Nik-modded CHS

[bstarr]

I haven'played nikademus' mod, so I'm unfamiliar with the concept; however, it looks very interesting. Overall it seems to increase the realism of Air to Air combat. The only problem I have is where the combat involves bombers. It seems that bombers are way to hard to shoot down.

example 1: I just had 17 Nells fly unescorted into the entire AVG with about 20 planes in the air. Despite engaging in a prolonged engagement that damaged several bombers, all 17 got through. they landed a total of 8 hits on the ships that the P40s were guarding. Also, no Nells were downed by AAA, depite the fact they were engaging mostly cruisers.

example 2: My dutch air force has actually been successful in getting bombers though to hit surface targets. At times they have managed this with minimal escort, flying against Zeros.

Perhaps the lethality of Aircraft-mounted guns and perhaps AAA should be increased along with the increase in durability.

Suggestions? Opinions? Comments?

[Nikademus]

Sorry, despite the title, i'm a bit unclear after reading the text.....re you playing CHS 2.0x?

[bstarr]

yes.  The 2.0 version with the extended map.

[bstarr]

scenario 158 version 2.04

I read the documentation and some of the ideas are already included in the scenario (increased AAA effect, better Air to Air accuracy) But maybe they need increased. I'm just wondering if any of the testers ran into similar superbomber problems. Other than that minor issue (which might be termed a preference) the mod seems to work quite well.

[Nikademus]

ok....just wanted to be sure. Andrew is probably the one best to answer your questions.

[Andrew Brown]

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

ok....just wanted to be sure. Andrew is probably the one best to answer your questions.

For the version of CHS that is similar to Nik's mod (scenario 158), aircraft durability and AA effectiveness are both increased, using the same multipliers that Nik used. This is done on the assumption that the two effects would cancel out. Nik would be better informed about whether this is indeed the case than I am. Note that in Nik's latest version of his mod, fighter durability is doubled again, which is something I have no done, so the modded CHS scenario is more similar to the "old" (pre 6.x) versions of Nik Mod.

Also, I did not adjust the ceilings of some AA weapons in the same way that Nik does, I only adjusted their effectiveness to compensate for the increased aircraft durability.

Andrew

[Nikademus]

well in regards to bombers being too hard to knock down. This reaction is inevitable because players are used to wargames giving back more immediate and substantial returns when air combat occurs. In RL, "massacres" in the air were much more rare and what might be described as a masacre in RL would still show numbers that would look anemic compared to what you see in stock.

Food for thought;

Jan 23, 1942: Burma.

12 Ki-30 light bombers approach Rangoon on a raid. Their fighter escort fails to link up with them. The AVG intercepts with approx 12-14 fighters. Easy meat? The AVG thought so, making numerous claims adding up to over half the Ki-30's.

Actual result: 1 Ki-30 downed. several others damaged but make it back to base. All this with no escort. If this result occured in the game, alot of players would think something was broke. [;)]

[bstarr]

I'm not looking for a bomber massacre. What bothers me is the success these bombers are having. Flying in against fighter CAP without escort and landing 8 torps on heavily armed ships is a little extreme in anybody's book.

Also, there should have been some planes shot down. I replayed the turn several times and never saw more than one Betty shot down. Compare this to the Betty raids on the shipping a Guadalcanal (which were escorted). Don't get me wrong, I agree that AtA combat in WITP is too bloody, that's why I tried this particular mod, however, the mod may be going a little too far the other direction. And by doing so, ships won't stand a chance.

Also, won't increasing the effect of DP guns make these guns too powerful in ship to ship combat?

On the other hand, I love the way the extra endurance causes the plane to take longer to repair. And I like the way the speed modification works out.

[Sardaukar]

Hmm..in CHS 2.04 experimental A2A and AA model (was it scen 160, me thinks?), I'm not seen excessive bomber penetration thru defenses. Many times bombers are turned back when damaged. Strong raids will get thru, though...and sometimes one is unlucky.
 
Early Feb 42 A-to-A kills are 144-75 for Japanese who have also lost 350+ planes to Flak and 150+ to ops losses. Looks reasonable to me against IJ AI.

[bstarr]

It could have been experience related. The nell unit had extremely high experience. Of course, so did the AVG, but my main gripe was the violence of the air to ship combat, not the absense of violence in the air to air combat.

However, there's little doubt that planes with higher durability will get through the defences more often. I wonder if lowering bomb and torpedo accuracy on scenarios which include planes with higher durability might not be in order.