Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Justification of house rule on fighter sweeps!

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 >> Justification of house rule on fighter sweeps! Page: [1]
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Justification of house rule on fighter sweeps! - 3/14/2017 12:03:44 PM   
Cavalry Corp


Posts: 2666
Joined: 9/2/2003
From: Sampford Spiney Devon UK
Status: offline
My opponent and I just moved to the house rule on sweeps at 2nd best MVR band. Its October 44 and the P38J at 20k got quite a trashing from my pilots over Japan- all pretty good like 75 plus skill and exp 9 flying at mixed heights between 10k and 30 k probably) . he says we should consider changing to make 25k as fighters like the p38 were designed for high flying.
I was wondering what other have found and I think most people stick to the house rule now. As am I right that altitude was too dominant before. I cannot see that as a good fix as he will always be at 25 k so I will be at say 27k?? But no one I guess will get to attack the bomber unless that are say at 15k or so.

I also found that defensive fighters not on max altitude have a better chance to engage fighters on a better balanced field but they also get more chance to attack bombers. Where before the highest flyers usually won and because everyone was so high the bombers never got touched.

I was wondering what thoughts were on this please.

Post #: 1
RE: Justification of house rule on fighter sweeps! - 3/14/2017 5:50:17 PM   

Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline
Allowing defensive fighters to go higher than the sweeping fighters would definitely put the attacker at an disadvantage. Either get rid of the HR altogether or place a top cap on all fighters so that they are a least on an equal footing. Like said before, players are getting a lot more refined about fighter use and it is doubtful that any HR is needed for fighters.

Best maneuver bands aside, it was the common course in air combat for pilots to strive to gain the maximum altitude that they could. No matter the performance hit, being above the enemy was the key advantage. During the Guadacanal campaign both the defending Wildcat pilots and attacking Zeros clawed for all the height that their planes could manage. The planes were so evenly matched that the day's combat usually went to the pilots that got the bounce. And, as in all air combat, once the fight started it quickly moved to lower levels and in most cases, ended on the deck.


I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Cavalry Corp)
Post #: 2
RE: Justification of house rule on fighter sweeps! - 3/15/2017 7:34:16 AM   


Posts: 5915
Joined: 1/17/2002
From: Cottesmore, Rutland
Status: offline
This is not a house rules I've heard of before and not one I'd wish to use.  Only height restrictions I use are no heavies under 10K for land bombing.

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 3
RE: Justification of house rule on fighter sweeps! - 3/15/2017 10:53:58 AM   

Posts: 2502
Joined: 2/27/2007
From: Bratislava, Slovakia
Status: offline
I am currently playing two PBEMS with the HR about sweeps/escorts. One is in place with 2nd best MVR and the other with max alt increasing with year (20k 1942, 25k 1943, 30k 1944, 35k 1945). So far I couldn't tell which one fits better, but on the other hand I see their effect in making sweeps less deadly.

Should they not be in place, the Sweeps would always arrive at max altitude with dive advantage. With this rule in place you can have some planes above the sweep, and not in stratosphere. Of course some later planes comes with same mvr for all bands that could go up to stars and dive from there. But one should hardly use a P-39D to sweep at 32100 ft when it struggled to reach 15000 ft IRL. Yet I have no problem with P-47 or P-38s flying that high as they were built as HIGH-ALTITUDE planes...


(in reply to Chris21wen)
Post #: 4
RE: Justification of house rule on fighter sweeps! - 3/15/2017 11:11:32 AM   

Posts: 1253
Joined: 4/12/2012
From: Bedlington, Northumberland, UK
Status: offline
If I had to try to recall and use this as a house rule on top of everything else I am having to think about my brain would explode...



An unplanned dynasty: Roger Neilson, Roger Neilson 11, Roger Neilson 3 previous posts 898+1515 + 1126 = 3539.....Currently in 1945 of my sole surviving PBEM which has been running since the game came out.

(in reply to Barb)
Post #: 5
RE: Justification of house rule on fighter sweeps! - 3/15/2017 2:08:55 PM   

Posts: 1939
Joined: 12/30/2010
From: Northern England
Status: offline
The one we've got at the moment in my current game is 10000 feet below its maximum altitude for CAP and Sweeps.

Though the value of stacked low CAP appears to be good as well, see Obvert and Lowpe for examples where it can work really well.


(in reply to RogerJNeilson)
Post #: 6
RE: Justification of house rule on fighter sweeps! - 3/18/2017 9:12:37 PM   

Posts: 6524
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline
Personally I wouldn't use the maneuver bands as they're usually different for each A/C model and it can be a pain to have to look them up all the time. In my games I would probably use the altitude settings for sweeps. Typically, '42-20k, '43-25k, '44-31k. I know 31k is kinda unusual, but I recall reading some AFB writing that its better for the P-47. Don't know if that's true or not. Either way 30 or 31k not that different. CAP can be set to any altitude as setting it too high opens up a whole can of worms for the defender. At any rate I find layered CAP to be the most effective tool for the defender.

Edit: Here's something to consider that I found out recently. IRL flying too high in an unpressurized cockpit can lead to the bends. Never even thought of that before. So therefore why do still like to send our A/C into the stratosphere?

< Message edited by rustysi -- 3/18/2017 9:22:56 PM >


It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb

(in reply to Encircled)
Post #: 7
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Justification of house rule on fighter sweeps! Page: [1]
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