RE: I'm still in the dark about the Air Combat model

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: I'm still in the dark about the Air Combat model

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 >> The War Room >> RE: I'm still in the dark about the Air Combat model

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: I'm still in the dark about the Air Combat model - 6/24/2018 3:22:17 AM

Lokasenna

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

Kates are slow - I think 235mph max speed. Wildcats are at least in the 300s.

LRCAP over carrier TFs is penalized in the extreme - I want to say 10% effectiveness (so divide whatever you set to be over it by 10 and that's what you get).

So is a viable work around to assign the carrier TF to follow a surface combat TF and assign the LRCAP to cover the surface combat TF?

You know, I tried that a few times, thinking that by the letter of the "law" it should work.

It doesn't work .

Yeah, everything falls apart when the CV to CV react routine overrides all other routines and settings.

Not that part. What doesn't work about it is the LRCAP does not work very well with the CV CAP in the same hex.

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 31

RE: I'm still in the dark about the Air Combat model - 6/25/2018 6:09:19 PM

Macclan5

Posts: 1065
Joined: 3/24/2016
From: Toronto Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

Kates are slow - I think 235mph max speed. Wildcats are at least in the 300s.

LRCAP over carrier TFs is penalized in the extreme - I want to say 10% effectiveness (so divide whatever you set to be over it by 10 and that's what you get).

So is a viable work around to assign the carrier TF to follow a surface combat TF and assign the LRCAP to cover the surface combat TF?

I am still following and my experience doesn't connect with this.

Because I am playing AI ?

Because I am not noting the details of the combat in intel monkey or something else?

Because I am inexperience?

--

Just had a turn the other day - Carrier TFs bleeding Japanese Kamikazi and Japanese air frames.

i) 2 perhaps 3 hexs north of Iwo Jima - Late 1944

ii) 4 Carrier TFs with Hellcats

iii) Hellcat CAP set variously 15k 10K 5K range 1

iv) One of those spectacular F4U Corsair squadrons 36 air frames on Iwo Jima set LR CAP over a single Carrier TF Alt = 20K Range is 4 verses max of 7 if I recall correctly.

v) Strikes come in.

vi) Corsairs rise 5 - 6 at a time and assist CAP.

Now what I do not have is a detailed tracker level breakdown to see if the Corsairs actually shot anything down - but "i perceive" they are helping.

Am I wrong ?

_____________________________

A People that values its privileges above it's principles will soon loose both. Dwight D Eisenhower.

(in reply to HansBolter)

Post #: 32

RE: I'm still in the dark about the Air Combat model - 6/25/2018 7:02:29 PM

AFBTD

Posts: 93
Joined: 5/21/2018
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Macclan5

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

Kates are slow - I think 235mph max speed. Wildcats are at least in the 300s.

LRCAP over carrier TFs is penalized in the extreme - I want to say 10% effectiveness (so divide whatever you set to be over it by 10 and that's what you get).

So is a viable work around to assign the carrier TF to follow a surface combat TF and assign the LRCAP to cover the surface combat TF?

I am still following and my experience doesn't connect with this.

Because I am playing AI ?

Because I am not noting the details of the combat in intel monkey or something else?

Because I am inexperience?

--

Just had a turn the other day - Carrier TFs bleeding Japanese Kamikazi and Japanese air frames.

i) 2 perhaps 3 hexs north of Iwo Jima - Late 1944

ii) 4 Carrier TFs with Hellcats

iii) Hellcat CAP set variously 15k 10K 5K range 1

iv) One of those spectacular F4U Corsair squadrons 36 air frames on Iwo Jima set LR CAP over a single Carrier TF Alt = 20K Range is 4 verses max of 7 if I recall correctly.

v) Strikes come in.

vi) Corsairs rise 5 - 6 at a time and assist CAP.

Now what I do not have is a detailed tracker level breakdown to see if the Corsairs actually shot anything down - but "i perceive" they are helping.

Am I wrong ?

On LRCAP against the AI; 36 corsairs will only protect you about 10-12; against the AI the first Fighters on engage combat if corsairs envolved and not are in the deck of the CV are THE CORSAIRS

_____________________________

mis amigos; EL FRENTE ATLETICO, LA PANDA DEL MOCO, OCHAITA FANS

(in reply to Macclan5)

Post #: 33

RE: I'm still in the dark about the Air Combat model - 6/25/2018 7:42:21 PM

Lokasenna

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Macclan5

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

Kates are slow - I think 235mph max speed. Wildcats are at least in the 300s.

LRCAP over carrier TFs is penalized in the extreme - I want to say 10% effectiveness (so divide whatever you set to be over it by 10 and that's what you get).

So is a viable work around to assign the carrier TF to follow a surface combat TF and assign the LRCAP to cover the surface combat TF?

I am still following and my experience doesn't connect with this.

Because I am playing AI ?

Because I am not noting the details of the combat in intel monkey or something else?

Because I am inexperience?

--

Just had a turn the other day - Carrier TFs bleeding Japanese Kamikazi and Japanese air frames.

i) 2 perhaps 3 hexs north of Iwo Jima - Late 1944

ii) 4 Carrier TFs with Hellcats

iii) Hellcat CAP set variously 15k 10K 5K range 1

iv) One of those spectacular F4U Corsair squadrons 36 air frames on Iwo Jima set LR CAP over a single Carrier TF Alt = 20K Range is 4 verses max of 7 if I recall correctly.

v) Strikes come in.

vi) Corsairs rise 5 - 6 at a time and assist CAP.

Now what I do not have is a detailed tracker level breakdown to see if the Corsairs actually shot anything down - but "i perceive" they are helping.

Am I wrong ?

Knowing your individual unit settings would be helpful. Did you have the Corsairs set to LRCAP, with range 4, and targeting a TF in the same hex with the CV TF?

Did the air strikes actually target the CV TF, or another TF in the same hex?

What version of the .exe are you playing?

Related to the range setting on your LRCAP-ing unit, did the combat report say "diverted to support CAP in hex"?

(in reply to Macclan5)

Post #: 34

RE: I'm still in the dark about the Air Combat model - 6/27/2018 12:04:20 PM

Macclan5

Posts: 1065
Joined: 3/24/2016
From: Toronto Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

Knowing your individual unit settings would be helpful. Did you have the Corsairs set to LRCAP, with range 4, and targeting a TF in the same hex with the CV TF?

Did the air strikes actually target the CV TF, or another TF in the same hex?

What version of the .exe are you playing?

Related to the range setting on your LRCAP-ing unit, did the combat report say "diverted to support CAP in hex"?

All of this is memory based so I am willing to be contradicted. I did not actually keep or save the combat report.

1) 4 Carrier TFs in the same hex - 3 hexes north of Iwo Jima. Each Carrier TF having a minimum of 4 CV / CVL per group with CA/CL/CLAA and 8 DD

The Carrier TF CAP was Escort 80/ Rest 20. Range 1. Individual squadrons were set at 5K (CVL squadrons), 10K, 15k

Average experience well in the 70's

2) Yes the Corsair Squadron was based on Iwo Jima. AFBase Level 2.

Corsair CAP was set at Escort LR CAP 70 / Rest 30 - target was specifically 1 of the Carrier TF (TF#184 IIRC), Range 4 Alt = 20K.

Average experience low 70's with many Aces and a handful of TRACOM eligible pilots

Yes I got the message "diverted to support CAP in hex"

3) Yes the AI flew well over 100 Planes perhaps as many as 300 at the various Carrier TFs in the same hex.

4) Despite 8 - 10 different grouping attacks from the AI / Japan - not a single hit was scored. Only 2 groupings with Jills and Betty's actually seemed able to drop Torps into the water / bombs. The other groupings did not seem to even get an attack run in.

5) In each attack run against various CV TFs - the Corsairs appeared in the report. As few as 2 - as many as 10.

I wish I had copied that Combat report.

6) Sum tally was something like 122 Japanese Aircraft lost that turn and 15 from Allied. Having said that other action would have contributed to those numbers.

7) Stock vanilla game.

_____________________________

A People that values its privileges above it's principles will soon loose both. Dwight D Eisenhower.

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 35

RE: I'm still in the dark about the Air Combat model - 6/27/2018 3:04:13 PM

Lokasenna

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

The message "diverted to support CAP in hex" tells me that they were pulled in from another hex, which means that the planes that showed up weren't actually over the carriers to begin with but "leaked" over.

(in reply to Macclan5)

Post #: 36

RE: I'm still in the dark about the Air Combat model - 6/29/2018 2:53:31 PM

Macclan5

Posts: 1065
Joined: 3/24/2016
From: Toronto Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

The message "diverted to support CAP in hex" tells me that they were pulled in from another hex, which means that the planes that showed up weren't actually over the carriers to begin with but "leaked" over.

Thank you sir ! More leanings.

Here I thought I invented something no one ever considered in this game before

Bwahahaha

_____________________________

A People that values its privileges above it's principles will soon loose both. Dwight D Eisenhower.

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 37

RE: I'm still in the dark about the Air Combat model - 6/30/2018 9:37:02 PM

Lokasenna

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Macclan5

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

The message "diverted to support CAP in hex" tells me that they were pulled in from another hex, which means that the planes that showed up weren't actually over the carriers to begin with but "leaked" over.

Thank you sir ! More leanings.

Here I thought I invented something no one ever considered in this game before

Bwahahaha

It is a potential work-around to the LRCAP limitation.

I'd have to test it to see.

(in reply to Macclan5)

Post #: 38

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> The War Room >> RE: I'm still in the dark about the Air Combat model

Page: << < prev 1 [2]