The early air war

[morvael]

ORIGINAL: Crackaces
The other possibility is the 2 hex rule .. so recon the same hex twice like you can only bomb a hex twice .. no historical reference or simulation argument there .. just an extension of an already established rule

I had to add this for the next patch to reduce chances for battle report exhaustion.

[HardLuckYetAgain]

ORIGINAL: morvael

ORIGINAL: Crackaces
The other possibility is the 2 hex rule .. so recon the same hex twice like you can only bomb a hex twice .. no historical reference or simulation argument there .. just an extension of an already established rule

I had to add this for the next patch to reduce chances for battle report exhaustion.

hahahahahahahaha, these Germans are sooooooooo abusing the Air War game ;-P

[HardLuckYetAgain]

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

ORIGINAL: morvael

ORIGINAL: Crackaces
The other possibility is the 2 hex rule .. so recon the same hex twice like you can only bomb a hex twice .. no historical reference or simulation argument there .. just an extension of an already established rule

I had to add this for the next patch to reduce chances for battle report exhaustion.

hahahahahahahaha, these Germans are sooooooooo abusing the Air War game ;-P

Now the Soviets will never get any "descriptive" type of recon besides a counter since it normally takes a multitude of passes to see if the unit in open terrain is either infantry or armor, lol

[HardLuckYetAgain]

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

ORIGINAL: morvael




I had to add this for the next patch to reduce chances for battle report exhaustion.

hahahahahahahaha, these Germans are sooooooooo abusing the Air War game ;-P

Now the Soviets will never get any "descriptive" type of recon besides a counter since it normally takes a multitude of passes to see if the unit in open terrain is either infantry or armor, lol

Will just have to spam all the hexes in a large area with 2 recon mission per hex to find out. Which brings us back to the same problem of having battle report exhaustion by someone doing that. We come a full 360 it looks like

[Telemecus]

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain



hahahahahahahaha, these Germans are sooooooooo abusing the Air War game ;-P

Now the Soviets will never get any "descriptive" type of recon besides a counter since it normally takes a multitude of passes to see if the unit in open terrain is either infantry or armor, lol

Will just have to spam all the hexes in a large area with 2 recon mission per hex to find out. Which brings us back to the same problem of having battle report exhaustion by someone doing that. We come a full 360 it looks like

However an Axis player could not optimise it to just the hex at a fighters maximum range. And to some extent at least there would be some cap (two times all hexes in range).

[HardLuckYetAgain]

ORIGINAL: Telemecus

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain




Now the Soviets will never get any "descriptive" type of recon besides a counter since it normally takes a multitude of passes to see if the unit in open terrain is either infantry or armor, lol

Will just have to spam all the hexes in a large area with 2 recon mission per hex to find out. Which brings us back to the same problem of having battle report exhaustion by someone doing that. We come a full 360 it looks like

However an Axis player could not optimise it to just the hex at a fighters maximum range. And to some extent at least there would be some cap (two times all hexes in range).

Improvement from the previous, yes. The final solution...... I would venture to say no from a 30,000 foot view.

[Crackaces]

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

ORIGINAL: Telemecus

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain




Will just have to spam all the hexes in a large area with 2 recon mission per hex to find out. Which brings us back to the same problem of having battle report exhaustion by someone doing that. We come a full 360 it looks like

However an Axis player could not optimise it to just the hex at a fighters maximum range. And to some extent at least there would be some cap (two times all hexes in range).

Improvement from the previous, yes. The final solution...... I would venture to say no from a 30,000 foot view.

The engineering constraint is what the maintainers are willing to code and how much the engine can be changed without lots of unintended consequences. It looks like the 2 operations hex air rule has been tested and the code works .. so now it's a simple call to this method to verify aircraft eligibility to conduct the operation.
Not only an improvement but feasible [8D]

[morvael]

Problem is we have a limit on battle reports (1000), and some people are ruining the game by exceeding that number. I was also thinking about recycling recon battle reports, but that would result in information loss. No good solution with the code as it is.

[Crackaces]

ORIGINAL: morvael

Problem is we have a limit on battle reports (1000), and some people are ruining the game by exceeding that number. I was also thinking about recycling recon battle reports, but that would result in information loss. No good solution with the code as it is.

Limiting recon spamming will indirectly solve the problem .. one does not have to directly address the problem ...
Many years ago I remember a problem with shared memory involving data (vs text [program executable in memory] which is usually read only) on a certain platform .. long story short put a delay loop in the code that enabled shared memory for data and application programmers found other means to implement the API services that were faster [until the problem could be fixed]
The gameplay encourages players to use a vulnerable part of the code .. discourage this behavior and they will not use this codepath [8D]
My point being make some penalty for recon spamming like increased interception effectiveness [nothing to do with history just gameplay] after X times or limit recon somehow like airbase attacks and you are below your 1000 battle reports threshold ..

The other option is for the community to come up with a home rule ..

[Telemecus]

I suspect however the 1000 battle reports limit has been exceeded many times and not because of large scale use of recon. It is just usually not noticed in the middle of 999 other battle reports and because it does not affect the real result which is carried over to the next turn. Go to some of the turns where you have extremely large armies later in the war. Double it for when both sides can initiate combats. Add in aggressive air power use and you are probably there. But if not there are other actions that benefit from high volume use - like soviet ground spam bombing.

This is not to say house rules or coded rules to limit recon are not good ideas. But it will need to be replicated for everything else that could be used in high numbers.

[HardLuckYetAgain]

ORIGINAL: Telemecus

I suspect however the 1000 battle reports limit has been exceeded many times and not because of large scale use of recon. It is just usually not noticed in the middle of 999 other battle reports and because it does not affect the real result which is carried over to the next turn. Go to some of the turns where you have extremely large armies later in the war. Double it for when both sides can initiate combats. Add in aggressive air power use and you are probably there. But if not there are other actions that benefit from high volume use - like soviet ground spam bombing.

This is not to say house rules or coded rules to limit recon are not good ideas. But it will need to be replicated for everything else that could be used in high numbers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZfpwfQ58Ds

[tyronec]

Looking at these solutions neither seems to work that well -

Introduce a CAP radius function:
- May be a solution if the airbases are well back from the front and you just want to cover them, but in some situations you want the CAP to cover large area of troops. So doesn't work all the time.
- Not sure how easy it is for WITE modders to pick up and implement code from another game.

Two recons per hex limit.
- Not really a solution if there are enough reconable hexes within range.
- Has side effect of limiting recon when someone wants to use it for 'legitimate' reasons.

We should be looking at a solution that punishes mass recon by getting them shot down, so making the game engine work better.
My two suggestions are:
Less fatigue for fighter interception.
At present most fatigue is for combat, not much for distance flown. Change this balance so that distance flown causes more fatigue and the actual combat less.

With either/both of these the 'defensive' player can set their fighter on higher intercept %age and shoot down more of recon for less fatigue.

[Dinglir]

Why not introduce a limit to the total amount of recons that a player can do in one turn - say 100?

If the total amount of recon missions by the player has reached that number, the amount of available aircraft is set to 0.

Downside is that some player may try to recon spam in the south only to find that he can't do any recon missions in the north.

[EwaldvonKleist]

Why not introduce a limit to the total amount of recons that a player can do in one turn - say 100?

I hardly ever stay below 100 recon flights as Axis. Sometimes a single swamp hex in an important location gets 5+ recon flights alone to make sure nothing unexpected happens.

[Twigster]

ORIGINAL: EwaldvonKleist

Why not introduce a limit to the total amount of recons that a player can do in one turn - say 100?

I hardly ever stay below 100 recon flights as Axis. Sometimes a single swamp hex in an important location gets 5+ recon flights alone to make sure nothing unexpected happens.

When things get hot and heavy, extensive recon becomes uber-important for me. I wouldn't want to see a limit but would understand if it happened.

[Telemecus]

If in addition to normal battlefield intelligence you use recon to boost interdiction, see where bombers can go unescorted, track airbases and airgroups over multiple turns, establish what is the enemy air doctrine, and the many other uses for recon, you will easily go over 100 missions. For what it is worth in the earlier example of exhausting fighters by mass recon, every single recon mission had another reason for it that some could would call legitimate.

Inevitably any limit on recon will limit any of its many uses. But you could see that as making for a different and interesting game. In as much as recon is an Axis strength it would shift the game balance to the soviet side. But if to address the issue of bugged battle reports, and if not able to just ignore them as they do not affect the wargame situation, then it seems there is no other way than restricting the number of battles in a turn.

[EwaldvonKleist]

Why not simply delete excess recon missions or at least delete all detail (recon aircraft numbers/type and interceptor number/type) from the battle list? This really is an edge case and I don't believe a player would be sad because recon mission number 1349 isn't shown in all detail. A notification that a recon mission in Hex xy took place would be completely enough.

[Telemecus]

Many want to filter out the air recon battle icons from the map so they could more easily see the air combat missions. This last suggestion, perhaps, could fulfil that wish too.

[morvael]

What if there would be no battle reports from recon missions?

[Telemecus]

As an extreme micromanager I would always want everything. But given the constraints being faced and what is being addressed this seems a reasonable option to me. At least it separates out issues of recon use from battle report bugs.