Author Topic: Please rate the Pantelleria scenario  (Read 4241 times)

Offline Devil 505

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9011
Re: Please rate the Pantelleria scenario
« Reply #15 on: October 31, 2018, 01:05:00 PM »
Sorry, Way, but I disagree. The 24K alt cap was at the same altitude where the four main fighters have the most equal speed. So all the top fighters start on a close to equal footing as far as speed is concerned. The Spit is has the best climb rate at 24K and also handles best too. The P-38's also handle better at 24K over the 109's and 190. Those advantages would only become greater with a higher alt cap. At least at 24K, the opening stages of a fight are determined mostly by the pilots, not the planes.
Kommando Nowotny

FlyKommando.com

Offline AKKuya

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2640
Re: Please rate the Pantelleria scenario
« Reply #16 on: October 31, 2018, 03:28:24 PM »
The alt cap issue only applies to the first 30 seconds of initial merging of opposing forces.  After that, comes the initial outcome.  Furball on the deck.

On rare occasions, the initial merge can be kept at high altitude. That relies on which specific aircraft flown by specific pilots with specific tactical agendas.

The fluidity of combat.
Chuck Norris can pick oranges from an apple tree and make the best lemonade in the world. Every morning when you wake up, swallow a live toad. Nothing worse can happen to you for the rest of the day. They say money can't buy happiness. I would like the opportunity to find out. Why be serious?

Offline FLOOB

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3054
Re: Please rate the Pantelleria scenario
« Reply #17 on: November 02, 2018, 12:28:04 AM »
2
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans” - John Steinbeck

Offline APDrone

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3384
Re: Please rate the Pantelleria scenario
« Reply #18 on: November 02, 2018, 06:13:20 PM »
0

Pros:
190A5.
3 lives helps net more kills.

Cons:
Too many targets for the amount of players and the fact that both sides must attack and defend. It makes it end up being an all-or-nothing approach for the battle plan which is not good.
Similar to the Kuban scenario, it played into the hands of "NOE attacks all the time" for the Allies, where they don't have to actually both escorting because the bombers are good enough to be on their own, and the opposition doesn't have enough players to both mount an attack and defend. I counted only one or two sorties in my 3 frames where the Allied bombers actually went in at alt and used escort.
Clouds were absolutely horrible. Way too dense and they were at all sorts of altitudes...something that doesn't really happen IRL. If the clouds functioned normally it might not have been such a big deal, but rather they function as a box, and even if you're on the edge of the box you can't see a damn thing.

I agree that this method does not really provide an accurate value of rating.

I have to chime in on this observation.  The B26s can do pretty good with minimal escort. The B25s, however, are dead meat if they are found without escorts. We proved that a few times.

Personally, I despise NOE missions in scenarios, and we didn't do them the first 2 frames, for the most part.  Primarily because we were attacking ground targets.    Vs  shipping, however, it was easy  enough to take out  the CA and CV from 15k.. but the destroyers.. no so much. We had to drop NOE to get to them.. often having to finish them off strafing.  Since our only bombable targets were ships the final 2 frames, we were kinda limited in our options.

This scenario is tough for me to rank.. I'd probably say 3 or less.  I am very close to recommending that the B25C, in it's current, defenseless, state not be used in future scenarios unless is is mandated to have close escort protection.  It's not fun sitting there getting hammered by 109s and 190s with no way to defend yourself. ( yes, it has an upper turret, but seems that everybody attacking my ships knew where it covered and they did a good job avoiding the arc of fire ).  Also the B25 drones are way to unresponsive to evasive maneuvers.. makes the frustration all the more.

I can strongly recommend to never have fleets being the only targets for these bombers. 

Fortunately, I was blessed with very tolerant buff drivers for this event.  Without them, .. well, let's just leave it as I wouldn't be a very happy camper.

 :salute
AKDrone

Scenario "Masters of the Air" X.O. 100th Bombardment Group


Offline KCDitto

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3233
Re: Please rate the Pantelleria scenario
« Reply #19 on: November 02, 2018, 06:32:30 PM »
Try doing that in JU-88

2 P-38s wiped out all of our ship attack

Offline Devil 505

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9011
Re: Please rate the Pantelleria scenario
« Reply #20 on: November 02, 2018, 07:37:09 PM »
I have to chime in on this observation.  The B26s can do pretty good with minimal escort. The B25s, however, are dead meat if they are found without escorts. We proved that a few times.

Personally, I despise NOE missions in scenarios, and we didn't do them the first 2 frames, for the most part.  Primarily because we were attacking ground targets.    Vs  shipping, however, it was easy  enough to take out  the CA and CV from 15k.. but the destroyers.. no so much. We had to drop NOE to get to them.. often having to finish them off strafing.  Since our only bombable targets were ships the final 2 frames, we were kinda limited in our options.

This scenario is tough for me to rank.. I'd probably say 3 or less.  I am very close to recommending that the B25C, in it's current, defenseless, state not be used in future scenarios unless is is mandated to have close escort protection.  It's not fun sitting there getting hammered by 109s and 190s with no way to defend yourself. ( yes, it has an upper turret, but seems that everybody attacking my ships knew where it covered and they did a good job avoiding the arc of fire ).  Also the B25 drones are way to unresponsive to evasive maneuvers.. makes the frustration all the more.

I can strongly recommend to never have fleets being the only targets for these bombers. 

Fortunately, I was blessed with very tolerant buff drivers for this event.  Without them, .. well, let's just leave it as I wouldn't be a very happy camper.

 :salute

Fly a Betty, He 111, or Ju 88 in an event and you'll be begging to get back to flying B-25C's.
Kommando Nowotny

FlyKommando.com

Offline APDrone

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3384
Re: Please rate the Pantelleria scenario
« Reply #21 on: November 02, 2018, 07:56:20 PM »
LOL.. They suck, too. Not saying they don't. 

But the 25C is basically a two engine Kate, with formations, as far as I'm concerned.

And I think I've gotten kills with JU-88s in scenarios.   
AKDrone

Scenario "Masters of the Air" X.O. 100th Bombardment Group


Offline KCDitto

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3233
Re: Please rate the Pantelleria scenario
« Reply #22 on: November 02, 2018, 08:29:56 PM »
And I think I've gotten kills with JU-88s in scenarios.   


in BOB vs SPIT I and Hurri Is

That is why BOB is so popular especially with buff drivers

Offline APDrone

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3384
Re: Please rate the Pantelleria scenario
« Reply #23 on: November 02, 2018, 08:47:16 PM »
From the Kuban scenario:

III/KG51 Edelweiss
APDrone
14:38:16 Departed from Field #65 in a Ju 88A-4
15:21:11 Destroyed a vehicle hangar at base #111
15:21:11 Destroyed a field gun at base #111
15:22:33 Shot down a P-39Q flown by CorkyJr.
15:25:20 Destroyed a town building at base #04
AKDrone

Scenario "Masters of the Air" X.O. 100th Bombardment Group


Offline Brooke

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15570
      • http://www.electraforge.com/brooke/
Re: Please rate the Pantelleria scenario
« Reply #24 on: November 04, 2018, 09:31:55 PM »
I fly Ju 88's lots in scenarios (Husky, Tunisia, MM, BoB, Southern Conquest) and He 111's (BoB, The Hardest Day).

I like them just fine, and I've done well enough in them.  Sometimes even had to fight my way out of situations in them.  One good example of that:


The B-25C, though, is in a worse position than the Ju 88 because it has no tail or ventral gun.

The B5N is yet less survivable.  I've flown those a lot in scenarios and done OK -- the thing being to get to target without getting attacked first.  But I rarely survived in them back to base.

Anyway, I would much rather have the B-25J for scenarios.

Offline KCDitto

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3233
Re: Please rate the Pantelleria scenario
« Reply #25 on: November 04, 2018, 09:49:14 PM »
I remember that

It was EPIC!

Got a safe landing while on FIRE!

Offline KillyJim

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 18
Re: Please rate the Pantelleria scenario
« Reply #26 on: November 06, 2018, 08:05:46 PM »
reposting again, because my first post not visible for some reason.

+5, ideal map size for team sizes. very enjoyable for bombers and lots of action. it felt like a real battle with progression. Thanks!

Offline TheKenzer

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4
Re: Please rate the Pantelleria scenario
« Reply #27 on: November 16, 2018, 03:10:50 PM »
I would rate it a 5.

Offline bangsbox

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1017
Re: Please rate the Pantelleria scenario
« Reply #28 on: November 19, 2018, 10:41:21 AM »
+3