pilot experience & combat

[pauk]

greetings,

I interested if the effect of pilot's experience has on fights increased. Actually I posted this question before, but there was no (if i recall right) final solution on that question. Had something changed from then?

It could be more interesting play on Japanese side trying to save his aces them (at least some of them) for desperate defence in the 44, and knowing that those aces can put some devil in allied bomber fleets. Of course, im not suggesting that aces with rating 99 or some becomes invincible, especially if they oposed to the advanced US fighters... all i want is lover kill ratio (i hate 8:1 corsair against zero!) then we have in UV.

thx in advance.

[DoomedMantis]

there is some further work that is going into this, but it hasnt been finalised

[pasternakski]

I have no problem with Zeroes losing eight times as many aircraft when fighting F4Us in South Pacific 1943.

[sven6345789]

use disbanding airgroups on a regular basis. This way you will be able to mix up aces with the replacements, reaching a better average. That is at least what i am doing in UV. Problem is, in the hands of a good pilot, the F4U was a much more powerful plane than the zeroes (even the A6M5). even in the hands of a less experienced pilot (lets say 50-60), the corsair is more powerful (unless the new pilot gets killed while practicing. Wasn't the Corsair also called the "Ensign Killer"?).
But by disbanding airgroups over time and withdrawing some for practice, you should be able to lower those loss-ratios.
Take a look at some of Mogami's postings. That guy does an excellent job considering this matter.

[LargeSlowTarget]

ORIGINAL: sven6345789
Wasn't the Corsair also called the "Ensign Killer"?).

"Ensign Eliminator"

[CynicAl]

IRL, Corsair vs all comers: 2140:189, or 11.3:1. So you're right, Pauk - the 8:1 ratio the Corsairs are getting in UV is way off.

[Drongo]

ORIGINAL: pauk
I interested if the effect of pilot's experience has on fights increased. Actually I posted this question before, but there was no (if i recall right) final solution on that question. Had something changed from then?

It could be more interesting play on Japanese side trying to save his aces them (at least some of them) for desperate defence in the 44, and knowing that those aces can put some devil in allied bomber fleets. Of course, im not suggesting that aces with rating 99 or some becomes invincible, especially if they oposed to the advanced US fighters... all i want is lover kill ratio (i hate 8:1 corsair against zero!) then we have in UV.

thx in advance.

You were getting only 8:1 against in UV, wow.

After a change to the air to air code, testing indicated that experience "appears" to be playing a stronger role in fighter vs fighter combat than in UV. Not enough to ever close the gap with the F4U but it helps make the results a bit less embarassing.

As DoomedMantis mentioned, it may receive further changes in the future.

[pasternakski]

ORIGINAL: CynicAl

IRL, Corsair vs all comers: 2140:189, or 11.3:1. So you're right, Pauk - the 8:1 ratio the Corsairs are getting in UV is way off.

Yep, but see, Al, here we are in a world where historical results have to be sacrificed in order to satisfy those who can't stand to play on the short end of the loss ratios.

I'm getting really tired of this. When I play the Japanese in UV, I expect to get my head handed to me on a plate in 1943. My goal is to apply my rapidly dwindling resources wisely in order to preserve as much of my early gains as possible, hoping to hold onto a fast declining victory point margin.

When the A6M2 was shown to be overrated against the F4F, nothing happened. When even a slight suggestion appears that the Yamato people are getting shafted, we certainly get treated to a lot of convoluted twisting and tweaking in favor of Japanese arms and aviators.

I dunno. I've followed the AARs that Mogami and the other testers have put up for WitP, but I don't see a lot that tells me things are going to change for the better in that game.

[Raverdave]

ORIGINAL: pasternakski

I have no problem with Zeroes losing eight times as many aircraft when fighting F4Us in South Pacific 1943.

BEER !

[Rendova]

ORIGINAL: pasternakski

ORIGINAL: CynicAl

IRL, Corsair vs all comers: 2140:189, or 11.3:1. So you're right, Pauk - the 8:1 ratio the Corsairs are getting in UV is way off.

Yep, but see, Al, here we are in a world where historical results have to be sacrificed in order to satisfy those who can't stand to play on the short end of the loss ratios.

I'm getting really tired of this. When I play the Japanese in UV, I expect to get my head handed to me on a plate in 1943. My goal is to apply my rapidly dwindling resources wisely in order to preserve as much of my early gains as possible, hoping to hold onto a fast declining victory point margin.

When the A6M2 was shown to be overrated against the F4F, nothing happened. When even a slight suggestion appears that the Yamato people are getting shafted, we certainly get treated to a lot of convoluted twisting and tweaking in favor of Japanese arms and aviators.

I dunno. I've followed the AARs that Mogami and the other testers have put up for WitP, but I don't see a lot that tells me things are going to change for the better in that game.

pasternakski

I agree totally with you... with some people in here if the A6M2 pilot isn't allowed to shoot down scores of F6F's with a handgun (as we all know did historicaly happened) then the entire game is horribly flawed and 2X3 needs to pay them copious amounts of money! I am not saying that US planes were invicible or that the F4U was bullet proof, but just realize that the plane really did have a 11:1 kill ratio so yes if you are a zero pilot and you see some coming RUN! Besides were are all these complaints when I am getting kicked around in P-400's by a bunch of A6M2? And for everyone who complains the B-17s are too tough to shoot down, jump in a plane and try it, the thing didn't get the name "Flying Fortress" for nothing, one German pilot likened it to "like making love to a mad porcupine" not saying B-17's were never shot down, alot were, but they were not the flaming death traps the Betty's were.

[Drongo]

ORIGINAL: pasternakski
When the A6M2 was shown to be overrated against the F4F, nothing happened. When even a slight suggestion appears that the Yamato people are getting shafted, we certainly get treated to a lot of convoluted twisting and tweaking in favor of Japanese arms and aviators.

Just for clarification, the experience change I mentioned was made purely to correct a problem where experience was having little impact on A2A results overall. Inexperienced pilots were doing almost as well as experienced pilots and vice versa.

To put it another way, a hot F4F squadron should now do a lot better than an inexperienced F4F group. Same for F4U squadrons, etc.

One further point that might help lift your spirits.
The early war USN carrier squadrons (fighter and bomber) are now on par in experience with their Japanese counterparts. IIRC, this reflects the high quality of those pre-war units.

Cheers

[Luskan]

1943 - my present PBEM test of WITP.

Have condensed my best pilots into a few squadrons at Rabaul (average experience over 80). 49 a6m3s escort a raid of 30 betties and maybe a dozen sallys(?) to munda - coming in at 15000, with the allied cap at 10000 (I think - pretty sure it was). Alied CAP was 22 lightnings with "Average" pilots.

Result: 22 zeros lost in air to air for 3 lightnings destroyed. 13 more zeroes didn't make it come to rabaul (op losses). IJN bombers also wiped out, with only 5 or 6 survivors.

Imagine what it would have been like with corsairs.

Of course, the op losses for the zeroes is too high - 13 didn't get back to rabaul, but they were 1 hex away from a friendly airbase at shortlands that in real life, they would have tried to land at.

[Rendova]

Thats something I never liked, planes flying past 2 other bases only to crash on the way home... but you can't code everything.[:-]

[bradfordkay]

Maybe they could add an increased chance to make it home for each friendly airbase, near the flight path, which is closer to the target; add to it an increased time for repair (to simulate the return of the damaged aircraft to the home base).

[pasternakski]

ORIGINAL: Drongo
One further point that might help lift your spirits.
The early war USN carrier squadrons (fighter and bomber) are now on par in experience with their Japanese counterparts. IIRC, this reflects the high quality of those pre-war units.

Cheers

Now, that done lifted muh speerits 'bout as good as Playtex lifted Maw's big fat old titties.

[CynicAl]

ORIGINAL: Drongo

Just for clarification, the experience change I mentioned was made purely to correct a problem where experience was having little impact on A2A results overall. Inexperienced pilots were doing almost as well as experienced pilots and vice versa.

To put it another way, a hot F4F squadron should now do a lot better than an inexperienced F4F group. Same for F4U squadrons, etc.

Sure, I don't have any particular fuss with that. But "average" (by mid-1943 standards) exp US groups flying Corsairs should come out on top vs. Japanese groups flying Zeros, no matter how experienced the IJN pilots. The tactics that made the Wildcat an even match for the Zero applied equally to the Corsair, which had superior performance to boot.

One further point that might help lift your spirits.
The early war USN carrier squadrons (fighter and bomber) are now on par in experience with their Japanese counterparts. IIRC, this reflects the high quality of those pre-war units.

Cheers

And there was much rejoicing.

[Drongo]

ORIGINAL: CynicAl
Sure, I don't have any particular fuss with that. But "average" (by mid-1943 standards) exp US groups flying Corsairs should come out on top vs. Japanese groups flying Zeros, no matter how experienced the IJN pilots.

That is the most likely outcome under those conditions in WITP.

[sven6345789]

In the hands of an experienced pilot who knew how to dogfight, the zero was a superior plane in early war. Same is true for the Ki.27 and the Ki.43 (Although they were missing punch regarding the guns). The japanese pilots didn't care about armor or speed, willing to trade that for agility. Now the early wartype like P-400, P-40 and the like had a problem. They couldn't dogfight the japanese and couldn't outclimb them. The P-40 could outrun them though, esspecially when diving (P-400, P-39, oh, well..., purple heart is waiting for you).
So, what was to do. Thach (or so), pilot on one of the US-carriers, came up with the thach-weave (or "Beam Defense Position). If you couldn't beat a zero one on one, why not protect one another. worked perfectly. Another idea was speed. If you could go faster, you could start hit and run tactics, denying to the japanese dogfighting. For this, you would have to outclimb them for making several attacks. This is what the P-38 was an expert for. It could outclimb the zero. By using this tactic, air superiority was gained over New Guinea in 1943. The F4U was able to outrun every japanese mid-war plane it faced. It was even 50 mph faster than the Hellcat. The F6f outperformed the zero in EVERY WAY. It was better armed. better armored, more durable, faster, more maneuverable... And, it was easy to fly. Even a beginner had a realistic chance of getting back even when faced with unfavorable odds. This situation changed only in late 1944, when the Ki.84 and N1K1-J became available (although there were never enough to go around).
The loss ratio therefore doesn't sound unfair to me. Lets not forget that the japanese do the same thing with the poor Brewster Buffalo Pilots.
By the way, lets not forget the Allies captured a Zero after the attack on Dutch Harbor during the Midway Operation. It was tested, its weaknesses were found out about, and tactics were developed to overcome this plane.

[pauk]

ORIGINAL: pasternakski

ORIGINAL: CynicAl

IRL, Corsair vs all comers: 2140:189, or 11.3:1. So you're right, Pauk - the 8:1 ratio the Corsairs are getting in UV is way off.

Yep, but see, Al, here we are in a world where historical results have to be sacrificed in order to satisfy those who can't stand to play on the short end of the loss ratios.

I'm getting really tired of this. When I play the Japanese in UV, I expect to get my head handed to me on a plate in 1943. My goal is to apply my rapidly dwindling resources wisely in order to preserve as much of my early gains as possible, hoping to hold onto a fast declining victory point margin.

When the A6M2 was shown to be overrated against the F4F, nothing happened. When even a slight suggestion appears that the Yamato people are getting shafted, we certainly get treated to a lot of convoluted twisting and tweaking in favor of Japanese arms and aviators.

I dunno. I've followed the AARs that Mogami and the other testers have put up for WitP, but I don't see a lot that tells me things are going to change for the better in that game.

To CynicAl (and proposal to Matrix,2by3team): I have no doubt that you found valuable source so i suggest game developers - use this mathematic formula for code - and we will have no trouble with un-historic results. Each Corsair should be allowed to shoot down exactly 11.3 japanese planes no less, no more


To pasternakski: With all respect i must replied that we agreed on only one isue: i'm also tired of this.
It seems that you read my post but not understood me (Ok, it is my fault because my english is not my mother tongue, sorry for that ). Im not talking of sacrifing historic results, im not expecting victory as Japanese... but, isnt guite unlogical that (if someone manage to keep Japanese aces alive in late 1943) average allied pilots produce turkey shoot of them? (in Marians, Japanese pilots were unexperienced)... Im not suggesting that aces will be invincible, only that experience will play reasonable role in air fights. I have nothing against lets say ratio 15:1,20:1 if Jap unexp. (exp 15-50) engage corsair veteran sqrdn (70,80,90)..... (also, crack aussie sqrdn on P-39 should not be slaughtered by green Zero Datai)

I agreed that we need historical game, but also think only the first WiTP PBEM will be close-as-can-be-close to the realitiy (if you understand what i meant - real war in Pacific happend only once).
Also, i don't see a reason why players shouldn't have LIMITED influence on production and some strategic solutions (because it will lead to unhistoric results[&:])? By that i mean: In real war Japanese didn't pay attention to the ASW untill its become to late. I will try in WiTP (right from begining) to do some work in ASW with japanese weak ASW weapons, and i hoped with better results than historic. So, I don't see a problem...


And the last but not the least: DRONGO, your answers and clarifications were just i wanted to know! I'm satisfied with actual solution[&o] (completly)
Greetings

[mdiehl]

IRL, Corsair vs all comers: 2140:189, or 11.3:1. So you're right, Pauk - the 8:1 ratio the Corsairs are getting in UV is way off.

Based on what, exactly, do you claim that the 8:1 ratio is way off? It sounds ballpark correct to me.