Page 1 of 1
Bug - Allied aircraft inactivity
Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2009 5:45 pm
by Hano
Any suggestions:
I'm in April 42 of the Rising sun campaign, I have installed all the updates for my WITP, but after I started the campaign. But I've suddenly found that my aircraft will not take offensive action, they will defend against attacks (CAP) but not take any offensive action even though I have selected naval attack. The aircraft will spot and find enemy units, but fail to attack them, including ports when I select the Port attack option.
This is particularly frustrating as I had a very one sided carrier battle when my dive bombers/torpedo bombers failed to attack japanese naval units, although my CAP defended the carriers, I had selected Naval attack, with max range (4)although they were closer, with a search level of 100 and an altitude of 10000. Its screwed up my campaign massively - I lost three of five carriers.
Is this a known bug, or am I being really stupid, is there a fix?
Any suggestions welcomed
RE: Bug - Allied aircraft inactivity
Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2009 5:55 pm
by Hano
Looks like I'm going to have to start again from scratch...
RE: Bug - Allied aircraft inactivity
Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2009 5:57 pm
by ChickenOfTheSea
ORIGINAL: Hano
Any suggestions:
I'm in April 42 of the Rising sun campaign, I have installed all the updates for my WITP, but after I started the campaign. But I've suddenly found that my aircraft will not take offensive action, they will defend against attacks (CAP) but not take any offensive action even though I have selected naval attack. The aircraft will spot and find enemy units, but fail to attack them, including ports when I select the Port attack option.
This is particularly frustrating as I had a very one sided carrier battle when my dive bombers/torpedo bombers failed to attack japanese naval units, although my CAP defended the carriers, I had selected Naval attack, with max range (4)although they were closer, with a search level of 100 and an altitude of 10000. Its screwed up my campaign massively - I lost three of five carriers.
Is this a known bug, or am I being really stupid, is there a fix?
Any suggestions welcomed
If you put all your aircraft on search, none will be a available to attack. Try dropping that to 10-20%.
Topics like this are more likely to get noticed in the war room.
RE: Bug - Allied aircraft inactivity
Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2009 6:41 pm
by FOW
Is this affecting all of your air units or are you just talking about your carrier based SBDs and TBDs?
Setting a squadron to 100% naval search means ALL aircraft are searching - leaving none to fly attack missions (as Chicken said).
RE: Bug - Allied aircraft inactivity
Posted: Fri Feb 06, 2009 8:55 am
by Hano
That seems to have sorted it - Makes perfect sense, moral of the story - "Read the manual properly".
Out of interest if you have search aircraft in the TF (floatplanes) would it make sense to set search to 0% for dive bombers/torpedo bombers, but 100% for floatplanes relying upon the floatplanes to to search and communicate the result to the bombers?
Any comments?
RE: Bug - Allied aircraft inactivity
Posted: Fri Feb 06, 2009 9:31 am
by rtrapasso
ORIGINAL: Hano
That seems to have sorted it - Makes perfect sense, moral of the story - "Read the manual properly".
Out of interest if you have search aircraft in the TF (floatplanes) would it make sense to set search to 0% for dive bombers/torpedo bombers, but 100% for floatplanes relying upon the floatplanes to to search and communicate the result to the bombers?
Any comments?
Sometimes it pays to put a few of some longer-range planes on search... check your ranges/extended ranges of your planes... the IJN has an advantage on this as their search planes have greater ranges.
The USN actually DID have some long-range carrier based search planes, but they are not in the game... and the USN didn't know what to do with them in the course of actual events either.
RE: Bug - Allied aircraft inactivity
Posted: Fri Feb 06, 2009 10:42 am
by herwin
ORIGINAL: rtrapasso
ORIGINAL: Hano
That seems to have sorted it - Makes perfect sense, moral of the story - "Read the manual properly".
Out of interest if you have search aircraft in the TF (floatplanes) would it make sense to set search to 0% for dive bombers/torpedo bombers, but 100% for floatplanes relying upon the floatplanes to to search and communicate the result to the bombers?
Any comments?
Sometimes it pays to put a few of some longer-range planes on search... check your ranges/extended ranges of your planes... the IJN has an advantage on this as their search planes have greater ranges.
The USN actually DID have some long-range carrier based search planes, but they are not in the game... and the USN didn't know what to do with them in the course of actual events either.
I try to keep my carrier TFs invisible, which means I search with float planes.
RE: Bug - Allied aircraft inactivity
Posted: Fri Feb 06, 2009 11:38 pm
by ChickenOfTheSea
ORIGINAL: herwin
ORIGINAL: rtrapasso
ORIGINAL: Hano
That seems to have sorted it - Makes perfect sense, moral of the story - "Read the manual properly".
Out of interest if you have search aircraft in the TF (floatplanes) would it make sense to set search to 0% for dive bombers/torpedo bombers, but 100% for floatplanes relying upon the floatplanes to to search and communicate the result to the bombers?
Any comments?
Sometimes it pays to put a few of some longer-range planes on search... check your ranges/extended ranges of your planes... the IJN has an advantage on this as their search planes have greater ranges.
The USN actually DID have some long-range carrier based search planes, but they are not in the game... and the USN didn't know what to do with them in the course of actual events either.
I try to keep my carrier TFs invisible, which means I search with float planes.
Really good suggestion. If the enemy sees Kates and Vals searching, he knows carriers are near by. Float planes are not nearly as informative. When playing the Japanese, making the KB disappear is a good way to make the allies really, really nervous.