Low CAP vs High SWEEPS test #1

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Low CAP vs High SWEEPS test #1

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 >> Low CAP vs High SWEEPS test #1

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

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Low CAP vs High SWEEPS test #1 - 3/20/2016 10:49:50 PM

obvert

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

Hi all. I've been testing my testbed a bit, and seeing if I had the factors correct to figure out if this idea of a low CAP could really combat high level sweeps.

Consider this a practice test, but let me know if I'm not considering something I should be here.

I ran two 27 plane P-47D2 groups with identical stats and similar leaders at three groups of 45 plane Ki-84r groups with identical stats and similar leaders. The base was 4 hexes away (PM to Lae) and Lae has 6 x type 3 radar, both an IJA and and IJN Air HQ and lots of supply in a level 9 base. Just learning to use the editor, so I've taken a long time to set this up here.

The weather in my first tests was too rough, so moved the test a few days ahead every other test after the first few looking for clear skies. Did get different weather, but nothing conclusive would show (so far) that weather is a factor that balances results to one side or the other.

The Ki-84 didn't do badly at all, but I'm et to run the high CAP test to see how they'll fare differently there.

Let me know if this looks like enough factors. The only thing changing beteen tests is the day and/or some group flying 10% CAP at Milne Bay to create random change in the situation.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by obvert -- 3/22/2016 11:20:19 PM >

_____________________________

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

Post #: 1

RE: Low CAP vs High SWEEPS test #1 - 3/21/2016 6:38:55 AM

JeffroK

Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline

How about assuming a half smart Allied player and send in sweeps at different heights.

Its not only the japanese player who can use his forces to their advantage.

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 2

RE: Low CAP vs High SWEEPS test #1 - 3/21/2016 8:28:04 AM

obvert

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffK

How about assuming a half smart Allied player and send in sweeps at different heights.

Its not only the japanese player who can use his forces to their advantage.

This is test 1. Hold your horses!

Just checking the setup now, but I'm definitely open to the factors you'd like to see tested.

Do you send your sweeps at differing altitudes? Which ones, and is there a differentiation as to which planes you'd send at those altitudes?

I'm trying to see what IS smart here. I've not actually had an Allied player regularly send sweeps at different altitudes (with different airframes) against me, although i know some players do, so I might learn something.

< Message edited by obvert -- 3/21/2016 10:27:57 AM >

_____________________________

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

(in reply to JeffroK)

Post #: 3

RE: Low CAP vs High SWEEPS test #1 - 3/21/2016 9:12:43 AM

Encircled

Posts: 2024
Joined: 12/30/2010
From: Northern England
Status: offline

Can I be the first to mention that in about a couple of months after this someone is going to take a beating with their P-47s and then blame you, the test and the game for the inherent randomness of some results.

Thanks in advance!

_____________________________

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 4

RE: Low CAP vs High SWEEPS test #1 - 3/21/2016 10:25:11 AM

obvert

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Encircled

Can I be the first to mention that in about a couple of months after this someone is going to take a beating with their P-47s and then blame you, the test and the game for the inherent randomness of some results.

Thanks in advance!

Ha! Yes.

The cool thing even in these first results is that you could run this low CAP and get creamed one day, but a few days later with the same settings and same groups could achieve a solid win against the Thuds. Crazy!

Total losses though are good for Japan here. 253 Ki-84r lost vs 169 P-47D2 lost.

I started with one of the IJ's best late airframes. The results will be different I assume with Ki-44 or N1K2 or J2M2.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Encircled)

Post #: 5

RE: Low CAP vs High SWEEPS test #1 - 3/21/2016 1:32:26 PM

Oberst_Klink

Posts: 4778
Joined: 2/10/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Encircled

Can I be the first to mention that in about a couple of months after this someone is going to take a beating with their P-47s and then blame you, the test and the game for the inherent randomness of some results.

Thanks in advance!

Your work and dedication is appreciated, mate! I done my bit for the Jerries with a Tutorial AAR, too.

Klink, Oberst

_____________________________

My Blog & on Twitter.
Visit CS Legion on Twitter & Facebook for updates.

(in reply to Encircled)

Post #: 6

RE: Low CAP vs High SWEEPS test #1 - 3/21/2016 3:23:54 PM

Lowpe

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

Very interesting, and I think when you are finished we will be find what we already know:

The air model is complex.

There is a random, or seemingly random element that might be a large factor.

There is no one right setting and tactics continually evolve. Counter the Low CAP with a sweep at lower altitude with LRCAP for example. Counter that with this and so on.

Personally, I would like to see you change that third squadron to Oscar IVs and put them at 3k to 5k & change the 2nd squadron to a George/Jack/Tony and put them at 8k.

I want to know when you are going to break down and start a game?

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 3/21/2016 3:25:39 PM >

(in reply to Oberst_Klink)

Post #: 7

RE: Low CAP vs High SWEEPS test #1 - 3/21/2016 3:38:38 PM

geofflambert

Posts: 14863
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline

I don't know about y'all, but if I'm sweeping I'm doing it at an altitude below what I think the maximum is for the CAP. However, if I come in too low and the CAP's too high, there may be no engagement. Likewise if I come in too high and the CAP's too low there may be no engagement. If you're using Sweep as a tactic, and no engagement occurs, that is what some people call a failure. Attrition may go against you on any given day, but if it is the right tactic to use (you desire to achieve air superiority and you believe you have the means to do it) attrition is what happens. Don't try to be too cute. The only reason to sweep at max alt is because you don't have air superiority or any hope of getting it but just want to stir things up so maybe some of your bombers get through.

_____________________________

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 8

RE: Low CAP vs High SWEEPS test #1 - 3/21/2016 3:48:32 PM

obvert

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Very interesting, and I think when you are finished we will be find what we already know:

The air model is complex.

There is a random, or seemingly random element that might be a large factor.

There is no one right setting and tactics continually evolve. Counter the Low CAP with a sweep at lower altitude with LRCAP for example. Counter that with this and so on.

Personally, I would like to see you change that third squadron to Oscar IVs and put them at 3k to 5k & change the 2nd squadron to a George/Jack/Tony and put them at 8k.

I want to know when you are going to break down and start a game?

You'll be VERY interested in the next results.

I'm starting with one of the best available airframes for Japan in good numbers. The Frank here is not the Symon version but the 399mph stock Ki-84r. I'll try other things later. This seems a good blend between really high performance airframes later and the mid war airframes.

I will though add in the factors of different airframes later. First I am trying this setup at different altitude settings for defenders and for the sweepers eventually.

I've just sent a note about my game with Historiker to see if he does want to restart or potentially pass it on to another player.

< Message edited by obvert -- 3/21/2016 3:49:11 PM >

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 9

RE: Low CAP vs High SWEEPS test #1 - 3/21/2016 3:50:36 PM

obvert

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

I don't know about y'all, but if I'm sweeping I'm doing it at an altitude below what I think the maximum is for the CAP. However, if I come in too low and the CAP's too high, there may be no engagement. Likewise if I come in too high and the CAP's too low there may be no engagement. If you're using Sweep as a tactic, and no engagement occurs, that is what some people call a failure. Attrition may go against you on any given day, but if it is the right tactic to use (you desire to achieve air superiority and you believe you have the means to do it) attrition is what happens. Don't try to be too cute. The only reason to sweep at max alt is because you don't have air superiority or any hope of getting it but just want to stir things up so maybe some of your bombers get through.

Why would you sweep at an altitude lower than the highest CAP? Don't you then have the CAP gain the dive?

I've not experienced the CAP not being engaged by even a 42k sweep so far, and the next test has the highest CAP at 9k.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to geofflambert)

Post #: 10

RE: Low CAP vs High SWEEPS test #1 - 3/21/2016 3:57:34 PM

obvert

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

For the next test i've used all three Ki-84r groups in a layered CAP low against the 42k sweeps. At 9k, 7k, and 5k.

This worked a bit too well! Yikes!

EDIT: I added a column for time to target, but this is incomplete as I didn't save all CR's. I can redo though and I think this is an important piece.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by obvert -- 3/21/2016 7:16:24 PM >

_____________________________

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

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 11

RE: Low CAP vs High SWEEPS test #1 - 3/21/2016 4:13:46 PM

mind_messing

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline

For future reference, can you record detection range? As in, in the CR where it says "Time to target X minutes"?

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 12

RE: Low CAP vs High SWEEPS test #1 - 3/21/2016 4:17:39 PM

Lowpe

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

For the next test i've used all three Ki-84r groups in a layered CAP low against the 42k sweeps. At 9k, 7k, and 5k.

This worked a bit too well! Yikes!

Bingo! I could tell you why, but lets see if you can figure it out.

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 13

RE: Low CAP vs High SWEEPS test #1 - 3/21/2016 4:29:58 PM

Lokasenna

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

For the next test i've used all three Ki-84r groups in a layered CAP low against the 42k sweeps. At 9k, 7k, and 5k.

This worked a bit too well! Yikes!

Bingo! I could tell you why, but lets see if you can figure it out.

Could it be that the CAP outnumbered the individual sweeps by more than 5:1, or the total sweep by more than 2.5:1? I mean, maybe....

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 14

RE: Low CAP vs High SWEEPS test #1 - 3/21/2016 4:31:23 PM

geofflambert

Posts: 14863
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

I don't know about y'all, but if I'm sweeping I'm doing it at an altitude below what I think the maximum is for the CAP. However, if I come in too low and the CAP's too high, there may be no engagement. Likewise if I come in too high and the CAP's too low there may be no engagement. If you're using Sweep as a tactic, and no engagement occurs, that is what some people call a failure. Attrition may go against you on any given day, but if it is the right tactic to use (you desire to achieve air superiority and you believe you have the means to do it) attrition is what happens. Don't try to be too cute. The only reason to sweep at max alt is because you don't have air superiority or any hope of getting it but just want to stir things up so maybe some of your bombers get through.

Why would you sweep at an altitude lower than the highest CAP? Don't you then have the CAP gain the dive?

I've not experienced the CAP not being engaged by even a 42k sweep so far, and the next test has the highest CAP at 9k.

Well, I have experienced having CAP too high and not intercepting bombers, much less sweeps. My position stands.

edit: I've also experienced having my sweeps too high and not encountering CAP,

< Message edited by geofflambert -- 3/21/2016 4:33:39 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 15

RE: Low CAP vs High SWEEPS test #1 - 3/21/2016 4:37:21 PM

Lowpe

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

For the next test i've used all three Ki-84r groups in a layered CAP low against the 42k sweeps. At 9k, 7k, and 5k.

This worked a bit too well! Yikes!

Bingo! I could tell you why, but lets see if you can figure it out.

Could it be that the CAP outnumbered the individual sweeps by more than 5:1, or the total sweep by more than 2.5:1? I mean, maybe....

How to explain the comparative change?

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 16

RE: Low CAP vs High SWEEPS test #1 - 3/21/2016 4:45:07 PM

Lowpe

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

I don't know about y'all, but if I'm sweeping I'm doing it at an altitude below what I think the maximum is for the CAP. However, if I come in too low and the CAP's too high, there may be no engagement. Likewise if I come in too high and the CAP's too low there may be no engagement. If you're using Sweep as a tactic, and no engagement occurs, that is what some people call a failure. Attrition may go against you on any given day, but if it is the right tactic to use (you desire to achieve air superiority and you believe you have the means to do it) attrition is what happens. Don't try to be too cute. The only reason to sweep at max alt is because you don't have air superiority or any hope of getting it but just want to stir things up so maybe some of your bombers get through.

Why would you sweep at an altitude lower than the highest CAP? Don't you then have the CAP gain the dive?

I've not experienced the CAP not being engaged by even a 42k sweep so far, and the next test has the highest CAP at 9k.

Well, I have experienced having CAP too high and not intercepting bombers, much less sweeps. My position stands.

edit: I've also experienced having my sweeps too high and not encountering CAP,

What you might be seeing is sweepers engaging a training squadron and there is no actual combat but the replay pops up for second or two.

I have never seen no combat between dedicated sweepers and enemy fighters on CAP. I have seen drastically short combats though because of the altitude difference and it seems more pronounced for Japan (as the sweepers) than the Allies.

(in reply to geofflambert)

Post #: 17

RE: Low CAP vs High SWEEPS test #1 - 3/21/2016 4:46:51 PM

Lowpe

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

I think Obvert vs the Gorn would be a great match. Geoff always finishes his games to quickly.

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 18

RE: Low CAP vs High SWEEPS test #1 - 3/21/2016 6:11:37 PM

tiemanjw

Posts: 580
Joined: 12/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

For the next test i've used all three Ki-84r groups in a layered CAP low against the 42k sweeps. At 9k, 7k, and 5k.

This worked a bit too well! Yikes!

Bingo! I could tell you why, but lets see if you can figure it out.

I'm curious to what you know here.

This, I think, agrees with my (untested) observations in our game.

I have nothing of value here to add, but I'm very curious about any results you uncover. Thanks for the work.

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 19

RE: Low CAP vs High SWEEPS test #1 - 3/21/2016 6:22:27 PM

geofflambert

Posts: 14863
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

I think Obvert vs the Gorn would be a great match. Geoff always finishes his games to quickly.

It is true that I am always swift. That is why Queen Gorn of the planet Gorn has exiled me to this miserable planet. She heard that female earthlings had lower standards. I have yet to confirm that, however.
I could be merciful to Obvert as long as he doesn't give me any more flak of any caliber.

_____________________________

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 20

RE: Low CAP vs High SWEEPS test #1 - 3/21/2016 6:44:04 PM

obvert

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

I don't know about y'all, but if I'm sweeping I'm doing it at an altitude below what I think the maximum is for the CAP. However, if I come in too low and the CAP's too high, there may be no engagement. Likewise if I come in too high and the CAP's too low there may be no engagement. If you're using Sweep as a tactic, and no engagement occurs, that is what some people call a failure. Attrition may go against you on any given day, but if it is the right tactic to use (you desire to achieve air superiority and you believe you have the means to do it) attrition is what happens. Don't try to be too cute. The only reason to sweep at max alt is because you don't have air superiority or any hope of getting it but just want to stir things up so maybe some of your bombers get through.

Why would you sweep at an altitude lower than the highest CAP? Don't you then have the CAP gain the dive?

I've not experienced the CAP not being engaged by even a 42k sweep so far, and the next test has the highest CAP at 9k.

Well, I have experienced having CAP too high and not intercepting bombers, much less sweeps. My position stands.

edit: I've also experienced having my sweeps too high and not encountering CAP,

Definitely, I've had this happen with bombers for sure. Sweeps seem a different thing though.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to geofflambert)

Post #: 21

RE: Low CAP vs High SWEEPS test #1 - 3/21/2016 6:48:27 PM

geofflambert

Posts: 14863
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

I don't know about y'all, but if I'm sweeping I'm doing it at an altitude below what I think the maximum is for the CAP. However, if I come in too low and the CAP's too high, there may be no engagement. Likewise if I come in too high and the CAP's too low there may be no engagement. If you're using Sweep as a tactic, and no engagement occurs, that is what some people call a failure. Attrition may go against you on any given day, but if it is the right tactic to use (you desire to achieve air superiority and you believe you have the means to do it) attrition is what happens. Don't try to be too cute. The only reason to sweep at max alt is because you don't have air superiority or any hope of getting it but just want to stir things up so maybe some of your bombers get through.

Why would you sweep at an altitude lower than the highest CAP? Don't you then have the CAP gain the dive?

I've not experienced the CAP not being engaged by even a 42k sweep so far, and the next test has the highest CAP at 9k.

Well, I have experienced having CAP too high and not intercepting bombers, much less sweeps. My position stands.

edit: I've also experienced having my sweeps too high and not encountering CAP,

What you might be seeing is sweepers engaging a training squadron and there is no actual combat but the replay pops up for second or two.

I have never seen no combat between dedicated sweepers and enemy fighters on CAP. I have seen drastically short combats though because of the altitude difference and it seems more pronounced for Japan (as the sweepers) than the Allies.

right, and another possibility is that the CAP was exhausted from previous sweeps and attacks. I usually throw everything at the same target. I never tried to pin it down like Obvert is.

_____________________________

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 22

RE: Low CAP vs High SWEEPS test #1 - 3/21/2016 6:50:44 PM

obvert

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

For future reference, can you record detection range? As in, in the CR where it says "Time to target X minutes"?

It's different for each group of course, and the interesting thing for me is that it does seem there is a correlation there between low CAP being successful and time to intercept.

So I've been taking screenshots of the CRs since they are overwritten each day, but I think I'll start also pushing a day ahead with each iteration so I can keep the CRs themselves. I'm as I say just getting a feel for what needs to be tested, and I haven't even started watching the combats yet. I would like to watch specific ones to see what happened over time. Sweeping with two groups does show just enough difference between them though that I think this will show a lot.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Bingo! I could tell you why, but lets see if you can figure it out.

I'm getting some ideas now, but i'll hold off until I can look through the CRs or match up CRs with the other data. It does feel like detection, time to target and time to intercept are big factors. I'll also have to test without radar (I've added a lot here to make sure some of it is working) and at different distances. I realize now 4 hexes may be too close for some radars. The US CPS-1 detects to 198 miles!

_____________________________

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

(in reply to mind_messing)

Post #: 23

RE: Low CAP vs High SWEEPS test #1 - 3/21/2016 7:18:04 PM

obvert

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

Just added the Time to Target notes from the CRs I had. Thought I had them all but not quite.

From that data though it doesn't look like the radar is working? Those are some very short detection times. Maybe I've got to tweak my test scenario. Type 3 is the best IJN radar for bases, right?

_____________________________

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

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 24

RE: Low CAP vs High SWEEPS test #1 - 3/21/2016 8:09:06 PM

tiemanjw

Posts: 580
Joined: 12/6/2008
Status: offline

When I did my testing and added radar the detection times were all awful (about 10 or so minutes), but the results were drastically improved for the CAP.

Also, I don't think radar has any effect outside the hex it is in, but the longer ranges still help you. Confusing, I know, but it is all part of the abstraction. Short version, I don't think moving further than 4 hexes will have any effect, regardless of the radar range.

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 25

RE: Low CAP vs High SWEEPS test #1 - 3/21/2016 8:14:00 PM

Lokasenna

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

Just added the Time to Target notes from the CRs I had. Thought I had them all but not quite.

From that data though it doesn't look like the radar is working? Those are some very short detection times. Maybe I've got to tweak my test scenario. Type 3 is the best IJN radar for bases, right?

Maybe I missed it in your notes when I scrolled back up.

You should use the -archive switch to keep every CR. The one in the simple SAVE folder will be overwritten daily, but you will have dated ones in your archive folder within the SAVE folder.

Sweeps function differently than bombing raids. I have seen a few sweeps where the attacking fighters do their "Ki-84a Frank sweeping at 34000 feet" and the visual is shown over the target base before the CAP is completely depleted, so there seems to be a random function in here for when the battle is over... however, for the most part, CAP and sweepers will always fight because the sweeps are looking for the CAP, and vice versa. For bombing raids, if the CAP doesn't have time to get to the raid, then it just begins its attack runs on the target.

I have had fewer strikes get through CAP when CAP was too high than when CAP was too low. I would rather err on the high side, and again I don't know why anyone would ever sweep at anything other than their plane's maximum altitude, so would rather err on the high side there also.

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 26

RE: Low CAP vs High SWEEPS test #1 - 3/21/2016 11:26:09 PM

BillBrown

Posts: 2335
Joined: 6/15/2002
Status: offline

I would love to see the second test redone with the P47s sweeping at 15,000 feet

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 27

RE: Low CAP vs High SWEEPS test #1 - 3/22/2016 6:54:58 AM

JocMeister

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

Erik, regarding sweeps and radar. I tested this a while back.

Have a squadron sweep a base. Note the TTT. Then switch them to AF attack and note the TTT. Results used to be very...interesting a while back. Don�t know if its fixed now.

(in reply to BillBrown)

Post #: 28

RE: Low CAP vs High SWEEPS test #1 - 3/22/2016 7:47:04 AM

Barb

Posts: 2503
Joined: 2/27/2007
From: Bratislava, Slovakia
Status: offline

IIRC Radars work just for the target hex. However longer detection range means more "rolls" for each radar device - so a radar could have 1 roll with range of 20 (it is assumed it is in centre of the hex), 2 rolls with range 60, 3 rolls with range 100, etc.. or something in that way...

Succesfull radar detection is critical in getting your own planes into the air - and possibly above the attackers regardless of CAP setting altitude ("Group altitude set 20000, climbing to 17000 to 31000" message).

_____________________________

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 29

RE: Low CAP vs High SWEEPS test #1 - 3/22/2016 8:24:07 AM

obvert

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

So here is another that I did late last night and accidently posted in John III's AAR. Whoops! Anyway, it's here now.

This is one to show the effects of an all high CAP at 31k. Quite a big difference! Should also point out that this is not a layered CAP, which based on earlier results seems more effective. I'll test a high layered CAP next for comparison.