UK/CW Air HQ

Please post here for questions and discussion about scenario design and the game editor for WITP.

Moderators: wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami

Post Reply
el cid again
Posts: 16983
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:40 pm

UK/CW Air HQ

Post by el cid again »

Air HQ appear not to have been very well done. One reason is we lack the slots to do them all. Another is that they were dynamic - changing significantly over time. These HQ had too much ability to support aircraft early - and not enough later on. They lacked defensive and engineering resources. RHS had begun to add some defensive assets - but not enough. Many did not appear at the right point or the right time.

I have reworked Allied UK and CW HQ and air support units (which represent HQ without being in HQ slots).
In particular, the RAAF has expanded the number of HQ assets - but the size of most of them is smaller. We have gone from two group HQ to four - except they are called "wings". [An RAAF "wing" seems to be something like a USAAF group - and originally were called "operations groups" before being renamed wings. They are collections of squadrons, not of groups.] A suggestion to add the RAAF First Tactical Air Force was implemented as a solution to the problem of getting more air support later in the war. In order to mitigate the problem that the air support was decreased on the order of 2/3, I added something from J.F. Dunnigans original War In The Pacific: forward base detchments. These are only squadron size for wings (or RAF groups) - but are of wing (i.e. group) size for Tactical Air Forces. I also made the "wing" a large group - 5 squadrons in the parent plus 1 more in the forward detachment. This because a wartime group often had more than the traditional 3 squadrons - and could efficiently control up to twice that many in an emergency.

RNZAF had a different problem: it lacks groups or wings (as far as I can tell) altogether - and it eventually gets so many squadrons they are difficult to support. While many no doubt will serve with RAAF and USAAF (or other Allied) groups/wings, I felt that more ground support in NZ was appropriate. Also, the existing support is fixed - tied to various base forces - leaving no flexability for a mobile and unpredictable defense - nor for offensive operations. To mitigate that I added a EAB (of large group capacity) and a forward air station (of squadron capacity) in 1943 and 1942, respectively.

RAF gained forward base elements for its two reinforcement groups and for its 3rd Tactical Air Force.

Duplicated HQ and EABs were combined in the HQ - and the EABs replaced by forward detachments - plus a few. We have now managed to fill almost all the slots - but come very close to representing the "fourth largest air force" (RAAF) as it should be.
Post Reply

Return to “Scenario Design”