Wildcats and other US plane mysteries

Wildcats and other US plane mysteries (Full Version)

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

Message

qgaliana -> Wildcats and other US plane mysteries (9/6/2006 5:07:33 PM)
I'm well past a full year of my first attempt to finish a campaign against the AI. The questions are starting to pile up. If I can tear myself from the game I'll be spending an awful lot of time here hoping for enlightenment [:D] Bear with me, I prefer personal WWII accounts to technical info so I'm not up to speed on a lot of this stuff. Most curious for me now: why do my wildcats stink so badly against zeros? My carrier planes typically take 5:1 losses against even IJA pilots and they're high 70 to low 80 exp. Were they historically this junky, even in early 43? On a related note, P40s do ok against the same fighter formations (on defense), P38s similar (on attack, so assume more fatigue). On the other hand RAAF Kittyhawks routinely brush aside twice their number of escorting zeros, with multiple kills, and savage incoming bombers. Obviously the Kittyhawk is cearly a superior plane to the P40 [8\|] Did I miss a hardcoded 'this plane sucks' flag somewhere?

Mike Scholl -> RE: Wildcats and other US plane mysteries (9/6/2006 5:17:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: qgaliana I'm well past a full year of my first attempt to finish a campaign against the AI. The questions are starting to pile up. If I can tear myself from the game I'll be spending an awful lot of time here hoping for enlightenment [:D] Bear with me, I prefer personal WWII accounts to technical info so I'm not up to speed on a lot of this stuff. Most curious for me now: why do my wildcats stink so badly against zeros? My carrier planes typically take 5:1 losses against even IJA pilots and they're high 70 to low 80 exp. Were they historically this junky, even in early 43? On a related note, P40s do ok against the same fighter formations (on defense), P38s similar (on attack, so assume more fatigue). On the other hand RAAF Kittyhawks routinely brush aside twice their number of escorting zeros, with multiple kills, and savage incoming bombers. Obviously the Kittyhawk is cearly a superior plane to the P40 [8\|] Did I miss a hardcoded 'this plane sucks' flag somewhere? NO. Statistically the F4f was pretty level with the Zero in the 1942 fighting. It generally benefited from certain advantages in that the Japanese were often opperating at the limits of their range (not a problem for the F4f's as their much shorter range prevented them from being involved in return strikes). On a totally level playing field, the Zero MIGHT have had a SLIGHT "edge", but the game's results are often just plain silly.

niceguy2005 -> RE: Wildcats and other US plane mysteries (9/6/2006 5:54:41 PM)
The most important factors in WitP are airplane speed and pilot ratings. The problem you may be experiencing is that your Wildcat Pilots are not fully trained up, while the carrier based zero pilots have experience in the 80s or 90s.

goodboyladdie -> RE: Wildcats and other US plane mysteries (9/6/2006 5:56:34 PM)
The difference you are seeing between P40E and Kittyhawk I results is probabably down to their opposition. The AI will keep a unit in the line against you and replace all it's pilots with untrained pilots as they are lost at this stage of the war. They rapidly become useless and you find your pilots getting large scores against them. The enemy units your P40Es are facing are probably not in as bad a state as the ones your Kittyhawks are facing. This was a historical problem for the Japs. PBEM opponents use various methods to ensure that their frontline units only receive experienced pilots, but I am afraid that once the pilot pool is gone, the AI becomes cannon fodder in the air.

qgaliana -> RE: Wildcats and other US plane mysteries (9/6/2006 6:07:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: niceguy2005 The most important factors in WitP are airplane speed and pilot ratings. The problem you may be experiencing is that your Wildcat Pilots are not fully trained up, while the carrier based zero pilots have experience in the 80s or 90s. Actually, I'm fighting the same LB zeros as the P40/kittyhawks. As I said, my wildcats are around 80exp give or take a few points. The results against carrier zeros were much, much worse. quote: The difference you are seeing between P40E and Kittyhawk I results is probabably down to their opposition. The AI will keep a unit in the line against you and replace all it's pilots with untrained pilots as they are lost at this stage of the war. They rapidly become useless and you find your pilots getting large scores against them. The enemy units your P40Es are facing are probably not in as bad a state as the ones your Kittyhawks are facing. This was a historical problem for the Japs. PBEM opponents use various methods to ensure that their frontline units only receive experienced pilots, but I am afraid that once the pilot pool is gone, the AI becomes cannon fodder in the air. In fact with my land based air I have been seeing these effects already (very favourable kill ratios and enemy planes breaking off). Which is why I was letting my carriers cruise into range of these bases and do some raiding. No damage to my ships but my wildcats take a consistent beating anyways.

niceguy2005 -> RE: Wildcats and other US plane mysteries (9/6/2006 7:08:19 PM)
Well, air speed and pilot ratings are by far the most important factors. Gun ratings are important for kills, but won't help the survivability of your pilots. You may just be getting bad die rolls.

Hoplosternum -> RE: Wildcats and other US plane mysteries (9/6/2006 7:20:28 PM)
Probably a bit of bad luck with the Wildcats. Unless it's really early on (when the Zeros have the 'bonus' that boosts their manoeuvre value) I usually get better ratios vs Zeros. Not 1:1 but better than 5:1. The speed point Niceguy was making is that the combat in WitP is dominated by (max) speed. This was crucial in real life of course, but WitP if anything, overstates this. At least many learned folks on the board seem to think it does. So Kittyhawk Is with a speed of 362 do well against Zeros with a speed of 332 (A6M2). That 30 difference is magnified by the WitP combat engine to give it an important edge. Wildcats (F4Fs) are rated at 320 I believe. A relatively small differential with the Zero, but this may have quite a large effect in the WitP air to air combat model. Of course the P-40Es are also rated at 362 so it does not explain that. The Kittyhawk I squadrons are small in number and many are quite 'famous' and so I suspect have a lot of named pilots rather than generic ones. This may have an impact. Some pilots wrack up a lot of kills despite not being as experienced as their fellows, these are often the named pilots. Maybe just chance / a myth but maybe not. Kills are certainly not spread evenly over a squadron in WitP, nor just via experience. Some pilots do seem to become and stay aces. There might be a hidden stat somewhere.... Also watch the experience of the units. P-40Es are USAAF and get far greener pilot replacements than the navy fliers (55 compared to 70 I think in '42). If those squadrons have a fairly high turnover their average experience is going to fall to 55-60 fairly quickly with a corresponding drop in performance. If your Kittyhawks are doing well they are not losing the pilots and will keep their quality up.

Howard Mitchell -> RE: Wildcats and other US plane mysteries (9/6/2006 7:23:56 PM)
What difficulty setting do you have the AI on qgaliana? At the higher settings it gets bonuses in combat IIRC, which amy also skew your results.

niceguy2005 -> RE: Wildcats and other US plane mysteries (9/6/2006 7:26:58 PM)
Hoplosternum brings up a point I am just beginning to study and understand, that is that air combat is determined by individual pilot rankings, not the overall unit average dispalyed on the info screen. Therefore, a unit with 4 or 5 pilots in the 90s and the rest in the 60s may do better in terms of kills than a unit with pilots all in the 60s and 70s, yet they still may have the same average expereince rating. I don't know if this really explains the problem with the Wildcats as a rating of 80 or better is pretty high.

qgaliana -> RE: Wildcats and other US plane mysteries (9/6/2006 7:38:08 PM)
Historical/Standard (?) difficulty, so no bonuses. I'm mostly trying to get used to the running different operations with the types and sizes of forces as the war goes on, so I'm not being extremely aggressive. It may just be bad luck. I've only really just gotten LB wildcats into action and they've been anemic but not pitiful. It's just been my carrier squadrons that have been abysmal in the 10 or so engagements, so its not a huge sample - I just pay a lot more attention to them. Mostly I was starting to wonder if their was a basis for the wildcat underperforming the zero because I hadn't gotten that impression before. Understood for the RAAF, and suspected something like that. In this particular war they've been the stars (ship sinkings, a2a kills, etc). Always wonder what little features are embedded under the hood that I don't know about. But do P40s suffer an undocumented altitude penalty like the 39s and 400s?

Nemo121 -> RE: Wildcats and other US plane mysteries (9/6/2006 7:43:30 PM)
Well if your carrier-based F4Fs are doing poorly compared to your land-based F4Fs it is probably the quality of the opposition. If your CV-based planes are facing KB's pilots then that will explain why they are doing much more poorly than your land-based planes facing less than the varsity.

qgaliana -> RE: Wildcats and other US plane mysteries (9/6/2006 8:16:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Nemo121 Well if your carrier-based F4Fs are doing poorly compared to your land-based F4Fs it is probably the quality of the opposition. If your CV-based planes are facing KB's pilots then that will explain why they are doing much more poorly than your land-based planes facing less than the varsity. Just to clarify from my initial post - when I said my wildcats stank against IJA zeros I was referring to LB zeros (in hindsight I don't think speaking of IJA zeros makes sense). Against KB it was a bloodbath. I've been getting that 5:1 ratio against the land based zeros that the aussies are using as punching bags. Again, it may just have been really bad luck and I'm psychologically grouping two battles with the KB butt kickings. But thanks for all the feedback, there are so many variables I usually learn something new everytime one of these discussions comes up.

Miller -> RE: Wildcats and other US plane mysteries (9/7/2006 12:14:52 AM)
Are you playing a stock game? Nikmod tones down speed values and ups durability to get more balanced results.

qgaliana -> RE: Wildcats and other US plane mysteries (9/7/2006 3:10:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Miller Are you playing a stock game? Nikmod tones down speed values and ups durability to get more balanced results. Stock for me right now. The mods sound promising but I've barely able to absorb the game as is so I'm going to stick with that for the moment. Just wondering if the wildcat was historically a mediocre fighter or it's just the way the game/oob is setup. I may be using it wrong, but my best case results (good xp, low fatigue, local cap, even odds) are still poor compared to other fighters.

dtravel -> RE: Wildcats and other US plane mysteries (9/7/2006 3:29:42 AM)
Its the way the game is set up.

jolly_pillager -> RE: Wildcats and other US plane mysteries (9/7/2006 5:24:46 AM)
My experience is that F4F's in general (counting both Marine and Navy planes) suffer at about 4-1 against A6M2's (again both land based and CV based) throughout '42. One of the reasons I started playing CHS.

seydlitz_slith -> RE: Wildcats and other US plane mysteries (9/7/2006 8:22:20 AM)
Historically, the F4F-4 Wildcat was hated by the majority of the naval fighter pilots. The added weight of the self sealing tanks, armor, and folding wings killed the performance drastically when compared to the F4F-3 (which was never a good climber). The -4 also had very limited ammo for the guns. If you want to learn about this, the best book to read is one called "The First Team" about the first year of naval air combat in the Pacific from Pearl Harbor through Midway. Very informative book.

herwin -> RE: Wildcats and other US plane mysteries (9/7/2006 12:28:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: qgaliana I'm well past a full year of my first attempt to finish a campaign against the AI. The questions are starting to pile up. If I can tear myself from the game I'll be spending an awful lot of time here hoping for enlightenment [:D] Bear with me, I prefer personal WWII accounts to technical info so I'm not up to speed on a lot of this stuff. Most curious for me now: why do my wildcats stink so badly against zeros? My carrier planes typically take 5:1 losses against even IJA pilots and they're high 70 to low 80 exp. Were they historically this junky, even in early 43? No. They were an even match, probably because most of the carrier pilots on both sides were expert fliers. Both sides had advantages and disadvantages, and knew them, so the exchange ratio basically reflected who surprised who. By 43-44, the Japanese had lost their experts, American planes were better, and the exchange rate moved to 10-1. quote: On a related note, P40s do ok against the same fighter formations (on defense), P38s similar (on attack, so assume more fatigue). On the other hand RAAF Kittyhawks routinely brush aside twice their number of escorting zeros, with multiple kills, and savage incoming bombers. Obviously the Kittyhawk is cearly a superior plane to the P40 [8\|] Did I miss a hardcoded 'this plane sucks' flag somewhere?

herwin -> RE: Wildcats and other US plane mysteries (9/7/2006 12:56:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: seydlitz Historically, the F4F-4 Wildcat was hated by the majority of the naval fighter pilots. The added weight of the self sealing tanks, armor, and folding wings� killed the performance drastically when compared to the F4F-3 (which was never a good climber).� The -4 also had very limited ammo for the guns.�� If you want to learn about this, the best book to read is one called "The First Team"� about the first year of naval air combat in the Pacific from Pearl Harbor� through Midway.� Very informative book. See Lundstrom, 1994, The First Team and the Guadalcanal Campaign, Naval Institute Press. This is a sequel that covers the period you're interested in. F4Fs usually had an altitude advantage, and that allowed them to hold their own against the attacking Zeros. You might consider finding out whether raising the altitude your CAP operates at will make a difference.

Sardaukar -> RE: Wildcats and other US plane mysteries (9/7/2006 6:19:38 PM)
Altitude might play a role here indeed. F4F had bad climb rate compared to A6M2 and in real world it was very bad to be "bounced" by Zeros coming from higher altitude, be it any plane one were flying. Might be useful to change CAP altitude from stock standard (10 000 ft?) to 15 000 ft at least. I seem to recall that AI often places it's Escort/CAP to 13 000 to 17 000 ft.

qgaliana -> RE: Wildcats and other US plane mysteries (9/7/2006 7:38:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sardaukar Altitude might play a role here indeed. F4F had bad climb rate compared to A6M2 and in real world it was very bad to be "bounced" by Zeros coming from higher altitude, be it any plane one were flying. Might be useful to change CAP altitude from stock standard (10 000 ft?) to 15 000 ft at least. I seem to recall that AI often places it's Escort/CAP to 13 000 to 17 000 ft. I typically set my CAP to 20k. But my bombers can vary and that would move my escort around. Good point. I'm trying to get plenty of turns in so I barely watch animations and haven't looked for messages indicating any tactical advantages.

Big B -> RE: Wildcats and other US plane mysteries (9/9/2006 12:56:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jolly_pillager My experience is that F4F's in general (counting both Marine and Navy planes) suffer at about 4-1 against A6M2's (again both land based and CV based) throughout '42. One of the reasons I started playing CHS. quote: ORIGINAL: herwin quote: ORIGINAL: qgaliana I'm well past a full year of my first attempt to finish a campaign against the AI. The questions are starting to pile up. If I can tear myself from the game I'll be spending an awful lot of time here hoping for enlightenment [:D] Bear with me, I prefer personal WWII accounts to technical info so I'm not up to speed on a lot of this stuff. Most curious for me now: why do my wildcats stink so badly against zeros? My carrier planes typically take 5:1 losses against even IJA pilots and they're high 70 to low 80 exp. Were they historically this junky, even in early 43? No. They were an even match, probably because most of the carrier pilots on both sides were expert fliers. Both sides had advantages and disadvantages, and knew them, so the exchange ratio basically reflected who surprised who. By 43-44, the Japanese had lost their experts, American planes were better, and the exchange rate moved to 10-1. It looks a bit different here... (From Nicholas Bell's test thread of air combat in the B-Mod) quote: ORIGINAL: Nicholas Bell Buin to Lunga [image]local://upfiles/20401/401C0E5DF36A461698ACE549C626C1C5.gif[/image]

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.015625