Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

CAP suggestions wanted

 
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 >> CAP suggestions wanted Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
CAP suggestions wanted - 9/27/2013 2:00:20 PM   
Jim Stevens

 

Posts: 164
Joined: 3/25/2009
From: Woodstock, Georgia USA
Status: offline 		I wanted to solicit suggestions from the studio audience on how best to approach a problem that I am sure has been hashed over before but I can't find here.

In a single CV Air Combat task force I have been pondering how best to employ the fighter air asset when I have escort and CAP as their mission. It seems if I give the group maximum range the CAP may stray too far if there is anything that draws their attention away. If I set the range to zero as I would a group that is 100% dedicated to CAP that might hose the escort mission. Not knowing how the game would resolve the missions configured these two ways I thought I would see what the collective experience was with the veteran players here.

What do you vets think?
Post #: 1
RE: CAP suggestions wanted - 9/27/2013 2:22:51 PM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Jim Stevens

I wanted to solicit suggestions from the studio audience on how best to approach a problem that I am sure has been hashed over before but I can't find here.

In a single CV Air Combat task force I have been pondering how best to employ the fighter air asset when I have escort and CAP as their mission. It seems if I give the group maximum range the CAP may stray too far if there is anything that draws their attention away. If I set the range to zero as I would a group that is 100% dedicated to CAP that might hose the escort mission. Not knowing how the game would resolve the missions configured these two ways I thought I would see what the collective experience was with the veteran players here.

What do you vets think?



There isn't any "CAP mission." There's an Escort mission with CAP as a percentage setting. If you set Range to zero that's how far your Escort planes will go. The CAP percentage will stay over the carrier more or less regardless of the Range setting. (Air model mavens, this is your cue. ) So set the Range wherever you think it needs to be for Escort.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Jim Stevens)
Post #: 2
RE: CAP suggestions wanted - 9/27/2013 4:03:36 PM   
Numdydar

 

Posts: 3211
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline 		Actually all fighter missions (execpt training) you can set the CAP percentage. This percentage will only protect the hex it is in. You may have one or two planes straggle into the surrounding hexs, but 99% of the CAP percentage will stay in the hex the TF or Base is in.

LR CAP is also a percentage and you can have both LR CAP, Escort, and CAP all at the same time. Any fighter will preform the mission selected, like Escort with the percentage of planes LEFT OVER from the percentages you set. So if you had a 10 plane fighter squardon and had 40% CAP, 20% LR CAP, 10% on Rest, and the mission set to escort, the following would occur

CAP - 4 fighters assigned
LR CAP - 2 fighters assigned
Rest - 1 fighter assigned (lucky stiff )

The rest of the fighters would be assigned to fly escort which is 3.

Please note that I was careful to say the planes were just ASSIGNED to do these things. There is a whole lot of other conditions that have to be met for the planes to ACTUALLY fly, much less actually intercept anything . But generally speaking, if mutiple fighter squadrons are assined percentages to do these tasks, you will have planes in the air when the enemy comes calling.

< Message edited by Numdydar -- 9/27/2013 4:04:02 PM >

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 3
RE: CAP suggestions wanted - 9/27/2013 4:26:18 PM   
KenchiSulla


Posts: 2948
Joined: 10/22/2008
From: the Netherlands
Status: offline 		In a multiple CV TF: If you have a squadron with elite pilots you absolutely want assigned to CAP (instead of getting butchered escorting aircraft) you could set range to 0 and CAP to the percentage you want and they would be dedicated to CAP duty.

Just assign other groups in the TF to escort duty by setting them at low percentages CAP.

_____________________________

AKA Cannonfodder

"It happened, therefore it can happen again: this is the core of what we have to say. It can happen, and it can happen everywhere.”
¯ Primo Levi, writer, holocaust survivor

(in reply to Numdydar)
Post #: 4
RE: CAP suggestions wanted - 9/27/2013 5:16:36 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

This percentage will only protect the hex it is in. You may have one or two planes straggle into the surrounding hexs, but 99% of the CAP percentage will stay in the hex the TF or Base is in.



Doesn't normal, non-LR CAP, extend out 3 hexes unless you set the range lower? The extension into the 3 hex CAP area is typically a fairly high percentage of the total CAP allotment and not just one or two planes.

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to Numdydar)
Post #: 5
RE: CAP suggestions wanted - 9/27/2013 5:43:38 PM   
linrom

 

Posts: 100
Joined: 2/20/2002
Status: offline 		I found out that when your primary mission is ESCORT, even when you set 100% of fighters to patrol duties, there are some planes that still fly escort? For example, 50% CAP and 50% REST. I still get a number of escorting planes, which is a large percentage in 9-10 sqn.

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 6
RE: CAP suggestions wanted - 9/27/2013 6:17:35 PM   
Lokasenna


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

ORIGINAL: HansBolter


quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

This percentage will only protect the hex it is in. You may have one or two planes straggle into the surrounding hexs, but 99% of the CAP percentage will stay in the hex the TF or Base is in.



Doesn't normal, non-LR CAP, extend out 3 hexes unless you set the range lower? The extension into the 3 hex CAP area is typically a fairly high percentage of the total CAP allotment and not just one or two planes.


I've had it go out even farther than that, I think. It's a low number of planes, but they'll "react" to a raid out to their range setting, I think. I've used Escort with CAP on 70/30 and range 1 to cover both the CV/CVE force and the Amph TF I'm trying to cover with the same fighter squadrons, from one hex out from the target, without suffering the penalty for being in a coastal/base hex.

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 7
RE: CAP suggestions wanted - 9/27/2013 6:19:02 PM   
Numdydar

 

Posts: 3211
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline 		It can happen as it depends on the die rolls and the local commander's ability to override some of your orders

(in reply to linrom)
Post #: 8
RE: CAP suggestions wanted - 9/27/2013 6:45:16 PM   
Q-Ball


Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline 		I recommend mixing your CV squadrons

Keep some "Elite" ones; these are CAP-only. Set them to Zero Range, 80% or 90% CAP. They won't tire very fast at Zero range, particularly if they are Elite, so don't worry about the high percentage

Set the less experienced squadrons to "ESCORT" with the range you need to escort. You can mix in some CAP on them, depending on what you need.

You can also mix the A/C types, if you have a mix. For example, it's 1944 and I am using Corsairs for the "Elite" units, and lesser units like CVE fighters use Hellcats or Wildcats. It doesn't matter much if escorts are Wildcats.

Basic point is that Escorting fighters are going to die regardless of plane type or pilot quality, so you may as well make sure the guys dying are not your best ones

_____________________________


(in reply to Numdydar)
Post #: 9
RE: CAP suggestions wanted - 9/27/2013 7:20:42 PM   
1EyedJacks


Posts: 2244
Joined: 3/12/2006
From: The Eastern Sierras
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Cannonfodder

In a multiple CV TF: If you have a squadron with elite pilots you absolutely want assigned to CAP (instead of getting butchered escorting aircraft) you could set range to 0 and CAP to the percentage you want and they would be dedicated to CAP duty.

Just assign other groups in the TF to escort duty by setting them at low percentages CAP.


I think setting range to 0 might be a mistake. Effectiveness of CAP is based in part on spotting the enemy formation B4 it gets to your base. The farther away you can engage the enemy formation from your base, the more effective it will be.

From page 172 of the manual:
CAP may react to defend a target as far as 2 hexes away. To do so, the hex to be defended must be attacked by more aircraft then are defending the hex, and the hex the CAP is going to come from must be under attack by less aircraft than are currently flying CAP over that hex (checked for each air unit, one at a time).

Added:
So if you have 10 fighters in a group and assign 30% to CAP then only 1/3 of the assigned CAP will be in the air (1 plane). Note that the language says that to engage further away from the base your CAP must be greater in numbers than the attackers...


< Message edited by 1EyedJacks -- 9/27/2013 7:26:37 PM >

_____________________________

TTFN,

Mike

(in reply to KenchiSulla)
Post #: 10
RE: CAP suggestions wanted - 9/27/2013 7:33:47 PM   
HistoryGuy


Posts: 80
Joined: 1/7/2009
From: Woodbridge, VA
Status: offline 		Agreed with avoiding setting CAP range to zero. Doesnt make sense tactically nor does it take advantage of radar and fighter direction (which I would assume WITP AE replicates because it does everything else so well).

(in reply to 1EyedJacks)
Post #: 11
RE: CAP suggestions wanted - 9/27/2013 7:38:20 PM   
LoBaron


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

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball
It doesn't matter much if escorts are Wildcats.

Basic point is that Escorting fighters are going to die regardless of plane type or pilot quality, so you may as well make sure the guys dying are not your best ones



Q-Ball, but this is a very JFB POV - which is understandable considering your agenda. I hope you do not misunderstand my comment, it is not meant insulting in any way.

Allied high quality escort fighters can make the difference between a successful strike which makes the attack run nearly untouched and some stray bombs dropped by low moral remnants of the attacking planes.

Corsairs and Hellcats (or Tbolts or Mustangs FWIIW) have enough durability to often remain in battle after receiving damage, are seldom shot down in a single pass in general, and have a high chance to get a pilot home. I have often seen escorting fighters really hurt CAP if the escorts held slight numerical superiority, consisted of high quality aircraft and were flown by high def skill pilots.

Low quality escorts with low skill pilots in a similar situation has a much higher chance to fail. The escorts usually don´t kill much, but keep the CAP occupied for so long many fail to break through to the bombers.

As a sidenote, until the F4U-D arrives the Corsairs have a SR of 2, which makes them not the optimal choice for CAP in case you need it for extended time periods.
(They are near perfect sweepers though )




_____________________________


(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 12
RE: CAP suggestions wanted - 9/27/2013 10:10:04 PM   
dr.hal


Posts: 3335
Joined: 6/3/2006
From: Covington LA via Montreal!
Status: offline 		I would like to comment on two points made here and then ask you all a question. First my experience says that if you are interested in defending a hex (base or CV) then put the CAP unit on 100%. It doesn't tire fast at all. The reason for this was indicated by 1EyedJacks, in that only 1/3 of them fly at any one time. Thus they don't really fly that much. Putting in a distance of hexes, even ONE hex really can tire them quickly. Second, you only need have them in your hex to be effective, it hurts cap to give them range. Why? Well in truth what you want is EARLY WARNING, not range. With the Mk 1 Eyeball, that's not easy. So usually there is little warning time for your other 2/3 group of fighters (remember only 1/3 is aloft) to get up and into the fight. Range will NOT help this reaction time alone, you need DETECTION range...that's why radar is so important. That's what will make your CAP effective, getting the other 2/3s up and into the fight in enough time to make a difference. It is impossible for aircraft aloft or eyeball ground observations to ring the alarm (except distant coast watcher, but that's another story) in time for aircraft to respond. You need air controllers and detection equipment. Remember a hex is 46 miles across, or 23 miles if you count the base in the middle (or TF) which is WELL beyond the range of an eyeball. So you need technology to help you out. Look for radar to give you that edge. Does this make sense?

As for the question, given that you have a LRCAP option I've often wondered; if you select that option and dedicate 50% of your fighters to it, and the hex is say three away from your base, do you put a "range" of ZERO or three? Remember that when you select LRCAP you are given the ability to put in a destination hex.... so if you put in one and it is three hexes away do you put a range in as three as well OR do the designated fighters travel to that hex as assigned by a destination and then because you put in a range of ZERO the fighters stray no further or do they need a range put in so that the can GET to the designated hex as well as being assigned to fly there (in this example I would have to put a three in the range box in order to give the 50% group enough space to fly to their designated hex)? I simply don't know which is needed. I believe I recall that if you designate LRCAP and DON'T put in a range but then select a destination, it AUTOMATICALLY fills in a range which reflects the number of hexes to that destination, but I"m not sure.

< Message edited by dr.hal -- 9/27/2013 10:12:34 PM >

_____________________________


(in reply to LoBaron)
Post #: 13
RE: CAP suggestions wanted - 9/27/2013 10:20:46 PM   
Cpt Sherwood

 

Posts: 837
Joined: 12/1/2005
From: A Very Nice Place in the USA
Status: offline 		If you have a LRCAP mission with a target 1 or more hexes away and range set to 0, they will not fly. I found this out the hard way.

I just came back to this and realized I made a mistake in posting. This mission was a SWEEP mission, not LRCAP. I apologize for the mistake.

< Message edited by Cpt Sherwood -- 9/28/2013 1:38:27 PM >

_____________________________

“Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.” ― Lucius Annaeus Seneca

(in reply to dr.hal)
Post #: 14
RE: CAP suggestions wanted - 9/27/2013 11:50:40 PM   
dr.hal


Posts: 3335
Joined: 6/3/2006
From: Covington LA via Montreal!
Status: offline 		Yah, I kinda thought that would be the case.

_____________________________


(in reply to Cpt Sherwood)
Post #: 15
RE: CAP suggestions wanted - 9/28/2013 12:35:01 AM   
1EyedJacks


Posts: 2244
Joined: 3/12/2006
From: The Eastern Sierras
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Cpt Sherwood

If you have a LRCAP mission with a target 1 or more hexes away and range set to 0, they will not fly. I found this out the hard way.


It shouldn't work that way - at least from what I read in the manual:

Page 154 - the bottom of:
The Maximum Range sets the maximum range in hexes that the squadron will travel in order
to reach the target. The air unit will not exceed this distance when picking a target using
Commander’s Discretion whether the target is for a strike Mission, escort, or Long-range CAP.
However, if the air unit is assigned a specific target (base or TF), then the air unit will ignore
this max range setting.

_____________________________

TTFN,

Mike

(in reply to Cpt Sherwood)
Post #: 16
RE: CAP suggestions wanted - 9/28/2013 1:01:09 AM   
dr.hal


Posts: 3335
Joined: 6/3/2006
From: Covington LA via Montreal!
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Cpt Sherwood

However, if the air unit is assigned a specific target (base or TF), then the air unit will ignore
this max range setting.

This could mean that if the unit's max range is set to be greater than the target hex, it would stop at the target hex. The converse might NOT be true, if the max range is LESS than the target hex, it might not GO to the target hex!

_____________________________


(in reply to 1EyedJacks)
Post #: 17
RE: CAP suggestions wanted - 9/28/2013 2:14:54 AM   
Jim Stevens

 

Posts: 164
Joined: 3/25/2009
From: Woodstock, Georgia USA
Status: offline 		So it's not so clear cut at all! Do the programmers ever weigh in on these questions? Or are they long gone?

(in reply to dr.hal)
Post #: 18
RE: CAP suggestions wanted - 9/28/2013 2:36:42 AM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Jim Stevens

So it's not so clear cut at all! Do the programmers ever weigh in on these questions? Or are they long gone?


Hey! I want credit for being the first to answer and attempting to keep it simple.

Some of the devs are still around, but are mostly involved in mods. Michael M. is the only one actively coding beta patches, on his own time. He is beloved by all. See the Tech sub-forum for his threads and the beta patches.

< Message edited by Bullwinkle58 -- 9/28/2013 2:37:03 AM >

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Jim Stevens)
Post #: 19
RE: CAP suggestions wanted - 9/28/2013 4:31:50 AM   
1EyedJacks


Posts: 2244
Joined: 3/12/2006
From: The Eastern Sierras
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.hal


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cpt Sherwood

However, if the air unit is assigned a specific target (base or TF), then the air unit will ignore
this max range setting.

This could mean that if the unit's max range is set to be greater than the target hex, it would stop at the target hex. The converse might NOT be true, if the max range is LESS than the target hex, it might not GO to the target hex!


I don't think it could mean that...

Let's look at a Nate squadron as an example. Using drop tanks the Normal range is 6 and Extended range is 8.

Let's say you want to fly escort missions but you don't want to stress out your pilots with fatigue so you set the Maximum range to 6. If you don't select a target then, at the Commander's Discretion, it can escort any bombing missions out to a range of 6.

Two turns later you wanna bomb Chungking. You select Chungking as the target (still flying Escort missions). Lets say Chungking is 10 hexes away. But your max range is still set at 6... In this case - because you selected Chungking as the target - the squadron will ignore the max range setting which was left at 6 hexes and fly all the way out 10 hexes to Chungking as long as it makes a successful roll to perform the mission.

As I read this, the Max Range setting is really for Commander's Discretion. I think if you read that section you'll see that it is - in fact - pretty clear cut.

Remember what I was responding to. Cpt. Sherwood was saying that the Max Range was set to 0 and that he gave it a target for LRCAP. According to the manual the game should ignore the range setting of 0 and fly out to the target he had set for LRCAP as long as it had made a successful roll to perform the mission.

< Message edited by 1EyedJacks -- 9/28/2013 4:35:08 AM >

_____________________________

TTFN,

Mike

(in reply to dr.hal)
Post #: 20
RE: CAP suggestions wanted - 9/28/2013 6:35:44 AM   
Numdydar

 

Posts: 3211
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline 		Well I can say what you describe has not been my experience. If I set the range at six and want them to escort, they do not seem to fly past the six hexes I set. Now there could be times where the AF commander overrides that setting, but I sure have not seen it or at least do not recall.

(in reply to 1EyedJacks)
Post #: 21
RE: CAP suggestions wanted - 9/28/2013 8:06:37 AM   
LoBaron


Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline 		Whether this was originally intended or not can be discussed, but neither escort, nor bombing missions, or even or even LRCAP reach targets further away than the range setting allows.


Still, 1EyedJacks is right that the manual hints different. And actually how the manual describes it this settings would be far more powerful.


< Message edited by LoBaron -- 9/28/2013 8:07:00 AM >

_____________________________


(in reply to Numdydar)
Post #: 22
RE: CAP suggestions wanted - 9/28/2013 11:15:16 AM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline 		The range issue was dealt with in post #1557 of Bullwinkle's AAR. That is why 1EyedJacks has not seen it.

The manual is not incorrect. Nor is there confusion on the subject.

1. Both CAP and LRCAP are not missions.

2. CAP and LRCAP is what is left over from some other dedicated mission.

3. The range set is for the purpose of that mission, be it escort, bombing, whatever but not CAP or LRCAP because as mentioned in point 1 above, they are not missions.

4. The overriding referred to in the manual and seen by players is when a target selected for a mission exceeds the currently assigned air group range, to reduce player micromanagement/forgetfulness, the new longer range is automatically substituted otherwise the target, which has been manually selected by the player could not be reached.

5. As a result of points 3 and 4 above, both CAP and LRCAP, provided they are capable of flying the additional distance, will have their range reset because they are not independent missions; they are bound by the parameters set for THE mission.

Alfred

(in reply to LoBaron)
Post #: 23
RE: CAP suggestions wanted - 9/28/2013 11:55:50 AM   
LoBaron


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

Manual:
However, if the air unit is assigned a specific target (base or TF), then the air unit will ignore this max range setting.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred
4. The overriding referred to in the manual and seen by players is when a target selected for a mission exceeds the currently assigned air group range, to reduce player micromanagement/forgetfulness, the new longer range is automatically substituted otherwise the target, which has been manually selected by the player could not be reached.


Alfred, this is a subjective translation of what the manual actually says. The manual is very straight forward and usually does not leave so much room for different interpretations.

Had the intention been to formulate it like you say, the text would be:

quote:

However, if the air unit is assigned a specific target (base or TF) more distant than the range set, then the max range will reset to the target distance.








< Message edited by LoBaron -- 9/28/2013 12:02:07 PM >

_____________________________


(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 24
RE: CAP suggestions wanted - 9/28/2013 1:39:12 PM   
Cpt Sherwood

 

Posts: 837
Joined: 12/1/2005
From: A Very Nice Place in the USA
Status: offline 		Please see my edited post above, I made an error, it was a SWEEP mission, not a LRCAP mission. I am sorry about that.

_____________________________

“Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.” ― Lucius Annaeus Seneca

(in reply to LoBaron)
Post #: 25
RE: CAP suggestions wanted - 9/28/2013 2:00:08 PM   
obvert


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

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

quote:

Manual:
However, if the air unit is assigned a specific target (base or TF), then the air unit will ignore this max range setting.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred
4. The overriding referred to in the manual and seen by players is when a target selected for a mission exceeds the currently assigned air group range, to reduce player micromanagement/forgetfulness, the new longer range is automatically substituted otherwise the target, which has been manually selected by the player could not be reached.


Alfred, this is a subjective translation of what the manual actually says. The manual is very straight forward and usually does not leave so much room for different interpretations.

Had the intention been to formulate it like you say, the text would be:

quote:

However, if the air unit is assigned a specific target (base or TF) more distant than the range set, then the max range will reset to the target distance.





The writing in the manual is anything but clear in my view, and often very ambiguous.

What would really help everyone in these kinds of threads is some examples from games or sand-boxes. All of these players must have some right? Instead of the difficulty of kind of knowing what we're talking about and then disagreeing as there is no concrete data to refer to, it just makes more sense to include something. I don't have the time unfortunately, and I'm not near the game machine now, and maybe that's the case for most.

Does anyone have time to run a few or some examples?

_____________________________

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

(in reply to LoBaron)
Post #: 26
RE: CAP suggestions wanted - 9/28/2013 3:50:01 PM   
1EyedJacks


Posts: 2244
Joined: 3/12/2006
From: The Eastern Sierras
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

The range issue was dealt with in post #1557 of Bullwinkle's AAR. That is why 1EyedJacks has not seen it.

The manual is not incorrect. Nor is there confusion on the subject.

1. Both CAP and LRCAP are not missions.

2. CAP and LRCAP is what is left over from some other dedicated mission.

3. The range set is for the purpose of that mission, be it escort, bombing, whatever but not CAP or LRCAP because as mentioned in point 1 above, they are not missions.

4. The overriding referred to in the manual and seen by players is when a target selected for a mission exceeds the currently assigned air group range, to reduce player micromanagement/forgetfulness, the new longer range is automatically substituted otherwise the target, which has been manually selected by the player could not be reached.

5. As a result of points 3 and 4 above, both CAP and LRCAP, provided they are capable of flying the additional distance, will have their range reset because they are not independent missions; they are bound by the parameters set for THE mission.

Alfred


First of all, let me say that I am ab-so-lutely offended that you and Bullwinkle had such a discussion and, considering my vast intellect and years of experience in playing the game and reading the manual, did not invite me to play! Hiding such conversations behind a private AAR that I am forsworn to stay out of is truely a gamey tactic. I, good sir, shall put in a protest!

Second of all - the manual is never wrong! This is pure Hearsay! Thou shallst be flogged and stoned for committing such thoughts to speech! Already there are humble Clerics of The Thread running about in the streets of every country known to man holding their manuals overhead whilst screaming at the very uppermost top of their lungs, "The manual is pure and true! Thanx be to the Thread!!!"

I tell you truely my dear Alfred, such thoughts shared amongst the masses shall have you excommunicated... Come back. Come back to the brotherhood of the Thread and repent. We shall wash your mind and make you whole again...

<sorry - another strange tangent did I go off on. But definitely tongue in cheek.>

So if I understand you correctly regarding fighter air groups: If the primary mission is on - lets say Escort, and the Patrol Level is set to 100% LRCAP, and Range is set to 4, and the Target is set for Commander Discretion, then the air group shall never fly as 100% of the resources for the Primary mission have been assigned. In other words - there is no Commander Discretion for a LRCAP.

If instead, I set a target that does not exceed the Extended Range, the air group shall fly the LRCAP and the previous value in the Maximum Range Set field shall be replaced with the current range to the target I selected.

Yes?


_____________________________

TTFN,

Mike

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 27
RE: CAP suggestions wanted - 9/28/2013 8:16:35 PM   
LoBaron


Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline 		While I understand how Alfred makes the distinction between 'mission' (escort, airfield attack, sweep,...) and 'leftovers' (CAP, LRCAP, train, rest), my personal opinion is that this classification does not always makes sense. There are overlaps on additional squadron settings, so depending on which 'leftover' you observe you can well view it as the primary mission.

IMHO a squadron set to [mission 'escort', 60%LRCAP, 40%rest] is on a LRCAP mission from a player´s perspective. I am aware of the specific differences, and which additional settings apply to what part of the general mission profile settings, so I don´t see the benefit in viewing such a setting as escort mission.

Target settings apply to LRCAP, alt settings apply to LRCAP, range settings apply to LRCAP.

The question if a distinction between primary mission and 'leftover' is useful is even more pressing when we approach such mission types as naval search and ASW. There the primary mission setting has no effect whatsoever - it does not matter whether you set your primary to ASW or search. The mission profile is defined by the percentage sliders exclusively.


I might have to point out that my disagreement with Alfred is with regards to the definition of what classifies as mission, not with regards to the effect such settings have on game mechanics.



To answer your questions 1EyedJacks:

There IS commander´s discretion for LRCAP. Without a target selected the percentage of planes assigned to LRCAP will patrol a hex within the preselected mission range.

And if you set a target withing the extended range of the plane type the range will reset to the range to target (if it was set lower previously) and the percentage of fighters assigned to LRCAP will patrol the assigned hex.

_____________________________


(in reply to 1EyedJacks)
Post #: 28
RE: CAP suggestions wanted - 9/28/2013 8:44:02 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: 1EyedJacks


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cpt Sherwood

If you have a LRCAP mission with a target 1 or more hexes away and range set to 0, they will not fly. I found this out the hard way.


It shouldn't work that way - at least from what I read in the manual:

Page 154 - the bottom of:
The Maximum Range sets the maximum range in hexes that the squadron will travel in order
to reach the target. The air unit will not exceed this distance when picking a target using
Commander’s Discretion whether the target is for a strike Mission, escort, or Long-range CAP.
However, if the air unit is assigned a specific target (base or TF), then the air unit will ignore
this max range setting.


I would be cautious here. You are putting way too much reliance on the manual which in many cases is wrong or either outdated due to the many patches put out since the manual was printed five years ago. Planes set to 0 range will not perform any mission outside of their own base hex, no matter the setting or conditions. If your range is set to zero and you set the mission to LRCAP and designate a location, (say, six hexes away) then the range will automatically reset to allow the aircraft to reach that location but will not be more than the number of hexes that your set target is. Likewise if you set a target that further away than normal range the plane will automatically add drop tanks without you having to set them-provided all other conditions for drop tanks are met.

But the important thing to remember is that the computer is not making a random decision to fly outside of the aircraft's range. The range of the unit automatically changes from zero when you set a target that is further away than zero.

If you set the range to 0 and leave it to commander's decision. The commander will never fly outside of the zero range limit under any condition. However, if you set that target for LRCAP six hexes away, the commander can then decide to fly other missions (escort or CAP outside of the base hex but no further than the range to the target you set for LRCAP. So you will "not" see your fighters escorting a bombing attack that flies seven hexes from your base.

Now if I could only get my f**king carrier commanders to act the same way.


< Message edited by crsutton -- 9/28/2013 8:49:19 PM >

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to 1EyedJacks)
Post #: 29
RE: CAP suggestions wanted - 9/9/2014 5:31:47 PM   
wegman58

 

Posts: 460
Joined: 12/28/2013
From: Edina, MN (FROM the Bronx)
Status: offline 		This thread seems to be a candidate for Alfred's update the manual project. (And if this is mentioned in that thread my apologies).

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> CAP suggestions wanted Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.641