Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

There's No Way This Could be Happening...Could It?

 
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 >> There's No Way This Could be Happening...Could It? Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
There's No Way This Could be Happening...Could It? - 1/22/2010 7:49:42 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21101
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline
I have noticed in my PBEM game (and commented in my AAR weeks ago) that something seemed to be going on with sweeps that seemed so unlikely as to surely be impossible. Yet it continues to occurr regularly in my game, so I wanted to mention it here. I may be (a) wrong or (b) unlucky. But just in case this is a trend, I wanted to point it out so that other players can look for this in their own games. If it's not happening, great. If it is...well...

The issue: Do Japanese fighters usually or always fly sweep missions against a hex before the Japanese bombers go in; and do Allied bombers usually or always fly missions against a hex before the Allied fighters goe in? If so this has significant ramifications on the outcome of air battles and seriously affects play balance.

Observation of Allied Missions: In my game the Allies frequently target Akyab for sweep/escort/bomber missions. Nearly always or always the bombers go first and the fighters arrive later. This means the bombers get beaten up, but it also means the Japanese fighters run out of ammunition and land before my sweep fighters come in. Turn after turn after turn my sweep fighters wouldn't encounter a single Japanese fighter even though there were 100 at the start of the turn. So my bombers would face 100 fighters, but my sweeping fighters wouldn't get a crack at any Japanese fighters. [Note - many or sometimes all of the fighters were based closer to the target hex than were the bombers]

Observation of Japanese Missions: After that happened I began to notice that when Japanese bombers target Allied hexes in China, the Japanese fighters always flew sweep missions before the Japanese bombers arrived. That mean the sweeping fighters got to deal with Allied CAP, reducing or eliminating them before the bombers arrive.

More recently I noticed this same phenomenon in the huge air/sea battles in the Kuriles. Japanese fighters on sweep mission always arrive first, so that my opponent was able to overwhelm my CAP. His following bombers faced few if any fighters.

Now it's just happened again in the DEI. My opponent sent two sweep missions against an island I'm invading. The sweep missions wore out my fighters. Then the Japanese Bettys arrive and faced minimal Allied CAP. From the combat report:

[1] Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Babar at 76,117

Weather in hex: Severe storms

Raid detected at 33 NM, estimated altitude 18,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 10 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 18

Allied aircraft
Spitfire Vc Trop x 18
P-38F Lightning x 2
P-38G Lightning x 3

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 5 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
Spitfire Vc Trop: 1 destroyed
P-38G Lightning: 1 destroyed

[2] Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Babar at 76,117

Weather in hex: Severe storms

Raid detected at 33 NM, estimated altitude 17,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 10 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 18

Allied aircraft
Spitfire Vc Trop x 4
P-38F Lightning x 2
P-38G Lightning x 1

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
Spitfire Vc Trop: 1 destroyed

Aircraft Attacking:
16 x A6M2 Zero sweeping at 15000 feet *

[3] Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Babar at 76,117

Weather in hex: Severe storms

Raid detected at 120 NM, estimated altitude 12,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 42 minutes

Japanese aircraft
G4M1 Betty x 45

Allied aircraft
Spitfire Vc Trop x 1
P-38G Lightning x 1

Japanese aircraft losses
G4M1 Betty: 1 destroyed, 22 damaged

Allied Ships
BB Washington, Torpedo hits 1
LST-18
AM Constant
CLAA Juneau
SC-641
DD Piet Hein
SC-640

[4] Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Babar at 76,117

Weather in hex: Severe storms

Raid detected at 18 NM, estimated altitude 13,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 6 minutes

Japanese aircraft
G4M1 Betty x 16

Allied aircraft
Spitfire Vc Trop x 1
P-38G Lightning x 1

Japanese aircraft losses
G4M1 Betty: 2 destroyed, 14 damaged

Allied Ships
BB Washington
CA Northampton

Is my opponent doing something right to get his fighters to fly before bombers and am I doing something wrong so that my bombers always fly before my fighters? Or is there something weird going on here? I know that in land combat the Japanese attack seems to always go first, so I wonder.

< Message edited by Canoerebel -- 1/22/2010 7:59:36 PM >
Post #: 1
RE: There's No Way This Could be Happening...Could It? - 1/22/2010 7:59:22 PM   
pompack


Posts: 2582
Joined: 2/8/2004
From: University Park, Texas
Status: offline
I have no idea what determines the order, but I will note that my Japanese sweeps virtually always go in after the bombers. I wish I knew your secret

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 2
RE: There's No Way This Could be Happening...Could It? - 1/22/2010 8:01:51 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21101
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline
You mean you wish you knew my opponent's secret.  You'll have to ask him.  I swear this happens every turn.  But it could be that he's using settings that help him and I'm using settings that hurt me.  Maybe I'm paranoid, but hopefully this will encourage players to be on the lookout in their games.

(in reply to pompack)
Post #: 3
RE: There's No Way This Could be Happening...Could It? - 1/22/2010 8:05:37 PM   
khyberbill


Posts: 1941
Joined: 9/11/2007
From: new milford, ct
Status: offline
My foes sweeps will sometimes come after the fact. I just dont sweep and attack the same turn. I will send in sweeps alone for several turns before sending in the bombers.

_____________________________

"Its a dog eat dog world Sammy and I am wearing Milkbone underwear" -Norm.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 4
RE: There's No Way This Could be Happening...Could It? - 1/22/2010 9:03:43 PM   
jackyo123

 

Posts: 697
Joined: 2/4/2008
Status: offline
sweeps are pretty unpredictable, even with altitude the same

what i have noticed though is that air HQ's and high experience pilots seem to do sweeps better than greenies - so the early japanese sweeps might just be because his pilot pool has 60's/70's pilots throughout and the allies dont.

i am playing the japanese in one pbem, and am playing allies in one pbem and 1 ai game, and find there isnt much of a difference with mid 50's pilots and no air hq's. they all stink at sweeping before the bombers. only the elite pilots seem to do better, and not by a large margin (so maybe its my imagination)

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 5
RE: There's No Way This Could be Happening...Could It? - 1/22/2010 9:11:04 PM   
Miller


Posts: 2226
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline
Hi Dan, the examples you quote are not sweep missions, they are escort that has become detatched from the bombers and has gone in alone, as were alot of my "sweeps" in the Kuriles.

As far as I am aware it is not a conspiracy by Matrix to shaft the Aliied player

(in reply to jackyo123)
Post #: 6
RE: There's No Way This Could be Happening...Could It? - 1/22/2010 9:25:54 PM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 9092
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline
If you really are bummed, and want to get a little better sweep/raid performance you could alternate days.. or day/night with sweeps in the day and bombing at night
just a suggestion

(in reply to Miller)
Post #: 7
RE: There's No Way This Could be Happening...Could It? - 1/22/2010 9:28:45 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21101
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline
The combat report specifically says that they are sweeps, so I thought they were sweeps.

Whatever they are, though, it seems like Japanese fighters always strike before Japanese bombers, but the reverse for Allied bombers and fighters.

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 8
RE: There's No Way This Could be Happening...Could It? - 1/22/2010 10:02:08 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
Canoerebel,
This isn't necessarily so in-game.

If you want sweeps to go in before the bombers then you need to arrange it so that they would physically arrive before the bombers. AE seems to have some pretty good code in there to determine this.... So, what do you need to do in-game.
1. Make sure the fighters fly from bases much closer to the target than the bombers.

That's pretty much it. The best determinant of when your fighters will arrive relative to the bombers is if the distance to the target / cruise speed is smaller than the bomber's distance to target / cruise speed. It does seem that if the fighters should arrive a little sooner but not by much that the bombers are still likely to go in first so I would suggest adding a 1 to 2 hex fudge factor for your calculations.

So, if the fighter flying from 3 hexes would arrive at the same time as the bombers flying from 5 hexes try to launch the bombers from 7 hexes.

Now compare the bombers flying from the same base as the fighters ( 3 hexes away ) and the bombers flying from 7 hexes away and note the relative appearance of fighters. Fighters will precede the bombers much more frequently when the bombers launch from 7 hexes. Not perfect but statistically significant.


Of course the much simpler work-around is simply to launch massive sweeps for a couple of days and then follow up with the bombers afterwards. It isn't as subtle but it would work.



In this I think you are blaming the game for something which is within your purview to ameliorate. I offer the above with a view to helping you solve the problem, I hope it is taken in that way.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 9
RE: There's No Way This Could be Happening...Could It? - 1/22/2010 10:06:25 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21101
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline
That would be great, Nemo, except it doesn't work.  Many times I've had fighters from Chittagong and Cox's Bazaar that arrived at nearby Akyab long after bombers that were flying from Diamond Harbor and Calcutta.

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 10
RE: There's No Way This Could be Happening...Could It? - 1/22/2010 10:13:37 PM   
Mac Linehan

 

Posts: 1484
Joined: 12/19/2004
From: Denver Colorado
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Canoerebel,
This isn't necessarily so in-game.

If you want sweeps to go in before the bombers then you need to arrange it so that they would physically arrive before the bombers. AE seems to have some pretty good code in there to determine this.... So, what do you need to do in-game.
1. Make sure the fighters fly from bases much closer to the target than the bombers.

That's pretty much it. The best determinant of when your fighters will arrive relative to the bombers is if the distance to the target / cruise speed is smaller than the bomber's distance to target / cruise speed. It does seem that if the fighters should arrive a little sooner but not by much that the bombers are still likely to go in first so I would suggest adding a 1 to 2 hex fudge factor for your calculations.

So, if the fighter flying from 3 hexes would arrive at the same time as the bombers flying from 5 hexes try to launch the bombers from 7 hexes.

Now compare the bombers flying from the same base as the fighters ( 3 hexes away ) and the bombers flying from 7 hexes away and note the relative appearance of fighters. Fighters will precede the bombers much more frequently when the bombers launch from 7 hexes. Not perfect but statistically significant.


Of course the much simpler work-around is simply to launch massive sweeps for a couple of days and then follow up with the bombers afterwards. It isn't as subtle but it would work.



In this I think you are blaming the game for something which is within your purview to ameliorate. I offer the above with a view to helping you solve the problem, I hope it is taken in that way.



Nemo -

Thanks for the advice; I will give it a go and see what happens.

Mac

_____________________________

LAV-25 2147

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 11
RE: There's No Way This Could be Happening...Could It? - 1/22/2010 10:20:32 PM   
Athius

 

Posts: 73
Joined: 9/12/2009
Status: offline
One thing I noticed that a lot of my "pre bomber sweeps" are actualy escorts who lost coördination and arrived early. In my japanese scen2 game my "42 ki-43 + 50 ki-21" strike often breaks down to a "20 ki-43 sweep" followed by a "12 ki-43 50 ki-21" bombing mission.



(in reply to Mac Linehan)
Post #: 12
RE: There's No Way This Could be Happening...Could It? - 1/22/2010 11:12:00 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
Well, nothing works all of the time and things do depend on experience etc. I bet your Allied fighters are pretty piss-poor experience wise... I have 60+ Exp pilots in the testing and it worked fairly well for me. It didn't work sufficiently well that I feel sweep and bomb on the same day is a tactic I would generally feel comfortable with long-term ( loss potential is too high ) but sweep THEN bomb on a different day is perfectly workable. For emergency situations though if you want to stack the odds in your favour for your sweep going in first then what I outlined is your best bet. Given the experience of the USAAF over the Netherlands and Germany I'm quite satisfied that the extempore arrangements for setting up sweeps etc in the Pacific would have resulted in a lot of bombing raids going in dys-synchronised with their sweeps.

If you want a guarantee then just sweep for a few turns before sending in the bombers. If, when you send them in on the same days as the sweep, they get clobbered then I think there's a simple pointer to a simple change in tactics which will solve the problem you are having.

(in reply to Athius)
Post #: 13
RE: There's No Way This Could be Happening...Could It? - 1/22/2010 11:13:31 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21101
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline
Nemo, nope.  This happened every time sweep and bombers flew missions against Akyab over the course of months.  Also, the pilots are high experience - Americans around 60 and RAF as high as the 70s. And there's a Fighter Command HQ present too.

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 14
RE: There's No Way This Could be Happening...Could It? - 1/23/2010 12:00:28 AM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
Well, in that case the game must just hate you personally ;-).


I didn't find what you describe when I tested this.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 15
RE: There's No Way This Could be Happening...Could It? - 1/23/2010 12:05:19 AM   
Feltan


Posts: 1150
Joined: 12/5/2006
From: Kansas
Status: offline
As the Japanese player, I have had the problem of sweeps coming in late.

To counter this, I set bombers on naval strike with a secondary mission of port or airfield strike. Hence, the bombers sit out the first air phase looking for a naval target -- only with a null naval target do they conduct the other strike.

This allows, almost always, the fighters to go in first on a sweep.

Regards,
Feltan

_____________________________


(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 16
RE: There's No Way This Could be Happening...Could It? - 1/23/2010 12:43:17 AM   
witpqs


Posts: 25914
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Well, in that case the game must just hate you personally ;-).


I didn't find what you describe when I tested this.


I've also seen quite a bit of variability. My only objection is that I believe commanders intended for sweeps to arrive first, so there should be some degree of bias toward them coming in first (but still great levels of variability).

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 17
RE: There's No Way This Could be Happening...Could It? - 1/23/2010 1:22:37 AM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21101
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121
Well, in that case the game must just hate you personally ;-).


Sometimes it feels that way!

Truthfully, though, Miller and I have played into April 1943 and there aren't too many other games that have gone this deeply. I've raised some issues that I thought needed to be addressed - some didn't, some did.

People politely mentioning potential wrinkles will allow others to add their input. Many times it will turn out to be a false alarm, but occassionally it will become apparent that there are wrinkles that need ironing.

I realized that this one was a real long shot, but it has occurred often enough that it has me scratching my head.

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 18
RE: There's No Way This Could be Happening...Could It? - 1/23/2010 1:54:20 AM   
CapAndGown


Posts: 3204
Joined: 3/6/2001
From: Virginia, USA
Status: offline
I can guarantee that those "sweeps" against a TF that you posted are not "sweeps" at all. It is impossible for sweep attack to target a TF. Even naval attack bombers cannot choose a target. The AI picks the target. So those fighters were actually escorts who lost contact with the raid.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 19
RE: There's No Way This Could be Happening...Could It? - 1/23/2010 2:05:52 AM   
michaelm75au


Posts: 13421
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline
Fighters on sweep can act as escorts. when they do, there is a chance that they will 'sweep' before the attack.
The high the leader's aggression rating, the more likely that they will go in first.

_____________________________

Michael

(in reply to CapAndGown)
Post #: 20
RE: There's No Way This Could be Happening...Could It? - 1/23/2010 2:06:54 AM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
Canoerebel, and you're right to mention them. Without them being mentioned we can't debate whether they really are problems of the game or the play. And if we don't identify the game ones they'll never get fixed.

My view is just that we can only ascribe it to "the game" when we've ruled out all possibility of it being due to the player. So far this one looks like a mix of the human prediliction to notice unfortunate things which happen to them and ascribe them greater frequency than they really have mixed in with a bit of escorts which didn't link up sweeping ahead of the Japanese bombers and making it look, erroneously as though he always swept before bombers while you never could.

Personally I think that the two real points of learning here were:
1. Sweep and bomb on different days and
2. (by far the better learning point ) - set the bombers on naval attack with the bombing mission as a secondary mission guaranteeing they will only fly in the PM phase --- Kudos Feltan, that's a good workaround.

(in reply to CapAndGown)
Post #: 21
RE: There's No Way This Could be Happening...Could It? - 1/23/2010 3:32:06 AM   
witpqs


Posts: 25914
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm

Fighters on sweep can act as escorts. when they do, there is a chance that they will 'sweep' before the attack.
The high the leader's aggression rating, the more likely that they will go in first.


Cool! Thanks.

(in reply to michaelm75au)
Post #: 22
RE: There's No Way This Could be Happening...Could It? - 1/23/2010 4:41:33 AM   
Reg


Posts: 2787
Joined: 5/26/2000
From: NSW, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Well, in that case the game must just hate you personally ;-).



I was always under the impression the code only contained the following fragment....

   if Ron then {
                 ......
               };


Looks like we have found some more personalised code....


_____________________________

Cheers,
Reg.

(One day I will learn to spell - or check before posting....)
Uh oh, Firefox has a spell checker!! What excuse can I use now!!!

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 23
RE: There's No Way This Could be Happening...Could It? - 1/23/2010 8:28:28 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 14090
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Canoerebel,
This isn't necessarily so in-game.

If you want sweeps to go in before the bombers then you need to arrange it so that they would physically arrive before the bombers. AE seems to have some pretty good code in there to determine this.... So, what do you need to do in-game.
1. Make sure the fighters fly from bases much closer to the target than the bombers.

That's pretty much it. The best determinant of when your fighters will arrive relative to the bombers is if the distance to the target / cruise speed is smaller than the bomber's distance to target / cruise speed. It does seem that if the fighters should arrive a little sooner but not by much that the bombers are still likely to go in first so I would suggest adding a 1 to 2 hex fudge factor for your calculations.

So, if the fighter flying from 3 hexes would arrive at the same time as the bombers flying from 5 hexes try to launch the bombers from 7 hexes.

Now compare the bombers flying from the same base as the fighters ( 3 hexes away ) and the bombers flying from 7 hexes away and note the relative appearance of fighters. Fighters will precede the bombers much more frequently when the bombers launch from 7 hexes. Not perfect but statistically significant.


Of course the much simpler work-around is simply to launch massive sweeps for a couple of days and then follow up with the bombers afterwards. It isn't as subtle but it would work.



In this I think you are blaming the game for something which is within your purview to ameliorate. I offer the above with a view to helping you solve the problem, I hope it is taken in that way.




this was more or less bulletprove in WITP (with very very rare exceptions) but not true in AE anymore. You can see 4Es going in first from 18 hexes away and afterwards the fighter sweep from 2 hexes arrives.

_____________________________


(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 24
RE: There's No Way This Could be Happening...Could It? - 1/23/2010 8:35:41 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 14090
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Feltan

As the Japanese player, I have had the problem of sweeps coming in late.

To counter this, I set bombers on naval strike with a secondary mission of port or airfield strike. Hence, the bombers sit out the first air phase looking for a naval target -- only with a null naval target do they conduct the other strike.

This allows, almost always, the fighters to go in first on a sweep.

Regards,
Feltan



this is a workaround to some extend, but you then end up doing the sweep and the bombing run in two different phases which is not that different from two different turns (except that some ac are repaired over night). One of the advantages of the sweep going in first is not just to take down enemy fighters but to disorganize the defense which makes CAP by far less effective, thus giving your escort a better chance to stand it´s own. If you sweep in the morning then the Cap in the afternoon works just fine (minus what you have shot down in the morning of course). Cap gets worse and worse the more strikes are coming in within the same phase.

As an attacker, no matter if Japanese or Allied, you want to see your sweep first and right thereafter you want to see your bombers going in with their escorts, both in the same phase. I have yet to see this constantly in my AI test game or in the PBEM. The opposite is true for me, it´s something like 1 out of 10 times for me that the fighters sweep first, it just seems like a total random with the odds highly favouring the bomb run to go first. It worked just fine in WITP, it seems (for me and obviously also for Canourebel and others) not to work in AE like it worked in WITP. Thus people have to either only sweep or only bomb, thus losing the advantage of a combined attack, which was quite substantial in WITP as follow on strikes often achieved kill rates twice or three times as high as the first attack against the CAP (or on the other way around with the kill rate of the Cap being only 1/2 or 1/3), this due to the fact that the CAP was completely disorganized and out of position (at least that´s what we´ve been told for years).

< Message edited by castor troy -- 1/23/2010 8:39:43 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Feltan)
Post #: 25
RE: There's No Way This Could be Happening...Could It? - 1/23/2010 1:08:23 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21101
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline
For those asserting that this was not a sweep mission, here's the pertinent portion of the combat report contained in my original post:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

[1] Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Babar at 76,117

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 18

Aircraft Attacking:
18 x A6M2 Zero sweeping at 15000 feet *


[2] Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Babar at 76,117

Weather in hex: Severe storms

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 18

Aircraft Attacking:
16 x A6M2 Zero sweeping at 15000 feet *

[


Secondly, I appreciate and wil try Feltan's work-around, but it's a duct-tape, molding, and caulk fix. If you set your bombers to naval attack primary and bomb airfield secondary, and two PCs end up in range, all your bombers go off after the ships. Should players have to go to that length to arrange fighters to (usually) go in ahead of bombers?

Thirdly, it shouldn't be necessary to send sweeps and bombers in separate turns. That's not the way it was done in the war and it's counter-intuitive (which hurts newbie players).

Fourth, when you sweep on turns before your bomb it alerts your opponent to what to expect. So your opponent clears that front line airfield of fighters and then sets a nice LRCAP ambush, which you can't counter because you can't sweep the same turn you bomb.

Fifth, I have tried to make it clear that this observation is just a hunch on my part (see the title of the post even). It seems that I'm seeing this situation consistenty, but I realize it could be my imagination or that my opponent could be setting up sweeps better than I am. It's just that I'd like to know for certain.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 26
RE: There's No Way This Could be Happening...Could It? - 1/23/2010 1:59:40 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
Canoerebel,

If an escort gets detached from the bombers it shows up as sweeping. You CANNOT order a sweep of a TF thus this could ONLY be escorts detaching from bombers and proceeding on to sweep alone.


As to counter-intuition... No, I don't think it is counter-intuitive to sweep and sweep and then sweep some more until the enemy fighters are gone. If that takes a few days then so be it. That is very often how it happened in real life.

I'm not saying your argument is entirely wrong, just saying that you aren't presenting some of the historical facts which were real but don't support your argument. I think that your argument contains truth but that we have to account for all the historical facts before we can assess what you are saying. Selectiveness doesn't help with this.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 27
RE: There's No Way This Could be Happening...Could It? - 1/23/2010 4:43:42 PM   
wwengr


Posts: 678
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin, USA
Status: offline
Historically, fighter sweep missions were simply air superiority missions targeted at a limited geographic airspace. They often were run independent of other mission strictly for the purpose of finding and destroying the enemy. Also, historically, these air superiority missions, were sometimes flown in coordination with strike missions for the purpose of forcing the enemy to engage the sweeps and spend their fuel and ammunition and for the purpose of destroying the enemy that would otherwise be able to disrupt the stroke mission.

Either approach is valid and has historcal precedence.

_____________________________

I have been inputting my orders for the campaign game first turn since July 4, 2009. I'm getting close. In another month or two, I might be able to run the turn!

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 28
RE: There's No Way This Could be Happening...Could It? - 1/23/2010 4:44:41 PM   
Feltan


Posts: 1150
Joined: 12/5/2006
From: Kansas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Feltan

As the Japanese player, I have had the problem of sweeps coming in late.

To counter this, I set bombers on naval strike with a secondary mission of port or airfield strike. Hence, the bombers sit out the first air phase looking for a naval target -- only with a null naval target do they conduct the other strike.

This allows, almost always, the fighters to go in first on a sweep.

Regards,
Feltan



this is a workaround to some extend, but you then end up doing the sweep and the bombing run in two different phases which is not that different from two different turns (except that some ac are repaired over night). One of the advantages of the sweep going in first is not just to take down enemy fighters but to disorganize the defense which makes CAP by far less effective, thus giving your escort a better chance to stand it´s own. If you sweep in the morning then the Cap in the afternoon works just fine (minus what you have shot down in the morning of course). Cap gets worse and worse the more strikes are coming in within the same phase.

As an attacker, no matter if Japanese or Allied, you want to see your sweep first and right thereafter you want to see your bombers going in with their escorts, both in the same phase. I have yet to see this constantly in my AI test game or in the PBEM. The opposite is true for me, it´s something like 1 out of 10 times for me that the fighters sweep first, it just seems like a total random with the odds highly favouring the bomb run to go first. It worked just fine in WITP, it seems (for me and obviously also for Canourebel and others) not to work in AE like it worked in WITP. Thus people have to either only sweep or only bomb, thus losing the advantage of a combined attack, which was quite substantial in WITP as follow on strikes often achieved kill rates twice or three times as high as the first attack against the CAP (or on the other way around with the kill rate of the Cap being only 1/2 or 1/3), this due to the fact that the CAP was completely disorganized and out of position (at least that´s what we´ve been told for years).


Castor Troy,

Not going to disagree too much here. I agree that it isn't exactly optimal to have morning sweeps with fighters and afternoon bomber missions. The sole advantage this tactic has is that it works pretty well if somewhat inefficiently.

However, if I may, I'd suggest your expectations for the coordination of air strikes may be a bit too strong. In real life, even today, this is difficult business. In PTO WWII, using different (often rudimentary and far flung) bases, little knowledge of the jet stream, spotty communications, fickle weather forecasts, no computerized logisitic system, and air crew and support staff that a few short months ago were farmers and factory workers -- it is kind of amazing that aircraft show up over the same target at all, and forget about the timing.

My Father was a B-17 pilot in Europe. As a teenager, and aspiring war gamer, I came to the conclusion after a little reading that if the 8th U.S. Air Force would have simply conducted 1000+ bomber raids every day, that the war in Europe could have been concluded sooner. Why not? They did conduct 1000+ bomber raids -- just do more of them! So simple! When I floated this idea to my Father, well, to say the least he was amused. After he stopped laughing, I got a little lesson in what it actually took to mount one of these massive raids. And in Europe, they had the advantage of relatively good and geographically close airfields, land-line communication and a centralized logistic system.

The frustration you (and all of us) have over coordinating air attacks is well founded. It is frustrating. However, I would also advance the notion that it is very, very realistic. In our twenty-first century culture of instant communication and internet access, such coordination seems like an easy problem to solve. However, it is not easy, not even today -- sixty five years ago in the Pacific it was geometrically more difficult, and I think the game does a pretty good job of modelling that.

Fighters in the morning; bombers in the afternoon. I think that level of coordination for a strike is probably pretty close to the precision that was historically possible in many cases. Of course you can roll the dice in the game and try to run the sweep and bombers in the same phase, it might work!, just don't have high hopes for a level of operational coordination that can easily be botched even in modern operations.

Regards,
Feltan

_____________________________


(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 29
RE: There's No Way This Could be Happening...Could It? - 1/23/2010 5:35:31 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 25914
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

For those asserting that this was not a sweep mission, here's the pertinent portion of the combat report contained in my original post:



I understand what the report says, but a lot of the report material is FOW. I would rather go by what your opponent says, at least for the turns where he is certain he remembers what orders he had in place.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> There's No Way This Could be Happening...Could It? 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

0.453