Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

2Nd Mvr Band HR

 
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 >> 2Nd Mvr Band HR Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
2Nd Mvr Band HR - 2/1/2012 5:25:12 AM   
denisonh


Posts: 2194
Joined: 12/21/2001
From: Upstate SC
Status: offline 		If you have a 2nd mvr band HR in a PBEM, is having those fighters escort above the that second band ceiling a "work around" for the HR? (i.e. the Zero is primary mvr band at 15k, so escorting raids above 20k would be above the secondary band)

Seems like a cheap way to get your fighters above the opponents if he is in fact adhereing to the HR.

Like to get some input on this one.

_____________________________


"Life is tough, it's even tougher when you're stupid" -SGT John M. Stryker, USMC
Post #: 1
RE: 2Nd Mvr Band HR - 2/1/2012 6:06:52 AM   
Dili

 

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline 		Well doesn't he lost with Zeros in suboptimal altitude if you put the your fighters at same altitude level?


Also at suboptimal altitude the zero also should have been penalized in range.


The game should have had a cruise altitude linked maybe to the best maneuverability.

That is one of the things that should have been made connect the range to altitude.Maybe somewhat related to maneuverability band.
Because range varies a lot with altitude. The best the plane is at altitude usually the bigger range difference at low level.
Put a B-29 at 1000m and the range is much less maybe by half.

(in reply to denisonh)
Post #: 2
RE: 2Nd Mvr Band HR - 2/1/2012 6:19:45 AM   
denisonh


Posts: 2194
Joined: 12/21/2001
From: Upstate SC
Status: offline 		Point is either player doesn't place his CAP above the HR altitude per the HR, so a player escorting a higher altitude bomber raid just got an altitude freebie.

Issue is if is it a an HR to fly at the 2nd mvr bad for combat, is the player exploiting the HR by getting escorting fighters above the CAP assuming his opponent adheres to the HR.

_____________________________


"Life is tough, it's even tougher when you're stupid" -SGT John M. Stryker, USMC

(in reply to Dili)
Post #: 3
RE: 2Nd Mvr Band HR - 2/1/2012 6:53:43 AM   
Barb


Posts: 2503
Joined: 2/27/2007
From: Bratislava, Slovakia
Status: offline 		I would expand the HR to include all missions. When you cannot climb up when you need to, why would you do so when you dont need to?

_____________________________


(in reply to denisonh)
Post #: 4
RE: 2Nd Mvr Band HR - 2/1/2012 7:30:19 AM   
koniu


Posts: 2763
Joined: 2/28/2011
From: Konin, Poland, European Union
Status: offline 		Everything is about details. If HR is about sweeps and CAP mission only, flying escort mission higher than 2nd mvr will not break that HR but i will have filling that this will exploit that HR little

Also i will be with Barb and i will suggest to use that HR to all Fighter missions.

< Message edited by koniu -- 2/1/2012 7:32:40 AM >

(in reply to Barb)
Post #: 5
RE: 2Nd Mvr Band HR - 2/1/2012 9:23:31 AM   
kjnoel

 

Posts: 104
Joined: 3/10/2011
Status: offline 		My opponent and I use this HR and that includes escorts.

There is a slight "fudge" in that escort missions appear to escort bomber raids that fly higher than their setting. So, escorts are set at 2nd mvr band 20,000ft and the bombers fly at 25,000ft; my opponent does this when he is trying to minimise flak losses. I don't know whether it makes co-ordinating raids harder but they usually turn up together.

I don't consider this as an exploit in any way as it means that both CAP and escorts sometimes have to climb.

It probably means that there is less intercept to the bombers but at these heights they don't do that much damage anyway.

Hope this helps.

(in reply to koniu)
Post #: 6
RE: 2Nd Mvr Band HR - 2/1/2012 10:00:23 AM   
Banzan

 

Posts: 288
Joined: 3/13/2010
From: Bremen, Germany
Status: offline 		If i remember right, escorts fly 2,000 feet above the bombers. There is your chance to "work around" the rule.

Edit: No clue how escorts work if altitude is set below the bombers, but my first guess would be that they still go 2k above the bombers if they manage the "we are going to escort them" dice rolls.
Setting bombers and escorts to the same altitude is important for coordinated strikes, so i guess he will have a hard time getting bombers and escorts together.

But the different altitude settings may be worth some testing.

< Message edited by Banzan -- 2/1/2012 10:08:05 AM >

(in reply to kjnoel)
Post #: 7
RE: 2Nd Mvr Band HR - 2/1/2012 12:43:26 PM   
USSAmerica


Posts: 18715
Joined: 10/28/2002
From: Graham, NC, USA
Status: offline 		Per the lead air developer, the altitude limit is really only useful as a HR for Sweep missions.  CAP will adjust to the level of the incoming raid (possibly with 1 initial altitude advantage attack pass), and Escorts do not fly at any altitude they are set to.  Escorting fighters always fly just above the bombers they are protecting.  I think the 2,000 feet number Banzan mentioned is correct.  

_____________________________

Mike

"Good times will set you free" - Jimmy Buffett

"They need more rum punch" - Me


Artwork by The Amazing Dixie

(in reply to Banzan)
Post #: 8
RE: 2Nd Mvr Band HR - 2/1/2012 3:31:53 PM   
wildweasel0585

 

Posts: 60
Joined: 12/31/2010
Status: offline 		First off, we never agreed to it. we only agreed to this "No "strato sweeping". Use MVR bands and don't set to max altitude to keep things more historic." You never suggested 2Nd Mvr Band HR.
I have the list of HR's in front of me.

Secondly, I'm not trying to exploit anything. I thought i was just fighting asymmetrically. Even though you always outnumber my escorting fighters and have the advantage of radar, I make you fight where I still have an edge in MVR. You have the advantage in reaction time, numbers, and Cap. All i have is just pilot skill. It's not like I'm setting my fighters to an altitude that your fighters can't reach at all like some do. Seeing as you've still shot down a fair share of my Zero's and Betty's I didn't think you cared. On the other hand i send sweeps in at 20k, which would be fair game even if we were using the other HR.

Dili: the number is 13 Zero's and 18 Betty's lost to his of 9 P-40B's and E's in 3 days.

3rd turn and you think I'm already trying to cheat? Why would I play some stupid altitude game and always try to keep my planes above yours when I'm the one who suggested to keep the air war more realistic and historic by setting altitudes according to MVR ratings and not strato- sweeping? Why bring this up now on turn 3, and not after turn 1?
Exploits are for losers. I'm playing for the fun experience, not to win. If i cared about winning, I wouldn't play the Japanese side.

< Message edited by wildweasel0585 -- 2/1/2012 3:41:16 PM >

_____________________________

THERE WAS A FIREFIGHT!!!!

(in reply to USSAmerica)
Post #: 9
RE: 2Nd Mvr Band HR - 2/1/2012 3:43:33 PM   
Dili

 

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline 		Well the gamers should ask for a toning down of altitude advantage if that is making things loop sided.


(in reply to wildweasel0585)
Post #: 10
RE: 2Nd Mvr Band HR - 2/1/2012 3:55:13 PM   
String


Posts: 2661
Joined: 10/7/2003
From: Estonia
Status: offline 		You have to remember that there are also hidden a2a modifiers to missions. Sweep> CAP> escort. So having your escorts at higher altitude than the CAP probably only negates the penalty for flying as escorts, nothing more.

_____________________________

Surface combat TF fanboy

(in reply to Dili)
Post #: 11
RE: 2Nd Mvr Band HR - 2/1/2012 3:57:18 PM   
wildweasel0585

 

Posts: 60
Joined: 12/31/2010
Status: offline 		things really aren't lopsided though. what's lopsided about me escorting bombers at 23k(default setting on turn 1) and losing more planes when I'm outnumbered? I don't have a problem with loosing more planes. hell, last turn I lost about 24 planes to his 7 in A2a combat. never said a peep.

Shouldn't it be me with the problem? The guy who's loosing more. The guy who put a big fat torpedo in the Big E last turn.


< Message edited by wildweasel0585 -- 2/1/2012 4:00:35 PM >

_____________________________

THERE WAS A FIREFIGHT!!!!

(in reply to Dili)
Post #: 12
RE: 2Nd Mvr Band HR - 2/1/2012 4:08:21 PM   
denisonh


Posts: 2194
Joined: 12/21/2001
From: Upstate SC
Status: offline 		Didn't intend to make any accusations, just trying to figure out if there is an decided advantage to doing high altitude raids.

I apologize if I have in any way inferred that you were cheating, as that was never my intent.
quote:

ORIGINAL: wildweasel0585

First off, we never agreed to it. we only agreed to this "No "strato sweeping". Use MVR bands and don't set to max altitude to keep things more historic." You never suggested 2Nd Mvr Band HR.
I have the list of HR's in front of me.

Secondly, I'm not trying to exploit anything. I thought i was just fighting asymmetrically. Even though you always outnumber my escorting fighters and have the advantage of radar, I make you fight where I still have an edge in MVR. You have the advantage in reaction time, numbers, and Cap. All i have is just pilot skill. It's not like I'm setting my fighters to an altitude that your fighters can't reach at all like some do. Seeing as you've still shot down a fair share of my Zero's and Betty's I didn't think you cared. On the other hand i send sweeps in at 20k, which would be fair game even if we were using the other HR.

Dili: the number is 13 Zero's and 18 Betty's lost to his of 9 P-40B's and E's in 3 days.

3rd turn and you think I'm already trying to cheat? Why would I play some stupid altitude game and always try to keep my planes above yours when I'm the one who suggested to keep the air war more realistic and historic by setting altitudes according to MVR ratings and not strato- sweeping? Why bring this up now on turn 3, and not after turn 1?
Exploits are for losers. I'm playing for the fun experience, not to win. If i cared about winning, I wouldn't play the Japanese side.



_____________________________


"Life is tough, it's even tougher when you're stupid" -SGT John M. Stryker, USMC

(in reply to wildweasel0585)
Post #: 13
RE: 2Nd Mvr Band HR - 2/1/2012 4:10:04 PM   
denisonh


Posts: 2194
Joined: 12/21/2001
From: Upstate SC
Status: offline 		That torpedo in the big E should be good consolation for losing those Ronsons over Iba.
quote:

ORIGINAL: wildweasel0585

things really aren't lopsided though. what's lopsided about me escorting bombers at 23k(default setting on turn 1) and losing more planes when I'm outnumbered? I don't have a problem with loosing more planes. hell, last turn I lost about 24 planes to his 7 in A2a combat. never said a peep.

Shouldn't it be me with the problem? The guy who's loosing more. The guy who put a big fat torpedo in the Big E last turn.




_____________________________


"Life is tough, it's even tougher when you're stupid" -SGT John M. Stryker, USMC

(in reply to wildweasel0585)
Post #: 14
RE: 2Nd Mvr Band HR - 2/1/2012 4:10:21 PM   
Banzan

 

Posts: 288
Joined: 3/13/2010
From: Bremen, Germany
Status: offline 		Well, so far i know the problem you got a house rule for is mainly a sweep problem, not an escort/cap problem.
Escorts are very often paying a high price for getting the bombers through the cap (both sides), no matter what planes you have on escort. A very high sweep gets the attacker into a perfect position and let them dive on the defenders. Escorts have to stay with the bombers and the position of cap is defined by altitude settings AND warning time. A long range radar warning can get the cap in good position and will make the attackers suffer greatly, while short warnings or coordinate failures can put the cap into a bad position.

(in reply to Dili)
Post #: 15
RE: 2Nd Mvr Band HR - 2/1/2012 4:22:16 PM   
bradfordkay

 

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline 		I don't believe that it is an exploit or attempt to work around the rule at all. As others have mentioned, the rule was designed to prevent the high altitude sweeps that trump all other fighter advantages. Escorts, being at the bottom of the fighter hierarchy, aren't going to trump the CAP very often if at all. Bomber altitude is usually a trade off between protection from AAA and bombing accuracy, and as such needs to be the commanding factor in the decision. CAP will climb to reach the bombers if given enough warning, and the CAP fighters will still have an advantage over the escorts in most situations.

JMO.


_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to Banzan)
Post #: 16
RE: 2Nd Mvr Band HR - 2/1/2012 4:39:20 PM   
wildweasel0585

 

Posts: 60
Joined: 12/31/2010
Status: offline 		No problem. Just a matter of miscommunication. would you like to start using the 2nd Mvr Band HR then. I have no problems with it.

From my experiences, the only time you should really be worried about seeing fighters at high altitude, is against a Sweep with planes that can't climb and no early warning from radar . Even so, Sweep advantages can be negated by layering CAP, which you've been doing. and doing well.


My Zero's were sitting and crying about their losses, and chose not to fly.
No consolation whatsoever.I would rather have my bombers die in a blaze of glory trying to sink your carriers

_____________________________

THERE WAS A FIREFIGHT!!!!

(in reply to bradfordkay)
Post #: 17
RE: 2Nd Mvr Band HR - 2/1/2012 4:45:20 PM   
Miller


Posts: 2226
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline 		In my game we have agreed a hard limit of 29000' for everything, regardless of mission. Seems to work fine so far.

(in reply to wildweasel0585)
Post #: 18
RE: 2Nd Mvr Band HR - 2/1/2012 4:56:20 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller

In my game we have agreed a hard limit of 29000' for everything, regardless of mission. Seems to work fine so far.

Ditto. A hard altitude cap is helpful for some.

_____________________________


(in reply to Miller)
Post #: 19
RE: 2Nd Mvr Band HR - 2/1/2012 9:40:25 PM   
Dili

 

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline
quote:

prevent the high altitude sweeps that trump all other fighter advantages


That seems to be loopsided.

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 20
RE: 2Nd Mvr Band HR - 2/1/2012 9:46:10 PM   
Cap Mandrake


Posts: 23184
Joined: 11/15/2002
From: Southern California
Status: offline
quote:

2nd mvr band HR in a PBEM


I wonder how many people in the world know what that means? Kinda makes me feel special.

(in reply to denisonh)
Post #: 21
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> 2Nd Mvr Band HR Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.234