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: Manila Falls

 
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 >> After Action Reports >> RE: Manila Falls Page: <<   < prev  32 33 [34] 35 36   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Manila Falls - 3/2/2016 11:58:06 PM   
obvert


Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Obvert, I got the Alfred stamp of approval for defensive CAP:

2. I am never in favour of HRs. In almost all instances a HR benefits one side and is a very lazy way for the disadvantaged to limit their disadvantage. In almost all instances, there is a legitimate tactic which obviates the necessity of a HR. A classic example is the constant whining of players that a HR is necessary to combat high altitude sweeps. You have consistently implemented the tactics which some of us have been saying for years are the correct response, and your results have been outstanding. Alfred

Of course, every game is different but I have done very well versus Jocke's Lightning sweeps so far this game. Knock on wood.


Ha!! I can probably find where he's mentioned the same to me. What I'll write now is in the context of complete respect for Alfred's knowledge of the game design and deep knowledge of tactical application. He doesn't, however, play people. It's not a knock, just a difference. Against an opponent like Jocke I'll be curious to see if your low level CAP can do well in the later game. The P-47 is a whole different beast.

Even developers of the game use HRs to make it more playable, representational of a semblance of realistic conditions, and because it helps the game function better while playing against an opponent.

We innovate. The AI does not. As you know things like 25 PT boat TFs or multiple 82 plane air groups kind of ruins the experience. Late war 42k power sweeps have the same feeling, and a bunch of CAP flying at 10-15k doesn't usually cut it against 120 P-47N!



< Message edited by obvert -- 3/3/2016 12:03:48 AM >


_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 991
RE: Manila Falls - 3/3/2016 1:39:37 AM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
I have done it against the first two models of the p47...


(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 992
RE: Manila Falls - 3/3/2016 2:27:22 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

I have done it against the first two models of the p47...





_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 993
RE: Manila Falls - 3/3/2016 9:33:01 PM   
obvert


Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

I have done it against the first two models of the p47...



I'm not trying to say you can't. No need to get defensive!

I just would like to know how you can use only low CAP against massed high altitude sweeps and not get smashed. Point me in the right direction. I'd love to learn.


_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 994
RE: Manila Falls - 3/3/2016 9:46:13 PM   
njp72

 

Posts: 1372
Joined: 9/20/2008
Status: offline
Howdy, this is my experience as well.

Layered CAP for bombers and fighter sweeps with massive numbers to offset quality of the airframes. So far it has worked reasonably well against the P47s.

Nevertheless, always happy to be educated.

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

They're increasing ALT restrictions though, right? This suggestion is late war when (I assume) CAP will have a higher limit.


Yes, but I probably won't climb with them...I want the air to air combat to be very low.



Don't we all?!?

I found that it was best to use layered CAP late, but I played with nearly every combination possible during my campaign games. Recently in tests I found Japanese defenders did well up high but were often skewered by divers without any chance to fight back if set all low.

It al depends on where you are and the other factors of course, but I think the ability of IJ fighters to climb makes them useful up high even against the best. This then leaves some lower CAP to fight bombers.

Let me know if you've discovered otherwise in my hiatus, as I'd like to understand this all better. Maybe there is a CR in your game you can point to where low CAP worked?




(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 995
RE: Manila Falls - 3/4/2016 12:50:32 AM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
NJP is correct in that you need numbers. As a very rough rule of thumb, it isn't worth defending if you can't really punish that first wave of Jugs sweepers, and to do that you need near 200 planes at the kind of settings I use.

If you try to fight them with equal planes you will never do well & create hideously good Allied pilots.

To fight with the low CAP idea I read theElf, Lobaron, Alfred and PaxMondo a lot! I experimented a lot. In this game I have given Jocke two very bloody noses when he has tried to use Lightning sweeps...I feel very confident that in this game I will be able to standup to Allied fighters thru 1944.







< Message edited by Lowpe -- 3/4/2016 1:04:52 AM >

(in reply to njp72)
Post #: 996
RE: Manila Falls - 3/4/2016 2:16:50 AM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

Very close to breaking into the central Chinese plains.

1st Tank Division is formed. It will be awhile before the 2nd Tank Division is formed, as most of the pieces are still in Manchuria/Korea. It will be one of the first buys once the West Coast invasion force is set.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 997
RE: Manila Falls - 3/4/2016 2:21:23 AM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
The Allies have an advantage in troops here, but not by much. I bombed the Aussies to the east of Dacca,which was actually an Indian Division yesterday and took today off.

Allies responded by flying fighters forward. Opportunity?




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 998
RE: Manila Falls - 3/4/2016 2:26:27 AM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
I lost an empty tanker, 8k size, here yesterday to a Dutch Sub. I moved the Lilly squadron from here to bolster ASW search in the Straits of Malacca.

Pete's don't have the range.

PDU off poses a challenge in countering Allied subs. Plus,I haven't put enough attention on it, too.

Still have bases I am cleaning up. Very tedious.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 999
RE: Manila Falls - 3/4/2016 2:59:39 AM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
I plopped the 5th Guards Division on Port Blair a month or so ago, and picked them up and shipped them off to Kodiak the other day.

I was hoping Jocke might get some sigint, but the deception is blown today with high DL at Port Blair. Their initial destination is Singers...so perhaps Jocke will get that.

I am sending troops to garrison these islands now...and Port Blair is a lvl 5 runway with Betties, Nells, Fighters and Vals and an air force Hq with plentiful supply.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 1000
RE: Manila Falls - 3/4/2016 4:34:05 AM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

NJP is correct in that you need numbers. As a very rough rule of thumb, it isn't worth defending if you can't really punish that first wave of Jugs sweepers, and to do that you need near 200 planes at the kind of settings I use.

If you try to fight them with equal planes you will never do well & create hideously good Allied pilots.

To fight with the low CAP idea I read theElf, Lobaron, Alfred and PaxMondo a lot! I experimented a lot. In this game I have given Jocke two very bloody noses when he has tried to use Lightning sweeps...I feel very confident that in this game I will be able to standup to Allied fighters thru 1944.




FYI, I just traded positive with 20ish A6M8 on 80% CAP at 18K and 20ish A6M5c on 80% CAP at 13K. 2x21 Jug sweeps came in. I shot down 11 in the air, lost 9 in the air. You don't need 200 fighters to do it . Only March 14, 1944, for me though.

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 1001
RE: Manila Falls - 3/4/2016 4:35:43 AM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

NJP is correct in that you need numbers. As a very rough rule of thumb, it isn't worth defending if you can't really punish that first wave of Jugs sweepers, and to do that you need near 200 planes at the kind of settings I use.

If you try to fight them with equal planes you will never do well & create hideously good Allied pilots.

To fight with the low CAP idea I read theElf, Lobaron, Alfred and PaxMondo a lot! I experimented a lot. In this game I have given Jocke two very bloody noses when he has tried to use Lightning sweeps...I feel very confident that in this game I will be able to standup to Allied fighters thru 1944.




FYI, I just traded positive with 20ish A6M8 on 80% CAP at 18K and 20ish A6M5c on 80% CAP at 13K. 2x21 Jug sweeps came in. I shot down 11 in the air, lost 9 in the air. You don't need 200 fighters to do it . Only March 14, 1944, for me though.

OK, this is just plain evil!

_____________________________


(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 1002
RE: Manila Falls - 3/4/2016 12:26:27 PM   
obvert


Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

I lost an empty tanker, 8k size, here yesterday to a Dutch Sub. I moved the Lilly squadron from here to bolster ASW search in the Straits of Malacca.

Pete's don't have the range.

PDU off poses a challenge in countering Allied subs. Plus,I haven't put enough attention on it, too.

Still have bases I am cleaning up. Very tedious.





I train up a lot of IJA pilots and any 2E bomber works well. My go to being old Sallys, which I'm sure are plentiful for you. Or Helen I after the II arrives. Lily works fine too.

Petes are always restricted to night search/recon for me with occasional spot CAP duties in a real pinch. Alf daytime search/ASW. Jakes just about anything, including low naval strikes, but obviously day search being their primary function. Daves also night search/recon, but no CAP.

_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 1003
RE: Manila Falls - 3/4/2016 12:29:45 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

FYI, I just traded positive with 20ish A6M8 on 80% CAP at 18K and 20ish A6M5c on 80% CAP at 13K. 2x21 Jug sweeps came in. I shot down 11 in the air, lost 9 in the air. You don't need 200 fighters to do it . Only March 14, 1944, for me though.


That is great! What was the weather, warning time, and what altitude were your planes scrambled to, range the jugs had to fly, and their initial sweeping altitude?

You did outnumber the initial sweep by roughly 2 to 1 which is very important, and you do need 200 planes when you add in two more sweeps and then want to have fighters remaining for several bomber waves.

I like your altitudes you picked for your fighters. The 8 above the 5 and the 5 set for bombers. What was the distribution of your fighter losses?

If you have a better mousetrap, I will definitely adopt it!



(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 1004
RE: Manila Falls - 3/4/2016 2:44:29 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
Mid September 1942

Jocke comes out of his shell and sweeps in the Pacific Northwest. He changes sweeping tactics, using a very large LRCAP. There are three or four waves of sweepers and Jocke does progressively worse as the LRCAP is worn down.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 1005
RE: Manila Falls - 3/4/2016 2:47:39 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
I had noticed the lack of fighters in the Seattle area...and decided to hit the huge resource stockpile at Tacoma. No opposition, I picked up over 300 VP I believe, in what was one of the best bombing runs of the war.

Intel shows 110 points damaged, but the victory screen tells of more. I think I lost 2 bombers.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 1006
RE: Manila Falls - 3/4/2016 2:49:19 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
The butchers bill in the air.

Allies lose more fighters than Japan. Banzai! Plus I am fighting over my territory.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 1007
RE: Manila Falls - 3/4/2016 3:53:56 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

I lost an empty tanker, 8k size, here yesterday to a Dutch Sub. I moved the Lilly squadron from here to bolster ASW search in the Straits of Malacca.

Pete's don't have the range.

PDU off poses a challenge in countering Allied subs. Plus,I haven't put enough attention on it, too.

Still have bases I am cleaning up. Very tedious.





I train up a lot of IJA pilots and any 2E bomber works well. My go to being old Sallys, which I'm sure are plentiful for you. Or Helen I after the II arrives. Lily works fine too.

Petes are always restricted to night search/recon for me with occasional spot CAP duties in a real pinch. Alf daytime search/ASW. Jakes just about anything, including low naval strikes, but obviously day search being their primary function. Daves also night search/recon, but no CAP.


Obvert, the problem is I need them bombing currently. PDU off. I have three active bombing fronts: PacNW, China, Burma. That is a lot!

I do have lots of Sonia's but I am using them bombing too! Most are hitting Sian with very good effect currently.

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 1008
RE: Manila Falls - 3/4/2016 4:55:57 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

FYI, I just traded positive with 20ish A6M8 on 80% CAP at 18K and 20ish A6M5c on 80% CAP at 13K. 2x21 Jug sweeps came in. I shot down 11 in the air, lost 9 in the air. You don't need 200 fighters to do it . Only March 14, 1944, for me though.


That is great! What was the weather, warning time, and what altitude were your planes scrambled to, range the jugs had to fly, and their initial sweeping altitude?

You did outnumber the initial sweep by roughly 2 to 1 which is very important, and you do need 200 planes when you add in two more sweeps and then want to have fighters remaining for several bomber waves.

I like your altitudes you picked for your fighters. The 8 above the 5 and the 5 set for bombers. What was the distribution of your fighter losses?

If you have a better mousetrap, I will definitely adopt it!



I'll check and get back to you. The Jugs were flying from Rabaul to Manus, which is well within their normal range (especially with DTs). They were at 42000, of course.

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 1009
RE: Manila Falls - 3/4/2016 5:12:39 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

FYI, I just traded positive with 20ish A6M8 on 80% CAP at 18K and 20ish A6M5c on 80% CAP at 13K. 2x21 Jug sweeps came in. I shot down 11 in the air, lost 9 in the air. You don't need 200 fighters to do it . Only March 14, 1944, for me though.


That is great! What was the weather, warning time, and what altitude were your planes scrambled to, range the jugs had to fly, and their initial sweeping altitude?

You did outnumber the initial sweep by roughly 2 to 1 which is very important, and you do need 200 planes when you add in two more sweeps and then want to have fighters remaining for several bomber waves.

I like your altitudes you picked for your fighters. The 8 above the 5 and the 5 set for bombers. What was the distribution of your fighter losses?

If you have a better mousetrap, I will definitely adopt it!



I'll check and get back to you. The Jugs were flying from Rabaul to Manus, which is well within their normal range (especially with DTs). They were at 42000, of course.


Found the settings. I set my CAP more to protect against raids than against sweeps, most of the time, but it all depends on what my opponents are doing and what their patterns are, plus if I have a hunch if they'll change something up due to challenges encountered.

63 Air skill for each leader. The groups are actually a split group that happen to be flying different models. A6M5c average XP was 74, and for the A6M8 it was 76.

16x A6M5c at 70% CAP at 6000

23x A6M8 at 70% CAP at 18000

According to Tracker, losses were 9+3 P-47s (A2A+Ops), while mine were 5+0 A6M8 and 3+1 A6M5c. I don't know his pilot quality. Our game is actually on the quiet side in the air, at least on my side, with only 10.6K IJA losses and almost 9.8K Allied losses (compared to my high air tempo game which is ~23K IJA to ~11K Allies only 3 months beyond this date).

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 1010
RE: Manila Falls - 3/5/2016 2:01:18 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
Jocke gave me one of his 10 minute turns...ouch. Nothing happened.

I am stressing Japan to the limit here. I have almost every cargo ship over 3000 tons or bigger working!!!! Not to mention I have continued to build merchant ships since day 1 of my takeover. I have tried to offset the fuel drain by having almost all warships in port.

All this in preparation of the west coast invasion.

Over 150 xaks have been converted to carry troops.

A huge slug of warships are in port getting upgrades. Some carriers at Tokyo; Kobe, Singers, Hiroshima have cruisers and destroyers.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 3/5/2016 2:22:37 PM >

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 1011
RE: Manila Falls - 3/6/2016 2:34:20 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
Once again, my plans don't quite come to fruition, but a nice day with promise for tomorrow. The area is amazingly devoid of Allied submarines.

TF Chikuma (Chikuma, Maya, 3 Yugumo class DD) raid south to foil the Allied shipping in the area. Worried about air strikes, they are covered by Rufes flying from Aoba and Zeroes from the Junyo and Shoho TF.

TF Junyo (Junyo, Shoho, CS, BB, DDs) will stay to the north and primarily provide air protection but also 7 hex strike capability if Allies react to TF Chikuma.


Racing in overnight the TF Chikuma misses, but during the morning we are rewarded with this strike on APDs...not great, but there is always the afternoon.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 3/6/2016 2:35:03 PM >

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 1012
RE: Manila Falls - 3/6/2016 2:36:20 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
A little better raid during the afternoon scores a much bigger ship...




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 1013
RE: Manila Falls - 3/6/2016 2:37:18 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
A very nice ship indeed!




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 1014
RE: Manila Falls - 3/6/2016 2:38:01 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
Hopes for tomorrow...




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 1015
RE: Manila Falls - 3/6/2016 2:39:09 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
Another Chinese rout.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 1016
RE: Manila Falls - 3/6/2016 2:43:28 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

FYI, I just traded positive with 20ish A6M8 on 80% CAP at 18K and 20ish A6M5c on 80% CAP at 13K. 2x21 Jug sweeps came in. I shot down 11 in the air, lost 9 in the air. You don't need 200 fighters to do it . Only March 14, 1944, for me though.


That is great! What was the weather, warning time, and what altitude were your planes scrambled to, range the jugs had to fly, and their initial sweeping altitude?

You did outnumber the initial sweep by roughly 2 to 1 which is very important, and you do need 200 planes when you add in two more sweeps and then want to have fighters remaining for several bomber waves.

I like your altitudes you picked for your fighters. The 8 above the 5 and the 5 set for bombers. What was the distribution of your fighter losses?

If you have a better mousetrap, I will definitely adopt it!



I'll check and get back to you. The Jugs were flying from Rabaul to Manus, which is well within their normal range (especially with DTs). They were at 42000, of course.


Found the settings. I set my CAP more to protect against raids than against sweeps, most of the time, but it all depends on what my opponents are doing and what their patterns are, plus if I have a hunch if they'll change something up due to challenges encountered.

63 Air skill for each leader. The groups are actually a split group that happen to be flying different models. A6M5c average XP was 74, and for the A6M8 it was 76.

16x A6M5c at 70% CAP at 6000

23x A6M8 at 70% CAP at 18000

According to Tracker, losses were 9+3 P-47s (A2A+Ops), while mine were 5+0 A6M8 and 3+1 A6M5c. I don't know his pilot quality. Our game is actually on the quiet side in the air, at least on my side, with only 10.6K IJA losses and almost 9.8K Allied losses (compared to my high air tempo game which is ~23K IJA to ~11K Allies only 3 months beyond this date).


Very interesting, & I will say no more!

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 1017
RE: Manila Falls - 3/6/2016 3:29:26 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
Another r&d milestone today...moved all factories to the Tojo IIc; IIb starts production on 10/1/42 in time to upgrade all squadrons to IIb for the west coast invasion.

Once the IIc comes it will stay in production for the entire game and will make a wonderful defensive fighter thru 44. However, any IIc squadron that can upgrade to the Frank will do so!

When the IIc arrives, those r&d facilities are set to change tooling for the Sam most likely.


(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 1018
RE: Manila Falls - 3/9/2016 11:38:30 PM   
tiemanjw

 

Posts: 580
Joined: 12/6/2008
Status: offline
A quick note about sweeps from an AFB perspective (sorry, I know I'm a bit late - just getting caught up).
If you are referring to our game at all, most of my sweeps are between 15k-25k. Strato sweeps may require different settings.
And the reason I do this is because it seemed like my strato sweeps were getting beat up. I tried lower sweeps and seemed to have more success. I ran some tests that strongly suggest this isn't a fluke or imagination. I can post the details if anyone is interested.
Now I'll go work on my turn

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 1019
RE: Manila Falls - 3/10/2016 12:24:28 PM   
obvert


Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tiemanj

A quick note about sweeps from an AFB perspective (sorry, I know I'm a bit late - just getting caught up).
If you are referring to our game at all, most of my sweeps are between 15k-25k. Strato sweeps may require different settings.
And the reason I do this is because it seemed like my strato sweeps were getting beat up. I tried lower sweeps and seemed to have more success. I ran some tests that strongly suggest this isn't a fluke or imagination. I can post the details if anyone is interested.
Now I'll go work on my turn


I'm doing some tests in a late war situation, where speed differentials are greater. I'll post these soon too.

One factor in all of this has nothing to do with the planes or altitudes, and that is radar/detection. If raids are detected earlier, planes will not be in the band you set them in, but they'll be adjusting to the incoming strikes. Japanese planes tend to have a better climb rate, on average, than Allied. So setting low doesn't men they stay low, and testing strato sweeps with and without decent radar at the base could provide very different results.

Just so I base my tests on useful situations, here is a list of factors I think I'd want to be aware of, and please let me know if I'm neglecting something;

altitude settings (putting airframes within their better maneuver bands for CAP, sweepers higher than CAP to get dive)
%CAP setting (at zero hex distance, noticing how many actually take part in combat vs those set to active CAP)
layering of CAP (or not)(keeping 3-5k between layers of CAP)
radar (for Japanese make sure to have multiple sets per base)

weather (noticing what effect weather has on tests)
distance to target (keeping in normal range for tests)

airframe(s) sweeping (choose fast with good armament for high sweeps, maneuverable and durable for lower sweeps)
airframe(s) defending (choose fast with good armament for high CAP, maneuverable and durable for lower CAP)

airframe fatigue (make sure it's consistently low)
numbers of planes for each side (how much numbers matter)

pilot fatigue/morale (low and consistent between tests)
pilot quality (aiming for equal between sides and consistent between tests of different airframes/situations)

air group leaders (high leadership, inspiration, air, aggressiveness)

HQ present in defending base with good leader (high air)



< Message edited by obvert -- 3/10/2016 12:25:30 PM >


_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to tiemanjw)
Post #: 1020
Page:   <<   < prev  32 33 [34] 35 36   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Manila Falls Page: <<   < prev  32 33 [34] 35 36   next >   >>
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

1.109