Unrealistic Feature of WITP - Will it be also in AE?

This new stand alone release based on the legendary War in the Pacific from 2 by 3 Games adds significant improvements and changes to enhance game play, improve realism, and increase historical accuracy. With dozens of new features, new art, and engine improvements, War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
Japan
Posts: 754
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 1:45 pm
Location: Heaven on Earth (Scandinavia of course)

Unrealistic Feature of WITP - Will it be also in AE?

Post by Japan »

In the real world if you had a (Large) Long Range CAP above a Base for a whole 24 Hour Period, then I dont think it will be possible for any Bombers at this base to Transfer to Another Base.

Fligerkorps II/JG11 of Germany was used a bit in this role on east front, thay prevented Soviet Bombers of departing when the German Bombers re-armed. This is one of the Factors to why 80% of the (Worlds Largest Airforce) Soviet Airforce was destroyed on only 2 weeks.

Why can I transfer my bombers when there is 300 Allied Planes on Day and 300 Allied Planes on Night Flying cirkles above my Air Base ???

I hope AE deals with this very unrealistic feature of the game.





AAR VIDEO
THE FIRST YEAR + THE SECOND YEAR
tm.asp?m=2133035&mpage=1&key=&
User avatar
eloso
Posts: 335
Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 1:57 am
Location: The Greater Chicagoland Area, USA
Contact:

RE: Unrealistic Feature of WITP - Will it be also in AE?

Post by eloso »

This is probably an unrealistic request of the programming team. It is still a turn based game and transfers occur during the orders phase. Operational losses occur but without some sort of routine to track where each aircraft was on the previous day it is highly unlikely that LRCAP will ever affect the ability to transfer aircraft. From my experience LRCAP is used to intercept incoming aircraft during the replay. The transfer would have to occur during the replay or it wouldn't be doable.

~just my two cent.
Image
pad152
Posts: 2835
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2000 8:00 am

RE: Unrealistic Feature of WITP - Will it be also in AE?

Post by pad152 »

If you are flying LRCap over an enemy airbase, any aircraft flying in or out should suffer the same effect as transport planes do in WITP when flying in troops/supplies. If it can be done for transport aircraft then is should be done for any other aircraft reguardless of mission type.

The trick is trying to keep up the LRCap 24 hours, night fighters would be required to continue the mission during night time, other wise planes could escape before dawn.
 




User avatar
JeffroK
Posts: 6420
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am

RE: Unrealistic Feature of WITP - Will it be also in AE?

Post by JeffroK »

How many aircraft would you need in your LRCAP to interdict the airfield all day?? Can I use a flight of 6-8 fighters and close down all airbses in a 40 mile hex?

And from what range are they flying so that you can get a continuous coverage, what allowance for "squadrons" which are late or lost? Can my Zekes close down Henderson Field all day when flying from Rabaul? Through some tropical rainstorms?

No attempt at this would be 100% guaranteed.

IMHO, your example of the Luftwaffe succes over the Red Air Force was more a Sweep which attacked aircraft both in the air & on the ground. Pad152's comment about the same effect as on transport flights is closer to the mark.
Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum
User avatar
cantona2
Posts: 3749
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 2:45 pm
Location: Gibraltar

RE: Unrealistic Feature of WITP - Will it be also in AE?

Post by cantona2 »

and to add what JeffK said the Soviet airforce was larely destroyed in day one when the Luftwaffe had the element of surprise. Fighters on LRCAp could easily be challenged by your own fighters sweeping the airspace over the CAPed base from other bases within range thus keeping the enemy planes occupied while bombers made their escape runs.
1966 was a great year for English Football...Eric was born

User avatar
eloso
Posts: 335
Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 1:57 am
Location: The Greater Chicagoland Area, USA
Contact:

RE: Unrealistic Feature of WITP - Will it be also in AE?

Post by eloso »

A point to consider is that a transfer is not a mission. Supply is.

A flying transfer would have to occur during one of the air phases imo. LRCAP shouldn't get a free shot at destroying inbound/outbound fighters like they do with transport planes.

Wouldn't inbound/outbound bombers be escorted by these same fighters?

How will the code differentiate between a flying transfer and a rail transfer?

Image
User avatar
castor troy
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 10:17 am
Location: Austria

RE: Unrealistic Feature of WITP - Will it be also in AE?

Post by castor troy »

ORIGINAL: Japan

In the real world if you had a (Large) Long Range CAP above a Base for a whole 24 Hour Period, then I dont think it will be possible for any Bombers at this base to Transfer to Another Base.

Fligerkorps II/JG11 of Germany was used a bit in this role on east front, thay prevented Soviet Bombers of departing when the German Bombers re-armed. This is one of the Factors to why 80% of the (Worlds Largest Airforce) Soviet Airforce was destroyed on only 2 weeks.

Why can I transfer my bombers when there is 300 Allied Planes on Day and 300 Allied Planes on Night Flying cirkles above my Air Base ???

I hope AE deals with this very unrealistic feature of the game.






the only unrealistic thing is that you think that you could have 300 fighters during a 24h phase above an enemy airfield... [8|]
User avatar
Japan
Posts: 754
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 1:45 pm
Location: Heaven on Earth (Scandinavia of course)

RE: Unrealistic Feature of WITP - Will it be also in AE?

Post by Japan »

Well, in many cases Huge Amounts of German Fighters Patrolled arround Air Bases of Soviet on the early days.

The Mission was to Kill any Soviet Bomber who tryed to escape / re-locate.


In Real World, if you try to escape with a Bomber, when you have alot of Fighters overhead... you would be dead.

The Transfer Order in AE should be a mission, that you actualy need to fly.


ANOTHER INPORTANT THING:
When flying ABOVE enamy bases, you should been intercepted.


Its silly that I can fly my bombers over 4 american bases and bomb the nr 5 base,  without being intercepted on the way to the target... and when im at the target the planes should land and reload so thay can hit me aigan when im on my way back.


AN EXAMPLE:

1. I Depart from Biak, target is Lee
2. I pass Hollendia, and are attacked by Fighters from Hollendia
3. I enter Lee area and are attacked by Fighters from Lee CAP
4. I do my bomb run and attack
5. Im passing Hollendia on the return trip and are attacked by fighters from Hollendia
6. The remaints of my Bomber Force arrive back at Biak

This was done more or less all the plase in the world, and this is also one of the reasons to
why Germany Killed 61% of the 8th Airforce mission on a Singel Day. The 8th Airforce didnt fly a 'real' mission for the next 5 months after that, and the strategy and tactics was reworked. (Reference WW2 By Thems)














AAR VIDEO
THE FIRST YEAR + THE SECOND YEAR
tm.asp?m=2133035&mpage=1&key=&
Fishbed
Posts: 1827
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:52 am
Location: Henderson Field, Guadalcanal

RE: Unrealistic Feature of WITP - Will it be also in AE?

Post by Fishbed »

ORIGINAL: Japan


This was done more or less all the plase in the world, and this is also one of the reasons to
why Germany Killed 61% of the 8th Airforce on a Singel Day. The 8th Airforce didnt fly a mission for the next 5 months after that, and the strategy and tactics was reworked. (Reference WW2 By Thems)


WHAAAT?!
If you're mentioning the Schweinfurt/Regensburg raid, 61 planes or so lost in a single day, yes, but certainly not 61% of the whole 8th Air Force...
Get off the booze my friend! [:D] [;)]

User avatar
eloso
Posts: 335
Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 1:57 am
Location: The Greater Chicagoland Area, USA
Contact:

RE: Unrealistic Feature of WITP - Will it be also in AE?

Post by eloso »

ORIGINAL: Japan

The Transfer Order in AE should be a mission, that you actualy need to fly.


ANOTHER INPORTANT THING:
When flying ABOVE enamy bases, you should been intercepted.


1. No planes are flown during a rail transfer so it would have to be distinguished as a separate mission.

2. This is already simulated somewhat. I've noticed numerous times where CAP from a nearby base defends another base.
Image
User avatar
JeffroK
Posts: 6420
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am

RE: Unrealistic Feature of WITP - Will it be also in AE?

Post by JeffroK »

ORIGINAL: Japan

Well, in many cases Huge Amounts of German Fighters Patrolled arround Air Bases of Soviet on the early days.

The Mission was to Kill any Soviet Bomber who tryed to escape / re-locate.


In Real World, if you try to escape with a Bomber, when you have alot of Fighters overhead... you would be dead.

The Transfer Order in AE should be a mission, that you actualy need to fly.


ANOTHER INPORTANT THING:
When flying ABOVE enamy bases, you should been intercepted.


Its silly that I can fly my bombers over 4 american bases and bomb the nr 5 base,  without being intercepted on the way to the target... and when im at the target the planes should land and reload so thay can hit me aigan when im on my way back.


AN EXAMPLE:

1. I Depart from Biak, target is Lee
2. I pass Hollendia, and are attacked by Fighters from Hollendia
3. I enter Lee area and are attacked by Fighters from Lee CAP
4. I do my bomb run and attack
5. Im passing Hollendia on the return trip and are attacked by fighters from Hollendia
6. The remaints of my Bomber Force arrive back at Biak

This was done more or less all the plase in the world, and this is also one of the reasons to
why Germany Killed 61% of the 8th Airforce on a Singel Day. The 8th Airforce didnt fly a mission for the next 5 months after that, and the strategy and tactics was reworked. (Reference WW2 By Thems)

1. If I planned a mission that passed over so many enemy bases I would deserve to be shot, a lot of effort went into plotting tracks that avoided both AAA & Fighters. in your scenario, I would plan to miss any of these bases by approx 50 miles. I would also plot supporting sweeps over any bases which i couldnt avoid.

4.In many AAR you see reference to "Leaking CAP" where some units might send 10-25% of their aircraft to an adjaecent base. What would happen to a commander who sent all of his CAP to intercept a raid (or maybe a feint) leaving his base wide open.

2. Though the Luftwaffe may have claimed to have shot down 61% of the 8th Air Force, it was was in fact about 61 aircraft out of 1 raid, approx 25% of THAT RAID, not the entire 8th Air Force. Plus the 8th Air Force didnt disappear for 5 months.

3. What happened in Russia has little relevance to the PTO, and vice versa.

From http://paul.rutgers.edu/~mcgrew/wwii/us ... ug.43.html
17 August 1943
STRATEGIC OPERATIONS (Eighth Air Force): VIII Bomber Command Mission 84:
On the first anniversary of US heavy bomber operations from the UK, a
two-pronged attack into Germany is launched, marking the deepest penetra-
tion of German territory to date. The critical targets are the Messer-
schmitt complex at Regensburg, and the anti-friction-bearing factories at
Schweinfurt.
1. 230 B-17's are dispatched to Schweinfurt; 188 hit the target at 1459-
1511 hours; they claim 148-18-63 Luftwaffe aircraft; 36 B-17's are lost, 3
are damaged beyond repair and 118 damaged; casualties are 3 KIA, 12 WIA and
352 MIA; there are 80 high explosive hits on the 2 main bearing plants.
2. 146 B-17's are dispatched to Regensburg; 127 hit the target at 1148-
1207 hours; they claim 140-19-36 Luftwaffe aircraft; 24 B-17's are lost, 1
is damaged beyond repair and 50 are damaged; casualties are 4 KIA, 9 WIA
and 200 MIA; every important building in the complex is damaged; the
surviving aircraft continue on to bases in North Africa.
60 B-17's are lost in the fierce air battle that extends to the targets
and continues after the bombing.
VIII Air Support Command Missions 23 and 24: Two airfields in France are
targetted.
1. 36 B-26's are dispatched to Bryas Sud Airfield; 29 hit the target at
1051 hours; 2 aircraft are damaged.
2. 72 B-26's are dispatched to Poix/Nord Airfield; 35 hit the target at
1552 hours; 20 aircraft are damaged; casualties are 1 WIA.
During the night of 17/18 Aug the Royal Air Force (RAF) begins Operation
CROSSBOW, massive attacks on German V-weapon sites. About 570 aircraft drop
2,000 tons of bombs on Peenemunde, Germany.


19 AUGUST 1943
STRATEGIC OPERATIONS (Eighth Air Force): VIII Bomber Command Mission 85:
Three Luftwaffe airfields in The Netherlands are targetted:
1. 125 B-17's are dispatched to Gilze-Rijen and Flushing Airfields; 38
B-17's hit Gilze-Rijen at 1802-1814 hours and 55 hit Flushing at 1756
hours; they claim 29-1-2 Luftwaffe aircraft; 4 B-17's are lost and 42
damaged; casualties are 9 WIA and 41 MIA; this mission is escorted by 175
P-47's who claim 9-2-4 Luftwaffe aircraft; 1 P-47 is lost and the pilot is
listed as MIA.
2. 45 B-17's are dispatched to Woensdrecht Airfield but weather prevents
them hitting the target.
VIII Air Support Command Missions 27A, 27B and 28: Three Luftwaffe air-
fields in France are targetted:
1. 36 B-26's are dispatched to Amiens/Glisy Airfield; all hit the target
at 1129 hours; they claim 1-0-2 Luftwaffe aircraft; 1 B-26 is damaged
beyond repair and 9 are damaged; casualties are 2 WIA.
2. 36 B-26's are dispatched to Poix/Nord Airfield; 35 hit the target at
1218 hours; 1 aircraft is damaged; there are no casualties.
3. 36 B-26's are dispatched to Bryas Sud Airfield but the target is
obscured by cloud and the mission is aborted


A 2 day break to easier targets, but they havent dissapeared

From http://paul.rutgers.edu/~mcgrew/wwii/us ... ct.43.html

14 October 1943
STRATEGIC OPERATIONS (Eighth Air Force): VIII Bomber Command Mission 115:
229 of 291 B-17's hit the city area and ball bearing plants at Schweinfurt,
Germany in 2 group; the first group bombs at 1439-1445 hours, the second
group at 1451-1457 hours; they claim 186-27-89 Luftwaffe aircraft; 60 B-17's
are lost, 7 damaged beyond repair and 138 damaged; casualties are 5 KIA, 40
WIA and 594 MIA. The attack, which causes great damage and interference with
production, results in German reorganization of the bearing industry. Fierce
opposition of great numbers of fighters, many of them firing rockets,
accounts for the 60 US aircraft shot down. As a result of these heavy losses,
daylight bombing against strategic targets deep in Germany is discontinued
for a short period.


Take the US claims with a few grains of salt[8D]

20th October 1943
STRATEGIC OPERATIONS (Eighth Air Force): VIII Bomber Command Mission 116.
The industrial area at Duren, Germany is the primary target. 97 of 170 B-17's
hit the primary target at 1413-1416 bombing from 30,000-feet (48,000 m)
because the cloud tops were at 29,500-feet (47,200 m); the 1st Bombardment
Division uses Oboe PFF for the first time but the equipment fails and 60
aircraft return to base without bombing; 42 of the 1st Bombardment Division's
aircraft hit Woensdrecht Airfield in the Netherlands as a target of
opportunity; and 70 B-24's fly a diversion; the totals are 4-1-1 Luftwaffe
aircraft claimed; 9 B-17's lost, 1 damaged beyond repair and 10 damaged;
casualties are 4 KIA (including 3 gunners who died from oxygen system failure),
2 WIA and 85 MIA.
VIII Bomber Command Mission 117: During the night of 20/21 Oct, 5 B-17's
drop 876,960 leaflets over Roen and Paris at 2211-2217 hours


A whole 6 days this time, could have been a bit of weather involved as well.

What is this "Thems" you refer to, a book, a DVD???

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum
Flying Tiger
Posts: 496
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 11:45 pm
Location: ummmm... i HATE that question!

RE: Unrealistic Feature of WITP - Will it be also in AE?

Post by Flying Tiger »

Well, in many cases Huge Amounts of German Fighters Patrolled arround Air Bases of Soviet on the early days.

The Mission was to Kill any Soviet Bomber who tryed to escape / re-locate.


In Real World, if you try to escape with a Bomber, when you have alot of Fighters overhead... you would be dead.

The Transfer Order in AE should be a mission, that you actualy need to fly.


ANOTHER INPORTANT THING:
When flying ABOVE enamy bases, you should been intercepted.


Its silly that I can fly my bombers over 4 american bases and bomb the nr 5 base,  without being intercepted on the way to the target... and when im at the target the planes should land and reload so thay can hit me aigan when im on my way back.


AN EXAMPLE:

1. I Depart from Biak, target is Lee
2. I pass Hollendia, and are attacked by Fighters from Hollendia
3. I enter Lee area and are attacked by Fighters from Lee CAP
4. I do my bomb run and attack
5. Im passing Hollendia on the return trip and are attacked by fighters from Hollendia
6. The remaints of my Bomber Force arrive back at Biak

This was done more or less all the plase in the world, and this is also one of the reasons to
why Germany Killed 61% of the 8th Airforce on a Singel Day. The 8th Airforce didnt fly a mission for the next 5 months after that, and the strategy and tactics was reworked. (Reference WW2 By Thems)

 
 
Sorry Japan, but whoever 'Thems' is (your WW2 reference), i suggest he/she read a real history book. As Jeff said above, at no time EVER was 61% of the 8th destroyed in one mission. And at no time was the entire 8th grounded for 5 months without flying a mission.
 
But.... despite that glitch, your suggestion above that 'transfer' should be a mission may have some merit. I do get a little puzzled by the idea that an air unit (squadron/wing/whatever) can fly a mission one day, overnight pack everything and transfer to the limit of their endurance (which for some AC in the game can be a VERY long way), and fly another mission from their new base the next day. To do this is unrealistic and very gamey, and therefore it would be good if the game prevented it from happening. 
User avatar
JeffroK
Posts: 6420
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am

RE: Unrealistic Feature of WITP - Will it be also in AE?

Post by JeffroK »

But,
 
The Allies, especially in early days, would fly missions from Townsville/Cairns etc Refuel & rest at PM or Milne Bay and then fly onto Rabaul etc.
 
Maybe there needs to be more "damaged" aircraft from such a tactic, but it shouldnt be eliminated
Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum
User avatar
Japan
Posts: 754
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 1:45 pm
Location: Heaven on Earth (Scandinavia of course)

RE: Unrealistic Feature of WITP - Will it be also in AE?

Post by Japan »

"On 17 August 1942, the first attack on the ball-bearing industry at Schweinfurt took place, with a diverionary attack on Regensburg was carried out to draw the Luftwaffe away from the main force heading to Schweinfurt. Luftwaffe defenses and AAA "flak" was intense and the few P-47 fighters available to escort the bombers could not possibly cover all seven groups in the attack. The 1st Wing force headed to Schweinfurt lost thirty-six B-17s, the 4th Wing which hit Regensburg, shot down twenty-six Fortresses. VIII Bomber Command flew only shallow penetration missions thoughout the rest of August and early September while losses were made good. New groups and replacement aircraft arriving were the new B-17G model, with improvements in various systems, along with the Chin Turrent facing front, to help ward off frontal attacks by the Luftwaffe."
 
 
 
If im not mistaking, the mission started with 43 B17 Bombers. It was supose to be 48, but 2 was lost the week before, and 3 was unfit to fly.
The Mission caused 26 lost B17, who is 61% of the planes flying in that mission.

Sorry for using the name 8th Airforce, i intended to mantion say 61% of that 8th Airforce mission.
Regardless, the whole 8th Airforce was effected, as thay had no "real" missions the following months.







 
AAR VIDEO
THE FIRST YEAR + THE SECOND YEAR
tm.asp?m=2133035&mpage=1&key=&
Fishbed
Posts: 1827
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:52 am
Location: Henderson Field, Guadalcanal

RE: Unrealistic Feature of WITP - Will it be also in AE?

Post by Fishbed »

Japan, you need to take read more carefully. The whole Schweinfurt and Regensburg operation saw 350+ bombers taking part. Read JeffK's numbers better, you are apparently mistaken by some of the data in your source, which isn't bad, but just not detailed at all about that very event...
User avatar
Japan
Posts: 754
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 1:45 pm
Location: Heaven on Earth (Scandinavia of course)

RE: Unrealistic Feature of WITP - Will it be also in AE?

Post by Japan »

Ok, interesting.
 
Will check it then np.   Hmm.. may it have been a "only 1" Bomber Group thay talk about maby?
 
Well, point being,  flying over many bases, should cause a CAP Interception for every one... shouldn't it?
AAR VIDEO
THE FIRST YEAR + THE SECOND YEAR
tm.asp?m=2133035&mpage=1&key=&
User avatar
JeffroK
Posts: 6420
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am

RE: Unrealistic Feature of WITP - Will it be also in AE?

Post by JeffroK »

ORIGINAL: Japan

"On 17 August 1942, the first attack on the ball-bearing industry at Schweinfurt took place, with a diverionary attack on Regensburg was carried out to draw the Luftwaffe away from the main force heading to Schweinfurt. Luftwaffe defenses and AAA "flak" was intense and the few P-47 fighters available to escort the bombers could not possibly cover all seven groups in the attack. The 1st Wing force headed to Schweinfurt lost thirty-six B-17s, the 4th Wing which hit Regensburg, shot down twenty-six Fortresses. VIII Bomber Command flew only shallow penetration missions thoughout the rest of August and early September while losses were made good. New groups and replacement aircraft arriving were the new B-17G model, with improvements in various systems, along with the Chin Turrent facing front, to help ward off frontal attacks by the Luftwaffe."
 
 
 
If im not mistaking, the mission started with 43 B17 Bombers. It was supose to be 48, but 2 was lost the week before, and 3 was unfit to fly.
The Mission caused 26 lost B17, who is 61% of the planes flying in that mission.

Sorry for using the name 8th Airforce, i intended to mantion say 61% of that 8th Airforce mission.
Regardless, the whole 8th Airforce was effected, as thay had no "real" missions the following months.







 
17 AUGUST 1942
ETO (8th AF): Mission 1: 12 of 12 B-17s bomb Rouen/Sotteville marshalling
yard in France at 1739-1746 hours; they claim 0-0-1 Luftwaffe aircraft; 2
B-17s are damaged. 6 B-17s also fly a diversion without loss; escort is
provided by RAF Spitfires

I am in serious fear for your source, your quote is out by a year, and has US aircraft shooting down US aircraft.

It also says the USAAF didnt do any long range attacks for the rest of Aug & early Sept, 2-3 weeks is a far cry from your early claim of "Months" It also coincided with the beginning of the No-Ball attacks on the V weapon sites and Operation Starkey.

Not arguing it wasnt a disatrous raid, but far from the near death blow you imply.

Where does this come from??
Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum
User avatar
Japan
Posts: 754
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 1:45 pm
Location: Heaven on Earth (Scandinavia of course)

RE: Unrealistic Feature of WITP - Will it be also in AE?

Post by Japan »

Ye as i mantioned above, it might be out of "a" group and not "the whole missio".
 
Also, sevral weeks is a while...
 
 
The whole point with the post however... is to surgest that  bo,ber Groups is attacked multiple times on long missions over land.
AAR VIDEO
THE FIRST YEAR + THE SECOND YEAR
tm.asp?m=2133035&mpage=1&key=&
Flying Tiger
Posts: 496
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 11:45 pm
Location: ummmm... i HATE that question!

RE: Unrealistic Feature of WITP - Will it be also in AE?

Post by Flying Tiger »

But,

The Allies, especially in early days, would fly missions from Townsville/Cairns etc Refuel & rest at PM or Milne Bay and then fly onto Rabaul etc.

Maybe there needs to be more "damaged" aircraft from such a tactic, but it shouldnt be eliminated
 
Good point Jeff. But.... these 'shuttle' missions still (usually) took 2 days - the AC would launch from Cairns/Townsville/Mareeba/wherever and fly out to Rabaul then back to POM, then the next morning back to Nth QLD. So the same AC was not (usually) available to fly combat missions on both days as well as the transfer.
 
To be honest I would love to see an option for these types of missions to be included - currently most of the bases in Nth QLD are under-utilised because they are out of range for most aircraft. The inclusion of shuttle missions would add a nice historical touch to that part of the world.
User avatar
JeffroK
Posts: 6420
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am

RE: Unrealistic Feature of WITP - Will it be also in AE?

Post by JeffroK »

ORIGINAL: Japan

Ye as i mantioned above, it might be out of "a" group and not "the whole missio".

Also, sevral weeks is a while...


The whole point with the post however... is to surgest that  bo,ber Groups is attacked multiple times on long missions over land.

I understand, but you bring quotes into the argument that are irrelevant or incorrect. Your point would be better served without them as they provide a target to attack.

IMHO, for the AUD$80 I paid, WITP does a bloody good job at recreating the PTO in WW2.

Perfect, far from it.

Will AE be perfect, impossible.
Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum
Post Reply

Return to “War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition”