Dealing with fighters as a bomber / fighter-bomber

[kraszus]

I fly bombers or fighter bombers primarily as I much prefer ground pounding to A2A. As I'm learning the sim, I'll fly as wingman or last in a flight of four - singleplayer. Currently mainly flying the Typhoon on interdiction missions. I'm getting a bit frustrated as on many missions, despite flying with an escort, I'm getting shredded by fighters. I am routinely carrying 2 x 1000lb or 2 x 500lb bombs (dependant on target) so the option to turn into a dogfight with a BF109 on my six really isn't viable. I usually try to extend in the hope that the escorts pick him up but 90% of the time I get shot down.

 

I guess historically the Typhoon would just jettison ordinance and engage or extend. But I would much rather the fighter escorts would just do their job! Last mission was 4 x Typhoons escorted by 4 x P-51 Mustangs engaged by 2 x Bf109s.

 

Any ground pounders out there have any advice? Only option I can see is to fall out of formation and drop well behind the escorts so they can buffer between myself and the bandits.

[=MERCS=JenkemJunkie]

I find the AI doesn't understand anything more complicated than boom and zoom or rate fighting, so you can force an overshoot very easily by cutting your throttle and jinking around it's flight path, then blasting it as it flys past you. 

[I./JG52_Woutwocampe]

There's a problem right now with fighters escort AI. A problem among many others related to AI in dynamic campaigns.

 

Depending on the circumstances the AI escort can be very passive and take AGES to react and engage interceptors.

 

I have an IL2 career in Stalingrad and it happens very often that 109s absolutely decimate my flight while La5s or Yaks are busy playing tourists behind. No kidding, the 109s can do 8 or 9 passes before the escort finally starts doing its job. 

 

I noticed it happens mostly when you are still far away from your target or when your main objective is consideres as accomplished.

[357th_KW]

3 hours ago, I./JG52_Woutwocampe said:

There's a problem right now with fighters escort AI. A problem among many others related to AI in dynamic campaigns.

 

Depending on the circumstances the AI escort can be very passive and take AGES to react and engage interceptors.

 

I have an IL2 career in Stalingrad and it happens very often that 109s absolutely decimate my flight while La5s or Yaks are busy playing tourists behind. No kidding, the 109s can do 8 or 9 passes before the escort finally starts doing its job. 

 

I noticed it happens mostly when you are still far away from your target or when your main objective is consideres as accomplished.

 

I gave up on using the "escort" commands - the AI will just sit and watch most of the time while the aircraft they are escorting get shot down.  I started using a series of sequenced attack areas so that they are at least aggressively engaging any enemies they find in those zones.

[I./JG52_Woutwocampe]

51 minutes ago, 357th_KW said:

 

I gave up on using the "escort" commands - the AI will just sit and watch most of the time while the aircraft they are escorting get shot down.  I started using a series of sequenced attack areas so that they are at least aggressively engaging any enemies they find in those zones.

 

Please elaborate about this method, sounds intriguing.

 

As the leader of my IL2 squadron, I can modify mission parameters to some extent and I will if it helps the escort do their damn job.

[357th_KW]

Within the mission editor, there is an MCU called Command:Cover that is the "escort" command function.  My experience is that it just doesn't work well.  So I started using the MCU called Command:AttackArea instead.  You can set it to just focus on air targets, adjust the area size and height as needed, and then I'll build a sequence of those and switch the escorts from one to the next (trigger it with a timer, or with the bombers reaching their next waypoint, etc).  The escorts tend to roam a bit, but they're much more aggressive at seeking out enemies and hitting them, rather then just watching as the bombers get wrecked.

[R33GZ]

Basically, in single player, you just can't rely on the AI to do anything that would be considered "artificially intelligent" they will do what the mission code tells them to do. It is most likely a mission design problem that you are encountering.

 

One way I found to get around this, is to fly as the flight leader and take your formation on a different flight route. This way, you can effectively avoid the enemy as they are most likely programmed to intercept your waypoints. Different story if they are programmed to intercept you at target - you can't avoid that ?

[Yogiflight]

Having a Bf 110 career on the Moscow map and a Hs 129 career on the Stalingrad map running, I can't confirm the experiences, posted here. My fighter escorts usually attack enemy fighters early enough to stop them from intercepting us. Of course it happens, that enemy fighters break through the defensive line of our escort fighters and attack our flight, but this seems quite realistic to me.

It is a completely different story in the so called 'Traffic interdiction' missions, in which you fly without fighter escort and get intercepted pretty regularely.

[kraszus]

2 hours ago, R33GZ said:

Basically, in single player, you just can't rely on the AI to do anything that would be considered "artificially intelligent" they will do what the mission code tells them to do. It is most likely a mission design problem that you are encountering.

 

One way I found to get around this, is to fly as the flight leader and take your formation on a different flight route. This way, you can effectively avoid the enemy as they are most likely programmed to intercept your waypoints. Different story if they are programmed to intercept you at target - you can't avoid that ?

Thank you @R33GZ. I can try that, but really that's a workaround rather than a fix. Thanks all the same ?

[I./JG52_Woutwocampe]

1 hour ago, Yogiflight said:

Having a Bf 110 career on the Moscow map and a Hs 129 career on the Stalingrad map running, I can't confirm the experiences, posted here. My fighter escorts usually attack enemy fighters early enough to stop them from intercepting us. Of course it happens, that enemy fighters break through the defensive line of our escort fighters and attack our flight, but this seems quite realistic to me.

It is a completely different story in the so called 'Traffic interdiction' missions, in which you fly without fighter escort and get intercepted pretty regularely.

 

I also have a 110 career that I started years ago in Moscow and that is now more than halfway through Stalingrad and I never really experienced this either with this career.

 

As I said before, it depends on a few circumstances that are probably not met in this career.

 

However, do start a Il2 career in Stalingrad, especially in the 2nd half at the point where things should actually be EASIER for a russian ground attack career....

 

You will feel pain. Intense pain.

 

 

 

 

[kraszus]

4 minutes ago, I./JG52_Woutwocampe said:

 

I also have a 110 career that I started years ago in Moscow and that is now more than halfway through Stalingrad and I never really experienced this either with this career.

 

As I said before, it depends on a few circumstances that are probably not met in this career.

 

However, do start a Il2 career in Stalingrad, especially in the 2nd half at the point where things should actually be EASIER for a russian ground attack career....

 

You will feel pain. Intense pain.

 

 

 

 

I use mainly PWCG campaign generator and, to a lesser extent, EasyMissionGenerator. (Not sure if those make a difference to what I experience compared to the stock missions)

Edited July 11, 2023 by kraszus

[R33GZ]

4 hours ago, kraszus said:

I use mainly PWCG campaign generator and, to a lesser extent, EasyMissionGenerator. (Not sure if those make a difference to what I experience compared to the stock missions)

Have a look around the campaign settings in PWCG. From memory, there are some detailed settings in there that dictate the experience levels of allied and enemy pilots. Maybe even post something in the PWCG forum, Patrick is usually pretty good at replying... SYN_Vander is too.

[AEthelraedUnraed]

On 7/11/2023 at 12:10 PM, kraszus said:

I guess historically the Typhoon would just jettison ordinance and engage or extend. But I would much rather the fighter escorts would just do their job! Last mission was 4 x Typhoons escorted by 4 x P-51 Mustangs engaged by 2 x Bf109s.

Well, reading the Operational Record Books of No. 174 Squadron of 1942 (at the time a Hurricane ground attack squadron, but they changed to Typhoons not much later), it differed a bit depending on the situation. There's at least one case where they continued with their bombs to the target (which by then was quite nearby), even after some planes actually fired their guns at the enemy in a head-on pass. There's also a case where they extended and left the enemy to their escort, although here too they kept their bombs and just used them to attack a train that they happened to spot.

 

22 hours ago, 357th_KW said:

Within the mission editor, there is an MCU called Command:Cover that is the "escort" command function.  My experience is that it just doesn't work well.  So I started using the MCU called Command:AttackArea instead.  You can set it to just focus on air targets, adjust the area size and height as needed, and then I'll build a sequence of those and switch the escorts from one to the next (trigger it with a timer, or with the bombers reaching their next waypoint, etc).  The escorts tend to roam a bit, but they're much more aggressive at seeking out enemies and hitting them, rather then just watching as the bombers get wrecked.

Interesting technique! What I usually do is just have the escort fly at the same speed as the bombers, on a parallel course. This requires some tuning (to make their speed match), but gives good results. Then either give them a Low waypoint priority, or use an Attack command if you know where you'll meet the enemy or by using a Proximity MCU.

Edited July 12, 2023 by AEthelraedUnraed

[13Nrv]

The only way to ... have more chance to survive , when you fly bomber , or bomber fighter , is to fly online with friends /people ...  Live on TS / Srs / Discord , sometimes the three of all at the same time ...

AND it s by far the most exiting way to play this game !   

Meet people , learn to fly together ...  have fun ... 

 

 

Edited July 12, 2023 by 13Nrv

[Yogiflight]

9 hours ago, AEthelraedUnraed said:

There's at least one case where they continued with their bombs to the target (which by then was quite nearby), even after some planes actually fired their guns at the enemy in a head-on pass. There's also a case where they extended and left the enemy to their escort, although here too they kept their bombs and just used them to attack a train that they happened to spot.

This is exactly, what I want them to do, as well. There is a reason for them to fly with bombs, and it is not to jettison them as soon as enemy fighters approach. It has become much better in one of the latest udates, but when the enemy fighters head for your 110 flight, it still breaks up the formation and starts to engage. The only goal for airforces is to support the ground forces. Everything they do is just for that purpose. There are many people stuck in that 'Flying circus' thinking, which makes the only reason for flying to shoot enemy planes down. But this was only means for the purpose, to get the ability to support their ground forces at the lowest possible danger level.

 

On 7/11/2023 at 11:16 PM, I./JG52_Woutwocampe said:

However, do start a Il2 career in Stalingrad, especially in the 2nd half at the point where things should actually be EASIER for a russian ground attack career....

 

You will feel pain. Intense pain.

This is what I read in posts about Allied careers at the western front scenarios as well, in which the Allied should have clear air superiority over the German Luftwaffe. Of course there might have been exceptions, but exactly that, exceptions, not the rule.

[AEthelraedUnraed]

1 hour ago, Yogiflight said:

This is exactly, what I want them to do, as well. There is a reason for them to fly with bombs, and it is not to jettison them as soon as enemy fighters approach. It has become much better in one of the latest udates, but when the enemy fighters head for your 110 flight, it still breaks up the formation and starts to engage. The only goal for airforces is to support the ground forces. Everything they do is just for that purpose. There are many people stuck in that 'Flying circus' thinking, which makes the only reason for flying to shoot enemy planes down. But this was only means for the purpose, to get the ability to support their ground forces at the lowest possible danger level.

Just as a heads-up; with human-made missions this is possible. Especially if you're flying a single-seater; you can just set the Waypoint Priority to High

 

1 hour ago, Yogiflight said:

This is what I read in posts about Allied careers at the western front scenarios as well, in which the Allied should have clear air superiority over the German Luftwaffe. Of course there might have been exceptions, but exactly that, exceptions, not the rule.

I'd love a "Realistic air opposition" setting. In reality, encountering enemy aircraft was a relatively rare occurrence, even before the Allies gained air superiority. I can see how the current odds make sense for a fighter career (it'd be pretty boring if you didn't encounter any enemies), but for a bomber or ground attacker career, it'd be welcome if it was a little less deadly since the main objective of those campaigns isn't connected to destroying aircraft.

[I./JG52_Woutwocampe]

For later western front allies campaigns, there's no doubt that there are to many Luftwaffe fighters compared to reality but its more fair than Stalingrad for russians imo. In Bodenplatte for instance, numbers on both sides are actually pretty close the way I see it, what makes the allied campaign a bit harder is that the AI seems more proficient with Lutfwaffe aircrafts than allied aicrafts. Overall its not realistic that both sides put an equal amout of vet pilots in the air in Feb 45 but the allied careers remain playable and enjoyable still.

 

Stalingrad russian careers though, by the end of the battle or near, when the germans were surrounded and very low of fuel, well, in game, you'll get outnumbered  3 or 4 to 1 by the Luftwaffe all the time, several waves of 109s will harass you one after the other of even at the ssme time and make it almost impossible to play. It feels like a joke when you compare it to reality.

 

Its so frustrating that I started a topic in complaints about it.

[LukeFF]

16 hours ago, AEthelraedUnraed said:

I'd love a "Realistic air opposition" setting. In reality, encountering enemy aircraft was a relatively rare occurrence, even before the Allies gained air superiority. I can see how the current odds make sense for a fighter career (it'd be pretty boring if you didn't encounter any enemies), but for a bomber or ground attacker career, it'd be welcome if it was a little less deadly since the main objective of those campaigns isn't connected to destroying aircraft.

 

It's been talked about recently in internal discussions, so hopefully it will become an option one day.

 

15 hours ago, I./JG52_Woutwocampe said:

Stalingrad russian careers though, by the end of the battle or near, when the germans were surrounded and very low of fuel, well, in game, you'll get outnumbered  3 or 4 to 1 by the Luftwaffe all the time, several waves of 109s will harass you one after the other of even at the ssme time and make it almost impossible to play. It feels like a joke when you compare it to reality.

 

Its so frustrating that I started a topic in complaints about it.

 

That should have been adjusted in the last update; if it wasn't, let me know and I can bring it up again.

[I./JG52_Woutwocampe]

28 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

 

It's been talked about recently in internal discussions, so hopefully it will become an option one day.

 

 

That should have been adjusted in the last update; if it wasn't, let me know and I can bring it up again.

 

Luke, my man, I'm happy that you brought this up. 

 

I confirm, I tested earlier today, 2 missions, and it was like it should be, a lot less Luftwaffe opposition, like 2x MC202 patrolling and like 2 109s thats it. 

 

Good job, I will do another mission soon. So far, very promising.

[LukeFF]

18 hours ago, AEthelraedUnraed said:

I'd love a "Realistic air opposition" setting. In reality, encountering enemy aircraft was a relatively rare occurrence, even before the Allies gained air superiority. I can see how the current odds make sense for a fighter career (it'd be pretty boring if you didn't encounter any enemies), but for a bomber or ground attacker career, it'd be welcome if it was a little less deadly since the main objective of those campaigns isn't connected to destroying aircraft.

 

Yes, that, or a slider or some sort where the player can set the chance of enemy fighter opposition. But yes, you're right, especially for fighter-bomber careers, the Allies were not encountering much resistance in the spring / early summer of 1944 over Normandy. I looked at the mission logs for 440 Squadron (a playable Typhoon unit in career mode that was flying every day of good weather), and during this time it was something like 5% of their sorties that resulted in contact with enemy fighters. 

[Yogiflight]

1 hour ago, LukeFF said:

But yes, you're right, especially for fighter-bomber careers, the Allies were not encountering much resistance in the spring / early summer of 1944 over Normandy.

This is an issue for ground attack aircraft careers, like the Hs 129, as well. In 'Traffic interdiction' missions, in which you are flying without fighter escort, you should rarely encounter enemy fighters, otherwise those missions don't make any sense to fly. Noone would have been flying those missions, if all aircrafts got shot down every mission.

[I./JG52_Woutwocampe]

I started a topic a while ago in suggestions guys, and it included a suggestion that adding a choice between 'balanced career' and 'historical career.

 

The former spawns aircrafts mostly in equal numbers in missions no matter when or where

 

The later is influenced by historical facts and the numbers would reflect reality at least to some extent.

 

But it should be about AI level too, not only the numbers.

Edited July 14, 2023 by I./JG52_Woutwocampe

[LukeFF]

7 hours ago, Yogiflight said:

This is an issue for ground attack aircraft careers, like the Hs 129, as well. In 'Traffic interdiction' missions, in which you are flying without fighter escort, you should rarely encounter enemy fighters, otherwise those missions don't make any sense to fly. Noone would have been flying those missions, if all aircrafts got shot down every mission.

 

I can ask and see if those templates can be adjusted.

[Letka_13/Arrow_]

10 hours ago, Yogiflight said:

This is an issue for ground attack aircraft careers, like the Hs 129, as well. In 'Traffic interdiction' missions, in which you are flying without fighter escort, you should rarely encounter enemy fighters, otherwise those missions don't make any sense to fly. Noone would have been flying those missions, if all aircrafts got shot down every mission.

 

Yes, these missions do not make much sense. In my Typhoon career they were the worst and usually resulted in big losses. I was able to interdict some traffic maybe once or twice and we were intercepted even then when low on ammo and that resulted in more catastrophic losses. It would be great to have the templates changed for them, or as it has already been said give players the choice to scale the numbers of enemy aircraft in careers, or introduce some historical setting. In my Typhoon career after having flown 138 missions, I was able to score some 40 kills and this shows how excessive is the air opposition in ground attack career over Normandy/Rhineland, contrary to all historical sources. Moreover my whole squadron was wiped out completely maybe 5 times mostly by enemy fighters. There were only a few (if any) missions where our flight was not intercepted often by more than one wave of enemy aircraft as also German fighter bombers liked to attack us and when we were escorted by P-47s I already knew that most of our flight will be shot down. 

[Yogiflight]

22 hours ago, I./JG52_Woutwocampe said:

I started a topic a while ago in suggestions guys, and it included a suggestion that adding a choice between 'balanced career' and 'historical career.

 

The former spawns aircrafts mostly in equal numbers in missions no matter when or where

 

The later is influenced by historical facts and the numbers would reflect reality at least to some extent.

 

But it should be about AI level too, not only the numbers.

Another thing I would like to have in a historical career to be more realistic, is the times for promotions and when you get appointed squadron leader. I was flying a Bf 110 career on the Stalingrad map and had my second promotion (to Leutnant) after four weeks and was appointed squadron leader one week later.

[R33GZ]

47 minutes ago, Yogiflight said:

I was flying a Bf 110 career on the Stalingrad map and had my second promotion (to Leutnant) after four weeks and was appointed squadron leader one week later

Makes sense if everyone ele had been shot down "newbie, your our only hope" ?