CAP trap?

Share your gameplay tips, secret tactics and fabulous strategies with fellow gamers here.

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

Post Reply
User avatar
HvMoltke
Posts: 111
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2003 11:27 am
Location: Munich/Bavaria

CAP trap?

Post by HvMoltke »

Another newbie question.
What exactly is a CAP trap, what are the suitable fighter and what are the settings?
Help from the Pros would be nice.
Hellmuth
User avatar
Sardaukar
Posts: 9869
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Finland/Israel

RE: CAP trap?

Post by Sardaukar »

You might refer to multi-layered CAP where different squadrons in base are set to different altitudes.

That often results attacker to bounce lower CAP and been themselves bounced by higher cap.

Useful especially when you have fighters in base with different best MVR band, but can be used anytime. One example is P-40s at 20k and P-39s at 15k. Check your plane Maneuver bands from plane info.

This is one remedy if opponent uses high-altitude fighter sweeps.
"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-

Image
User avatar
Trugrit
Posts: 973
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 12:31 pm
Location: North Carolina

RE: CAP trap?

Post by Trugrit »


There are long range patrol planes and heavy bombers in the game that can carry torpedoes.
This is very effective against naval targets. Good at long range so they are well beyond friendly
fighter escort if they are set up that way.

When you set them to naval attack you don’t get a choice of naval targets.
They pick their own naval targets.

So the opposing player forms up a one ship task force with remain on station orders
at a near by port that has a lot of fighters on cap.

The enemy planes (without escorts) go after the single ship task force and get slaughtered.

I don’t use cargo ships to bait the trap because I consider that to be gamey.

I will use a destroyer task force. Using destroyers is fine, they are warships.
That is their job. They have the weapons and speed needed for combat.

You can use destroyers on picket duty as well with the same type of results.

"A man's got to know his limitations" -Dirty Harry
GetAssista
Posts: 2768
Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2009 6:13 am

RE: CAP trap?

Post by GetAssista »

"CAP trap" is a general term for suddenly having CAP where your opponent does not expect it.
Can be a deliberate baiting like Trugrit described. Can be a sudden CAP over a hex that your opponent bombed during previous turns. Any fighter good on CAP will do. Those with longer range are easier to use in the role since they can fly from your other bases and LRCAP a multitude of possible targets in the vicinity.
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 18307
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

RE: CAP trap?

Post by BBfanboy »

A word of caution about flying in planes to set up a CAP trap - transferring between bases always causes some fatigue to both planes and pilots. With that fatigue at the outset, you might get two good days of intense CAP patrol over the base and then need to withdraw them for recovery of fatigue and airframe upkeep. So if you set up a CAP trap and the enemy does not show up in the fist couple of days, check your plane and pilot fatigue before deciding to keep the trap going for a third or fourth day.
Any fatigue (pilot or plane) over 10 seems to start reducing effectiveness and any fatigue near 20 causes significant drop in performance, IMO.
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
User avatar
Lokasenna
Posts: 9297
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:57 am
Location: Iowan in MD/DC

RE: CAP trap?

Post by Lokasenna »

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

A word of caution about flying in planes to set up a CAP trap - transferring between bases always causes some fatigue to both planes and pilots. With that fatigue at the outset, you might get two good days of intense CAP patrol over the base and then need to withdraw them for recovery of fatigue and airframe upkeep. So if you set up a CAP trap and the enemy does not show up in the fist couple of days, check your plane and pilot fatigue before deciding to keep the trap going for a third or fourth day.
Any fatigue (pilot or plane) over 10 seems to start reducing effectiveness and any fatigue near 20 causes significant drop in performance, IMO.

Not much, though. Even flying 90% CAP will produce single digit levels of fatigue, if range is at 0 and altitude isn't super high.

The transfer distances of most fighters will maybe bump even a unit that is being used in such a fashion to high-10s fatigue, maybe 20-22 at the very most. Which is still plenty fine for doing at least 1 day of CAP/LRCAP.
User avatar
HansBolter
Posts: 7191
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 12:30 pm
Location: United States

RE: CAP trap?

Post by HansBolter »

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

A word of caution about flying in planes to set up a CAP trap - transferring between bases always causes some fatigue to both planes and pilots. With that fatigue at the outset, you might get two good days of intense CAP patrol over the base and then need to withdraw them for recovery of fatigue and airframe upkeep. So if you set up a CAP trap and the enemy does not show up in the fist couple of days, check your plane and pilot fatigue before deciding to keep the trap going for a third or fourth day.
Any fatigue (pilot or plane) over 10 seems to start reducing effectiveness and any fatigue near 20 causes significant drop in performance, IMO.

Not much, though. Even flying 90% CAP will produce single digit levels of fatigue, if range is at 0 and altitude isn't super high.

The transfer distances of most fighters will maybe bump even a unit that is being used in such a fashion to high-10s fatigue, maybe 20-22 at the very most. Which is still plenty fine for doing at least 1 day of CAP/LRCAP.


Yea, they really watered down the fatigue effect of executing a transfer.

In Uncommon Valor you had to stand your pilots down for at least a day after executing a transfer from Townsville to Port Moresby.
Hans

User avatar
Sardaukar
Posts: 9869
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Finland/Israel

RE: CAP trap?

Post by Sardaukar »

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

A word of caution about flying in planes to set up a CAP trap - transferring between bases always causes some fatigue to both planes and pilots. With that fatigue at the outset, you might get two good days of intense CAP patrol over the base and then need to withdraw them for recovery of fatigue and airframe upkeep. So if you set up a CAP trap and the enemy does not show up in the fist couple of days, check your plane and pilot fatigue before deciding to keep the trap going for a third or fourth day.
Any fatigue (pilot or plane) over 10 seems to start reducing effectiveness and any fatigue near 20 causes significant drop in performance, IMO.

Not much, though. Even flying 90% CAP will produce single digit levels of fatigue, if range is at 0 and altitude isn't super high.

The transfer distances of most fighters will maybe bump even a unit that is being used in such a fashion to high-10s fatigue, maybe 20-22 at the very most. Which is still plenty fine for doing at least 1 day of CAP/LRCAP.


Yea, they really watered down the fatigue effect of executing a transfer.

In Uncommon Valor you had to stand your pilots down for at least a day after executing a transfer from Townsville to Port Moresby.

I agree.

Long-distance transit should generate higher fatigue. Same with flying CAP/Sweeping etc. at altitudes requiring use of oxygen mask, not super-high fatigue, but higher than now.
"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-

Image
User avatar
HvMoltke
Posts: 111
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2003 11:27 am
Location: Munich/Bavaria

RE: CAP trap?

Post by HvMoltke »

Thanx for the in depth discussion of this common tool.
Seems there are always several aspects of such a simple thing like air war.
Markko
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Nov 23, 2019 2:43 pm

RE: CAP trap?

Post by Markko »

Smiling. :)
Had the same reaction. It sounds like if anyone writes the definitive, unabridged dictionary of witpae language, then "Cap Trap" is going to be one of those entries with definition 1., then 2., then 3., etc.

Thanks everyone for the info. I'm getting back into witpae after an absence, so I'm reading the forums looking just for such nuggets as these. :)
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17134
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: CAP trap?

Post by John 3rd »

Setting up a successful CAP TRAP can really cause a serious bellyache with your opponent and provide you with a day's bragging rights!
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

fcooke
Posts: 1156
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2002 10:37 pm
Location: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY

RE: CAP trap?

Post by fcooke »

Not so much a CAP trap but in a PBEM years ago my Japan opp was bombing Balipaken (sp?) every day with Netties without escort, because what's to fear from the Dutch in Feb 42? But I had pulled back all the fighters, combined units and trained. And built up the Bali airfield. So, one a nice clear day I sent all the fighters to Bali and the nearby base and set 100% CAP. The Dutch had a field day, taking out about 70 Netties. My opp was devastated, but realized he had been sloppy. It was great for exp levels, and the Allied navies were now allowed to be a bit more aggressive.

And he was bombing the troops. Not sure why. They sure could not stop any real force.

But the game constantly reminds you to not make assumptions, and not rely on what you think the enemy will do, but can do.
ITAKLinus
Posts: 630
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2018 2:56 pm
Location: Italy

RE: CAP trap?

Post by ITAKLinus »

I see three possible CAP traps.

Maybe my definitions are wrong, but it's what in my twisted mind I use to define "CAP traps".

1 - The Old Classic CAP Trap. The enemy is bombing position-xy and you send a bunch of fighters there to murder his bombers. Sometimes is useful also against sweeps even if I see less returns on that.

2 - The LRCAP Variation. You basically do not respond to enemy harrassing you on position-xy, but at a certain point you unleash your fighters in a LRCAP to kill enemy's stuff. As per every LRCAP, ops are higher and returns lower than pure CAP. On the other hand, I prefer this variation for places like China, as Allied player, where many bases have no railroads.

3 - Leaking CAP Trap. Basically, here you have your sweet fighters in CAP on a base. They are, supposedly, at range=0. At certain point you put a higher range, say range=1, to intercept enemy attacks on a nearby base. It's quite useful even if the leaking CAP is low in numbers and good radars should be a must. It' extremely situational, as you generally would prefer to directly LRCAP instead of relying on the weark leaking CAP.




As a general rule: the more an enemy gets lazy in his aerial patterns, the more there is space for CAP traps. Individually, as allied player, I find its biggest use in China where it has strong strategic implications: the Japanese isn't allowed to run wild and has to keep a fair force of fighter in the theater.
In other areas, it's highly situational. For example: as Japanese player, it's difficoult sometimes to set up a proper CAP trap since the 4Es will tear apart your weak fighters more than in a normal situation.
However, I use it a lot. Especially in areas such as Salomons&co, where the Allied player starts contant bombings fairly early. Same with Burma.


Suitable planes: ideally, if you go for the variations 1. and 2., a plane with decent range (for LRCAP) and decent SR (=1) for the 1. since the day after your CAP trap the enemy will probably trash the AF and any a/c which has been damaged will be trashed as well.



Francesco
Post Reply

Return to “The War Room”