Experienced Jap airmen mean nada (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945



Message

DDLAfan -> Experienced Jap airmen mean nada (3/16/2006 11:14:17 PM)

It's dec 43 in my pbem, and I just lost 100 tony's for 6 thunderbolts. I've been playing this game since it first came out, and been reading this message board regularly regarding the historicity (?) of the jap pilot training program. Despite all the reams of threads regarding this, it's all irrevelant. A crap plane is a crap plane. A good number of those Tony's had 80 and 90 exp pilots flying them.

Oh, and by the way, for all the allied players who cry about how powerful Japan is early in the war, etc, etc., trying playing Japan. Not only are my planes no match, my bases and ground troops suffer from daily carpet bombing raids from 200+ 4E's. I now realize I have to spend a good year of my life getting a daily arse kicking in a game which I KNOW I have no chance to win.

I'm not quitting tho. If Tojo and friends can stand it, I can....




Demosthenes -> RE: Experienced Jap airmen mean nada (3/16/2006 11:19:30 PM)

I can assure you Japan IS too powerful in the first year of the war - in this game.
I also have no doubt that what just happened to you - happened to you, and is not realistic either.
The specs for aircraft are pretty accurate - relative to each other.

That leads me to believe what we are both seeing is that the formula for aircombat is not working well (biggest understatement of the year).

Demo



Ursa MAior -> RE: Experienced Jap airmen mean nada (3/17/2006 12:46:38 AM)

Try Nikademus' mod. The stock air to air model suxxx.



marky -> RE: Experienced Jap airmen mean nada (3/17/2006 12:55:40 AM)

training isnt always everything. look at it this way. If youre Mario Andretti but you drive a Geo Metro wat will happen? [:D]



Demosthenes -> RE: Experienced Jap airmen mean nada (3/17/2006 12:57:16 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: marky

training isnt always everything. look at it this way. If youre Mario Andretti but you drive a Geo Metro wat will happen? [:D]

Marky...are you old enough to remember Mario Andretti?[X(][:D]



Ron Saueracker -> RE: Experienced Jap airmen mean nada (3/17/2006 12:58:37 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: marky

training isnt always everything. look at it this way. If youre Mario Andretti but you drive a Geo Metro wat will happen? [:D]


Depends if you are downtown shopping or at the oval.[:D]
He'd still get laid, handsome bugger.



Demosthenes -> RE: Experienced Jap airmen mean nada (3/17/2006 1:00:22 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ursa MAior

Try Nikademus' mod. The stock air to air model suxxx.

Yah.....the stock model leaves a lot to be desired. (sigh) Even the mods acknowledge that[;)]



Sardonic -> RE: Experienced Jap airmen mean nada (3/17/2006 1:14:44 AM)

I would argue that the attrition modeling for aircraft is either ignored or insufficient.

The USA lost on the average 10% of all active planes per month.

I assure you I have NEVER seen anything approaching that level of attrition.

Those 200+ raids would get REAL expensive at that level.

I am not saying the planes were lost. They were written off.



el cid again -> RE: Experienced Jap airmen mean nada (3/17/2006 4:26:28 AM)

The problem is in the code: one day you lose your power as Japan.
It probably should be fixed. But nothing we can do about it. This is different from the early war issues. I ran tests in 1945 (to learn about 1945 planes) - Japan might as well surrender. The whole combined air force scored a single hit on USS New Jersey! And died in the effort.



Ursa MAior -> RE: Experienced Jap airmen mean nada (3/17/2006 9:01:00 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Demosthenes


quote:

ORIGINAL: marky

training isnt always everything. look at it this way. If youre Mario Andretti but you drive a Geo Metro wat will happen? [:D]

Marky...are you old enough to remember Mario Andretti?[X(][:D]


Problem is that I remember him driving in Formula one. That was before he switched to Nascar.

BTW downtown I dont think most of us could catch him with a 'regular' (ie not sports or tuned up) car, Metro or not.

And yes pilot exp DO count. Even in 1945 some P51D's (2or3) IIRC were shot down by clearly outclassed Me109's flown by surviving experten. Or even if we half Sakai's claim about shooting down Corsairs on the last day of the war, an experienced pilot CAN overcome superior planes. Erich Hartmann has survived wioth his Me109G a dogfight with as much as 10 Mustangs over a rumanian oilfield. No losses on any side. [:D]

IMHO the air combat model should take into consideration the following things

1. Altitude
2. Number ratio
3. Pilot exp
4. Plane capabilities

In this order.



kokubokan25 -> RE: Experienced Jap airmen mean nada (3/17/2006 9:16:06 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again

The problem is in the code: one day you lose your power as Japan.
It probably should be fixed. But nothing we can do about it. This is different from the early war issues. I ran tests in 1945 (to learn about 1945 planes) - Japan might as well surrender. The whole combined air force scored a single hit on USS New Jersey! And died in the effort.


Those stats are with the concurrence of the kamikazes??



Mike Scholl -> RE: Experienced Jap airmen mean nada (3/17/2006 5:58:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardonic

I would argue that the attrition modeling for aircraft is either ignored or insufficient.

The USA lost on the average 10% of all active planes per month.

I assure you I have NEVER seen anything approaching that level of attrition.

Those 200+ raids would get REAL expensive at that level.

I am not saying the planes were lost. They were written off.



And Japan's attrition losses were slightly higher than those of the US. It's a seriously under-represented factor in the game.



Sneer -> RE: Experienced Jap airmen mean nada (3/17/2006 6:17:57 PM)

not true from 2k lost jap planes half is to ops



bradfordkay -> RE: Experienced Jap airmen mean nada (3/17/2006 6:58:20 PM)

" Marky...are you old enough to remember Mario Andretti?


Ursa Major:
Problem is that I remember him driving in Formula one. That was before he switched to Nascar. "


Actually, Mario raced Nascar before he went into Formula One. I recall him winnning the 1967 Daytona 500, long before he won the 1978 Formula One championship for Lotus.



Ursa MAior -> RE: Experienced Jap airmen mean nada (3/17/2006 11:53:04 PM)

Hey I am not THAT old![:D]



Demosthenes -> RE: Experienced Jap airmen mean nada (3/18/2006 12:00:00 AM)

Heck, I remember him (Mario Andretti) racing in the Indy'500 back in 1966 ...though he lost to A.J.Foyt as I recall.[;)]




el cid again -> RE: Experienced Jap airmen mean nada (3/18/2006 12:39:20 AM)

quote:


The problem is in the code: one day you lose your power as Japan.
It probably should be fixed. But nothing we can do about it. This is different from the early war issues. I ran tests in 1945 (to learn about 1945 planes) - Japan might as well surrender. The whole combined air force scored a single hit on USS New Jersey! And died in the effort.


Those stats are with the concurrence of the kamikazes??


No they were not. I am not sure the code will do kamakazes with new plane types it never heard of? Anyway, I don't believe in kamakazes and I wanted to know if the regular planes would fly? Well - they fly - they just cannot survive! Even though I put the US fleet at Osaka and allowed it NO air cover! They just shot down everything. Now I am an anti-air warfare guy - US Navy type - and I believe in guns - but that is rediculous.



el cid again -> RE: Experienced Jap airmen mean nada (3/18/2006 12:42:44 AM)

quote:

And Japan's attrition losses were slightly higher than those of the US. It's a seriously under-represented factor in the game.


The problem is that how you use your planes affects attrition. Specifically, it matters the size of the airfield relative to the size of the plane. Also, the mission matters. So measuring what the game does is complicated. But the theory was that durability would affect attrition. I cut durability by about 6 - on the average - as far as I can go and still have a reasonable range to represent different plane types. It does not seem to have been enough - and if it is - it is barely enough. It is clearly not excessive. A code change may be required to get attrition as high as we would like. If you wish to couduct tests with the new plane values, let me know.



el cid again -> RE: Experienced Jap airmen mean nada (3/18/2006 12:45:24 AM)

quote:

And Japan's attrition losses were slightly higher than those of the US. It's a seriously under-represented factor in the game.

_____________________________


This MIGHT be true - but the g ame DOES model higher losses (for Japan) due to the way the Allies were set up to recover pilots - so I would not bet on it being totally ignored. Under the hood there are some very sophisticated considerations - if we only knew about them we would be impressed. In this case, it was disclosed.



Ron Saueracker -> RE: Experienced Jap airmen mean nada (3/18/2006 2:56:30 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again

quote:

And Japan's attrition losses were slightly higher than those of the US. It's a seriously under-represented factor in the game.

_____________________________


This MIGHT be true - but the g ame DOES model higher losses (for Japan) due to the way the Allies were set up to recover pilots - so I would not bet on it being totally ignored. Under the hood there are some very sophisticated considerations - if we only knew about them we would be impressed. In this case, it was disclosed.


Or there may be grade school drawings. That's the beauty of keeping it hidden, nobody knows if your are an idiot or not.[:)]



Feinder -> RE: Experienced Jap airmen mean nada (3/18/2006 3:15:15 AM)

quote:

Oh, and by the way, for all the allied players who cry about how powerful Japan is early in the war, etc, etc., trying playing Japan.


I -do- play Japan. Japan -IS- very powerful early war.

But it also gets clobbered when the advanced Allied fighters come out. I lost 350 planes YESTERDAY in my game vs. Ollie (shot down maybe 8 of his). Difference being I didn't post an inflamatory whine-fest on the board.

-F-



TheElf -> RE: Experienced Jap airmen mean nada (3/18/2006 5:47:43 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: marky

training isnt always everything. look at it this way. If youre Mario Andretti but you drive a Geo Metro wat will happen? [:D]


The problem with this generalization as it pertains to the original posters situation is that a Tony is one of the better Japanese Fighters, excepting Range and perhaps maintainability. In the Real world if you got 100+ Tonys airborne with the type of pilots DDLAfan is describing the P-47s would have to have several key factors in their favor at the beginning of the engagement to do anywhere near the damage that seems have been done here.

I'm talking Altitude, airspeed, Numerical superiority of at least 2 to 1 if not more, and an overall EXP level equal to or exceeding that of the Tony pilots. Even then a Highly experienced IJAAF Tony Group should be able minimize casualties due to sheer EXP such that the casualties are nowhere near as bloody as this.

Long story short in comparison to a P-47 the Tony is not as bad as a Metro.

DDLAfan, it is a well known fact that the Air Routine (there isn't a model) does not handle large Air battles well and this is the kind of all too common result of the typical one-upsmanship game most PBEM players play. They assume that by concentrating all their Air units in one place they will be better off. Try spreading your forces out and hurting your opponent in many different places so that you have many smaller battles instead of one big one. THAT is a more realistic way to fight in the Pacific, with a few exceptions of course.



Charles2222 -> RE: Experienced Jap airmen mean nada (3/18/2006 12:07:10 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Feinder

quote:

Oh, and by the way, for all the allied players who cry about how powerful Japan is early in the war, etc, etc., trying playing Japan.


I -do- play Japan. Japan -IS- very powerful early war.

But it also gets clobbered when the advanced Allied fighters come out. I lost 350 planes YESTERDAY in my game vs. Ollie (shot down maybe 8 of his). Difference being I didn't post an inflamatory whine-fest on the board.

-F-


So what's more offensive to this board (I ask rhetorically as your opinion is clear) a possible subjective viewpoint as to whether someone whines or not, or the objective offense your avatar poses? Beam in your eye perhaps?



invernomuto -> RE: Experienced Jap airmen mean nada (3/18/2006 2:00:45 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Feinder

I -do- play Japan. Japan -IS- very powerful early war.

But it also gets clobbered when the advanced Allied fighters come out. I lost 350 planes YESTERDAY in my game vs. Ollie (shot down maybe 8 of his). Difference being I didn't post an inflamatory whine-fest on the board.

-F-


350 vs 8 is a very big game problem, not a whine.

I hope the new devs will focus on tuning A2A model, such results are plain absurd...

Bye.



Feinder -> RE: Experienced Jap airmen mean nada (3/18/2006 8:02:33 PM)

Invernomuto, I completely agree that the (large scale) air to air model in WitP "needs a lot of work".

My response to DDLFan was that quite simply, his assumption that Allied playes had/don't play Japan, is quite incorrect. I do play both sides. His post reflects the same myopic view-point that he is accusing "the Allied fan-boys" of.

I play PBEM as both Allies and Japan. I can see both sides of the spectrum quite well, despite DDLFan's juvenile finger-pointing.

Cheers.
-F-



esteban -> RE: Experienced Jap airmen mean nada (3/18/2006 11:17:00 PM)

Faced with 2-1 or 3-1 odds, against good Japanese pilots in decent fighters, those Thunderbolts should have lost half their number or more at the cost of maybe the same number of Japanese fighters.




elxaime -> RE: Experienced Jap airmen mean nada (3/18/2006 11:54:52 PM)

Hi -

I am the Allied player on the other side of this December 1943 massacre (the Japan player is my brother).

In actuality the Allies had a numerical advantage in this fight.

The Allies had roughly 100 RAF Thunderbolt II's and 25 RNAF Corsair IV's flying from Akyab against 100 JAAF Tony based out of Rangoon.

The T-bolt squadrons had all spent several weeks attacking Jap ground targets in Burma, so their average experience levels were all in the low to mid-70's. The Corsair IV's averaged in the mid-70's. This means that, while the Japanese had some good pilots in the 80's and 90's, so did the Allies. Overall, I think the Allied pilots average experience levels were 5-10 points higher than the Japanese.

Plus, this was a fighter sweep, so the Allies were all coming in at maximum altitude and generally got the "bounce" in the first few rounds. The result was 100 Tonys flamed vs 6 T-bolts. The sweep was followed by about 350 or so Liberators who erased the remaining 50 or so Japanese fighters on the airstrip.

We have halted our game for other reasons (the disappearing leader and disappearing units bugs have basically just worn us down from wanting to play on) but I told my bro' my sense was that this result was within reason given the quality of the Allied squadrons and planes, the type of mission, etc.

I think we both agree though that the air combat model is too bloody. It doesn't account for limited ammo in each planes guns, the numbers of planes that historically didn't actually engage during fights (abort, etc.) and generally the fact that squadrons tend to have more planes in "ready" status than they did historically.

The conclusion I draw from this is that the Japanese, even with the most sophisticated pilot training programs and player-controlled upgrades, simply cease being competitive in the air with the Allies once the new US aircraft types are deployed in numbers. While tweaking the air model might spread out the carnage, I don't think it changes the overall situation.

Anyway just hope this helps debate.



Big B -> RE: Experienced Jap airmen mean nada (3/19/2006 1:26:24 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: elxaime

Hi -

I am the Allied player on the other side of this December 1943 massacre (the Japan player is my brother).


Ooooohhh - In my house an incident like that would have led to the usual insults followed by bare knuckles![X(] [:D]



Black Mamba 1942 -> RE: Experienced Jap airmen mean nada (3/19/2006 2:24:58 AM)

I hope you are correct![:D]

In a current PBEM, by 20 Dec 41, the Japanese have lost 560 ac vs 450 Allied ac.
Enterprise lost, Shokaku and Kaga lost, all outside Pearl.

The entire Central Pacific has been overwhelmed in less than 2 weeks.
Midway, Palmyra, Johnston, Christmas, and Noumea![:D]

Hong Kong is still barely holding out.
It's the longest defense there that I've ever seen.[X(]

I'm hoping this aggressive style by the Japanese will really come back to bite them in 42.[;)]
I should also note that the IJN player opted not to strike PH on turn one to conserve ac.[;)]



elxaime -> RE: Experienced Jap airmen mean nada (3/19/2006 3:18:14 AM)

One of the reasons I play Allies against my brother as Japan is I can be sure he will stick it out once the tide turns.

I had heard that unfortunately it is pretty common for Japan players to disappear from WITP PBEM games once the early "fun" part of the war is over for them.

I have had that happen in other PBEM wargaming. You play the side that is on the defense and you get your head beaten in for the first part of the game. Then, just as you anticipate your reward for sticking it out and surviving, your PBEM opponent goes poof. Bummer.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.890625