Bombers flying to 'Location' don't engage enemy ships

[dizzy]

williammiller , Fredrik W

In testing, it appears dive/torp bombers use a sight range to engage enemy ships that is about equal to a ship's sight range. This leads to aircraft not engaging enemy targets because they are no longer in the strike area. The truth is that aircraft can see much further than a ship's sight range. I don't like how often my planes just fly in a tight 10,000 yard circle and ignore enemy ships that are just outside of that sight range that's referenced at the bottom right of the screen, usually 25,000-30,000 yards.

I think aircraft need a 2x or 3x multiplier for sight range if it's based on a ship's sight range. At 10,000 feet altitude, a plane can see 122 miles. A ship can only see 17 miles. See the problem?

[dohboy]

I have noticed this behavior recently. It doesn't happen all the time, just occasionally and doesn't seem dependant on sight distance or weather. I wonder if it results from changes made to address complaints about strikes dumping all their munitions on a merchant half way to the target area.

I have especially noticed this with float planes. I often send scouts out from raiders to make bombing runs on intercepting ships to slow them down by making them take evasive action and help my chances of escape. I will watch the scouts loiter around directly over the target giving me contact reports while never attacking. And if I am getting contact reports sight distance isn't the problem, something else is going on.

[dizzy]

dohboy No, it's not new. It's been this way since RTW2 launched. Planes don't seem to have any longer sighting range than a ship. This is actually a big problem.

I'm pretty sure Torp and Dive bombers have their own sight range that's equal to a ship's sight range to engage targets and it shouldn't be. Planes can see ships much further away. Why is this important? It's important because bombers won't attack ships they can still technically see. So your planes just circle around and do nothing.

[jwsmith26]

It is an old issue but I don't recall ever seeing aircraft not attack when enemy ships are obviously in sight. What I do see is that when planes on a strike reach the target location and cannot find an enemy to attack they simply continue to search centered on the target location. They continue to search the same location for hours until dusk, bad weather or lack of fuel forces a return. In the meantime other planes find someone to attack, return, are rearmed and sent on another strike, find the enemy, attack and are sent on a third strike while those lost planes continue to circle uselessly. It is quite frustrating to have a portion of your strength just disappear for most of the day and achieve nothing. Preferred behavior would be for the strike to search for perhaps 30 minutes, and if no target is found, return to base.

I will say that it makes me quite cautious when launching that first strike. I no longer jump at early sighting reports but rather wait to see if the first report is confirmed. 

Regarding aircraft sighting ranges, it certainly seems that planes in RTW2 have a longer sighting range than surface ships based on the search pattern that they fly. Once they get about 100 nm from their carrier they are searching an area about twice the visual sighting range of surface ships. At 200 miles each plane is searching a swath about 70 nm wide. At 300 miles, which is the typical search range for land based air each plane flying down the center of its assigned search section is expected to sight enemy ships up to 50 nm away. As far as I recall, that happened once during the war (documented in "The first Team") and that sighting was so unusual that it made the Americans suspect that the Japanese had aerial radar. Normal aerial sighting range was around half that, though it varied considerably depending on weather conditions.

History would suggest that search planes would search such a wide section by reaching the the end point and then flying a dogleg before returning to search the other half of their slice of ocean. This does not appear to happen in RTW2. What I see is the plane flying out down the center of its search segment and actively searching that entire width, both on the outward path and the inward path. I don't see a dog leg happening. I suspect that is a simplification that is perhaps somewhat inaccurate, but accurate enough for the purposes of the game. 

[dohboy]

Oct 1, 2019 19:05:48 GMT -6 jwsmith26 said:

It is an old issue but I don't recall ever seeing aircraft not attack when enemy ships are obviously in sight.

I get it about 50% of the time with floatplane scouts since 1.09, never noticed it before. Sometimes they will finally attack after a few passes over the target, sometimes I just get contact reports while my raider is burning to the fast rising waterline. I would be better off trading the scouts for a knot or two as far as escaping goes, but I have been told that they improve the effectiveness of raiders in game. Wonder if it's true.

I think the search patterns is a bigger issue than sighting distance. An airplane has a longer line of sight than a ship, but that doesn't necessarily mean it will spot a ship farther away. A ship has more eyes, better optics (with less vibration to affect their use), and the clouds don't get in the way as often. A spotter in an airplane also has to scan the whole board, from a ship they only have to scan the horizon. In optimal conditions the plane should have a longer maximum sight distance, but a lower probability of seeing ships within it than a ship spotting something within it's range. A flying boat or medium bomber should probably have a higher probability of spotting than other aircraft because of the larger crew too.

[dizzy]

Oct 1, 2019 19:05:48 GMT -6 jwsmith26 said:

It is an old issue...

I will say that it makes me quite cautious when launching that first strike. I no longer jump at early sighting reports but rather wait to see if the first report is confirmed. 

TY for the response, jwsmith26 !

I'm not sure I know the particulars of the 'old issue', so I can't comment on that. Care to enlighten me?

Without knowing exactly what Fredrik W set a plane's sight range to, this will come down to simple observation which is easy to test. It's not too hard to try and lure enemy ships back to an area you sent a strike group of planes to that's flying around already. How big is that circle? Move a ship over and click the 'Show sight range' button. That'll give you an idea in yards. Then observe if those planes ever attack an enemy as you try to draw them into range of your ship that's sailing under their circle location. What you'll find, jwsmith26 is that the planes will not attack an enemy ship while circling a 'Location' you've targeted unless the enemy ship comes within what I've judged to be an area equal to a ship's sight range.

That's pretty definitive proof for me that planes can't see any further than a ship. So when you say:

Regarding aircraft sighting ranges, it certainly seems that planes in RTW2 have a longer sighting range than surface ships based on the search pattern that they fly.

That's not accurate, at least it's not consistent with any of the testing I've done specifically looking at this issue. I've noticed it before, but it wasn't until I specifically started testing how planes engage ships did I notice they don't seem to see any further than a ship can.

Why is all this a big deal? Well, just as you said, it tempers your ability to use a carrier at the outset of a battle even when you know where the enemy is because they likely won't be there by the time the air strike reaches the target. That leaves an entire carrier air wing uselessly flying around in circles above the ocean. This is a particularly maddening problem. There's just no solution to it and it takes the fun out of using carriers.

This is why I want to know what Fredrik W has set for a plane's sight range. IMHO, it should be 2x-3x the sight range of any ship. Can you get that info for me?

Also, I do think their should be another layer of logic on top of what planes do when they reach their target 'Location' you've selected for an airstrike. If they have enough fuel, a search pattern should be commenced that widens their circle they fly around their target location. Also, as you said, a dog leg pattern or some other form of pattern could be done. I've been asking for tech additions that would add radios to planes so they can respond to nearby ships under attack and get real time updates on enemy main force locations, heading and speed.

Look, as it is, it's playable, but ultimately frustrating that this issue isn't getting any attention. Can we look into this, please? It happens often enough that it's a pretty big issue for me, at least. I'd like SOMETHING done...

[dizzy]

Oct 1, 2019 20:39:10 GMT -6 dohboy said:

Oct 1, 2019 19:05:48 GMT -6 jwsmith26 said:

It is an old issue but I don't recall ever seeing aircraft not attack when enemy ships are obviously in sight.

An airplane has a longer line of sight than a ship, but that doesn't necessarily mean it will spot a ship farther away. 

Gotta just say I agree with clouds, weather issues, etc., all affect sighting range, but if we are talking R/L then a PBY Catalina could spot an enemy fleet with wake many times the sight range of any ship.

This problem isn't about R/L, I'm trying to point out that planes don't have an observable sight range for engagement of enemy ships any further than that of a ship's sight range. And for a lot of reasons, that's bad game design because it results in planes flying around in a circle doing absolutely nothing for hours and there's nothing that can be done about it. That needs to be fixed.

[jwsmith26]

We are talking about two issues here, interrelated but separate. The first issue is quite clear - strikes that miss their target remain airborne searching for an unreasonable and unrealistic length of time. The second issue is the sighting range for aircraft. I don't feel that it is clear yet that this is, in fact, an issue.

It is not the case that aircraft could always see further than surface vessels. Cloud cover could seriously reduce this aerial visibility while not significantly affecting surface visibility. When the game indicates that conditions are "cloudy", there is no further indication of the percentage of cloud cover, meaning it could be anything from 1/8th coverage to 8/8th coverage. There is no indication of the type of cloud cover, so it could be anything from low lying rain-laden stratus clouds, which would seriously restrict aerial visibility, to icy cirrus, which would have no effect. Weather conditions can also be quite local, wherein a small squall can completely obscure a naval force that would have been clearly visible 10 minutes earlier. None of that is communicated to the player but it is reasonable to assume that the game virtually represents these highly random and quickly changeable weather occurrences by randomly varying the aerial sighting distances. It would be unreasonable to do otherwise in a game simulation that only peripherally represents such a major factor as weather.

I do think we should do some more testing to further explore the normal limits of aerial sighting but I would not find it unreasonable if we discover that aerial sighting distances vary widely. 

Regarding the first issue I mentioned - strikes staying aloft too long when a target is not located, I don't speak for Fredrik so I can't tell you if or when this problem will be addressed. Fredrik is aware of the frustration this causes but there are many other issues that need to be addressed and he can only do so much. Personally I feel that this issue, in particular, can be addressed by the player modifying his own behavior - be more certain of your target before you launch a strike.

[dohboy]

I have definitely changed my behavior to mitigate the loiter time issue. I wait for better information before launching strikes, and only launch ready aircraft to improve the chances that the enemy will still be there. I also take range off the design priority for carrier based aircraft after I get around the 200 mile mark. A range of 1000+ miles is of little advantage and makes for extremely long loiter time. It keeps land based TBs and DBs from engaging sometimes, but they are often 30 miles behind the enemy by the time they get there anyway. I have even edited the save to shorten ranges a few times.

[tortugapower]

I've had this issue at the very launch of the game.

I put a CVL on convoy protection or raiding, and got into a 1v1 duel against a CL. I spent my time launching aircraft at a CL just at visual range, and yet my bombers never attacked it.

That was particularly stupid, because it was the middle of the Pacific. I'm telling my bombers: "you see that ship at the edge of the horizon from us? Go bomb it!" There's nothing else around, and yet they failed.

Here is the start of the battle: youtu.be/oSmq6Y0ICWw?t=6417
Here is sample stupidity: youtu.be/oSmq6Y0ICWw?t=6739

Check the second timestamp there for the quick view (and scan forward as desired). The plane takes off with my carrier in visual range of the enemy. It flies to the side and doesn't engage.

It might be nice to have a "engage this target" option, which works for both visual contacts and sighting reports (I want you to focus on the CV of this CV + BB group, or I want you to focus on the CL of this BB + CL group, for my own selfish reasons).

[jwsmith26]

tortugapower , that looks like pretty ridiculous behavior at a quick glance, but I'll just mention that the weather condition in your video was "Cloudy". I don't know for sure that this will impact aerial sighting in RTW2 but that may have (and should have) had an effect.

The other issue at play is that the enemy ship is moving at right angles to the vector of the air strike. This makes it more likely that the target ship will move out of the target location and out of the search pattern that occurs after the strike arrives. I have actually found this type of sideways movement to be quite effective at fooling incoming AI strikes and for hiding my ships (I've tested this in fleet exercises). The closer your ships are to the attacking carrier the more likely this tactic is to succeed. (If you are 100 miles away and you steam 30 miles during the time it takes for a strike to arrive, you might manage to move sideways by 10 degrees from the vector of the incoming attack. If you're 30 miles away you can probably move 90 degrees out of that line of attack. If you have a few hours you can move sideways far enough that the AI is unlikely to locate you at all, especially if you make it into a second day.

That doesn't necessarily explain your aircraft's failure to attack, but these two factors together may have been the reason. We really don't know much about how sighting works and what may impact aerial sighting. It would be useful to be told what the default aerial sighting distance is, as well as the the maximum distance that sighting can occur and the elements that will impact sighting distance. Certainly the factors impacting aerial search would have been available to the contemporary naval commanders but we have no idea if any of the historical factors have any impact in RTW2. I can imagine many things that could impact sighting range such as weather, sea surface conditions, time of day, experience level of crews, and even the type of searching plane but I really have no idea if any of this has any effect.

BTW, your last sentence has been suggested by the test team.

[tortugapower]

jwsmith26 I take it that you're providing game-mechanic reasons for the possible failure here (and for the general underlying issue of bombers not attacking things in their view). That's good.

I cannot concoct a real-world scenario where the bombers would fail as such -- so I would even call this a game bug. This is video evidence for Fredrik to analyze if he needs it.

dizzy Feel free to use in a bug report, which I feel this issue merits.

[dizzy]

jwsmith26, that tortugapower vid is similar to the ridiculousness I see when visual conditions are good. Planes fly a tight circle at 'Location' coordinates and fail to attack planes outside what is equal to a ship's sight range from where the planes are circling. In the above video, I can understand how cloudy conditions prevent planes from attacking. As I said before, I fully support weather to affect sight range of planes.

That being said, something needs to be done to address the issue. I can think of a lot of ideas that'd make the game more enjoyable and fun that'd table this problem completely, but apparently you have a team of people just thinking **** up. So think something up and fix it. But make sure you fix the Naval Aircraft budget for AI that bankrupts their economy forcing them to scrap their BB's between 1944-47. That crap just ruins the game. My games are not worth playing after 1947-48 because there's nothing good to sink.

[dizzy]

Oct 2, 2019 14:13:40 GMT -6 tortugapower said:

jwsmith26 I take it that you're providing game-mechanic reasons for the possible failure here (and for the general underlying issue of bombers not attacking things in their view). That's good.

I cannot concoct a real-world scenario where the bombers would fail as such -- so I would even call this a game bug. This is video evidence for Fredrik to analyze if he needs it.

dizzy Feel free to use in a bug report, which I feel this issue merits.

I'll report it. Thx

[tortugapower]

Oct 2, 2019 14:23:26 GMT -6 dizzy said:

In the above video, I can understand how cloudy conditions prevent planes from attacking. I can understand how cloudy conditions prevent planes from attacking. As I said before, I fully support weather to affect sight range of planes.

Frankly, I cannot envision a scenario where visibility is good at the surface, yet prevents torpedo bombers from making an approach on target. (I.e., the only cases where I can imagine a cloud layer at the 100-200 foot level that would prevent torpedo bomber approaches would also prevent visibility of this range.)

But I'm not an expert, so if that really is possible, I await enlightenment.