Advancements

[ncc1701e]

ORIGINAL: Uxbridge

"In the Deployment window, you mean?"

Yes, that was the thought, if it is really necessary. I would prefer that the unit must be out of enemy ZoC; in an 7-9 supply hex; close or next to an HQ, and will suffer loss of entire conversion turn. Even if the actual conversion is done in a fortnight, the total procedure takes much longer. Think that would suffice.

I see. Major change indeed, let's see what Alvaro will propose.

ORIGINAL: Uxbridge

Regarding fighter-bomber, I never build them, but they're not totally useless. If low on oil they pay only one point for operations, for example. And if you're low on assetts in a region, this unit can both attack ground targets and defend against incoming bombers. Maybe they should have a slightly better range (here I see Bf 110's and Mosquitos). If there's anything that would be nice, I would give them better ability to cause interdiction on enemy units. But that is probably beyond the present game engine.

If we consider the P-47 in the fighter-bombers category, I also thought to give them a better range. Like this, there is a better dilemma between interceptors, escort fighters and fighter-bombers.

I was thinking of something like this (the yellow cells are the ones changed):

[Tejszd]

I do not buy them because they are too much of a compromise. But I do like the point that Uxbridge made that in areas where you can only have 1 plane that they can do all roles just not well.... if they could be improved somewhere that could help make them get purchased/used....

[Harrybanana]

ORIGINAL: Alvaro Sousa

Because I am thinking of what to do that's why.

Thank you Alvaro. My 2 cents is that you will need to increase the FBs Tactical rating if you want to make it worth it for anyone to use them. Fighters have a base Tactical of 2, so even with the +2 that the 1944 and 1945 FBs get, that still only gives them a 4 Tactical strength. This means they are only half as good at TAC as a 1939 ground attack group (though admittedly they have better defense and air combat ratings). I also personally think that their aircombat should be the same as an escorts.

[Uxbridge]

Increasing range and tac value a bit would certainly make them more interesting.

[ncc1701e]

ORIGINAL: Harrybanana

I also personally think that their aircombat should be the same as an escorts.

Not sure about this. The whole question is which real WW2 plane should we compare them to?

[ncc1701e]

ORIGINAL: Uxbridge

Increasing range and tac value a bit would certainly make them more interesting.

New version, I don't want to create a Death Star either. [:D]

[LiquidSky]

In my ongoing game as the allies, I am nearing the end of 1942.

I am trying an experiment. The British, I kept their fighters as Interceptors. So I disbanded their escort fighter and replaced it with an interceptor. I also built an extra interceptor for the Canadians. They are being used near invasions sites now.

The Americans, I am building Escort fighters. Some of them have arrived in theatre, and are mostly just sitting and (hopefully) protecting fleet elements at sea from Axis bombers.

The Russians, I disbanded their entire airforce and rebuilt 6 Fighter-Bombers and 6 Single Engine Ground Support.

Wherever their was a German fighter on the front, I would avoid it with the Russian air. There was always targets to bomb and fight against *somewhere* along the front....and indeed, I would credit retaking Moscow October 1941 with those 12 planes flying as much as possible against Axis armour that was too far ahead of his air. But overall, I would say the FB's were not very good bombers.

My FB tech is now 1943 and when rested, in good weather, they show a pretty good ground attack value...but it is snowing, and I am bombing but they seem to be about as good as early German Tactical bombers were. The tech is almost 1944, and should be by the time summer '43 rolls around, and I am hoping that my investment then pays off.

[Harrybanana]

ORIGINAL: LiquidSky



In my ongoing game as the allies, I am nearing the end of 1942.

I am trying an experiment. The British, I kept their fighters as Interceptors. So I disbanded their escort fighter and replaced it with an interceptor. I also built an extra interceptor for the Canadians. They are being used near invasions sites now.

The Americans, I am building Escort fighters. Some of them have arrived in theatre, and are mostly just sitting and (hopefully) protecting fleet elements at sea from Axis bombers.

The Russians, I disbanded their entire airforce and rebuilt 6 Fighter-Bombers and 6 Single Engine Ground Support.

Wherever their was a German fighter on the front, I would avoid it with the Russian air. There was always targets to bomb and fight against *somewhere* along the front....and indeed, I would credit retaking Moscow October 1941 with those 12 planes flying as much as possible against Axis armour that was too far ahead of his air. But overall, I would say the FB's were not very good bombers.

My FB tech is now 1943 and when rested, in good weather, they show a pretty good ground attack value...but it is snowing, and I am bombing but they seem to be about as good as early German Tactical bombers were. The tech is almost 1944, and should be by the time summer '43 rolls around, and I am hoping that my investment then pays off.

If you are using the FBs primarily (and perhaps even solely) as bombers and avoiding enemy fighters, I believe you would have got more bang for your buck by purchasing 12 ground attack air groups (rather than 6 and 6). They cost the same and the same and have much better TAC bombing numbers.

[Harrybanana]

Oops, forget it I figured it out.

[ncc1701e]

Might be cool to have at least these conversions:

Infantry:
Assault <--> Anti Tank

When going on offense or defense...


Armor / Mechanized:
Breakthrough <--> Heavy Armor

When going from Pz II to Panther...


Strategic Bombers:
Detection & Electronics <--> Strategic Bombing

When Battle of Atlantic is done and you can concentrate on factories...

[Dalwin]

ORIGINAL: ncc1701e

Might be cool to have at least these conversions:

Infantry:
Assault <--> Anti Tank

When going on offense or defense...


Armor / Mechanized:
Breakthrough <--> Heavy Armor

When going from Pz II to Panther...


Strategic Bombers:
Detection & Electronics <--> Strategic Bombing

When Battle of Atlantic is done and you can concentrate on factories...

historically it was also common to see an experienced infantry unit get converted to motorized or panzer grenadier, or to see Mot or PzG converted to panzer. It was less common to see new panzer formations built from scratch with green troops.

Converting from assault infantry to AT should be as simple as swapping out a few field howitzers for a battalion or two of AT guns (or tank destroyers). Very little retraining should even be involved. The cost should be way less than half the cost of the unit and the time involved much less than that to build a new unit from scratch.

The current system is pretty far off the mark when compared to the things done historically.

[AlvaroSousa]

I'll take it into consideration.

[Harrybanana]

ORIGINAL: ncc1701e

Might be cool to have at least these conversions:

Infantry:
Assault <--> Anti Tank

When going on offense or defense...


Armor / Mechanized:
Breakthrough <--> Heavy Armor

When going from Pz II to Panther...


Strategic Bombers:
Detection & Electronics <--> Strategic Bombing

When Battle of Atlantic is done and you can concentrate on factories...

I would agree with the first two, but not so sure about the last. The aircraft used for anti-sub (ie detection and electronics) were often different than those used for strategic bombing. As far as the US was concerned they were, from I think 43 on, controlled by the Navy.

My own wish list:

1. Give FBs much greater TAC strength,
2. Add another OP point to Breakthrough in 42 (so that they will have 11 OPs). This might almost make it worth it to research rather than Heavy armour.

[baloo7777]

My own wish list:

1. Give FBs much greater TAC strength,
2. Add another OP point to Breakthrough in 42 (so that they will have 11 OPs). This might almost make it worth it to research rather than Heavy armour.

I would also like to see the Heavy Armor OP's reduced to 7 or 8. The German and British heavy's were notoriously slow and susceptible to bogging and the German's to increased breakdown. Russian heavy armor was also subject to increased breakdown and American really only came at the tail end of the war. French/Italian have no effect on the war for obvious reasons.

[ncc1701e]

ORIGINAL: ncc1701e

ORIGINAL: Uxbridge

Increasing range and tac value a bit would certainly make them more interesting.

New version, I don't want to create a Death Star either. [:D]

For all, here is the new Fighter Bomber tech in 1.00.08U3 patch. [:)]

[kennonlightfoot]

What is the difference for air units between "Anti-Air" and "Air Combat" parameters?

[AlvaroSousa]

Anti-air are AA guns when bombed
Air combat is fighting another aircraft in the air like in interception or escorting.

[ncc1701e]

I am experimenting something with the Germans versus AI.

Starting 1939, I am searching Interceptors to reach 1941 level.
Then, I will switch full speed to Fighter Bombers to reach 1942 level.

And I will convert some of my Interceptors to Fighter Bombers. I did this already for the single interceptor own by the Italian.

Will see how it goes...

[kennonlightfoot]

ORIGINAL: Alvaro Sousa

Anti-air are AA guns when bombed
Air combat is fighting another aircraft in the air like in interception or escorting.

I can see how the AA value would apply to targets that are on the ground/ocean like combat units and ships.

What confused me is that planes are given Anti-Air factors. While this would make sense for bombers like Strategic Bombers who see there Combat Air go up from 6 to 8 as skill levels rise and there Anti-Air goes up from 2 to 4, what does it mean for an Air Superiority Interceptor when its Air Combat rises from 8 to 12 and its Anti-Air rises from 2 to 4?

What types of combat with Interceptors would use the Air Combat versus Anti-Air factors? Or does it use both?

[AlvaroSousa]

So say I bomb your enemy land unit and you intercept. That interceptor will use A2A. The target land unit will use its AA

But if I bomb the interceptors airfield it will fight A2A then use its AA before you bomb.

That is how it works. The Air counter is basically a setup airfield with defenses. The defenses only work if that air fiend is targeted