Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7
Now when you bump that up to Very High, yes there is only a 8 point manuevre diffence between the Zero and the Warhawk, but the Warhawk has manuever of 2! I've seen bricks with more manueverability.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

combat reports are permanently FOW'd and will consistantly show less losses than actually occured. (even if you turn FOW off) You have to check the loss screen the turn after for the accurate result.

quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.diplodocus

Conclusion: In that case it'd be better to send P-40s in at 5k where you loose less planes then send them in at 29k just so you can get 4 kills. The object in war is to loose less than your opponent not to get highest kill tally.Even if you lost 0 planes and shot down 1 at 5k, you'd still send them in at 29k, even if that meant loosing 60 planes and shooting down 60. but if you want to use your fighters just for the sole reason to get a 5:1 ratio, then nobody's stopping you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kwik E Mart
this was 4 different runs of a single turn, or 5 consecutive days of same settings? did you restart the game for each run, or load the save each time? i thought i read something about having to restart to get different RNG's for each run...also curious if CAP had radar assist

quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7
Now when you bump that up to Very High, yes there is only a 8 point manuevre diffence between the Zero and the Warhawk, but the Warhawk has manuever of 2! I've seen bricks with more manueverability.

Shark7, it could well be that you are right and my assumption is wrong.

But as far as I remember the maneuverability is only a modifier for the speed value, so the performance of an AC is calculated by something resembling speed+man=performance.
If this is correct (maybe one of the devs can help here) the relative performance of planes only depends on the manouverability delta of two planetypes and the ammount of manouverability is
not important by itself.

quote:

ORIGINAL: xj900uk

The Zero airframe was not weak, although it could wrinkle/crumple up at faster speeds. It was the duraluminum skin which saved weight and took a lot of the structural loads, but had no redundant systems or 'safety zone'. Thus it could take absolutely no punishment whatsoever

quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.diplodocus

"Feel free to harp on altitude but is not the ONLY thing that matters. You clearly make this statement out of pure ignorance of the code. Not your fault, but let's be clear that you do not have a whit's knowledge of the inner workings of the game."

quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.diplodocus

you have it all wrong. here's what you posted

25k feet = 4 losses each
20k feet = 3 losses each
15k feet = 3 losses each
10k feet = 3 losses each
5k feet = 2 P40s lost, 3 Zeroes lost
100' = 8 P40s lost, 0 Zeroes lost

Clearly at 5k, loosing 2 P40s will always be better than loosing 4. Just like flying a plane will be better where the MVR is 20s and 30s insted of a number in the low in the low 10s. If you want to loose less fighters you be smart with them and use them where they can get more kills than they lost, not send them up to 20k where they loose 4 in the process of shooting down 4. A fighter on rest is a wasted fighter.

All the tests show is that you'd rather use planes in an gamey un-historical manner just to try to get the most kills, not play the game how its supposed to be played. Anyone can be gamey, its not hard. people knock on the AI saying, its predictable, but so are humans.

"Feel free to harp on altitude but is not the ONLY thing that matters. You clearly make this statement out of pure ignorance of the code. Not your fault, but let's be clear that you do not have a whit's knowledge of the inner workings of the game."

quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.diplodocus
so make sure you know your shi* before you end up making youself look like a dumbass

quote:

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.diplodocus
so make sure you know your shi* before you end up making youself look like a dumbass

Well you get 10 out of 10 for irony, I'll give you that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

EUBanana the combat report files are not surprising.

You compare two airframes that can compete with each other on roughly equal terms, both planes still perform at high altitude,
you are using relatively equal numbers of opposing planes and do not use large enough numbers for effective split CAP.

The results are similar to what I would have expect them to. What is your conclusion from this that so differs from what I am describing?

quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.diplodocus
i never said strato sweeps don't work, then only thing I've been saying is that stratosweeps are gamey.

quote:


the number of posts has nothing to do with it... Not making tons of posts doesn't imply ignorance...

quote:

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

EUBanana the combat report files are not surprising.

You compare two airframes that can compete with each other on roughly equal terms, both planes still perform at high altitude,
you are using relatively equal numbers of opposing planes and do not use large enough numbers for effective split CAP.

The results are similar to what I would have expect them to. What is your conclusion from this that so differs from what I am describing?

My point is that being above the enemy is by far and away the most significant factor assuming you got two roughly comparable aircraft. I imagine with Buffaloes even with the bounce they'll be nailed (might be a fun test though, never assume :D).

And really maneuver bands don't seem to have much of a discernable impact at all. I'm sure they are being considered somewhere in the code but it looks like that consideration is quite minor. Which is likely fair enough, speed wins, and altitude can be turned into speed, but it looks to me like altitude is just too much of a modifier, it's swamping everything else.

I bet you if I ran the tests with P40Ks instead you wouldn't see any real difference at high altitude even though the K's high altitude performance is out of all proportion to the E. Such is my experience of using P40Ks in game.

This is why you have stratosweeps. The most significant factor by far is altitude, therefore you fly as high as you can. It's a race to the top. There is no disadvantage in doing so, you can engage bombers at 5k feet quite easily with CAP at 35,000'. The idea of maneuver bands I think is really cool but it's lost in the noise - there's no reason to mess about finding altitude bands of maximum comparative advantage, it might have an effect but it just gets lost in the bigger modifier of being below the foe.

So the game is made less deep as a result - there is no consideration to make when setting fighter altitude. Set it to max, unless you are escorting. Also, it's ahistoric, though I'm less bothered about that to be honest than I am about all that data painstakingly entered with altitude bands being consigned to irrelevance, I'd rather it mattered.

quote:

ORIGINAL: FatR

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kwik E Mart

speaking of speed "being considered", isn't the AAR between FatR and Yubari a modified scenario? i.e., aren't the japanese fighter speeds adjusted up?

No, in Scen 70 they aren't.

Kirk Lazarus: I know who I am. I'm the dude playin' the dude, disguised as another dude!
Ron Swanson: Clear alcohols are for rich women on diets.

quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.diplodocus

you have it all wrong. here's what you posted

25k feet = 4 losses each
20k feet = 3 losses each
15k feet = 3 losses each
10k feet = 3 losses each
5k feet = 2 P40s lost, 3 Zeroes lost
100' = 8 P40s lost, 0 Zeroes lost

Clearly at 5k, loosing 2 P40s will always be better than loosing 4. Just like flying a plane will be better where the MVR is 20s and 30s insted of a number in the low in the low 10s. If you want to loose less fighters you be smart with them and use them where they can get more kills than they lost, not send them up to 20k where they loose 4 in the process of shooting down 4. A fighter on rest is a wasted fighter.

All the tests show is that you'd rather use planes in an gamey un-historical manner just to try to get the most kills, not play the game how its supposed to be played. Anyone can be gamey, its not hard. people knock on the AI saying, its predictable, but so are humans.

"Feel free to harp on altitude but is not the ONLY thing that matters. You clearly make this statement out of pure ignorance of the code. Not your fault, but let's be clear that you do not have a whit's knowledge of the inner workings of the game."

Kirk Lazarus: I know who I am. I'm the dude playin' the dude, disguised as another dude!
Ron Swanson: Clear alcohols are for rich women on diets.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kwik E Mart

did anyone ever answer the OP? is there a penalty for escorts? or no penalty and just a sweep bonus? or maybe not a sweep bonus, but a better chance for "bounce" the higher they sweep? the world wonders...

all this speculation on the "black box" that is the air-to-air algorithms seems pointless sometimes...we may just never know all the variables and relationships...however, gamers have a deep rooted desire to understand the mechanics so that they can improve their play...we may have to eventually accept the fact that the developers wanted us to learn just like they did in real life...thru experience...how frustrating

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kwik E Mart

did anyone ever answer the OP? is there a penalty for escorts? or no penalty and just a sweep bonus? or maybe not a sweep bonus, but a better chance for "bounce" the higher they sweep? the world wonders...

quote:


all this speculation on the "black box" that is the air-to-air algorithms seems pointless sometimes...we may just never know all the variables and relationships...however, gamers have a deep rooted desire to understand the mechanics so that they can improve their play...we may have to eventually accept the fact that the developers wanted us to learn just like they did in real life...thru experience...how frustrating

quote:

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kwik E Mart

did anyone ever answer the OP? is there a penalty for escorts? or no penalty and just a sweep bonus? or maybe not a sweep bonus, but a better chance for "bounce" the higher they sweep? the world wonders...

In my experience, in terms of effectiveness, the order is

Escort < CAP < Sweep

quote:



understood...but is this because Escort is usually lower than CAP and CAP is usually lower than Sweep and in these cases there is usually more chance for "bounce"? or is there something more at play here?

_____________________________

Kirk Lazarus: I know who I am. I'm the dude playin' the dude, disguised as another dude!
Ron Swanson: Clear alcohols are for rich women on diets.

(in reply to EUBanana)