Question: Bombing at night

[pwwl]

Bombing at night required training and more importantly sophisticated equipment. So did the response in terms of nightfighters. While Germany did use day fighters (e.g. Wilde Sau) the bulk of the reponse to British nighttime bombing was in terms of an arms race (e.g. radar, Kammhuber line etc) and specialist nightfighters. My question is if this should be reflected as a possible variant for heavy fighters in the game (on the same line as carrier planes)?


I also wanted to ask if there will be a DD on Aces. It was promised in one of the previous ones but never materialised?

 

[awsomename]

good points, i hope it will be reflected in the game.

 

[Victor Cortez]

I think I proposed this a while ago. Planes should have a night-flying version, just like the carrier-borne version. Night-time planes should have less malus at night.

 

[wright1331]

Bombing at night required training and more importantly sophisticated equipment. So did the response in terms of nightfighters. While Germany did use day fighters (e.g. Wilde Sau) the bulk of the reponse to British nighttime bombing was in terms of an arms race (e.g. radar, Kammhuber line etc) and specialist nightfighters. My question is if this should be reflected as a possible variant for heavy fighters in the game (on the same line as carrier planes)?


I also wanted to ask if there will be a DD on Aces. It was promised in one of the previous ones but never materialised?

I can't see them adding night versions of planes, only tech to possible make them more effective

 

[LordOfWar16]

I can't see them adding night versions of planes, only tech to possible make them more effective

which frankly is an bad approach. Nightfighter variants of planes make much more sense. Dayfighters usualy didnt had an radar, and on light airframes there is franky no room for good radar. The bf110 was not the greatest plane in its initial role as an heavy fighter, but excelent as an nightfighter variant.

 

[teamgene]

And lets not forget the trouble AA has in distinguishing friend from foe at night in the air.

 

[Victor Cortez]

If the ever implement the "equipment built using other equipment", night flying planes could be "normal plane" + "support equipment".
That should be pretty user friendly.

 

[Denkt]

Don't think they will create night variants for the same reason they will not create winter equipment and such.

 

[Premu]

Well, we know at least that there will be both single engine fighters and heavy fighters. Heavy fighters were much more effective at night compared to single engine fighters as their weakness (bad agility) didn't matter as dogfights didn't really happen at night, while their strength (massive firepower) was essential to shoot down planes in the short time frame they had available. Plus it was easier to add additional equipment in heavy fighters.

So heavy fighters could have a lower penalty at night than single engine fighters.

 

[rafan]

If i remember corectly in strategic bombardment air doctrine tree there is a choice betwen day and night bombardment resarch.

 

[Antediluvian Monster]

Don't think they will create night variants for the same reason they will not create winter equipment and such.

That would only be the case if night fighters were a simple upgrade. I don't think that should be the case. If heavy fighters are long range escorts and light strike aircraft, night fighters could sacrifice suitability for both for sake of being good as night fighters only. They could even have lower (day) air attack to represent oblique armament.

 

[edowie]

I also wanted to ask if there will be a DD on Aces. It was promised in one of the previous ones but never materialised?

:O Including aces sounds pretty cool! I hope this is still a thing and not something that was dropped with any reworked features.

 

[wright1331]

which frankly is an bad approach. Nightfighter variants of planes make much more sense. Dayfighters usualy didnt had an radar, and on light airframes there is franky no room. The bf110 was not the greatest plane in its initial role as an heavy fighter, but excelent as an nightfighter variant.

tbh, it sounds like unneeded micromanagement. having to manage what planes launch at which times...

 

[Antediluvian Monster]

tbh, it sounds like unneeded micromanagement. having to manage what planes launch at which times...

In the air combat diary in the example screenshot the fighters were already set for day ops only. This could be managed primarily by defaults per plane type anyway, leaving only fine tuning to the player.

 

[Victor Cortez]

tbh, it sounds like unneeded micromanagement. having to manage what planes launch at which times...

Not really.
You build night-time versions and set them to night-time flying, unless you're desperate.
You build day-time versions and set them to day-time flying, unless you're desperate.

But most importantly, you build now what you think you will use later.
It's just more planning, not more micro. But maybe that's just me.

 

[Swinds]

I like the idea of a Night fight variant, I agree.

Bombing at night needs training true but it does not need equipment other than blind flying instruments. If you want to bomb and hit something (within 10 miles) every time then you need to develop aids to navigation and target identification. This is simple technical innovation vs technical innovation of counter measures.

However there is one thing that has been overlooked. PDX have chosen to use the P47D as a heavy fighter. Strictly speaking that does not work but PDX could adjust the Heavy fighter to be a twin engined plane, however hard that might be for the US.

 

[LordOfWar16]

That would only be the case if night fighters were a simple upgrade. I don't think that should be the case. If heavy fighters are long range escorts and light strike aircraft, night fighters could sacrifice suitability for both for sake of being good as night fighters only. They could even have lower (day) air attack to represent oblique armament.

they wouldnt have to change much. Heavy fighters are less agile than light fighters. If the enemy decides to do nightly bombing countering that with nightfighter versions of your heavy fighters makes alot of sense, while at day they are at an disadvantage when fighting light aircraft. The BF110 wasnt as good as initially hoped due to that agility disadvantage, but turned out to be an excelent night fighter for example.

Don't think they will create night variants for the same reason they will not create winter equipment and such.

You cant really compare Night Fighters and winter eqiupment tho. Winter Equipment doesnt really make much sense, since yes, everybody would use it anyway, it would only really be effective a couple of months a year and having basicly 2 of the same thing with one having slightly better winter resistance makes no sense.

Night Fighters however would be an noticeable addition to the game, to counter night bombing. They have an disadvantage against light fighters, but at night they are excelent hunters. Lets say germany had air superiority and has alot more bf109 for example. If the UK decides to bomb at night, those bf109 will of course fight worse, while those bombers being escorted by night fighter mosquitos for example would help quiet alot to locate and destroy the german interceptors. Same could be done the other way around of course, with germany focusing on missions in the cover of the night if the allies have air superiority.

Simply mass producing regular fighters and adding an "night combat bonus" on them sound like an missed oppertunity. That far we only have carrier based versions anyway, so it really wouldnt overload the air techtree either.

 

[Mannstien]

And lets not forget the trouble AA has in distinguishing friend from foe at night in the air.

Night fighters with airborne radar were generally guided close to the bomber formations using radio instructions from ground radar stations to get them close enough to the formation so that their shorter ranged sets could start to track them, generally at this point they would coordinate with the flak batteries to cease fire as the fighters closed in to attack the formation though I'm sure FF happened just like in the daytime Flak batteries would not continue firing while fighter formations were engaging.

 

[teamgene]

Night fighters with airborne radar were generally guided close to the bomber formations using radio instructions from ground radar stations to get them close enough to the formation so that their shorter ranged sets could start to track them, generally at this point they would coordinate with the flak batteries to cease fire as the fighters closed in to attack the formation though I'm sure FF happened just like in the daytime Flak batteries would not continue firing while fighter formations were engaging.

For Germany, guiding the fighters was done quite often by sites.....a burning bomber, lights from the pathfinders, etc.... Radar would get them in the air, but generally the bombers would be out of airborne radar range. Flak would often set to fire up to 20,000 feet for example and the fighters would operate above the stated elevation, but that zone between 20,000 and 25,000 could get dicey.

 

[wright1331]

In the air combat diary in the example screenshot the fighters were already set for day ops only. This could be managed primarily by defaults per plane type anyway, leaving only fine tuning to the player.

Not really.
You build night-time versions and set them to night-time flying, unless you're desperate.
You build day-time versions and set them to day-time flying, unless you're desperate.

But most importantly, you build now what you think you will use later.
It's just more planning, not more micro. But maybe that's just me.

Well you both have pretty good thought about not adding more micro to the game.