Airfield & Port Damage

[StoneAge]

Is there a way of not repairing the damage to airfields and ports. I want to try and save the supply points that are used for the repairs.

A commander at some point would stop wasting his supply repairing an airfield that he knows will never have airplanes flying from it again.

If there is no way to do this can we please have one.

[n01487477]

Repairs to damaged airfields and ports do not use supplies iirc ... only when expanding much to my consternation 

[StoneAge]

I may be wrong but reading this rule makes me think they do and I once read that attaking a base airfield would strip them of supply and make it easier to invade later.

9.4.2
"Each turn, engineers at a base automatically attempt to repair any damage existing to their bases, repairing runways first, airfield service damage second and ports last."

"The remaining engineers at a base that have not conducted repairs will, if the base has been given the appropriate order, attempt to increase the size of the airfield and port and increase the amount of fortifications protecting the base."

"One supply point is consumed every twelve hours for each engineering squad (or equivalent) that is involved in construction operations."

[n01487477]

ORIGINAL: StoneAge

I may be wrong but reading this rule makes me think they do and I once read that attaking a base airfield would strip them of supply and make it easier to invade later.

"One supply point is consumed every twelve hours for each engineering squad (or equivalent) that is involved in construction operations."

Construction ... not repairs iirc ... attacking will sometimes hit supply dumps destroying supplies, you can see it in the combat.txt report when this occurs

--Damian--

[n01487477]

Furthermore. you don't need any units at a base to repair airfield or port damage, it happens naturally [8|]

[TheTomDude]

Uhm you sure?? I always thought repairing damaged airfields and ports need supplies. So if there are no ships or aircraft then Air attacks are useless? At least with the few and light - medium bombers the japs have. Because the only thing they hit is the runway...sometimes. On ground attack some 40 Sallys hit maybe 10 soldiers which is not even 1 squad. So what else can you do? Port and Airfield.
I'm attacking Singapore by air now for 5 months (!) because the AI had 70000 men and 100'000 supplies at the beginning of the siege and now you tell me repairing does not cost any supplies ?!?
O M G ........
Please can someone else verify if this is correct or not. [X(]

[n01487477]

Here ...

[PaxMondo]

Smells like a bug ...  have you reported?

[n01487477]

This is not a bug, already talked to Joe about it ... 

[TheTomDude]

Well now we know that you don't need supplies or units to have airfields or ports repaired slowly over time, as has been shown by n01487477.
BUT what if you do have engineers at the base. Don't they speed up repairs like they should and therefore use supplies? Dev-team?

[BigJ62]

1. If you have any friendly unit at base then you get a bonus eng value of 5 to total eng value regardless of opMode.
2. Repairs are free but you must have engs in cbt mode, however you do get the +5 bonus in spite of opMode so repairs might occur(just real slow) depending on base size.
3. Construction is not free and eng must be in cbt mode.
 
The no units at base and repairs are still occurring is a bug and will be fixed in Patch 1.

[DHRedge]

I read in a few places that to 'weaken an encircled enemy' attacking ports or airfield would deplete supply.

I understand you are saying that is not true, however why was that a discussed strategy for so long?

When someone posts about attacking Saigon they would say bomb them so they have to 'pay supply' to repair, has that been wrong in all those posts that posted that as an assumption?


If repair cost no supply, then attacking 'ground units' would be the best choice to get them to use up supplies by having to help reconstitute dispersed units, correct?

[geofflambert]

ORIGINAL: DHRedge

I read in a few places that to 'weaken an encircled enemy' attacking ports or airfield would deplete supply.

I understand you are saying that is not true, however why was that a discussed strategy for so long?

When someone posts about attacking Saigon they would say bomb them so they have to 'pay supply' to repair, has that been wrong in all those posts that posted that as an assumption?


If repair cost no supply, then attacking 'ground units' would be the best choice to get them to use up supplies by having to help reconstitute dispersed units, correct?

Nobody's saying that because it is absolutely true. At bases only, supplies may be destroyed by air attack (unlike against units or stacks in non-base territory) or by surface fleet bombardment. When you see "airfield supply hits" or "port supply hits" you will see your supplies deteriorate substantially, sometimes alarmingly. In many cases you can ameliorate this in advance by dumping enormous amounts of supply at bases that you expect to be besieged.

The thing that cheeses me off is that by bombing airfields and ports, you force the engineers present to repair that damage (at no cost in supplies) when they should be fortifying the base (at some cost in supplies). You cannot order otherwise even though you have no use for the port or airfield yourself, and expect the enemy to capture the base after you spent so much time repairing it for them.

I would just love it if there were a button you could push stopping all repairs at the base no matter what. The button, once pushed would read "resume repairs" if you decided to push it again.

I am not qualified in game development and have been told it simply is not possible.

[DHRedge]

ORIGINAL: geofflambert
At bases only, supplies may be destroyed by air attack (unlike against units or stacks in non-base territory) or by surface fleet bombardment. When you see "airfield supply hits" or "port supply hits" you will see your supplies deteriorate substantially, sometimes alarmingly. In many cases you can ameliorate this in advance by dumping enormous amounts of supply at bases that you expect to be besieged.

So it is true that bombing the airfields do lower supply,
however it is not true that is caused by 'repairing the bases' but instead by the loss during the attacks.

That could have been an assumption error, the reason for supply loss.

Does bombing port or airfield hit more supplies then 'ground attack' method?

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: DHRedge

ORIGINAL: geofflambert
At bases only, supplies may be destroyed by air attack (unlike against units or stacks in non-base territory) or by surface fleet bombardment. When you see "airfield supply hits" or "port supply hits" you will see your supplies deteriorate substantially, sometimes alarmingly. In many cases you can ameliorate this in advance by dumping enormous amounts of supply at bases that you expect to be besieged.

So it is true that bombing the airfields do lower supply,
however it is not true that is caused by 'repairing the bases' but instead by the loss during the attacks.

That could have been an assumption error, the reason for supply loss.

Does bombing port or airfield hit more supplies then 'ground attack' method?

Bombing the AF MAY lower supply. Usually does, but may not depending on lots of factors.

Repairs to AF, ports, forts do not cost supply. Moving between levels in construction does, at increasing, non-linear rates.

To answer your question from above, when someone says they "bombed Saigon", and it will cost supply to repair, they're talking about bombing industry: HI, LI, oil, refineries, yards, engines, aircraft, armament, vehicles, manpower. Repairing damage to them does cost supply. 1000 per point repaired and 10,000 in the hex to begin at all.

[DHRedge]

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

To answer your question from above, when someone says they "bombed Saigon", and it will cost supply to repair, they're talking about bombing industry: HI, LI, oil, refineries, yards, engines, aircraft, armament, vehicles, manpower. Repairing damage to them does cost supply. 1000 per point repaired and 10,000 in the hex to begin at all.

That makes sense, thanks

[Yaab]

1. If you have any friendly unit at base then you get a bonus eng value of 5 to total eng value regardless of opMode.
2. Repairs are free but you must have engs in cbt mode, however you do get the +5 bonus in spite of opMode so repairs might occur(just real slow) depending on base size.
3. Construction is not free and eng must be in cbt mode.
 
The no units at base and repairs are still occurring is a bug and will be fixed in Patch 1.

1) Is this bonus stackable? If I have i.e. two engineer unit at a base , do I get +10 bonus to total eng value?

If I have a fragment of eng unit, do I still get +5 bonus to total eng value?

[Platoonist]

1) Is this bonus stackable? If I have i.e. two engineer unit at a base , do I get +10 bonus to total eng value?

If I have a fragment of eng unit, do I still get +5 bonus to total eng value?

Hopefully somebody else has the answer. That poster hasn't been active here for over nine years.

[Yaab]

The info can be also found here, in the FAQ (sadly, this is still info from 2009)
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 9#p2119069

"9.4.2 - BASE CONSTRUCTION/REPAIR:

1. If you have any friendly ENG unit at base then you get a bonus ENG value of 5 to total eng value regardless of opMode."

[Chris21wen]

It's not the engineer unit that does the repair, it's the engineering devices that do, either sqd or vehicle. The rules do not specify a limit so I've always assumed and, although not specifically monitored, gone with the more the merrier.

Two turns ago I had a const unit move into a base in strategic mode. It had no other units in the base and after giving it the order to change to combat mode it immediately built a level one fort. The point is the unit was not in combat mode but changing. I'm testing and so far found will build in strategic mode? I'm testing further. This is under 26b.