very often IRL - probably only at night.

The Vincent and Vildebeeste are variants of the same aircraft - and combined in RHS (although if we get some slots - which art reform promises- we will split them into land and float versions). They were used in various modes - and one of them did indeed carry a torpedo. They were pressed into service - both versions - for patrol duties early in the Pacific War period. They won't last very long - players will upgrade them or the units will die in place. But they are delightful chrome. How effective they are is a function of several things: I rarely see them score because I cover targets in range with proper CAP - and there are not enough to penetrate in numbers. But uncovered targets beware - and that is probably realistic. The British had a big problem getting out of the mind set (mostly ETO and mostly in earlier years - but still somewhat at the start of PTO operations) that ships can sail in range of land based air without cover. Not smart.
You will find that code gives the Allies advantages in most combat routines - so that may also be a factor. [The allegation that the code is unbalanced with many fictional advantages for the Japanese is generally unjustified. A real effort was made to get it right. Hats off to the designers.]

Since patrol planes carry NO torpedoes, the question is not germane (about a dual device). It would be modeled with the same effect/penetration values, but a greater effectiveness rating - probably 1.4 times the effectiveness rating. NEMO proposed this at one point - for non patrol planes fitted with two weapons. Instead, I went over to using a different torpedo. In RHSEOS there is a plane not developed - the G7 - and it has a 21 inch torpedo. [US aireal torpedoes as large as 22 inch were routinely carried. The Japanese 21 inch has much greater range and warhead than the 18 inch does.]

Well, the problem lies in the model. We are playing an slightly modified RHS RAO scenario with experience levels for aircraft further reduced than the RHS "official" standard.

The problem is that those PBY squadrons that started with experience 45 now have 80+ and with RHS plane range a squadron based in the philippines can spot Japanese TFs from Malaya to Taiwan (A lot), thus achieving hits very often.

ORIGINAL: Bliztk

Well, the problem lies in the model. We are playing an slightly modified RHS RAO scenario with experience levels for aircraft further reduced than the RHS "official" standard.

The problem is that those PBY squadrons that started with experience 45 now have 80+ and with RHS plane range a squadron based in the philippines can spot Japanese TFs from Malaya to Taiwan (A lot), thus achieving hits very often.

And because a squadron is able to search every hex in range, the result is a rain of death on Japanese ships not covered by CAP...

ORIGINAL: m10bob

ORIGINAL: herwin

ORIGINAL: Terminus

To a very great extent...

I looked carefully through my records for the RHS scenario and note:

1. The PBYs aren't launching torpedoes. It's the Vincents that are doing the damage.

2. On the other hand, the Vincents/Vildebeests are extremely effective. They're getting about 25-30% hits per sortie, which is better than the Japanese G3Ms and G4Ms did historically.

3. Both side's search aircraft are very effective. Search aircraft are getting about two hits a day.

We'ren't the Vincents army cooperation aircraft, modified for tropical operations and without torpedoes?

The Vincents were put into RHS at my suggestion. The plane is identical to the Vildebeest except the Vincent carried a large gas tank under the fuselage,(not droppable) and carried bombs under its' wings. Yes, it could be used for army co-op, or anything else a bomber aircraft might be used for.
While in game the plane(s) are given a range of "7", this was (to me) a good compromise for both aircraft, in that the Vildebeest might really have a range of 5 and the Vincent a range of "9"..
BTW, to me, 2 hits per day in a theatre that large with multiple squadrons in use, and maybe 20-30 planes does not seem such a large number to me?

As for ALL torpedoes, how exactly might a "chance per hit" be toned down??
Does the size of the torp matter, or can the amt of damage be altered??
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To Sid:
Yes, we know PBY/Emily/Mavis types IRL carried 2 torps, but since the game does not allow this to be represented, maybe a single torp might be created to replicate the damage and hit potential of 2????

Turns out WITP uses torpedoes - period. No matter the type. You can change the hit probability (effectiveness) rating - but you should not. It is a value used for surface ships, submarines, maybe even land units, as well as aircraft - and it should be related to the real data for the particular torpedo. In the case of Japan - the aircraft torpedo was indeed related to a midget submarine torpedo - so using the same device makes some sense. There are other torpedoes which should not be used by aircraft. Due to a limited device count, sometimes we use the closest torpedo. There is no Soviet torpedo - but we use the torpedo with the closest range available.

It does appear that experience builds too rapidly. Similarly units rebuild too fast - IF in supply in a generous sense. But we cannot change such things.

You probably changed experience for pilots or air groups - not for aircraft. Aircraft don't have experience ratings!