RE: Good to know UBER Cap is gone

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Good to know UBER Cap is gone

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Good to know UBER Cap is gone

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Good to know UBER Cap is gone - 1/14/2010 4:40:39 PM

Nikademus

Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

There are examples for a single US fighter shooting down 5-6 Betties alone when they tried to attack the US CV�s in the Solomon Sea IIRC.

Yes....one example. O'Hare's exceptional combat. These are exceptions to the general rule as mentioned. I wasn't implying that one never saw excessive casualties....but that on average this was not the case outside of the intial two months of Barbarossa (caused mainly by VVS tactics dicated from above), otherwise combat losses in WWII would have been far higher.

quote:

The usual reason for fighters not shooting down bombers was and is the escort. Unescorted Japanese bombers were as good as dead as soon they met fighter opposition.

Not in every bomber's case. Unarmored bombers are more vulnerable yes.....dead meat by default? no. It depends on the circumstances. Not every fighter can be in position and target every bomber and not every bomber targeted and hit will blow up or go down in a stream of flames.

quote:

Difference to the game is this did not really happen . The Japanese did not attack Singapore with unescorted Sallies in a couple of separate raids into a waiting Buffalo CAP.

That particular example never happened in real life. I was using it as a good example. 18 Buffalos each shooting down a big 2E bomber in RL is highly unlikely. If you'd like a real life example i can post several from Shores documenting a good sized interception that resulted in no losses at all for either side. The "Christmas" battle of Rangoon was a good example of highly inflated loss estimates and escorts seperated from their charges. Despite this losses were not extreme.

My main points being....Yes, Castor is right when he complains the losses are 'excessive' when compared to overall trend of WWII air combat.....and Elf is right in that the game will in general punish player tactics that are risky or error prone. The game will most certainly differentiate between an escorted and an unescorted raid regardless of the actual losses, which under such circumstances, can emulate Stock.

_____________________________

(in reply to LoBaron)

Post #: 31

RE: Good to know UBER Cap is gone - 1/14/2010 4:59:04 PM

John Lansford

Posts: 2662
Joined: 4/29/2002
Status: offline

In my CG the AI keeps sending Bettys after my CA squadron at Darwin, sometimes with Zero escorts, sometimes without. I've got 5 squadrons of fighters there, a mixed bag of P-40E/K's, P-39's and P-38's. They almost never break through my CAP even when escorted, usually losing 2-8 bombers and 1-8 fighters, but every once in a while a few bombers manage to make an attack on the ships. Most of the time the survivors abort and run for home. So, while the Ubercap may no longer exist, the idea that "the bomber will always get through" is still only for those pilots with nerves of steel.

(in reply to Nikademus)

Post #: 32

RE: Good to know UBER Cap is gone - 1/14/2010 5:35:16 PM

LoBaron

Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline

Nik mainly I agree with you, I simply tried to point out that these situations did occur in RL but every
decent PBEM player tries to reproduce them as often as possible, simply something that was not so
easy during WWII.

What I�m beginning to suspect is that many of those issues are related to players style.

John Lansfords example is good and what CT ran into was probably a 80+ exp, 80+ morale formation, 30 O�Hares so to speak.

The AI uses its bombers in a more "reckless" way, going in probably when a high number of pilots has a morale as low as 40 or 30
while a human play would consider a morale of 50 too low.
One more reason why CT�s 139WH-3s got slaughtered while the AI betties turned around in the face of opposition.
In RL morale in the aircombat squads probably quite low except for some crack formations and in game low morale also often leads to less casualties
because the guys simply turn back.

_____________________________

(in reply to John Lansford)

Post #: 33

RE: Good to know UBER Cap is gone - 1/14/2010 5:50:22 PM

Nikademus

Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

Nik mainly I agree with you, I simply tried to point out that these situations did occur in RL but every
decent PBEM player tries to reproduce them as often as possible, simply something that was not so
easy during WWII.

What I�m beginning to suspect is that many of those issues are related to players style.

This is true. Player tactics will directly impact the potential for excessive losses, hence part of my point was to emphasis that the game will punish players who don't adequately defend their raids, more so if the bombers are unarmored. In fairness to Castor's original complaint though, i agreed that in RL terms, yes....just because a raid is lightly or undefended won't equate to a "30 O'Hares" having 30 exceptional combats all at the same time producing 120 losses (

...if one were to grant each pilot 4 bomber kills)

In some cases the tactics are beyond player control, such as my game vs. the AI. (apparantly the AI was either confused or 'tempted'/triggered by the presence of a naval TF evacing Singapore leading to the unescorted Sally bombing raid) Were I to sketch this in RL terms....18 Buffalos on CAP, even with radar aid i'd expect to down no more than 3 - 4 x Ki-21's. This is only in terms of a kill estimate. Being unescorted, its also likely the raid, either in part most likely, or in whole would have been thwarted/driven off. CAP's and bomber raids don't all fly around in one single formation....so in this case based on my readings you'd have elements of fighters nibbling away at elements of the raid here and there.

Game wise.....the unescorted bombers got hit again and again and again by the mass of 18 planes, reinforced by "scrambles" "elements of CAp arriving" causing more and more bombers to fall. Game wise....to prevent this you have to have fighters there to soak up these attacks. This is SAIEW. AE tones it down....but the essential game engine remains.

_____________________________

(in reply to LoBaron)

Post #: 34

RE: Good to know UBER Cap is gone - 1/14/2010 5:54:12 PM

Sardaukar

Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline

Castor is definitely the most negative poster on the forum. I have not seen a single post from him that does not criticize the AE and apparently he still plays it a lot.

Lot of issues, lot of issues...

I don't see anything wrong with those obsolete Dutch bombers getting massacred. Everything in mission calculations was against them, exp, plane quality, lack of fighter escort etc. If they had been B-25s with average pilots, I'd have hoped for some chance for bomb hits...but still, unescorted light bomber raid against enemy's No.1 fighter teams is not recommended.

_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von B�lov, 1870-

(in reply to LoBaron)

Post #: 35

RE: Good to know UBER Cap is gone - 1/14/2010 5:58:11 PM

mjk428

Posts: 1944
Joined: 6/15/2002
From: Western USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dbfw190

mjk428- he was implying what Castor said was crazy, not calling the guy crazy.

So if I was to tell you to take a deep breath and run your post through an intelligence filter before pressing "OK", you wouldn't think I just called you stupid? OK. Either way, it's still a personal attack. I didn't see any personal attacks by Castor Troy so I don't think it was justified. Criticizing a product is not a personal attack.

If I say "The Jonas Bros stink", I'm not attacking them, I'm just saying I don't like their music. Although I certainly understand why they wouldn't like my opinion of their product. However, Castor Troy didn't even go that far. It's more like: "I bought the new Jonas Bros album and I couldn't stop playing it. However, the chorus on track 4 really gets on my nerves so I may stop listening."

edit:

For any devs feeling unloved. Be glad you didn't work on Rogue Warrior. Loser of this bet has to play it to completion.

http://g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/701866/TheFeed.html

< Message edited by mjk428 -- 1/14/2010 6:36:12 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Ikazuchi0585)

Post #: 36

RE: Good to know UBER Cap is gone - 1/14/2010 6:51:31 PM

KenchiSulla

Posts: 2948
Joined: 10/22/2008
From: the Netherlands
Status: offline

The outcome seems reasonable to me... and I am dutch! Hehehe.

Casualties like this happen.. and they actually DID happen during the war (I recall one account where Hans Joachim Marseille shot down 17 planes in one day (8 within 5 minuts)...

Try a WW2 flightsim and you'll find out (ofcourse a sim cant really match with real life) that some blokes are great shots (5-10 kills in a 90 minut sortie). Others, especially the poorly trained ones, only shoot holes in the air and crashland the plane on return....

Also, escorting them with Brewsters wouldnt really help you because... the Dutch are very poorly trained.... the IJN has some great aviators on those CVL's...

ps: as a sidenote, Castor Troy, chill on the drama... make a compliment at times because really... this game isnt that bad..

_____________________________

AKA Cannonfodder

"It happened, therefore it can happen again: this is the core of what we have to say. It can happen, and it can happen everywhere.�
� Primo Levi, writer, holocaust survivor

(in reply to LoBaron)

Post #: 37

RE: Good to know UBER Cap is gone - 1/14/2010 8:05:27 PM

crsutton

Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

Is it just me. I have yet to see a bomber actually shoot down a fighter in the game. Lots of damage but never a red destroyed. Anyone?

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to LoBaron)

Post #: 38

RE: Good to know UBER Cap is gone - 1/14/2010 8:31:50 PM

Speedysteve

Posts: 15998
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline

Yesh i've a few that have. At least 2 B17's from Clark have shot down a fighter.

_____________________________

WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to crsutton)

Post #: 39

RE: Good to know UBER Cap is gone - 1/14/2010 8:55:44 PM

John Lansford

Posts: 2662
Joined: 4/29/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Is it just me. I have yet to see a bomber actually shoot down a fighter in the game. Lots of damage but never a red destroyed. Anyone?

I've had some B-17's shoot down fighters. They're technically fighter/bombers but I had some Beaufighters shoot down fighters while they were on a naval attack mission, so I'd think that would count.

(in reply to crsutton)

Post #: 40

RE: Good to know UBER Cap is gone - 1/14/2010 9:02:19 PM

Canoerebel

Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline

My B-24s and B-17s - even with experience in the high 40s and 50s - fare pretty well when the target an enemy base. They are able to drive home their attacks without taking unacceptable losses from CAP and their defensive guns damage a fair number of enemy fighters (I assume they destroy some of those damaged, though I haven't paid attention that closely).

(in reply to John Lansford)

Post #: 41

RE: Good to know UBER Cap is gone - 1/14/2010 9:11:19 PM

Cuttlefish

Posts: 2454
Joined: 1/24/2007
From: Oregon, USA
Status: offline

It is uncommon but not all that rare for Allied 4E bombers to shoot down one of my fighters in my two PBEMs. And they damage a lot of them, not all of which then land safely or successfully.

_____________________________

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 42

RE: Good to know UBER Cap is gone - 1/14/2010 9:40:06 PM

JWE

Posts: 6580
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline

Uummmm ... poptarts.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to mjk428)

Post #: 43

RE: Good to know UBER Cap is gone - 1/14/2010 10:05:41 PM

TheElf

Posts: 3870
Joined: 5/14/2003
From: Pax River, MD
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mjk428

quote:

ORIGINAL: dbfw190

mjk428- he was implying what Castor said was crazy, not calling the guy crazy.

So if I was to tell you to take a deep breath and run your post through an intelligence filter before pressing "OK", you wouldn't think I just called you stupid? OK. Either way, it's still a personal attack. I didn't see any personal attacks by Castor Troy so I don't think it was justified. Criticizing a product is not a personal attack.

If I say "The Jonas Bros stink", I'm not attacking them, I'm just saying I don't like their music. Although I certainly understand why they wouldn't like my opinion of their product. However, Castor Troy didn't even go that far. It's more like: "I bought the new Jonas Bros album and I couldn't stop playing it. However, the chorus on track 4 really gets on my nerves so I may stop listening."

edit:

For any devs feeling unloved. Be glad you didn't work on Rogue Warrior. Loser of this bet has to play it to completion.

http://g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/701866/TheFeed.html

Actually mjk, my remark was neither a personal attack on Castor nor an implication that his post (or anything he said) was crazy.

I meant, "do a little research on the assets involved, run the contributing factors of the engagement (weather, LDRs, Altitude, Firepower, advantages etc...)through your head a couple times, and see if the issue you have is really as crazy as it first seems." THEN post...

If this sanity check, or filter as I called it, turns up a negative then you've solved your own problem and the only reason to post is to vent. If however you turn up an affirmative then post what you believe to be a legitimate issue with supporting references from your previous research.

Castor didn't personally attack anyone, I agree, but when people jump to conclusions about some combat result and then post threads like "Allied fighters suck" or facetious Posts like "Good to know UBER Cap is gone", the sincerity of the post is questionable and the good of the game, the community, and any future customers who do lurk on these threads is negatively affected. For what? Someone's slanted view of what reality should be? Over one engagement? An engagement that no one has any precedent to judge by? If people thought these things out a little bit before throwing hand grenades such as this post, you'd likely find more reasoned, patient and eager to help responses from those who can actually look into an issue.

In this case, while the result is clearly lopsided, how many learned players here would cite the model for the failings of the Martin 139? How many would cite Castor for poor judgment in his employment of them, and further poor judgement in how he decided to vet this result publicly?

I'll let the public decide. I already made my decision.

_____________________________

IN PERPETUUM SINGULARIS SEDES

(in reply to mjk428)

Post #: 44

RE: Good to know UBER Cap is gone - 1/14/2010 10:14:26 PM

frank1970

Posts: 1678
Joined: 9/1/2000
From: Bayern
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Frank

Castor, I see 45 Zeros in your reports. Can you verify they were all the same or is it possible, that MiniKB could have managed these numbers by permanently replacing them??

http://books.google.de/books?id=IzJUlCpm4zMC&pg=PA15&lpg=PA15&dq=aeral+kills+Barbarossa&source=bl&ots=gy86mLskU0&sig=0d4lliSHG6qBhh2K0wfHpkRRF2k&hl=de&ei=Dj5OS5ODKNiqsQb5z831AQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CAkQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=&f=false

As for destroying lots of enemy aircraft with little losses on one day in little missions, just follow the link above.
Unprepared Soviet pilots and planes were lost in masses to German fighters in the beginning days of barbarossa.

Don�t forget the extremely heavy losses of the Brits when attacking the panzerships on monday, 18th december 1939. And that were quite stable Wellingtons getting the stick, loosing more than 60% of their number. 44 attacking bombers, 34 shot down (offical German numbers)Brits say 15 lost of 22.
This is quite in the range of the losses your forces suffered.
So, it isn�t that unrealistic loosing heavily when using unescorted bombers.

In this example, how many German fighters were involved? Only 25% of the number of attacking bombers?

It�s not a question to me of the total number of losses, it�s the question about how many ac involved on each side and how many bombers then were shot down.

As far as I collected data, there were 3 squadrons of Me110 taking part in the battle. Can�t tell you how many of those planes actually fired at the bombers. Might have been between 36 and 80 fighters.

_____________________________

If you like what I said love me,if you dislike what I say ignore me!

"Extra Bavaria non est vita! Et sic est vita non est ita!"

(in reply to castor troy)

Post #: 45

RE: Good to know UBER Cap is gone - 1/14/2010 10:21:38 PM

frank1970

Posts: 1678
Joined: 9/1/2000
From: Bayern
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheElf

...

The A6m2 by comparison was just entering service a year or so before the out break of WWII in the pacific and was by all accounts the F-22 Raptor of '39-'41 (without the supercruise).

Now please, neither the spitfire nor the Fw190 were worse than the Zero

_____________________________

If you like what I said love me,if you dislike what I say ignore me!

"Extra Bavaria non est vita! Et sic est vita non est ita!"

(in reply to TheElf)

Post #: 46

RE: Good to know UBER Cap is gone - 1/14/2010 10:29:54 PM

TheElf

Posts: 3870
Joined: 5/14/2003
From: Pax River, MD
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Frank

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheElf

...

The A6m2 by comparison was just entering service a year or so before the out break of WWII in the pacific and was by all accounts the F-22 Raptor of '39-'41 (without the supercruise).

Now please, neither the spitfire nor the Fw190 were worse than the Zero

My Raptor statement was by no means meant to imply that from '39-'41 the other major combatants didn't already have their own "Raptor" design. Except perhaps France, Russia, and the US....

The Spit, and FW are fine examples of Raptors of their day.

_____________________________

IN PERPETUUM SINGULARIS SEDES

(in reply to frank1970)

Post #: 47

RE: Good to know UBER Cap is gone - 1/15/2010 12:26:09 AM

mjk428

Posts: 1944
Joined: 6/15/2002
From: Western USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheElf

Actually mjk, my remark was neither a personal attack on Castor nor an implication that his post (or anything he said) was crazy.

I meant, "do a little research on the assets involved, run the contributing factors of the engagement (weather, LDRs, Altitude, Firepower, advantages etc...)through your head a couple times, and see if the issue you have is really as crazy as it first seems." THEN post...

If this sanity check, or filter as I called it, turns up a negative then you've solved your own problem and the only reason to post is to vent. If however you turn up an affirmative then post what you believe to be a legitimate issue with supporting references from your previous research.

Castor didn't personally attack anyone, I agree, but when people jump to conclusions about some combat result and then post threads like "Allied fighters suck" or facetious Posts like "Good to know UBER Cap is gone", the sincerity of the post is questionable and the good of the game, the community, and any future customers who do lurk on these threads is negatively affected. For what? Someone's slanted view of what reality should be? Over one engagement? An engagement that no one has any precedent to judge by? If people thought these things out a little bit before throwing hand grenades such as this post, you'd likely find more reasoned, patient and eager to help responses from those who can actually look into an issue.

In this case, while the result is clearly lopsided, how many learned players here would cite the model for the failings of the Martin 139? How many would cite Castor for poor judgment in his employment of them, and further poor judgement in how he decided to vet this result publicly?

I'll let the public decide. I already made my decision.

I understand the importance of correcting the record. Which you did admirably. Then you took an unnecessary shot at the originator of the thread.

It's really not up to anyone here, except of course the admin, to determine the worthiness of a given thread. Some will be better than others. Some will be downright unpleasant to read but still be within the written rules. I'm sure Erik & David will keep the forum and their products protected from undue harm.

< Message edited by mjk428 -- 1/15/2010 12:27:07 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to TheElf)

Post #: 48

RE: Good to know UBER Cap is gone - 1/15/2010 12:58:37 AM

TheElf

Posts: 3870
Joined: 5/14/2003
From: Pax River, MD
Status: offline

quote:

I understand the importance of correcting the record. Which you did admirably. Then you took an unnecessary shot at the originator of the thread.

I'm sorry, not sure what you mean?

_____________________________

IN PERPETUUM SINGULARIS SEDES

(in reply to mjk428)

Post #: 49

RE: Good to know UBER Cap is gone - 1/15/2010 1:04:12 AM

Ikazuchi0585

Posts: 108
Joined: 1/25/2008
From: United States
Status: offline

I've had a Blenheim score a kill... sadly he didnt survive to much longer after that.

(in reply to mjk428)

Post #: 50

RE: Good to know UBER Cap is gone - 1/15/2010 1:29:18 AM

Fishbed

Posts: 1822
Joined: 11/21/2005
From: Beijing, China - Paris, France
Status: offline

From what I am counting in the report, a lot of those 50 planes were written off or got lost on the way home, they didn't get destroyed in direct combat - they dropped their load but back home they were too damaged to be flown again, and they count as a A2A loss, right?

< Message edited by Fishbed -- 1/15/2010 1:30:40 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Ikazuchi0585)

Post #: 51

RE: Good to know UBER Cap is gone - 1/15/2010 3:02:25 AM

EUBanana

Posts: 4552
Joined: 9/30/2003
From: Little England
Status: offline

A couple of turns ago in my own game ~15 Hurricanes, ~15 Mohawk IVs and 20 P40s met 20 Oscars and 20 Zeroes and 75% of the Allied a/c were shot down (30 for 1 Jap), despite the Allies doing the sweeping and the Japanese doing the CAPping which theoretically gives the Allied a/c an advantage.

One issue which I am aware of is that the Allied a/c came in three waves due to being at a range of altitudes - clearly that doesn't work, just stick everything at max altitude - but even so. 75% of the Allied airforce - we're talking a full month of production here - gone in a day. Fighters vs fighters. Whether they came in bits and bobs or not, thats simply not possible IMHO.

As a slight aside I think the bonus given for 'bouncing' is ridiculous, it's far, far too effective. Altitude is the factor in the air to air model, seemingly second only to experience. Operational ceiling becomes the red letter stat.

< Message edited by EUBanana -- 1/15/2010 3:06:09 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to LoBaron)

Post #: 52

RE: Good to know UBER Cap is gone - 1/15/2010 3:48:56 AM

Alfred

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

Anyone here know of an instance when the Dutch consolidated their obsolete Martin bombers and launched 89 against a single target? Well that just screams ahistorical to me. When one player engages in ahistorical actions then I see absolutely nothing wrong with an ahistorical outcome resulting.

So the OP had a loss of 50 bombers, which he thought was too much but he thought a loss of 30 bombers would have been acceptable. Really, on what basis was that conclusion reached? Surely not on the basis that AE is a simulation, because it is not. Nor on the basis of precedent because...well not too many come to mind.

Then we have other players' experiences to guide us on whether ubercap exists in AE. Beside the examples quoted in this thread, look at Canoerebel's AAR (and separate thread) where he bemoans that 160 Wildcats had limited success against Japanese bombers in the Kuriles. To offset that example, there is Q-Balls recent experience in the Celebes.

The Elf has it in one. If I employ poor tactics and get spanked, the fault lies with me, not the game.

Alfred

(in reply to EUBanana)

Post #: 53

RE: Good to know UBER Cap is gone - 1/15/2010 4:09:31 AM

Ikazuchi0585

Posts: 108
Joined: 1/25/2008
From: United States
Status: offline

so it's impossible to loose 75% of your raid under any circumstances?

(in reply to Alfred)

Post #: 54

RE: Good to know UBER Cap is gone - 1/15/2010 4:16:29 AM

TheElf

Posts: 3870
Joined: 5/14/2003
From: Pax River, MD
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dbfw190

so it's impossible to loose 75% of your raid under any circumstances?

how do you come to this conclusion?

_____________________________

IN PERPETUUM SINGULARIS SEDES

(in reply to Ikazuchi0585)

Post #: 55

RE: Good to know UBER Cap is gone - 1/15/2010 4:19:07 AM

Nikademus

Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Frank

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Frank

Castor, I see 45 Zeros in your reports. Can you verify they were all the same or is it possible, that MiniKB could have managed these numbers by permanently replacing them??

http://books.google.de/books?id=IzJUlCpm4zMC&pg=PA15&lpg=PA15&dq=aeral+kills+Barbarossa&source=bl&ots=gy86mLskU0&sig=0d4lliSHG6qBhh2K0wfHpkRRF2k&hl=de&ei=Dj5OS5ODKNiqsQb5z831AQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CAkQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=&f=false

As for destroying lots of enemy aircraft with little losses on one day in little missions, just follow the link above.
Unprepared Soviet pilots and planes were lost in masses to German fighters in the beginning days of barbarossa.

Don�t forget the extremely heavy losses of the Brits when attacking the panzerships on monday, 18th december 1939. And that were quite stable Wellingtons getting the stick, loosing more than 60% of their number. 44 attacking bombers, 34 shot down (offical German numbers)Brits say 15 lost of 22.
This is quite in the range of the losses your forces suffered.
So, it isn�t that unrealistic loosing heavily when using unescorted bombers.

In this example, how many German fighters were involved? Only 25% of the number of attacking bombers?

It�s not a question to me of the total number of losses, it�s the question about how many ac involved on each side and how many bombers then were shot down.

As far as I collected data, there were 3 squadrons of Me110 taking part in the battle. Can�t tell you how many of those planes actually fired at the bombers. Might have been between 36 and 80 fighters.

12 Wellingtons went down with a further 6 crash landing during the return phase. 5 x Bf-109's were lost in return from bomber return fire.

Total Wellington force was 22 planes though the Germans thought that as many as 54 bombers attacked. Battle was notable in that it was the first instance where cannon armed Bf-110's engaged British bombers in large numbers. While the lightly armed 109D and E's had to get close to attack, the 110's were able to utilize high speed runs and long range firing with cannon to pump their querry full of ammo. This was the largest air battle yet fought between the RAF and Luftwaffe over a area that exceeded 60-70 kilometers.

Units involved:

10(N)/JG-26
II/JG/77
3/ZG-26
6/JG-77
5/JG-77
2/ZG-26
3/JGr-101

< Message edited by Nikademus -- 1/15/2010 4:20:48 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to frank1970)

Post #: 56

RE: Good to know UBER Cap is gone - 1/15/2010 7:12:04 AM

mjk428

Posts: 1944
Joined: 6/15/2002
From: Western USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheElf

quote:

I understand the importance of correcting the record. Which you did admirably. Then you took an unnecessary shot at the originator of the thread.

I'm sorry, not sure what you mean?

You gave a good and detailed explanation of why the results Castor Troy was so unhappy about were within the bounds of a realistic result. I completely understand why you don't want the claim "Uber CAP is back" to stand, especially if that's not the case.

Then you put this totally unnecessary cherry on top:

quote:

Next time take a deep breath and run this sort of thing through a sanity filter before posting like this...

_____________________________

(in reply to TheElf)

Post #: 57

RE: Good to know UBER Cap is gone - 1/15/2010 8:32:37 AM

1275psi

Posts: 7979
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline

Deleted -wrong link!

< Message edited by 1275psi -- 1/15/2010 8:36:09 AM >

(in reply to mjk428)

Post #: 58

RE: Good to know UBER Cap is gone - 1/15/2010 8:38:14 AM

1275psi

Posts: 7979
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline

30 betties -unescorted -vs a pack of fighters

No survivors
A comaparable situation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MONSFUS5iwI

I think the game got it just right -unescorted obsolete crud vs elite pilots/planes -equals disaster.

< Message edited by 1275psi -- 1/15/2010 8:39:40 AM >

(in reply to 1275psi)

Post #: 59

RE: Good to know UBER Cap is gone - 1/15/2010 9:46:07 AM

tazaaron

Posts: 5
Joined: 1/12/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mjk428

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheElf

quote:

I understand the importance of correcting the record. Which you did admirably. Then you took an unnecessary shot at the originator of the thread.

I'm sorry, not sure what you mean?

You gave a good and detailed explanation of why the results Castor Troy was so unhappy about were within the bounds of a realistic result. I completely understand why you don't want the claim "Uber CAP is back" to stand, especially if that's not the case.

Then you put this totally unnecessary cherry on top:

quote:

Next time take a deep breath and run this sort of thing through a sanity filter before posting like this...

I might be a new poster to this forum but not someone who hasn't kept up with everything over the YEARS but why even start a argument, Castor can defend himself yet he hasn't thats what he wants someone like you to step forward, hes watching you carry the spark. Ive seen his past posts and its good theres someone who points out some downfalls in the game but i agree with Elf, and this doesn't just apply to this game people scream murder on any game thread when things go against them a small % of the time. You can have 199 perfect caps but the one time its off they scream THE GAME IS BROKE DONT BUY IT. This is outright insane or none of us would be here, if you got proof post it and im not talking one engagement with crap bombers that cant even run from the battle with no escort im talking proof. Ive had some crazy results about once a MONTH, u dont see me yelling into the forum that its broke he shot down 21 bombers,go upstairs and tell your mom if thats the problem. If it happened every turn it might be a different thing and id point it out. It must be a good game or Castor wouldnt have 7050 posts on this forum. If your looking for the perfect game with no flaws every now and them, well im sorry to tell you but you might as well go out and step in front of a truck because its not going to happen.

You either love me or hate me, im not going to beat around the bush its just a waste of time. Ive been around the block a few times so show it or stay home.

Aaron

(in reply to mjk428)

Post #: 60