RE: Sweep vs Escorts

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: Sweep vs Escorts

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 >> RE: Sweep vs Escorts

Page: << < prev 3 4 5 6 [7]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Sweep vs Escorts - 7/19/2010 9:31:36 PM

EUBanana

Posts: 4552
Joined: 9/30/2003
From: Little England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron
What Nomad, Sardaukar, Nemo and me tried to show, and probably many others already are aware of: the dive is not almighty if you
don�t play dumb. Its just another feature.

None of that is relevant though. When you have a unit you think will see action you must set its altitude. At that precise moment, what do you set it to? That is the only question I am interested in. Pilot quality, defensiveness, type of aircraft - all irrelevant. At that precise moment where you are about to see action, you must pick an altitude.

And with whatever pilot, whatever plane, whatever defensiveness, if you're not trying to escort bombers, then the answer is always the same. The ceiling. I've yet to see any evidence whatsoever - aside from split CAP which we've already touched on as no more than partially relevanti n practice - that I should set that altitude setting to anything other than the aircrafts ceiling.

There is plenty more to the game than altitude settings. That is simply stating the obvious. However when it comes to actually choosing an altitude none of that is relevant, I'm talkign about altitude, not, for example, how long you should train a pilot to be competent, or how many Zeroes a P40 is worth on average, or which bases are best to conquer. Just altitude.

_____________________________

(in reply to LoBaron)

Post #: 181

RE: Sweep vs Escorts - 7/19/2010 10:57:16 PM

Vladd

Posts: 69
Joined: 10/24/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

None of that is relevant though. When you have a unit you think will see action you must set its altitude. At that precise moment, what do you set it to? That is the only question I am interested in. Pilot quality, defensiveness, type of aircraft - all irrelevant. At that precise moment where you are about to see action, you must pick an altitude.

And with whatever pilot, whatever plane, whatever defensiveness, if you're not trying to escort bombers, then the answer is always the same. The ceiling.

Interesting thread to follow. This is the crux of the matter for me also. If I know my fighters have a higher ceiling than their adversaries, why should I set their altitude to anything other than maximum? The issue, mentioned before, seems to me to be that large discrepencies in altitude should result in no contact most of the time. This doesn't happen.

It may be possible IRL - under ideal conditions - to spot a non-camouflaged car travelling along an obvious road from 30k, occasionally. But spot (say) a green-painted land-rover moving over a grass field from that height? Impossible. Same with a camouflaged aeroplane. Who will usually always spot the higher aircraft first btw, under the (assumed) ideal visibility...

IRL we all know fighters were not routinely told to fly at ceiling altitude in the combat zone. This was true no matter what ceiling the enemy was believed to be capable of. In all the 42 carrier battles (for example) no fighter ever got near their maximum altitude. At Midway VF6 cruised over the Japanese fleet at (a ridiculously modest in AE terms) 22k and still never saw the USN torpedo planes get massacred below by the large numbers of Japanese Zeros. No, the skies weren't clear, but that should be the norm.

This should be the penalty incurred by strato-sweeps if defending planes stay low. Your 39k P38s simply don't engage the Oscars at 10k except under near perfect conditions and with excellent leadership. Give the attacker an incentive to go lower...and make the game more interesting whilst you are at it...

(in reply to EUBanana)

Post #: 182

RE: Sweep vs Escorts - 7/19/2010 11:22:31 PM

topeverest

Posts: 3376
Joined: 10/17/2007
From: Houston, TX - USA
Status: offline

To state the obvious, when providing escort, the unit(s) providing escort typically are at or very near the attack airframes altitude. This causes much of the fighting at lower altitudes. For a variety of reasons out of scope here, I find lower altitudes and multiple altitudes to work better than strato sweeps / caps. not scientific, but imo what i have seen.

_____________________________

Andy M

(in reply to Vladd)

Post #: 183

RE: Sweep vs Escorts - 7/20/2010 12:20:12 AM

Kwik E Mart

Posts: 2447
Joined: 7/22/2004
Status: offline

to quote TheElf from a War Room thread from March:

"There is no air this game. Lowering the Altitudes to those that are more representative of those flown IRL would do nothing, as the relative performance advantages would be the same when interpolated at lower Alt. Players will always find a way to game the system....

This issue is likely best resolved by House Rule as much as it pains me to say it. AE leadership has stated, and continues to state that AE support will remain at the Bug squashing level. This is not a bug. It is a player loophole in the code. There are lots of loopholes.

HOUSE Rule. Sweeps May be flown NO higher than the top altitude in their Optimum Altitude Band. CAP may be flown at any altitude.

This may sound unfair, but CAP is limited to only a portion being airborne @ the assigned altitude, the rest have to scramble and as such would be at disadvantage."

...yer pissin' in the wind boys...

...hopefully all the bugs get squashed soon and this can be properly addressed...in the meantime, break out your HR's!

_____________________________

Kirk Lazarus: I know who I am. I'm the dude playin' the dude, disguised as another dude!
Ron Swanson: Clear alcohols are for rich women on diets.

(in reply to topeverest)

Post #: 184

RE: Sweep vs Escorts - 7/20/2010 1:31:09 AM

witpqs

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

Here's my 2 cents worth.

I see that IRL planes had various altitude capabilities and some got the better of others and that's how it was. The game is engineered to be true to the overall historic capabilities, not every single small historical fact. That's only practical. So, I think having fighters come it at 30+ zillion feet is fine, 'cause its only an abstraction.

It does bother many people to see that. My opponent and I discussed it. At first we settled on an altitude limit of 30,000ft, but he noted that many of my fighters (P-40's) are limited to 29,000 and so the P-38's advantage was reduced but the Zero/Tojo/whatever's advantage versus the P-40 was still in place. He offered to lower the limit to 29,000. But some planes have ceilings a bit lower (Wildcats are 28,300 for example), so we settled on 25,000ft.

We had also discussed the bands thing and various formulas to set altitude for each plane type - but all of that is a micromanagement nightmare with player error after player error just waiting to happen.

My advice is either have no altitude limit at all or set one altitude limit for everything and be done with it.

(in reply to Kwik E Mart)

Post #: 185

RE: Sweep vs Escorts - 7/20/2010 5:15:32 AM

LoBaron

Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron
What Nomad, Sardaukar, Nemo and me tried to show, and probably many others already are aware of: the dive is not almighty if you
don�t play dumb. Its just another feature.

None of that is relevant though. When you have a unit you think will see action you must set its altitude. At that precise moment, what do you set it to? That is the only question I am interested in. Pilot quality, defensiveness, type of aircraft - all irrelevant. At that precise moment where you are about to see action, you must pick an altitude.

And with whatever pilot, whatever plane, whatever defensiveness, if you're not trying to escort bombers, then the answer is always the same. The ceiling. I've yet to see any evidence whatsoever - aside from split CAP which we've already touched on as no more than partially relevanti n practice - that I should set that altitude setting to anything other than the aircrafts ceiling.

There is plenty more to the game than altitude settings. That is simply stating the obvious. However when it comes to actually choosing an altitude none of that is relevant, I'm talkign about altitude, not, for example, how long you should train a pilot to be competent, or how many Zeroes a P40 is worth on average, or which bases are best to conquer. Just altitude.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

CAP engaged:
201 Ku S-1/A with A6M2 Zero (0 airborne, 4 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 10000 , scrambling fighters to 10000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 20 minutes
201 Ku S-1/B with A6M2 Zero (0 airborne, 4 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 14000 , scrambling fighters to 14000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 27 minutes
201 Ku S-1/C with A6M2 Zero (0 airborne, 4 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 20000 , scrambling fighters to 20000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 12 minutes

post #134

And yes, I know you are not interested in split CAP. Fine, so you are not using an option you have.
You could as well say "I�m not interested in +30k" Its entirely up to you.

_____________________________

(in reply to EUBanana)

Post #: 186

RE: Sweep vs Escorts - 7/20/2010 7:22:38 AM

castor troy

Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kwik E Mart

to quote TheElf from a War Room thread from March:

"There is no air this game. Lowering the Altitudes to those that are more representative of those flown IRL would do nothing, as the relative performance advantages would be the same when interpolated at lower Alt. Players will always find a way to game the system....

This issue is likely best resolved by House Rule as much as it pains me to say it. AE leadership has stated, and continues to state that AE support will remain at the Bug squashing level. This is not a bug. It is a player loophole in the code. There are lots of loopholes.

HOUSE Rule. Sweeps May be flown NO higher than the top altitude in their Optimum Altitude Band. CAP may be flown at any altitude.

This may sound unfair, but CAP is limited to only a portion being airborne @ the assigned altitude, the rest have to scramble and as such would be at disadvantage."

...yer pissin' in the wind boys......hopefully all the bugs get squashed soon and this can be properly addressed...in the meantime, break out your HR's!

it took months for such a statement though, before it always was: "it�s all fine..."

and with the months having past, we�re more or less back at "it�s all fine" when reading the latest comments... like a candle in the wind...

< Message edited by castor troy -- 7/20/2010 7:23:13 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Kwik E Mart)

Post #: 187

RE: Sweep vs Escorts - 7/20/2010 7:25:10 AM

castor troy

Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

quote:

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron
What Nomad, Sardaukar, Nemo and me tried to show, and probably many others already are aware of: the dive is not almighty if you
don�t play dumb. Its just another feature.

None of that is relevant though. When you have a unit you think will see action you must set its altitude. At that precise moment, what do you set it to? That is the only question I am interested in. Pilot quality, defensiveness, type of aircraft - all irrelevant. At that precise moment where you are about to see action, you must pick an altitude.

And with whatever pilot, whatever plane, whatever defensiveness, if you're not trying to escort bombers, then the answer is always the same. The ceiling. I've yet to see any evidence whatsoever - aside from split CAP which we've already touched on as no more than partially relevanti n practice - that I should set that altitude setting to anything other than the aircrafts ceiling.

There is plenty more to the game than altitude settings. That is simply stating the obvious. However when it comes to actually choosing an altitude none of that is relevant, I'm talkign about altitude, not, for example, how long you should train a pilot to be competent, or how many Zeroes a P40 is worth on average, or which bases are best to conquer. Just altitude.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

CAP engaged:
201 Ku S-1/A with A6M2 Zero (0 airborne, 4 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 10000 , scrambling fighters to 10000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 20 minutes
201 Ku S-1/B with A6M2 Zero (0 airborne, 4 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 14000 , scrambling fighters to 14000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 27 minutes
201 Ku S-1/C with A6M2 Zero (0 airborne, 4 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 20000 , scrambling fighters to 20000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 12 minutes

post #134

And yes, I know you are not interested in split CAP. Fine, so you are not using an option you have.
You could as well say "I�m not interested in +30k" Its entirely up to you.

you may have missed one more important statement by EUbanana it seems: with different fighters at a base set to Cap you�ve got split Cap by default as they usually all have different ceilings... he couldn�t be more correct. And even with split Cap you then end up most of the times seeing a single higher fighter squadron dive and dive and dive on EVERY other squadron being at a lower alt, split Cap or not...

_____________________________

(in reply to LoBaron)

Post #: 188

RE: Sweep vs Escorts - 7/20/2010 8:30:42 AM

LoBaron

Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline

Maybe but split capping at the lowest performance altitude (strato) against an opponent who can set an even higher
ceiling anyway is the wrong way to do it, because you�d get dived on no matter what...

But doesn�t matter. As I see it everbody should do what he think is best.

_____________________________

(in reply to castor troy)

Post #: 189

RE: Sweep vs Escorts - 7/20/2010 8:50:34 AM

Sardaukar

Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline

Some more interesting trends. Using the same units as in previous split CAP-test, but changing the defender altitudes to 15 000 and 10 000.

IJN US (A2A+Ops)

0+1 5+1
3+1 3+1
2+2 2+0
1+0 3+2
2+0 3+2

Apparently 5000ft dispersion is not enough for split CAP to work and sweepers are able to continue energy tactics against both groups. So to me, it seems that split CAP has to have minimum of 10 000ft separation in altitude.

Another with same units with altitudes of 20k and 10k.

3+2 5+0
1+1 7+0
0+0 1+0
2+3 1+1
2+1 1+1
1+1 3+0
2+0 3+2

Bigger altitude difference with split CAP helps a bit. Enemy still has edge because of initial altitude and experience (Rufe unit is about 10 points higher in exp and skills)

Biggest defensive difference is seen when defending unit has as good or better exp/skills than attacker. Then fights turn to favour of more experienced, despite other having altitude advantage. This indicates that experience and skills do remedy bad tactical situation.

_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von B�lov, 1870-

(in reply to castor troy)

Post #: 190

RE: Sweep vs Escorts - 7/20/2010 8:56:51 AM

LoBaron

Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline

Thats again interesting results Sardaukar. :)

Thought it was the other way, but this could depend on aircraft type also, no?

_____________________________

(in reply to Sardaukar)

Post #: 191

RE: Sweep vs Escorts - 7/20/2010 9:52:29 AM

EUBanana

Posts: 4552
Joined: 9/30/2003
From: Little England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron
Maybe but split capping at the lowest performance altitude (strato)�against an opponent who can set an even�higher
ceiling anyway is the wrong way to do it, because you�d get dived on no matter what...

But we have a test which indicates that 'lowest performance' makes no discernable difference.

_____________________________

(in reply to LoBaron)

Post #: 192

RE: Sweep vs Escorts - 7/20/2010 10:31:20 AM

Sardaukar

Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

Thats again interesting results Sardaukar. :)

Thought it was the other way, but this could depend on aircraft type also, no?

What I think is that is't bit of paper, rock, scissors-situation, where you often have more than one thing stacked against you.

For example, if enemy has better plane (SPD, MVR, Climb, DUR, Armour), it's advantage. Experience and skills are big advantage, altitude is also big advantage.

In some situations, for example, not many tactical decisions make you win the battle. Lets take for example Malaya with Zeroes vs. Buffaloes. Now you are against way better plane with way better pilots. If they also come from above (as any IJ player would unless escorting), you are in world of hurt. No amount of split CAP will offset at least 3 advantages, maybe at least 4 if they also have better Air Leader. It may lower the kill ratio a bit, but Buffaloes are going to get creamed even if numbers are similar. I have no doubt about that numerical advantage skews the results even more.

I tried to have approx. same number of planes engaging in my tests and achieved it with max. +/- 2 plane difference. But if enemy also has double number planes with all those advantages...

In situation like that, I suggest not to fight but pull back and train your pilots so that at least skill levels are comparable before engaging. Sometimes there are no other options but to fight, though. On the other hand, if opposition is sweeping, those planes are not escorting bombers, so you may be able to even the score now and then by killing unescorted bombers. Kills raise pilot exp and skills quickly.

To me, it seems that saving better pilots (70+) and sticking them to elite formations is best way to counter enemy a/c superiority locally. Exp/skills seem to be big modifiers. For Japan, it probably also pays to invest R&D to planes that can somewhat compete with allies in altitude. For example, Ki-61 Hien/Tony was historically about only plane that could challenge Allied planes high during mid-war. If starting to get high-altitude sweeps from planes like P-47/P-38, that is bad place to be in Zero/Oscar.

There are many modifiers in A2A combat in AE, but some patters can be distinguished. Like, altitude itself is not only thing that kills. Altitude and Exp/skill edge combined is big killer. Add to that better planes and situation gets darker for defender. Defender can lessen the impact by building his pilots to higher exp/skill level and hope for better planes. Or just try to outnumber enemy with experienced pilots. But it's always bad situation if number of factors are stacked against you.

_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von B�lov, 1870-

(in reply to LoBaron)

Post #: 193

RE: Sweep vs Escorts - 7/20/2010 10:50:52 AM

yubari

Posts: 365
Joined: 3/24/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kwik E Mart

to quote TheElf from a War Room thread from March:

"There is no air this game. Lowering the Altitudes to those that are more representative of those flown IRL would do nothing, as the relative performance advantages would be the same when interpolated at lower Alt. Players will always find a way to game the system....

This issue is likely best resolved by House Rule as much as it pains me to say it. AE leadership has stated, and continues to state that AE support will remain at the Bug squashing level. This is not a bug. It is a player loophole in the code. There are lots of loopholes.

HOUSE Rule. Sweeps May be flown NO higher than the top altitude in their Optimum Altitude Band. CAP may be flown at any altitude.

This may sound unfair, but CAP is limited to only a portion being airborne @ the assigned altitude, the rest have to scramble and as such would be at disadvantage."

...yer pissin' in the wind boys......hopefully all the bugs get squashed soon and this can be properly addressed...in the meantime, break out your HR's!

Hmm, that is interesting. I am using this house rule in both of my PBEM games and it seems to be working very well, indeed I would say that it is by far the best air model I have seen in all of the WITP games.

From my observations it is the sweep bonus that is a far more important factor than altitude in air combat and which is causing some of the unbalanced kill ratios. When the sweep bonus is combined with the altitude bonus then it becomes mighty indeed.

(in reply to Kwik E Mart)

Post #: 194

RE: Sweep vs Escorts - 7/20/2010 10:55:49 AM

Sardaukar

Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline

It is good rule, but with some specific planes like P-47 it might not help much, since at least some models have same MVR on every alt band..allowing very high sweeps. Of course, P-47 was excellent high-altitude fighter anyway, so artificially restricting it might not be fair either.

_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von B�lov, 1870-

(in reply to yubari)

Post #: 195

RE: Sweep vs Escorts - 7/20/2010 11:09:17 AM

EUBanana

Posts: 4552
Joined: 9/30/2003
From: Little England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar
To me, it seems that saving better pilots (70+) and sticking them to elite formations is best way to counter enemy a/c superiority locally.

That's certainly true, the game rewards 'flying circuses' of elite pilots. Put them in the best aircraft available and ass will be kicked.

_____________________________

(in reply to Sardaukar)

Post #: 196

RE: Sweep vs Escorts - 7/21/2010 12:39:59 AM

TheElf

Posts: 3870
Joined: 5/14/2003
From: Pax River, MD
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

Thats again interesting results Sardaukar. :)

Thought it was the other way, but this could depend on aircraft type also, no?

What I think is that is't bit of paper, rock, scissors-situation, where you often have more than one thing stacked against you.

For example, if enemy has better plane (SPD, MVR, Climb, DUR, Armour), it's advantage. Experience and skills are big advantage, altitude is also big advantage.

In some situations, for example, not many tactical decisions make you win the battle. Lets take for example Malaya with Zeroes vs. Buffaloes. Now you are against way better plane with way better pilots. If they also come from above (as any IJ player would unless escorting), you are in world of hurt. No amount of split CAP will offset at least 3 advantages, maybe at least 4 if they also have better Air Leader. It may lower the kill ratio a bit, but Buffaloes are going to get creamed even if numbers are similar. I have no doubt about that numerical advantage skews the results even more.

I tried to have approx. same number of planes engaging in my tests and achieved it with max. +/- 2 plane difference. But if enemy also has double number planes with all those advantages...

In situation like that, I suggest not to fight but pull back and train your pilots so that at least skill levels are comparable before engaging. Sometimes there are no other options but to fight, though. On the other hand, if opposition is sweeping, those planes are not escorting bombers, so you may be able to even the score now and then by killing unescorted bombers. Kills raise pilot exp and skills quickly.

To me, it seems that saving better pilots (70+) and sticking them to elite formations is best way to counter enemy a/c superiority locally. Exp/skills seem to be big modifiers. For Japan, it probably also pays to invest R&D to planes that can somewhat compete with allies in altitude. For example, Ki-61 Hien/Tony was historically about only plane that could challenge Allied planes high during mid-war. If starting to get high-altitude sweeps from planes like P-47/P-38, that is bad place to be in Zero/Oscar.

There are many modifiers in A2A combat in AE, but some patters can be distinguished. Like, altitude itself is not only thing that kills. Altitude and Exp/skill edge combined is big killer. Add to that better planes and situation gets darker for defender. Defender can lessen the impact by building his pilots to higher exp/skill level and hope for better planes. Or just try to outnumber enemy with experienced pilots. But it's always bad situation if number of factors are stacked against you.

Bingo....we have a winner.

_____________________________

IN PERPETUUM SINGULARIS SEDES

(in reply to Sardaukar)

Post #: 197

RE: Sweep vs Escorts - 7/21/2010 5:50:58 AM

LoBaron

Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

Thats again interesting results Sardaukar. :)

Thought it was the other way, but this could depend on aircraft type also, no?

What I think is that is't bit of paper, rock, scissors-situation, where you often have more than one thing stacked against you.

For example, if enemy has better plane (SPD, MVR, Climb, DUR, Armour), it's advantage. Experience and skills are big advantage, altitude is also big advantage.

In some situations, for example, not many tactical decisions make you win the battle. Lets take for example Malaya with Zeroes vs. Buffaloes. Now you are against way better plane with way better pilots. If they also come from above (as any IJ player would unless escorting), you are in world of hurt. No amount of split CAP will offset at least 3 advantages, maybe at least 4 if they also have better Air Leader. It may lower the kill ratio a bit, but Buffaloes are going to get creamed even if numbers are similar. I have no doubt about that numerical advantage skews the results even more.

I tried to have approx. same number of planes engaging in my tests and achieved it with max. +/- 2 plane difference. But if enemy also has double number planes with all those advantages...

In situation like that, I suggest not to fight but pull back and train your pilots so that at least skill levels are comparable before engaging. Sometimes there are no other options but to fight, though. On the other hand, if opposition is sweeping, those planes are not escorting bombers, so you may be able to even the score now and then by killing unescorted bombers. Kills raise pilot exp and skills quickly.

To me, it seems that saving better pilots (70+) and sticking them to elite formations is best way to counter enemy a/c superiority locally. Exp/skills seem to be big modifiers. For Japan, it probably also pays to invest R&D to planes that can somewhat compete with allies in altitude. For example, Ki-61 Hien/Tony was historically about only plane that could challenge Allied planes high during mid-war. If starting to get high-altitude sweeps from planes like P-47/P-38, that is bad place to be in Zero/Oscar.

There are many modifiers in A2A combat in AE, but some patters can be distinguished. Like, altitude itself is not only thing that kills. Altitude and Exp/skill edge combined is big killer. Add to that better planes and situation gets darker for defender. Defender can lessen the impact by building his pilots to higher exp/skill level and hope for better planes. Or just try to outnumber enemy with experienced pilots. But it's always bad situation if number of factors are stacked against you.