Possible fix for Stratospheric Sweep Advantage?

[Nemo121]

I've been reading about the problems with stratospheric sweeps and have asked a couple of times about possible fixes for this ( I think the best would probably just be to add a bit of code checking for altitude differential and running a spotting check.... The greater the height differential the more likelihood the high sweep will simply fail to spot the defending fighters. But it looks as though this mightn't be addressed in the new patch so in the meantime we might have to look to our own, indirect solutions.


So, I was thinking of simply setting the maximum altitudes for most fighters and bomber to be no more than 25,000 feet. All planes with a ceiling below that level would maintain their current settings but the vast majority of fighters with ceilings above 25,000 feet would find them reduced to 25,000 feet. This would eliminate stratospheric sweeps butchering lower-flying forces. It might need a little massaging of MVR ratings for the current high-flyers so they'd still get the benefit of their higher ceiling ( e.g for every 3,000 feet of ceiling above 25,000 they get an extra point of MVR ) but it would end the stratospheric sweep issue whilst keeping some advantage to the high-fliers.

[chesmart]

Interesting Nemo will you publish the stats ?

[packerpete]

How about giving an increased spotting bonus, an added initiative check, or a defensive bonus to radar directed CAP? This would mainly only affect the defense but it would help stop the mass killing.

I know early radar's ability to estimate altitude was more of an art than a science (fade charts) and the absence of IFF early in the war imposed significant problems with CAP direction, but it should provide at least a spotting bonus for azimuth and good guesstimate on altitude most of the time.

Does anyone know if weather effects used in the intercept/spotting calculations?

[Texas D]

Hey Nemo, how far along are you with your EA mod?

[Nemo121]

Packerpete,

Defensive bonuses and the like are all things which would require hard-coded changes... I amn't going to get into changing game code, just game data.

Texas_D,
Well I've played 6 weeks of the Grand Campaign and have enough of an idea of how the pieces fit together now that I have been doing some design work for the past couple of weeks.

I intend to post a precis of the proposed changes next week and will then begin creating the mod from there. Mostly though since the engine now allows mid-game updating of in-game data I would imagine a release date by the end of March since I can release something and then update as required from there. In addition the release should be pretty quick since the AE has fixed many of the things I had to work around in WiTP and so fewer out and out changes are needed. There are still some of course.


My reason for posting this here is that the 25,000 foot ceiling is an idea I am playing around with for EA and I wanted some feedback before I included something this radical in a mod. Based on some testing I've done it properly eliminates stratospheric sweep syndrome ( SSS ) whilst still giving the Boom and Zoom type fighters a MVR bonus even at 25,000 feet.

[treespider]

Interesting idea....I haven't looked at the stats of the fighters but you may even be able to get away with using 30,000' with a bonus to the highest band of MVR for those with a Max higher than 30,000'....rather than 25,000'.

Also remember that bombers MVR ratings are, IIRC, essentially a non-factor.

[Nemo121]

I find that quite a few early-war planes have ceilings between 25,000 and 30,000 feet so setting it at 30,000 feet would allow the SSS to reign into late 1942 at least. My view is that it should be fixed throughout the war and not just in the mid to late war.

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

I find that quite a few early-war planes have ceilings between 25,000 and 30,000 feet so setting it at 30,000 feet would allow the SSS to reign into late 1942 at least. My view is that it should be fixed throughout the war and not just in the mid to late war.

Did a quick search and the only "fighters" sub-27,000' MAX altitude are the A-36 Mustang and the SNJ-3 Texan.

27,000' fighters incude:
I-16-III
Blenheim IF
P-26A


28,000' fighters include:
P-66 Vanguard
Martlet IV
F4F-4 Wildcat



29,000' fighters include:
P-40E Warhawk
Hurricane I Trop
P-40E Warhawk
Kittyhawk IA
Kittyhawk IA
P-400 Airacobra
P-40E Warhawk
P-40K Warhawk
Yak-9D


EDIT: If you include TYPE 1 aircraft - IIRC Fighters Bombers

Sub 27,000' include:
Beaufighter VIc
Beaufighter Ic
Beaufighter VIc
Beaufighter 21
Ki-79a Nate

[jwilkerson]

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

I find that quite a few early-war planes have ceilings between 25,000 and 30,000 feet so setting it at 30,000 feet would allow the SSS to reign into late 1942 at least. My view is that it should be fixed throughout the war and not just in the mid to late war.

30K might be a better choice than 25K. IIRC NikMod (for WITP) used 25K and that was running into some kind of Flak Ceiling problem.

Not clear what you mean by "allow the SSS to reign into late 1942" ... I agree any fix should be for entire war.

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

I find that quite a few early-war planes have ceilings between 25,000 and 30,000 feet so setting it at 30,000 feet would allow the SSS to reign into late 1942 at least. My view is that it should be fixed throughout the war and not just in the mid to late war.

30K might be a better choice than 25K. IIRC NikMod (for WITP) used 25K and that was running into some kind of Flak Ceiling problem.

Not clear what you mean by "allow the SSS to reign into late 1942" ... I agree any fix should be for entire war.

From my quick and dirty review of F and FB I would suggest 27,000' ---

Those few F & FB w/ less than 27,000' MAX altitude would not be running high level CAP in any event.

[WLockard]

27,000 sounds good. What about Bombers? Wouldn't be right to have them able to fly above the CAP when they are somewhat artificially restricted.

[jwilkerson]

30,000 sounds good to me [:D] and I assume we are talking about ALL planes.

[WLockard]

I just read his outline for his EA mod and most aircraft are to be so restricted.

[Nemo121]

Hi all, thanks for the input...

jwilkerson, would 27,000 run into the FlAK problem? Was the FlAK problem discussed publicly? If it was I could have a read of it and decide - would anyone happen to have a link, I could search but the search engine is a bit hit and miss sometimes ...


Restrictions would be for all planes except the occasional recon plane which was designed to go super-high and the jets which also had a significant advantage up high which I think should be modelledto show their Boom and Zoom characteristics.


As to SSS reigning through 42... I was thinking that a few more of the early-war Allied fighters topped out at 28,000 to 29,000 and so didn't want to disadvantage them vs the Zero in early 42. It looks like that won't be a problem though.

[vettim89]

Your ideas seem to be on target Nemo. I think a simple HR not allowing sweeps over 25k might be a simple quick fix. I know the Devs extensiviely researched all the data for AE. I don't want to slam them because they worked very hard at this. Still, there is a differnce between max ceiling and max operational ceiling. Sure a brand new Ki-43 could reach 38k on the day it left the asembly line but I doubt many of them could do that after even a few months in the field. I don't believe the plane had a supercharger which means that the amount of thrust the engine could produce at that altitude was seriously affected. Giving ANY non-supercharger equipped a/c a high MAN rating at that alt is wrong. Yes the Ki-43 still had an incredibly low wing loading at any altitude but the thrust/weight ratio should have been in the toilet.

Edit: the Ki-43 had a single stage supercharger with the Ha-25 engine. Duel stage was introduced in the Ki-43II with the Ha-115 engine. Nonetheless both sides had problems with high altitude performance early in the war. While use of high altitude tactics is certainly permitted, it just seems wrong that players can accomplish things their RL counterparts could not due to technical limitations

[jwilkerson]

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Hi all, thanks for the input...

jwilkerson, would 27,000 run into the FlAK problem? Was the FlAK problem discussed publicly? If it was I could have a read of it and decide - would anyone happen to have a link, I could search but the search engine is a bit hit and miss sometimes ...

Yes the Flak Problem(s) were discussed publically - certainly in relation to NIKMOD - if Nik sees this he can probably answer this question group.

Restrictions would be for all planes except the occasional recon plane which was designed to go super-high and the jets which also had a significant advantage up high which I think should be modelledto show their Boom and Zoom characteristics.

Except recon planes sounds ok.

As to SSS reigning through 42... I was thinking that a few more of the early-war Allied fighters topped out at 28,000 to 29,000 and so didn't want to disadvantage them vs the Zero in early 42. It looks like that won't be a problem though.

I see some people worrying about "Oscars" flying high. In my game - I'm the Oscars - and my opponents (in early 1942 in Burma) are flying the P-38s at 39,000 feet - so I'm worrying about the P-38s! My "solution" is to "bug out"!!!

I don't think one plane or the other - or one side or the other should be a consideration - there will always be some asymmetry in the game - and there should be some.

[PaxMondo]

I agree with Jwilk, 30K.  You do want to see SOME altitude variance because there was some.  Just not a complete single variable solution.  Late '42 there are quite a few a/c that can make 30K, so it all levels out.
 
I am adding the 30K house rule to my games.  I think it appropriate based upon results ...

[oldman45]

I think the P400's would have a very hard time going over 10k. Unless there is a field mod, they are shipped with no supercharger or O2 for the pilot.

[Nemo121]

jwilkerson, I'm ALL in favour of asymmetry. But what I'm not in favour for is that asymmetry leading to a rock, paper,scissors solution in which the only best possible solution is "go as high as you can".

Have you given any thought to adding a simple "spotting check" which checks the height differential between the sweep and CAP mission and the greater the height differential the more chance the sweep just fails to see the CAP?

That would incentivise people bringing their sweep heights down to more reasonable levels. As it is at the moment there's just no reason to sweep at less than maximum altitude and that's just not kosher from what I know of history.

It would also remove the need for this type of jimmying with the figures...

P-400 .... Good point, probably a good candidate for an exception.

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: Nemo121


P-400 .... Good point, probably a good candidate for an exception.

Sorry, I did not mean to suggest move ALL fighters to be the same at 30K. Rather, adjust the database so that the HIGHEST any fighter can go is 30K. If it goes less, then leave it.