Matrix Games Forums

Like a lot of other esoterica about this game, I *vaguely* remember that LRCAPing a naval TF with army aircraft (USAAF or IJAAF) was less efficient or more prone to mishaps than LRCAPing a naval TF with naval aircraft (USN / USMC or IJNAF). Can someone point me in the right direction if I'm correct or dissuade me if I'm incorrect?

Never seen this. Range however plays a huge part in LRCAP and as land based aircraft are likely to have to fly further this could be the original source to the so called problem.

I recall the same, although I don't have a solid source.

I think the theory was that the Army wasn't trained to track moving targets away from land, or something like that.

dcpollay wrote: Fri Apr 25, 2025 12:18 pm I recall the same, although I don't have a solid source.

I think the theory was that the Army wasn't trained to track moving targets away from land, or something like that.

That's a plausible reason, but it doesn't by itself prove that they programmed in a malus to account for that factor. Could just be that navy pilots were better trained and more experienced than army ones. We know that Experience has a good deal of importance for group cohesion & navigating to target.

Plausable maybe but not in the game as far as see. Even the IJA and IJN can escort each other without a problem and if anywhere in the game they should.

My recollection is shore-based (regardless of navy or army) LR Capping of a CV TF that has its own CAP isn't very effective or efficient, but as far as I know, there's no malus for shore-based army birds (vs. navy or marine) LR Capping other types of TFs. It seems to work as well as you'd expect. On the Allied side, I often use P-38s in that role to fairly good effect.

Cheers,
CB