Exploit ?

[gmtello]

In late 43 the American opponent is sending sweeps at 25000 feet and destroying all the japanese fighters even the latest ones with pilots of more than 80 exp. What can i do to fight this

[HansBolter]

What makes 'success' an exploit?

[gmtello]

Its a question

[Canoerebel]

There is no exploit.

There are ways to counter most any tactic in this massive game. It takes awhile to learn how, as though you've just advanced from Single A baseball to Triple A, so that your encountering the curve ball for the first time. That curve ball isn't an "exploit" - its the skill of an experienced player. Eventually, you'll learn to predict and foresee and handle that skill, so that you can hit that dadgum curveball.

In most games with experienced IJ players, its the Japense air forces (and fighters) that typically have the edge, leaving the Allied player feeling sorta like your feeling. But even then, there are measure and countermeasures. There are so many zillion tactics to try and fine tune before any bellyaching begins about "exploits."

[gmtello]

Could u mentíon one please

[Canoerebel]

Could I mention one what?

Do you mean one way to counter enemy sweeps?

It depends on a zillion circumstances that you know that I don't. In general, when I face strong enemy sweeps the first thing I tinker with is my fighter groups - are they decent fighters? are the pilots high quality? how about the squadron leader? Then I'll tinker with altitude - if they're coming in at 25k, I might try my guys at 30k, or perhaps a low layered CAP at 6/8/10k. And there are many other things I'd explore and consider. Among these: is the need to defend the base high or low, is it temporary or long term, can I counter with aerial bombing or bombardment by ship.

This game is rocks-papers-scissors on steroid and it takes a long, long time to get a feel for it, especially if you're facing an opponent that is better (more experienced, more skilled) than you.

[gmtello]

I meant that using higher bands in fighters dogfight could meant an advantage for the allied player. Not an exploit but a flaw

[Canoerebel]

It's not a flaw.

There are ways to counter altitude advantages. It just takes time and patience (and a lot of trial and error) to gain enough experience to know what to do.

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: gmtello

I meant that using higher bands in fighters dogfight could meant an advantage for the allied player. Not an exploit but a flaw

There are a number of games that restrict 'sweep' altitudes by House Rule to avoid 'stratospheric sweep' issues that game developers have identified as a potential cause of imbalance. The most common one that I've seen is to limit planes' sweeps to their second highest manuever band. This will ensure that aircraft that really couldn't operate at extremely high altitudes IRL cannot sweep at unrealistically high altitudes in the game.

IRL throughout the Pacific, very high altitudes were really not used very often, including for fighter sweeps. The 'second highest manuever band' rule puts a lid on things nicely IMO.

Another discussion for you to have with your gaming partner would be to keep a general hard ceiling. Mine is that-in 1941/2, there really shouldn't be many sorties of any sort above 25,000 feet. Maybe some recon flights here and there, but it just wasn't done IRL because of the problems with very high flight settings. Maybe move the ceiling up to 30,000 feet in 1943 and maybe higher in subsequent years.

BUT. Two caveats:

1. 25,000 feet sweeps are high but not absurdly high. Particularly in 1943 for Allied fighters that were beginning to operate en masse at higher elevations. If he was routinely flying sweeps at >40,000 feet, then that may be a cause for annoyance. But-without knowing the details-25,000 feet isn't absurd to me.

2. These are House Rules to be ironed out before you start your game. Playing into 1943 and then getting frustrated about the way things are going against is very different than gamestart House Rules that are negotiated apriori.

I haven't seen major issues in my games with stratospheric sweeps. But then I've also had HRs to restrict this sort of behavior and have been fortunate to have opponents that are mostly 'historic' players that don't abuse the engine. I haven't either.

Obvert or PaxMondo (forget which) did some nice spreadsheet simulations on stacked low CAP as a means of dealing with persistent high sweeps. He set up three Japanese defensive units at altitudes of (example, don't remember specifics verbatim) under 10,000 feet. For example, one unit at 5,000 feet, one at 7,000 and one at 9,000 feet. These would draw Allied 'boom and zoom' type fighters down into low altitude dogfights where the staggered Japanese CAP generally outperformed them in manuevering dogfights. Sure the Allies got the initial bounce / dive bonus, but then they got dragged down through successive levels of slicing and manuevering fights for which they were ill suited.

And numbers! Numbers of CAP fighters versus numbers of sweep fighters is very important. If you can 'pull' enemy down to lower altitudes and outnumber him >2:1 this is likely to incite losses higher than yours.

Of course, 'forcing' Allied high level sweepers into low-level maneuver dogfights is also unrealistic. IRL, the Allied air unit commander could simply have refused combat if offered conditions that did not preserve his altitude advantage. There's some question about how realistic the game is in allowing combat refusal at the discretion of the commander or if they're kind of shoehorned into that based on a low-CAP counter.

[dr.hal]

ORIGINAL: gmtello

I meant that using higher bands in fighters dogfight could meant an advantage for the allied player. Not an exploit but a flaw

Not being a developer I'm not sure of the exact advantage but getting a "bounce" on your opponent's fighters is advantageous in most aerial situations. I have read that this is true in WITP-AE. So you might read your combat reports carefully and determine what altitude your enemy is actually conducting the sweep (you state 250000 but is that what they fly in at or is that the height of the actual combat?) and station your fighters about 3K above that (don't go too far up or they might miss combat). Look at the characteristics of your fighters at that altitude against his (this information is contained in the game and/or in tracker). Don't send up fighters that are inferior at that altitude as they will be shot to pieces. As other forum members have said, there are a lot of factors to consider. If you want even more detailed responses you might consider giving more details about your actual combat situation (leadership skills of commanders, skill levels of pilots, etc.).

[John 3rd]

I used the stacked-low altitude option pretty well in my games. Best plane at 10, 2nd best at 8, and third best at 6.

The Allied player gets the bounce but then the rest of the fight is down nice and low.'

[dr.hal]

Good response Chickenboy, well done. The game doesn't allow for too much individual "realism" when it comes to fighter restrictions. For example the P-39 and 400 were not effective at high altitudes due to the lack of fuel injection but the game allows them to operate at very high altitudes (IIRC). You even have some open cockpit fighters going VERY high (I would not want to be in one that's for sure). So to bring things back down to reality (pun intended) you need house rules. Of course, like what actually happened, things change as time in the war advances and thus house rules can be flexible or age related. But in truth you can never list enough house rules to reflect all of reality. What you need is a like minded opponent that will play the sort of game you want to play. If it's a NO HOLES BARRED slug fest your opponent wants, then you don't want to play with her if you are a "realism" type player. This needs to be ironed out before you start however and in your case it would appear that your game is well underway. Good luck.

[witpqs]

I would add a reminder that the game is not doing a full on simulation of the aircraft flying around engaging in combat with each other. It's most useful to think of the altitude assignments as metaphors: one group is higher than another, not so much that one group is "at 32,000 ft" and the other group is "at 29,000 ft" or whatever.

The techniques which players have developed for layering CAP work so well that I feel there is no problem remaining which requires house rules. But the beautiful thing about house rules is that only the players in that contest need agree on them!

Also keep in mind that at some times and certainly at some times and places, one player or the other might have a big advantage. This can be due to various factors, but the point is that sometimes one player will take a beating, even for an extended period of time. That's part of the nature of the campaign scenarios.

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: dr.hal
If it's a NO HOLES BARRED slug fest your opponent wants, then you don't want to play with her if you are a "realism" type player.

Eesh. I've never played with "NO HOLES BARRED", Dr. Hal. There are some holes that I consider barred forevermore. YMMV of course. Not that there's anything wrong with that. [X(]

[Kull]

[:D][:D][:D][:D][:D][:D]

[Zorch]

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: dr.hal
If it's a NO HOLES BARRED slug fest your opponent wants, then you don't want to play with her if you are a "realism" type player.

Eesh. I've never played with "NO HOLES BARRED", Dr. Hal. There are some holes that I consider barred forevermore. YMMV of course. Not that there's anything wrong with that. [X(]

I'm afraid to ask, "What kind of holes?". Black ones? Can you bar only part of a hole or does it have to be the (w)hole thing?

[geofflambert]

Some of your fighters have a large maneuver advantage especially at low altitudes. They’re kites. The US fighters are rocks with wings. If they want to sweep you they’ll have to come down to your altitude or meet in between somewhere. If he’s bombing with 4Es your CAP may not be doing much anyway. If he’s not bombing with B-25s, maybe don’t put up any CAP. He can sweep the seagulls.
If you can sweep him, by all means do that instead. Even Oscars can get kills sweeping. If he doesn’t come up, bomb him if you can. If you’re just sending in one squadron go in as high as you can. Only those planes at altitude when you show up will have the advantage. If you can send multiple squadrons send them in at a wide range of altitudes. You’ll catch fighters trying to get airborne flat footed.
Don’t be afraid to use Nicks. You have a lot of squadrons that can convert from bombers to Nicks, so you can use them to train fighter pilots, but they can be effective in sweeps and as CAP against bombers. They also make good naval attack planes if you’ve trained for that.

[dr.hal]

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: dr.hal
If it's a NO HOLES BARRED slug fest your opponent wants, then you don't want to play with her if you are a "realism" type player.

Eesh. I've never played with "NO HOLES BARRED", Dr. Hal. There are some holes that I consider barred forevermore. YMMV of course. Not that there's anything wrong with that. [X(]

I think I'll avoid colloquialisms in the future. I don't want people to get themselves into a hole over this.

[RangerJoe]

Nope. "No holds barred" when it come to colloquialisms is fine by me. As far as getting into a hole, it depends upon the hole . . . [;)]

[Sardaukar]

US fighters later in war were way better high altitude than opponents. Luftwaffe found that out hard way too.

That is not exploit per se, but fact. More powerful engines, better turbo/superchargers and also one less-mentioned, way better fuel. Up high raw power beats anything else. That's why P-47 was so good at high altitudes.

So, IJ player is in similar historical disadvantage than in real war. You just cannot win up high, so you have to devise a way to bring battle to low.

Layered CAP is one way that usually evens out the odds a lot.