Option to repair base damage

niceguy2005 · Post by **niceguy2005** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:01 pm

This is my first AE question and I'm sorry if it's already been covered, but does anyone know if in AE players will finally be given the option to turn on or off repair of bases? This is an exploit that has long bugged me. The ability of a commander to tell his troops not to burn up supplies to repair bases would be a very nice new feature.

kaleun · Post by **kaleun** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 11:42 pm

The problem is that without that "bug" fortified bases like Singapore and Manila become inexpugnable.

Terminus · Post by **Terminus** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 11:43 pm

ORIGINAL: kaleun

The problem is that without that "bug" fortified bases like Singapore and Manila become inexpugnable.

That's a new word...[X(][X(]

Mark VII · Post by **Mark VII** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 11:55 pm

Not on the team but pretty sure I've read that yes, damage repair can be turned off at bases.

What does inexpugnable mean?[&:]

Terminus · Post by **Terminus** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 12:06 am

I think it means "can't be expunged", but I'm not sure...[:D]

Nomad · Post by **Nomad** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 12:10 am

Here is one definition. inexpugnable

It is also a Star Wars ship class. inexpugnable

Andy Mac · Post by **Andy Mac** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 12:42 am

Supply is not used up  on repairs of facilities only construction - its like that in stock as well

castor troy · Post by **castor troy** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 4:32 pm

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Supply is not used up on repairs of facilities only construction - its like that in stock as well

and that´s what I´ve been saying for years but was always told it wouldn´t be like that! [X(][8|]

Nomad · Post by **Nomad** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 6:09 pm

The biggest reason to keep airfields and ports damaged is to prevent fort being built.

Charbroiled · Post by **Charbroiled** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 7:24 pm

ORIGINAL: Nomad

The biggest reason to keep airfields and ports damaged is to prevent fort being built.

A better way to handle this, though, would be to allow forts to be reduced through naval and/or air bombardment.

Nomad · Post by **Nomad** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 7:28 pm

ORIGINAL: Charbroiled

ORIGINAL: Nomad

The biggest reason to keep airfields and ports damaged is to prevent fort being built.

A better way to handle this, though, would be to allow forts to be reduced through naval and/or air bombardment.

I don't think that is appropiate. Bombing forts just produces more forts, though more ad hoc ones.

Charbroiled · Post by **Charbroiled** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 7:34 pm

ORIGINAL: Nomad

ORIGINAL: Charbroiled

ORIGINAL: Nomad

The biggest reason to keep airfields and ports damaged is to prevent fort being built.

A better way to handle this, though, would be to allow forts to be reduced through naval and/or air bombardment.

I don't think that is appropiate. Bombing forts just produces more forts, though more ad hoc ones.

Yes, but only level 3 at best.[:D]

niceguy2005 · Post by **niceguy2005** » Mon Mar 31, 2008 4:55 am

ORIGINAL: Charbroiled

ORIGINAL: Nomad

The biggest reason to keep airfields and ports damaged is to prevent fort being built.

A better way to handle this, though, would be to allow forts to be reduced through naval and/or air bombardment.

This would mean certain and early doom for Japan. 4E squadrons could bomb a hex down to 0 forts in no time.

Plus the idea of a level 9 fort is that it's supposed to be pretty tough to penetrate.

I think a better approach is to limit fort construction by making achieving level 7,8 and 9 almost impossible (takes forever).

niceguy2005 · Post by **niceguy2005** » Mon Mar 31, 2008 4:57 am

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Supply is not used up on repairs of facilities only construction - its like that in stock as well

with all due respect to Andy who's been here a long time and knows the game usually far better than I. I have seen supplies get used up for facility repair.

BigJ62 · Post by **BigJ62** » Mon Mar 31, 2008 7:35 am

Andy is correct.

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Supply is not used up on repairs of facilities only construction - its like that in stock as well
with all due respect to Andy who's been here a long time and knows the game usually far better than I. I have seen supplies get used up for facility repair.

treespider · Post by **treespider** » Mon Mar 31, 2008 11:54 am

ORIGINAL: BigJ62

Andy is correct.

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Supply is not used up on repairs of facilities only construction - its like that in stock as well
with all due respect to Andy who's been here a long time and knows the game usually far better than I. I have seen supplies get used up for facility repair.

He's one of the coders....and its been tested and verified. Set up a scenario with no supply, damage a base and watch the airfield repair.

Terminus · Post by **Terminus** » Mon Mar 31, 2008 11:57 am

The supplies being used in NG's example were probably for maintaining the units that did the repairing.

treespider · Post by **treespider** » Mon Mar 31, 2008 12:00 pm

ORIGINAL: Terminus

The supplies being used in NG's example were probably for maintaining the units that did the repairing.

Not that you necessarily need the units to repair....
....but bombing will increase supply usage of units.

Option to repair base damage

Option to repair base damage

RE: Option to repair base damage

RE: Option to repair base damage

RE: Option to repair base damage

RE: Option to repair base damage

RE: Option to repair base damage

RE: Option to repair base damage

RE: Option to repair base damage

RE: Option to repair base damage

RE: Option to repair base damage

RE: Option to repair base damage

RE: Option to repair base damage

RE: Option to repair base damage

RE: Option to repair base damage

RE: Option to repair base damage

RE: Option to repair base damage

RE: Option to repair base damage

RE: Option to repair base damage