Developer's Commentary: Airfield Stacking

[John Lansford]

These new rules really require a change in thinking about HQ's.  Before they just provided support for the base, and some form of assistance for coordination and reinforcements for those units within their radius.  Now they both increase the stacking capability of a base and help squadrons perform at their highest levels, in addition to the coordination and reinforcement functions.  This makes them a lot more valuable than in WitP and requires more careful consideration as to where to place them during the campaign.

[stuman]

I made a big mistake. For some reason I read this thread upon waking up with a headache. And before coffee. My brain may explode.

[romanovich]

ORIGINAL: dasboot

2 cents here --------- when the asterisk arrives shouldn't really trump conciousness of what one is ordering durin the turn in my opinion, and I thank the developers from loosening the players' grip on total control. Everybody wants to make a good move, but even what gets written up as 'perfection' in history book very seldom actually went down that way.
As to the 'admin' (or any of the three explained above) check - I say why not, it's one more chance for Mr. Murphy to play.................

I wholeheartedly agree with this. I hope the devs aren't swayed by the many comments on the forums from folks who need to see an * everytime they plan on doing something dumb but need Mom to tell them not to, need to have lines included for them in the ops reports like "Your industry doesn't produce anything because you are out of oil", or need to have the game give them pointers whether their LCU should be in strat or combat mode.

Good grief! Please don't dumb the game down because there's this vocal minority on the forums who prefers to post complaints rather than read the manual. And yes, the manual is incomplete, and the * could probably be made to show up on the turn you move your planes to some island and get close to the limits. But hey, IRL, once you dispatched those squadrons, you would never know what might hit you. Maybe the runways were to sandy and everyone would get stuck in the dunes, maybe there were some big ol' ugly rocks (and no dynamite) which no one had thought about before, but now they jut out into the approach path, so you gotta shut down one rwy while you vector someone to the other, etc. So many things were NOT planned. By not having an * there immediately, or not knowing to the decimal all those variables that make up the gaming algorithms gives me the chance to get frustrated, vent, try again, and possibly triumph against adversity. It's good NOT to have an * sometimes. It's good if the game sometimes doesn't 'play by the rules'. That's LIFE! Don't take that away from me!

[Mynok]

Agree 100%.

[stuman]

ORIGINAL: Mynok


Agree 100%.

I will see your 100% , and raise by 10 %

[medicff]

Back on topic (albeit the soap)

Michael had the most excellent explainations here tm.asp?m=2222404 in the tech support forum.

Please check it out!!

[DuckofTindalos]

ORIGINAL: romanovich

ORIGINAL: dasboot

2 cents here --------- when the asterisk arrives shouldn't really trump conciousness of what one is ordering durin the turn in my opinion, and I thank the developers from loosening the players' grip on total control. Everybody wants to make a good move, but even what gets written up as 'perfection' in history book very seldom actually went down that way.
As to the 'admin' (or any of the three explained above) check - I say why not, it's one more chance for Mr. Murphy to play.................

I wholeheartedly agree with this. I hope the devs aren't swayed by the many comments on the forums from folks who need to see an * everytime they plan on doing something dumb but need Mom to tell them not to, need to have lines included for them in the ops reports like "Your industry doesn't produce anything because you are out of oil", or need to have the game give them pointers whether their LCU should be in strat or combat mode.

Good grief! Please don't dumb the game down because there's this vocal minority on the forums who prefers to post complaints rather than read the manual. And yes, the manual is incomplete, and the * could probably be made to show up on the turn you move your planes to some island and get close to the limits. But hey, IRL, once you dispatched those squadrons, you would never know what might hit you. Maybe the runways were to sandy and everyone would get stuck in the dunes, maybe there were some big ol' ugly rocks (and no dynamite) which no one had thought about before, but now they jut out into the approach path, so you gotta shut down one rwy while you vector someone to the other, etc. So many things were NOT planned. By not having an * there immediately, or not knowing to the decimal all those variables that make up the gaming algorithms gives me the chance to get frustrated, vent, try again, and possibly triumph against adversity. It's good NOT to have an * sometimes. It's good if the game sometimes doesn't 'play by the rules'. That's LIFE! Don't take that away from me!

Don't worry, we won't.

[Woos]

By romanovich:
I hope the devs aren't swayed by the many comments on the forums from folks who need to see an * everytime they plan on doing something dumb but need Mom to tell them not to ....

Please don't dumb the game down because there's this vocal minority on the forums who prefers to post complaints rather than read the manual.

Nice to know that the "No immediate *" guys feel their position is so weak that they have to switch to putting up strawmen and conducting ad hominem attacks.

But hey, IRL, once you dispatched those squadrons, you would never know what might hit you. Maybe the runways were to sandy and everyone would get stuck in the dunes, maybe there were some big ol' ugly rocks (and no dynamite) which no one had thought about before, but now they jut out into the approach path, so you gotta shut down one rwy while you vector someone to the other, etc. So many things were NOT planned.

Minor problem of this argument is that it required the formulas to be not known. But they are known, mostly even documented. They are just not calculated by the game on the fly. Everybody can know the formulas, calculate them in his head/paper/spreadsheet and, if e.g. playing a PBEM against you, getting an advantage over you by doing so. So you have to calculate them by hand, too (or accept to be at a disadvantage). This IMHO just adds to the tediousness of the tasks to be done every turn and not to the "athmosphere". For that base overstacking had to be random.

Anyone who is not sufficiently challenged by the game, I suggest playing the Japanese without making use of WitpStaff and WitpTracker instead of praising things like "no immediate indication of AF overstacking".

[Jzanes]

ORIGINAL: Woos

By romanovich:
I hope the devs aren't swayed by the many comments on the forums from folks who need to see an * everytime they plan on doing something dumb but need Mom to tell them not to ....

Please don't dumb the game down because there's this vocal minority on the forums who prefers to post complaints rather than read the manual.

Nice to know that the "No immediate *" guys feel their position is so weak that they have to switch to putting up strawmen and conducting ad hominem attacks.

But hey, IRL, once you dispatched those squadrons, you would never know what might hit you. Maybe the runways were to sandy and everyone would get stuck in the dunes, maybe there were some big ol' ugly rocks (and no dynamite) which no one had thought about before, but now they jut out into the approach path, so you gotta shut down one rwy while you vector someone to the other, etc. So many things were NOT planned.

Minor problem of this argument is that it required the formulas to be not known. But they are known, mostly even documented. They are just not calculated by the game on the fly. Everybody can know the formulas, calculate them in his head/paper/spreadsheet and, if e.g. playing a PBEM against you, getting an advantage over you by doing so. So you have to calculate them by hand, too (or accept to be at a disadvantage). This IMHO just adds to the tediousness of the tasks to be done every turn and not to the "athmosphere". For that base overstacking had to be random.

Anyone who is not sufficiently challenged by the game, I suggest playing the Japanese without making use of WitpStaff and WitpTracker instead of praising things like "no immediate indication of AF overstacking".

+1

Make it possible to easily tell if a base is overstacked and I'm sure everyone will learn to live with this rule. Still wish overstacking was just dependant on # engines but that seems to be a forlorn hope at this point.

[Mynok]

Administrative issues should be taken into consideration as well. They were certainly critical to operations. They've done an admirable job of representing that within the limitations of the engine.

[ago1000]

Graymane
Is it a size 4 or a size 9 airfield when HQ is added?

I'm no expert, but I believe its a size 4 airfield which allows 9 groups.

I'm not part of the developing team nor one of the experts but just hoping I can help with the question at hand and hopefully I'm giving you the correct answer. I will make one basic assumption:

If the * appears by the airfield you are incurring some form of penalty inside the program code (and based on what "theElf" said about a size 9 airfield (no penalties and you can overstack)).

I went into the editor and made some changes to the airfield size at Dutch Harbor. My results are depicted below with my conclusion based on my assumption. The size 4 airfield is still overstacked and I'm assuming that it is incurring some form of penalty within the program code.
Furthermore, removing some air groups from Dutch Harbor will remove the * in front of the airfield.
My 2 cents.

[Graymane]

Interesting. Thanks for showing that! I assumed that was the case, but the text of his reply seemed to be saying that once you hit 9+, there would be no more overstacking.

[ago1000]

We must remember that "theElf" was part of the development team. He is privy to information we don't know. How things are calculated, how random numbers are generated, etc. I'm assuming that the * means that the AF is not working at peak efficiency within the conditions of the program code and will suffer with penalties as a result. I can only go by what I see on the screens. The programmers may have ommitted a line in the code that removes the * infront of the airfield but all mathematical calculations for the program would allow the field to operate as a 9+ field.
i.e.
If (group size >=9) then
{
-act as 9+ AF
-remove * infront of airfield (forgot this line of code--I don't know)
}


I would have to run combat simulations for several days and compare the results to see the effect in the two cases I stated above. However, looking at the screens and seeing the *, I say we are looking at a size 4 field incurring overstacking penalties.

[ago1000]

Graymane
I had a chance to test one day trials on the B24D bomber attack on Kiska Island. The results I obtained are below. They show if anything that more calculations (probably penalties) are incurred on the AF of size 4 with the *, hence I would assume that the program code understands Dutch Harbor to be overstacked. The HQ seems to effect only the number of groups and not the airfield size.

Hope this helps and hopefully I'm correct because I'm no expert.

[medicff]

ORIGINAL: Graymane

Interesting. Thanks for showing that! I assumed that was the case, but the text of his reply seemed to be saying that once you hit 9+, there would be no more overstacking.

Hi Graymane,

Michaelm cleared up elf's scenario of the '9' overstacking rule. Only if you have a 9 AF (no HQ applied) do you have unlimited stacking without penalty.

[TheElf]

ORIGINAL: medicff

ORIGINAL: Graymane

Interesting. Thanks for showing that! I assumed that was the case, but the text of his reply seemed to be saying that once you hit 9+, there would be no more overstacking.

Hi Graymane,

Michaelm cleared up elf's scenario of the '9' overstacking rule. Only if you have a 9 AF (no HQ applied) do you have unlimited stacking without penalty.

Yes, there are two ways to be overstacked.

1) Physical space. (ie. AF size vs number of engines)

2) Administrative. (ie. AF size vs too many groups)

The HQ only adds to the Administrative overstacking penalty. It won't magically increase the size of the AF. However we will likely look at this as a possible change in patch 2.

[ago1000]

Thanks theElf

That does make perfect sense. [:)] HQ should add to the administrative headaches but not the physical size of the base. That is an AF of size of 1 should not be allowed to fly heavy bombers just because there is an HQ there. (It should not magically become AF of size 6) However the AF may be able to handle more groups of A/C (hence more A/C) as long as they fall within a certain number that the base can physically handle. (ie. I believe its 50 engines at the moment).
Thanks again for the explanation everyone.

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: TheElf


Yes, there are two ways to be overstacked.

1) Physical space. (ie. AF size vs number of engines)

2) Administrative. (ie. AF size vs too many groups)

The HQ only adds to the Administrative overstacking penalty. It won't magically increase the size of the AF. However we will likely look at this as a possible change in patch 2.

This is what I needed. THANKS!

[Xxzard]

Is there a point where by overstacking an airfield there would actually be less strikes/cap/sweep missions going on than if the AF is at the appropriate limit? Or is the penalty a little more complicated than that?

[John Lansford]

The AI has taken the base in western Sarawak (the northern coast of Borneo) and is basing Bettys out of there to attack shipping in Java.  However, the base is (I think, I'm at work) only a size 2, yet the Bettys are most definitely carrying torpedoes!  I thought that bombers operating out of airfields too small for them could only carry extended range weaponry (bombs).
 
I have noticed that their strike packages are very spotty.  Sometimes the base sends 10 Bettys at a target, other times they send only 2 or 3, and none are escorted.  Is this a result of the small base or overstacking, or both?