From: Vienna, Austria
I'm not sure if there's a hard limit on the number of fighter rounds or not but if there is I just thought I'd suggest moving away from a hard limit and moving to a limit based solely on the number of fighters available and the time available for them to make their firing passes.
The reason being that a hard limit on the number of fighter passes would actually have the result of, effectively, imposing a limit on the effective CAP which can be placed over a base or TF irrespective of the number of planes available.
Here's an example to illustrate what I mean:
1. Assume that there's a hard limit of 300 fighter passes in any combat no matter how many fighters or how long a time could pass from spotting the raid.
2. Assume that with a raid spotted 50 minutes out any fighter on CAP could make 5 firing passes on an unescorted bomber stream. One pass every 10 minutes.
3. So, spotting a raid 50 minutes out would mean that even with 500 fighters on CAP ( say over Tokyo or over a massive CV TF ) only 60 would actually engage, with the other 440 just circling around watching combat. Why? Simple, 60 fighters making 1 pass every 10 minutes can, over 50 minutes generate 300 firing passes.
Obviously, in the game more than 60 of these fighters would engage since they'd have to reach the enemy bombers ( and that would take time, limiting the amount of time available for firing passes once interception was made ) and some would be damaged by defensive fire such that others would take their place to continue making passes until the hard limit was reached.
Effectively a hard limit would mean that for raids detected at long range ( e.g by USN radars ) only a small amount of the CAP would actually engage but that portion of CAP would engage very decisively - which seems to be mirroring what we are seeing reported in late-war games. I've certainly noted situations where only a few of my USN squadrons or USAAF squadrons engage an incoming raid ( as shown by a few of the squadrons on CAP getting huge increases in the numbers of kills while others have no increase in kills at all ).
Obviously I'm not sure if there is a hard limit on number of firing passes but logically a hard limit would disproportionately penalise the side with the larger number of fighters on CAP and the better radar ( IOW, the USN CV TFs ) and might explain some of what we're seeing - where fighters engage opposing fighters, seem to use up most of their firing passes on the enemy fighters and then have so few passes left that they don't effectively engage and disrupt the bombers, allowing them to achieve outsize results vs USN CV TFs.
The best solution would be, IMO, to enable a toggle to set fighters to preferentially engage other fighters or enemy bombers ( and this would allow twin-engined zerstoerer types to be used much more historically ( as opposed to wasting themselves dogfighting with nimble single-engined opponents as currently happens ) ) but if there is a hard limit removing it and replacing it with a "number of firing passes per fighter per minute vs other fighters" and " number of firing passes per fighter per minute vs bombers" might go some way to remedying the situation and prevent the current situation where huge CAPs relatively frequently intercept but don't decisively engage enemy bomber formations.
Hi Nemo! I agree with your proposal, considering Michael´s posts in this thread
seem to hint that a similar system is already used with the air combat model - though
maybe on a more granular scale than you are suggesting.
Michael made two posts here that support my assumption:
I can increase the number of combat rounds when there is a large number of fighters in CAP.
This increases the dogfights without making a lopsided change.
Michael, just out of interest, would this increase combat rounds with short detection
ranges as well?
If I understand this correctly, the amount of combat rounds is a factor of detection range
and # and attributes of a/c involved. So basically you are increasing the cap on maximum combat rounds possible?
Only if the CAP is large. And a larger initial rounds due to the higher 'cap', would then be lowered if detection range is low.
And a higher 'cap' to the rounds wont necessarily mean a bloodier battle, as it still needs dice rolls for plane detection, interception, attack, defend, etc.
This seems to hint that there already is a (granular) threshold present, depending on total ammount of CAP fighters
available, modified by detection range, and the result further influenced by "dice rolls for plane detection, interception,
attack, defend, etc.".
So the proper approach could be to reduce the granularity and to increase the hard CAP at the upper end of
the scale. This might be a good solution depending on whether the game engine can handle such a change.
< Message edited by LoBaron -- 12/30/2011 6:46:22 AM >