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: The tojo as uber.....

 
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: The tojo as uber..... Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: The tojo as uber..... - 2/28/2010 1:03:12 PM   
Hortlund


Posts: 2884
Joined: 10/13/2000
Status: offline
Glad you found it funny. If your posts were not filled with all that whining and complaining about pretty self-explaining truths, perhaps they would be funny too.

In my game as allied, Ive tried to set my CAP fighters on higher altitude than his sweeps. Guess what, my fighters still draw the short straw. 20 Hurricanes on CAP at 35k still lose 3-1 to 30 Oscars sweeping at 15k. I think we all have experiences like that, and therefore your whining and complaining is all the more silly.

_____________________________

The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close.
In its place we are entering a period of consequences..

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 61
RE: The tojo as uber..... - 2/28/2010 1:11:54 PM   
chesmart


Posts: 908
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Malta
Status: offline
What we should do is test it further and see if we have consistent results with "Uber CAP". Lets test it further in test scenarios and we will see if it is that bad or not. Dont mind Castor he lives in a negative troll world, had an experience myself when i tried to reason with him. 

(in reply to Hortlund)
Post #: 62
RE: The tojo as uber..... - 2/28/2010 1:25:44 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 13692
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

Glad you found it funny. If your posts were not filled with all that whining and complaining about pretty self-explaining truths, perhaps they would be funny too.

In my game as allied, Ive tried to set my CAP fighters on higher altitude than his sweeps. Guess what, my fighters still draw the short straw. 20 Hurricanes on CAP at 35k still lose 3-1 to 30 Oscars sweeping at 15k. I think we all have experiences like that, and therefore your whining and complaining is all the more silly.



oh yeah, try setting them lower, perhaps they get shred 10:1 then. Open your eyes. Take the example I posted from my last PBEM turn. A 0:10 turns into a 3:0. The reason for this was the bounce. And yeah, if you think the airwar in the Pacific happend above 30.000ft ->

www.amazon.com

some nice books for sale...

_____________________________


(in reply to Hortlund)
Post #: 63
RE: The tojo as uber..... - 2/28/2010 1:32:53 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 13692
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: che200

What we should do is test it further and see if we have consistent results with "Uber CAP". Lets test it further in test scenarios and we will see if it is that bad or not. Dont mind Castor he lives in a negative troll world, had an experience myself when i tried to reason with him. 



better to live in a troll world than in an ignorant brown noser world. You probably too think that the fights in the Pacific were going on at 30.000ft to just below 40.000ft and that this altitude was the standard for an Oscar, a Zero or a P-40. Not even the devs dare to say that this would be realistic, hence it happens in all PBEMs where people donīt restrict them to keeping their fighters at reasonable alts because the game canīt force them to. Not even the great Panzerjaeger keeps his fighters at reasonable alt it seems as heīs also fighting Oscars at 35.000ft. So what? Reasonable? Realistic? Sure, only the books and veterans are wrong. And me of course. And not to forget about the two others that think airwar in the Pacific at 38.000ft is off. But hey, better a troll than an ignorant dreamer. You sure can offer some quotes that prove the 35.000ft encounters of Oscars sweeping P-40 at 10.000ft, diving down at them and killing them off at 10:0? And no, this is not an AFB or JFB whine, you can do the same with Lightnings at 39.000ft against Oscars at x feet lower so it works just both ways. And thatīs the reason why there seem to be some trolls saying that itīs just off. Oh I forgot, those fighters all had 21st century radar sets, heat shields and all the other stuff to make things possible. Iīm looking for an interview with a USAAF veteran that quotes Oscars diving down 20.000ft to take out a whole squadron.

oops, too much sarcasm again, I better just keep going on with the Sputnik term.

< Message edited by castor troy -- 2/28/2010 1:35:31 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to chesmart)
Post #: 64
RE: The tojo as uber..... - 2/28/2010 1:35:57 PM   
viberpol


Posts: 838
Joined: 10/20/2005
From: Gizycko, Poland, EU
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: che200

What we should do is test it further and see if we have consistent results with "Uber CAP". Lets test it further in test scenarios and we will see if it is that bad or not. Dont mind Castor he lives in a negative troll world, had an experience myself when i tried to reason with him. 


Yup. But how to test it?
If you repeat the same turn over and over again on your computer, without changing a single bit, you'll always receive the same results.

I'm not a statistician, but I think we'd need about 100 trials for the results to be statistically important & credible.
And as we change things, altitude selection etc., that's not good, because every result can happen at least once.

_____________________________

Przy lackim orle, przy koniu Kiejstuta Archanioł Rusi na proporcach błysł

(in reply to chesmart)
Post #: 65
RE: The tojo as uber..... - 2/28/2010 1:42:20 PM   
chesmart


Posts: 908
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Malta
Status: offline
Create a test scenario with average pilots both sides using the planes you want to test and test them at the different altitudes. I would recommend Oscar vs P-40 for your first test.Use 10 tests at Different Altitudes as your Reference and from there you get the data. Unfortunately i cannot do it until i finish the mod i am creating. BTW guys Nemo is doing a Mod where The Altitude is limited, he is discussing it in the Scenario and Mod forum.

< Message edited by che200 -- 2/28/2010 1:43:08 PM >

(in reply to viberpol)
Post #: 66
RE: The tojo as uber..... - 2/28/2010 1:57:38 PM   
Titanwarrior89


Posts: 3285
Joined: 8/28/2003
From: arkansas
Status: offline
Thats just it, there won't be any later stages. The game will be over. Japs win! Again I ask If "ANYONE" played into the later stages(pbem) as the allies and seen real world results for the allies in the game. All the players do here is throw up -"Look at what we get in 1944". Japs were not super human nor their aircraft. Game is off, as been from the beglining. Has anybody had a MIDWAY yet? Should it always happen-no it should not. But the way this game is set up it will never happen. Its hard for the allied player just to get a Coral sea result.
quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

July 15, 1942. Tokyo Rose

"Once again, highly trained Japanese army pilots, using their refined "high altitude sweep" tactics prevailed over the American dogs.

38 of the " universally respected and beloved" tojo fighters swept into Allied skies at a comfortable 36,000 feet and impaled a superior force of Allied P-40 aircraft-proving again the dominance of Japanese technoloy, pilot skill and industrial prowess. For the lost of just two "vaunted" tojos, the force of 38 "elite" army fighters, sporting weak armament and no armor, engaged 65 Allied planes and sliced up fourty P-40 Es in air to air combat. The highly skilled P 40 pilots while flying at the optimum altitude for their pitiful aircraft, grew over confident behind the superior armor and firepower of the hopelessly obsolete curtis fighters and were paid in kind for their reckless optimism. It is a shame that American and Australian girls have to lose their beloved sweetheat and husbands who are sent to war in this pitiful aircraft-no longer suited for any sort of front line activity but yet used by the Allies as they are unable to produce anything better. You Yanks thought you were in trouble facing our marvelous Zeros and Oscars and their tremendous high flying tactics. Now you must quiver in your boots at the the thought of facing the "new" superior tojo fighters."



Truthfully, this just totally blows. Tojos have slaughterd my hurricanes in India and are now doing a job on my fighters in OZ. This mediocre aircraft is a total killer and combined with superior numbers and the high altitude sweep just makes me sick. I have tried many solutions but it is July of 1942 and so far my the best tactic I have found to conter the Japanese air force is to pray that they do not show up in the same hex that I send my aircraft. Pretty sad. Takes me two months to build up my squadrons only to see them slaughtered in combat. I know I am not the first to complain about this but the high altitude sweep is totally out of whack. I suspect that Japanese players are going to be screaming about the same thing when our games get into the later stages. Any Japanese player who would build Tonys (service rating of 3) over these aircraft is out of his mind.

I have to confess that I am playing scen 2. Hindsight being 20/20, I should have negotiated a better deal....



< Message edited by Titanwarrior89 -- 2/28/2010 2:01:39 PM >


_____________________________

"Before Guadalcanal the enemy advanced at his pleasure. After Guadalcanal, he retreated at ours".

"Mama, There's Rabbits in the Garden"

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 67
RE: The tojo as uber..... - 2/28/2010 1:58:16 PM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 9348
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: viberpol


quote:

ORIGINAL: che200

What we should do is test it further and see if we have consistent results with "Uber CAP". Lets test it further in test scenarios and we will see if it is that bad or not. Dont mind Castor he lives in a negative troll world, had an experience myself when i tried to reason with him. 


Yup. But how to test it?
If you repeat the same turn over and over again on your computer, without changing a single bit, you'll always receive the same results.

I'm not a statistician, but I think we'd need about 100 trials for the results to be statistically important & credible.
And as we change things, altitude selection etc., that's not good, because every result can happen at least once.


If you close the program and restart it after every test turn, random seed for RNG gets reset and results will vary.

_____________________________

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


(in reply to viberpol)
Post #: 68
RE: The tojo as uber..... - 2/28/2010 2:00:13 PM   
viberpol


Posts: 838
Joined: 10/20/2005
From: Gizycko, Poland, EU
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: che200
Create a test scenario with average pilots both sides using the planes you want to test and test them at the different altitudes. I would recommend Oscar vs P-40 for your first test.Use 10 tests at Different Altitudes as your Reference and from there you get the data.


IMHO this data wouldn't be statistically important & it would not be possible to draw any conslusions from it.
Just 10 trials with different settings -- meaning 10 different results and only results -- not a clear representation of the formula.
What we need is 100 - 200 trials with the same settings on different computers, so that the results differ not the settings.

_____________________________

Przy lackim orle, przy koniu Kiejstuta Archanioł Rusi na proporcach błysł

(in reply to chesmart)
Post #: 69
RE: The tojo as uber..... - 2/28/2010 2:06:20 PM   
Hortlund


Posts: 2884
Joined: 10/13/2000
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy
oh yeah, try setting them lower, perhaps they get shred 10:1 then. Open your eyes. Take the example I posted from my last PBEM turn. A 0:10 turns into a 3:0. The reason for this was the bounce. And yeah, if you think the airwar in the Pacific happend above 30.000ft ->

www.amazon.com

some nice books for sale...


Well, Ive tried to put them lower, and no, the difference was not that big. Ive also had successful dogfights where my Hurricanes and P40s have taken down more Oscars than they lost. Usually that was when I was outnumbering them.

What exactly is your problem with the bounce results? When one side had the bounce, they got 10-0 (with fog of war) and when the other side got the bounce, they got 3-0 (also with fog of war). So what?

If you dont want the airwar in the pacific to happen above 30k, then dont set your fighters at that altitude. Pretty simple really.

_____________________________

The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close.
In its place we are entering a period of consequences..

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 70
RE: The tojo as uber..... - 2/28/2010 2:37:56 PM   
Zigurat666


Posts: 374
Joined: 9/26/2008
Status: offline
I can hardly wait for AE to have some time behind it. I dont visit the forum much anymore because of the complaining. I dont play WitP much anymore since switching to AE but I used to gather lots of useful info from its forums.
I dont know,maybe its me but for those of you who dont like some of the elements of the game,move along and play something else or develop your own game. IMO this is one of the best PC strategy games I,ve come across and when I see something ingame that doesnt seem to be WAD I find a way to counteract it,thats really the whole point of a strategy game isn,t it?

(in reply to Hortlund)
Post #: 71
RE: The tojo as uber..... - 2/28/2010 3:07:34 PM   
pompack


Posts: 2568
Joined: 2/8/2004
From: University Park, Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy


better to live in a troll world than in an ignorant brown noser world.




(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 72
RE: The tojo as uber..... - 2/28/2010 3:10:39 PM   
pompack


Posts: 2568
Joined: 2/8/2004
From: University Park, Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zigurat666

I can hardly wait for AE to have some time behind it. I dont visit the forum much anymore because of the complaining. I dont play WitP much anymore since switching to AE but I used to gather lots of useful info from its forums.
I dont know,maybe its me but for those of you who dont like some of the elements of the game,move along and play something else or develop your own game. IMO this is one of the best PC strategy games I,ve come across and when I see something ingame that doesnt seem to be WAD I find a way to counteract it,thats really the whole point of a strategy game isn,t it?


Zig, I totally agree with you

There was a time when there was good information on this forum. I am sure it still is, but it is hidden behind all of the repetitive, argumenative, and just plain nasty posts.

(in reply to Zigurat666)
Post #: 73
RE: The tojo as uber..... - 2/28/2010 3:13:05 PM   
Titanwarrior89


Posts: 3285
Joined: 8/28/2003
From: arkansas
Status: offline
You really think I care what you think.
quote:

ORIGINAL: Zigurat666

I can hardly wait for AE to have some time behind it. I dont visit the forum much anymore because of the complaining. I dont play WitP much anymore since switching to AE but I used to gather lots of useful info from its forums.
I dont know,maybe its me but for those of you who dont like some of the elements of the game,move along and play something else or develop your own game. IMO this is one of the best PC strategy games I,ve come across and when I see something ingame that doesnt seem to be WAD I find a way to counteract it,thats really the whole point of a strategy game isn,t it?



_____________________________

"Before Guadalcanal the enemy advanced at his pleasure. After Guadalcanal, he retreated at ours".

"Mama, There's Rabbits in the Garden"

(in reply to Zigurat666)
Post #: 74
RE: The tojo as uber..... - 2/28/2010 3:15:06 PM   
Titanwarrior89


Posts: 3285
Joined: 8/28/2003
From: arkansas
Status: offline
Same for you bud.
quote:

ORIGINAL: pompack


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zigurat666

I can hardly wait for AE to have some time behind it. I dont visit the forum much anymore because of the complaining. I dont play WitP much anymore since switching to AE but I used to gather lots of useful info from its forums.
I dont know,maybe its me but for those of you who dont like some of the elements of the game,move along and play something else or develop your own game. IMO this is one of the best PC strategy games I,ve come across and when I see something ingame that doesnt seem to be WAD I find a way to counteract it,thats really the whole point of a strategy game isn,t it?


Zig, I totally agree with you

There was a time when there was good information on this forum. I am sure it still is, but it is hidden behind all of the repetitive, argumenative, and just plain nasty posts.



_____________________________

"Before Guadalcanal the enemy advanced at his pleasure. After Guadalcanal, he retreated at ours".

"Mama, There's Rabbits in the Garden"

(in reply to pompack)
Post #: 75
RE: The tojo as uber..... - 2/28/2010 3:16:41 PM   
pompack


Posts: 2568
Joined: 2/8/2004
From: University Park, Texas
Status: offline
I rest my case

(in reply to Titanwarrior89)
Post #: 76
RE: The tojo as uber..... - 2/28/2010 3:26:33 PM   
Titanwarrior89


Posts: 3285
Joined: 8/28/2003
From: arkansas
Status: offline
You should! Your better than thou attitude. Ever one has the right to complain who has bought the game and has been playing the system since release in july o4. As for you! Do you really think I care what YOU think. Take your friend and you two move along. Maybe you two could find another game. Since you guys seem to be the game wardens.
quote:

ORIGINAL: pompack

I rest my case



_____________________________

"Before Guadalcanal the enemy advanced at his pleasure. After Guadalcanal, he retreated at ours".

"Mama, There's Rabbits in the Garden"

(in reply to pompack)
Post #: 77
RE: The tojo as uber..... - 2/28/2010 3:39:49 PM   
vicberg

 

Posts: 1166
Joined: 4/19/2008
Status: offline
There are wonderful turn-based air war board games out there dating back to the Avalon Hill days, covering all periods (WW1, WW2 and Modern). GDW has a wonderful game, if it can be found, called Air Combat (covering Modern Jets). The technology has changed but the tactics haven't. High altitude, by itself, isn't a bonus. There's a counter to everything in air battles, based on plane and pilot, and in modern age, missle quality. The goal is to get on the opponent six and has been for almost 100 years. This has been negated a bit due to radar missle and the ability to launch from any angle, but heat seakers are still based on oppoent six (or close to).

High altitude means energy, which means more options. Speed in a unmanuverable plane, like a P-40, meant high speed passes at the enemy, extend away, climb and turn, do it again. Against a Zero, this tactic often didn't work and why the Zero was dominant early war. The Zero could out climb and out-manuver the P-40, so it could negate the P-40 dive ability leaving the P-40 pilot with two choices: 1) fight a manuver battle against a more manuverable plane or 2) dive and run away. Of course, a good pilot in a P-40 could still beat a Zero, but it wasn't based strictly on altitude.

IMO, there should be a few things tweaked with the air combat:
1) Altitude bonus, by itself, should be removed...altitude is pretty much already included in plane air to air ability and pilot quality...all things being taking into affect, altitude should only affect the ability to "bounce" (surprise) the enemy and "bounce" should affect the first round of combat only (assuming the game does round by round combat).
2) There should be a true "bounce" check. Though lower altitude planes might not be able to exploit a bounce, it was possible IF the planes could climb fast enough and the altitude difference wasn't extreme. Bouncing comes down to how fast you can surprise the enemy. The check should go for both sides, with a bonus to the higher altitude planes. Pilot quality, alititude difference, climb ability, radar (if present) should come into play. Even if the higher altitude planes get a "bounce", if there's a 20,000 feet difference, the higher altitude planes might not be able to exploit it because it takes time to drop 20,000 feet and the defenders could see them coming and manuver accordingly...If someone wants to fly at 30,000+ feet, fine, but it will significantly reduce the ability to bounce someone at 10,000 feet.

The two changes above, are probably within the scope of changes to this game that are possible. There's another option that may not be doable.
3) There should be a "spot" check, with altitude, weather, pilot quantity, etc., coming into play. If there are multiple squadrons at multiple levels, who spots whom and at what level would have major affect. High level cap spots high level sweep but misses low level bombers/escorts. Mid-level cap bounces low level bombers/escorts, but gets bounced by high level sweep or misses high level bombers (which is what happened at Midway...fighters went low to attack torp bombers and missed high level dive bombers)...

This would open the air war up a bit from the current "fly as high as you can" approach...Fly cap at high altitude to get a bounce and miss either the bounce or the low level enemy altogether...fly cap at mid-level to bounce low level bombing raids and possibly get bounced from high level sweeps. Fly sweeps at high leve (30,000+)l and miss the cap entirely or the bounce.

To bring up another point about air combat. Japanese started the game with superior fighters and superior pilot quality (with combat experience from the war in China). This isn't really reflected in scenario #1. The zeroes were their top plane, and the zero squadrons (at least land based at Formosa) start with a rookie average quality. Hmmmm.....scenario #2 is the other way, with almost ALLl starting squadrons averaging 75-85 pilot quantlity. Not sure if that's correct either, but it's closer to the mark.

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 78
RE: The tojo as uber..... - 2/28/2010 3:55:01 PM   
jwilkerson


Posts: 10466
Joined: 9/15/2002
From: Kansas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Titanwarrior89
Same for you bud.


Demoting this one to the War Room ...

_____________________________

AE Project Lead
New Game Project Lead

(in reply to Titanwarrior89)
Post #: 79
RE: The tojo as uber..... - 2/28/2010 4:18:14 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 13692
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund


quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy
oh yeah, try setting them lower, perhaps they get shred 10:1 then. Open your eyes. Take the example I posted from my last PBEM turn. A 0:10 turns into a 3:0. The reason for this was the bounce. And yeah, if you think the airwar in the Pacific happend above 30.000ft ->

www.amazon.com

some nice books for sale...


Well, Ive tried to put them lower, and no, the difference was not that big. Ive also had successful dogfights where my Hurricanes and P40s have taken down more Oscars than they lost. Usually that was when I was outnumbering them.

What exactly is your problem with the bounce results? When one side had the bounce, they got 10-0 (with fog of war) and when the other side got the bounce, they got 3-0 (also with fog of war). So what?

If you dont want the airwar in the pacific to happen above 30k, then dont set your fighters at that altitude. Pretty simple really.



yeah, it is simple, I donīt deny that and also said that the only way to see it happen at realistic altitudes would be the players forcing themselve to do so. The problem in this is that everyone just tries to get at least 100ft higher than the enemy and those 100ft (just like 20.000ft) results in the allmighty bounce. So let the bounce be allmighty but then the aircraft need to have reasonable stats (or if the stats are correct then there needs to be a reasonable routine) because what you get just below 40.000ft when Lightnings encounter Oscars is not reasonable. At least not in my book. There are things you can prevent with hrs but I canīt really see a hr on altitude. What would that be? Realistically it would have to be Allied fighters in general being able to fly higher than Japanese from early 43 on. Canīt see how this should work though. Itīs the game that needs to force the player to use itīs planes under conditions that suit them best, if they donīt use them under those conditions then the game should harm the player for doing so. But itīs the total opposite, like the game is now (decide yourselve if the stats or the routines are the reason), the player is just asked to use his aircraft in a way how they would never have worked well in real life. Thereīs a good reason why air engagements happened at low or medium alt in real life and not above 30.000ft.

Counted the kills during the combat replay and those are pretty spot on (donīt know if they even are hit by FOW at all) and as you can see both the cr (which just always shows fewer kills) and the loss list show different kills. And even if it would be 9 or 11:0 or 4 or 2:0, what should be noticed is the DIFFERENCE between having the bounce or not and that difference is off, as itīs just too much. But still, the main problem IMO is that you are not forced to do what one of the major changes from WITP to AE promised: looking at the stats to use your ac under best conditions to achieve best results. Thatīs just not true, otherwise you wouldnīt see Zeroes at 32.000ft or Oscars at 38.000ft. Same goes for a couple of Allied fighters too of course.

< Message edited by castor troy -- 2/28/2010 4:22:02 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Hortlund)
Post #: 80
RE: The tojo as uber..... - 2/28/2010 4:19:08 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 13692
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: pompack


quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy


better to live in a troll world than in an ignorant brown noser world.







youīre right, a silly comment.

_____________________________


(in reply to pompack)
Post #: 81
RE: The tojo as uber..... - 2/28/2010 4:31:51 PM   
packerpete

 

Posts: 129
Joined: 2/27/2010
Status: offline
quote:

High altitude means energy, which means more options. Speed in a unmanuverable plane, like a P-40, meant high speed passes at the enemy, extend away, climb and turn, do it again. Against a Zero, this tactic often didn't work and why the Zero was dominant early war. The Zero could out climb and out-manuver the P-40, so it could negate the P-40 dive ability leaving the P-40 pilot with two choices: 1) fight a manuver battle against a more manuverable plane or 2) dive and run away. Of course, a good pilot in a P-40 could still beat a Zero, but it wasn't based strictly on altitude.

IMO, there should be a few things tweaked with the air combat:
1) Altitude bonus, by itself, should be removed...altitude is pretty much already included in plane air to air ability and pilot quality...all things being taking into affect, altitude should only affect the ability to "bounce" (surprise) the enemy and "bounce" should affect the first round of combat only (assuming the game does round by round combat).
2) There should be a true "bounce" check. Though lower altitude planes might not be able to exploit a bounce, it was possible IF the planes could climb fast enough and the altitude difference wasn't extreme. Bouncing comes down to how fast you can surprise the enemy. The check should go for both sides, with a bonus to the higher altitude planes. Pilot quality, alititude difference, climb ability, radar (if present) should come into play. Even if the higher altitude planes get a "bounce", if there's a 20,000 feet difference, the higher altitude planes might not be able to exploit it because it takes time to drop 20,000 feet and the defenders could see them coming and manuver accordingly...If someone wants to fly at 30,000+ feet, fine, but it will significantly reduce the ability to bounce someone at 10,000 feet.

The two changes above, are probably within the scope of changes to this game that are possible. There's another option that may not be doable.
3) There should be a "spot" check, with altitude, weather, pilot quantity, etc., coming into play. If there are multiple squadrons at multiple levels, who spots whom and at what level would have major affect. High level cap spots high level sweep but misses low level bombers/escorts. Mid-level cap bounces low level bombers/escorts, but gets bounced by high level sweep or misses high level bombers (which is what happened at Midway...fighters went low to attack torp bombers and missed high level dive bombers)...

This would open the air war up a bit from the current "fly as high as you can" approach...Fly cap at high altitude to get a bounce and miss either the bounce or the low level enemy altogether...fly cap at mid-level to bounce low level bombing raids and possibly get bounced from high level sweeps. Fly sweeps at high leve (30,000+)l and miss the cap entirely or the bounce.



Vicberg: I agree 100%. This what I was trying to say in my own inarticulate way in another thread.

I Would only like to add that most USN standard CAP altitudes started at 10K FT until ordered to do otherwise because of pilot fatigue issues revolving around: limited quantities and/or questionable quality of LOX onboard (ie. Guadalcanal), the cold (those cockpits were often not heated), and spotting difficulties while constantly wrestling with the cumbersome O2 masks and the often not coolocated microphone.

There is another thread somewhere in here where Treespider is thinking about incorporating some of this in his mod.

(in reply to jwilkerson)
Post #: 82
RE: The tojo as uber..... - 2/28/2010 4:40:47 PM   
Who Cares

 

Posts: 67
Joined: 2/2/2010
Status: offline
I agree as well, the "bounce" should only apply if one side is surprised regardless of relative altitudes. If a lower altitude air group spots a higher altitude air unit that does not see them, they will invariably climb to "bounce" them (or they will just plain run away). These altitude issues are nothing new, they were there in WitP and the testers had reported these issues YEARS ago in AE.

(in reply to packerpete)
Post #: 83
RE: The tojo as uber..... - 2/28/2010 5:31:22 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 13692
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Who Cares

I agree as well, the "bounce" should only apply if one side is surprised regardless of relative altitudes. If a lower altitude air group spots a higher altitude air unit that does not see them, they will invariably climb to "bounce" them (or they will just plain run away). These altitude issues are nothing new, they were there in WitP and the testers had reported these issues YEARS ago in AE.



they werenīt there in WITP (at least not the same as in AE) because in WITP altitude settings for fighters didnīt matter at all. Hard to believe but thatīs how it is in WITP. The bounce exists though and is only related to radar in most cases because if youīve got enough radar coverage somewhere (means everywhere for the Allied in 43+) then your fighters would always be in position to bounce the enemy.

_____________________________


(in reply to Who Cares)
Post #: 84
RE: The tojo as uber..... - 2/28/2010 7:40:08 PM   
Big B

 

Posts: 4870
Joined: 6/1/2005
From: Old Los Angeles pre-1960
Status: offline
This is well reasoned as far as common assumptions go, but is incorrect, and lies at the root of the problem in AE.
quote:

ORIGINAL: ...
High altitude means energy, which means more options. Speed in a unmanuverable plane, like a P-40, meant high speed passes at the enemy, extend away, climb and turn, do it again. Against a Zero, this tactic often didn't work and why the Zero was dominant early war. The Zero could out climb and out-manuver the P-40, so it could negate the P-40 dive ability leaving the P-40 pilot with two choices: 1) fight a manuver battle against a more manuverable plane or 2) dive and run away. Of course, a good pilot in a P-40 could still beat a Zero, but it wasn't based strictly on altitude....


I know (as a bit of an insider) that the aircraft ratings for maneuver, and to an extent the actual air combat model itself, is a bit simplistic, and does not take into account all of the tangibles and intangibles of maneuver and aircraft limitations. This is what is giving unrealistic results.
This is not to open an old debate - but simply stating that a Zero or Oscar are more maneuverable than a P-40, or F4F, or Hurricane (based on best climb and sustained turning radius) - hence a much greater maneuver rating, is over simplified and does not take into account the many other factors that go into actual air combat.
The game does not (and probably cannot) take into account all of the different factors that actually determine relative maneuverability and ADVANTAGE between opposing aircraft - especially considering the dynamics of multiple aircraft engagements, whereas in real life - aircraft with superior sustained turning capabilities have that advantage negated by aircraft with decidedly greater rate of roll and speed (meaning energy, and the ability to change direction and gain quick target angles, or execute defensive maneuvers that the other aircraft cannot follow).
This is why in real life, aircraft that cannot out-turn a Zero or an Oscar (for example) ONE ON ONE - more than held their own with them actual combat.
One cannot overstate that rate of roll (and hence ability to change lift vector) changes with dramatically with speed. Our game does not reflect this.
If light wing-loading, and small turn radius, were the definitive qualities of a WWII fighter aircraft - then the most effective fighters of WWII would have been the CR-42 or Bristol Bulldog - not the FW 190 or P-51 ...and we all know this was never the case, yet these are the very qualities that matter most for maneuver in the game - as far as maneuver rating is concerned.

I believe the apparent problem of High Altitude Sweep unrealistically ruling (though enough people have posted sound arguments against this currently being too high), is only a part of the problem. The air combat model itself is not sophisticated enough to really accurately generate reasonably expected results. I could spit out more - but this post is already over-long.

So if you ask me (and no one has) a lot more experimenting with what can be done with-what we have, is in order.

(in reply to vicberg)
Post #: 85
RE: The tojo as uber..... - 2/28/2010 8:28:25 PM   
vettim89


Posts: 3595
Joined: 7/14/2007
From: Toledo, Ohio
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Big B


So if you ask me (and no one has) a lot more experimenting with what can be done with-what we have, is in order.



BRIAN!!!!!!

We want Big B 2.0!!! But you have to fix China too like you did in WiTP

_____________________________

"We have met the enemy and they are ours" - Commodore O.H. Perry

(in reply to Big B)
Post #: 86
RE: The tojo as uber..... - 2/28/2010 8:53:01 PM   
Big B

 

Posts: 4870
Joined: 6/1/2005
From: Old Los Angeles pre-1960
Status: offline
Hahaha
quote:

ORIGINAL: vettim89


quote:

ORIGINAL: Big B


So if you ask me (and no one has) a lot more experimenting with what can be done with-what we have, is in order.



BRIAN!!!!!!

We want Big B 2.0!!! But you have to fix China too like you did in WiTP


Thanks vettim89, but if I could paraphrase from Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid - "If they would just pay me to stop robbing 'em - I'd stop robbing 'em"
Meaning- "if I made a paycheck off of doing this stuff - I'd do it!"

I love WitP & WitP/AE, but as you can guess - it takes A LOT of time to figure this stuff out - and in the mean time I have to actually work to support my family! (not to mention doing the next generation of ship-art).

So...as I told my good friend TOMLABEL, I've got ideas and theories germinating, but I don't have a lot of time to devote to it....(yeah - this is a naked attempt to having Matrix pay me - LOL).

Thanks for the vote of confidence!
Brian

(in reply to vettim89)
Post #: 87
RE: The tojo as uber..... - 2/28/2010 9:46:18 PM   
Rob Brennan UK


Posts: 3685
Joined: 8/24/2002
From: London UK
Status: offline
Vote +1 for Big B to get a pay check from Matrix !

Back in the real world .. Big B .. great to see you back again and hope all is well in your world.

Not impressed with Poor Ziggurats slap down by TitanWarrior .. someone with that many posts and thereby a lot of time here should know better than to rag on a new guy .. but you'll no doubt not care about my opinion regardless. However the rules state that posters should be POLITE .. you arent.

Can we all take a big deep breath and calm down here. forums for porting comments , advice and opinions on the game NOT a sandbox for slaggong other people off. We all can have differant opinions/experiences and preferances for the future of this great game but lets not drag the forums into the sewer guys. YOU know your better than this.

_____________________________

sorry for the spelling . English is my main language , I just can't type . and i'm too lazy to edit :)

(in reply to Big B)
Post #: 88
RE: The tojo as uber..... - 3/3/2010 9:43:31 PM   
christenberryd

 

Posts: 9
Joined: 2/9/2010
Status: offline
My first post ... what fun.

Perhaps consider two categories for fighters to engage each other. First would be surprise, as mentioned in the posts above. Second, and that is that most fighter pilots knew, is to not seek to engage if they were under a serious disadvantage.

Pilots knew not to climb at 100 knots airspeed to go fight someone 5k feet over you.

And basically, aside from the B-29, there was no reason to engage high flying aircraft in the Pacific. Anything over 15k feet is not a threat to anything in this theatre for most of the war. So as other posts mention, the altitude sweep goes in ... and does nothing other than grow fatigue and suffer higher ops losses.

This dynamic could be modeled into AE.

The P39's at Port Moresby became known as the "fishing fleet" (Fire in the Sky) as the fighters would head towards Australia to avoid a zero sweep.

My peeve is highly trained Betty's put on naval strike to interdict Guadacanal and instead hitting a few AKs covered by 100 fighters over the aforementioned PM. The max strike range is no use here. I would like to set a "patrol zone" for naval strike. Also, possibly assign a target value ... if you see a capital ship, hit it. Ignore 2 AKL and a patrol boat!

Cheers,

Dave

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 89
RE: The tojo as uber..... - 3/3/2010 10:23:27 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
I'd like to second RobBrennan's comments.

I have no problem disagreeing with people or having them disagree with me but going around calling people "brown nosers" for having an opinion which just happens to disagree with yours and be the same as the Matrix opinion is a very low standard.

By the same token just a day ago Terminus' response to a complain was to simply post "Moron" so it goes both ways.



Here's the bottom line though.... If you actually want ANYONE to listen to anything you say then cut out the personal stuff. Feel free to point out factual errors OR just disagree and agree to disagree but when you have to fall to calling someone a moron or brown-noser or whatever then you've actually abandoned any factual basis for your argument and, in future, you'll have no-one but yourselves to blame when no-one reads your stuff.


FWIW I'm sure I'm not alone in having run lots of tests on this and coming to conclusions but I'm also sure I'm not alone in thinking to myself, "Why on earth should I post to that vituperative viper's den when all it will do is guarantee that 50% of the people call me names?" So, if you don't give a damn about yourselves also just realise that you're actually preventing rational people who wish to debate things rationally with facts and multiple series of test runs in order to ensure some measure of statistical validity from actually posting their findings to the fora. That hurts not just you but prevents improvement of the game.


I'll give you this for free though, there is a problem but the problem is not height, it is a consequence of height differentials and their interaction with other factors which aren't, as of yet, modelled. Hence it requires code additions, not changes. As such I think it is unlikely to get fixed unless the team makes it a priority.

2nd piece of free advice.... Bleating and calling eachother names won't get the team to pay any (good) attention to any of you.

3rd piece of advice.... If you want the team and any other rational adults here to treat you guys like rational adults in future I suggest you agree to disagree, start a new thread and try to keep that on a more statistical basis. You'd be surprised what might come of rational discussion.

(in reply to christenberryd)
Post #: 90
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> The War Room >> RE: The tojo as uber..... Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   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

0.494