AE Air Issues and Air OOB Issues [OUTDATED]

[Sardaukar]

Damage trick was in WitP, where you could simulate increase in on-map factory production by having the factories start as damaged. Is it possible for production/replacement to have different values based on month/year etc. ?

[m10bob]

ORIGINAL: DivePac88

ORIGINAL: Cathartes

All P-40 variants and nation air forces have their separate production queue.  You will be pressed for P-40Es early on as Allies, but production and variants pick up nicely in the third quarter of '42.

Thank you Cathartes sounds great exactly what I was hoping for. [:)]

According to Eric Bergerud, it would be normal to be shy of P 40's early on, as the Australians so tired of the constant promise of their coming that they began calling the Tomahawk the "Tomorrowhawk".
To confound matters, a whole load of them went to the bottom with the sinking of the Langley..

[Cathartes]

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

Damage trick was in WitP, where you could simulate increase in on-map factory production by having the factories start as damaged. Is it possible for production/replacement to have different values based on month/year etc. ?

I'm not familiar with this one honestly. I didn't think you could change Allied production in stock WITP.

In the editor you can set/modify production start and end times for each variant, in essence making your own mod, but to my knowledge you can't set it to increase for a few months and then decrease. TimTom can better elaborate if he chooses.

[Sardaukar]

ORIGINAL: Cathartes

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

Damage trick was in WitP, where you could simulate increase in on-map factory production by having the factories start as damaged. Is it possible for production/replacement to have different values based on month/year etc. ?

I'm not familiar with this one honestly. I didn't think you could change Allied production in stock WITP.

In the editor you can set/modify production start and end times for each variant, in essence making your own mod, but to my knowledge you can't set it to increase for a few months and then decrease. TimTom can better elaborate if he chooses.

It was used in CHS to simulate CONUS factory input increase, I don't think could be used for airplane factories though. So, if we don't have ability to modify Allied production by month, we probably can modify it by following way:

1. P-40E (1) model production from 12/41 to 3/42, ends 3/42
2. P-40E (2) model production starts 4/42 modified value, ends 8/42.
3. P-40E (3) model production, starts 9/42 modified value. ends... etc.


It's bit of work, but can circumvent the limitation by using different name for same model, if production number need adjustment.

[Flying Tiger]

It was used in CHS to simulate CONUS factory input increase, I don't think could be used for airplane factories though. So, if we don't have ability to modify Allied production by month, we probably can modify it by following way:

1. P-40E (1) model production from 12/41 to 3/42, ends 3/42
2. P-40E (2) model production starts 4/42 modified value, ends 8/42.
3. P-40E (3) model production, starts 9/42 modified value. ends... etc.


It's bit of work, but can circumvent the limitation by using different name for same model, if production number need adjustment.

this works, but is far from ideal. Apart from chewing through AC slots (which may not be such a problem in AE) it also still requires the player to upgrade units to the same model of P40 (or whatever AC type is being dealt with). It is just a bit 'messy'. Still, a do-able workaround if no other option is available.

[Sardaukar]

Yep. it is definitely not ideal. I'd prefer ability to input monthly figures. Or add on-map factories by date.

[Dili]

Cathartes, Sardaukar explained better what i wanted to say, a way to increase output.

Yep. it is definitely not ideal. I'd prefer ability to input monthly figures. Or add on-map factories by date.

Adding factories would be good enough. For example here tm.asp?m=1991501&mpage=3# Historiker shows a way to split oil prodution in one base. If we could give a date to start production we could simulate a factory getting bigger.

[Dili]

Cheat question: can i put a squadron training in middle of China in Naval attack? Or it needs Sea like it should?

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: Dili

Cheat question: can i put a squadron training in middle of China in Naval attack? Or it needs Sea like it should?

Sure but they may get caught up in a sweep by the AVG.

[Dili]

[:)] Okay thanks.

[doc smith]

I apologize if this was answered earlier - 40+ pages are too intimidating a hurdle to getting an answer.

I've read enthusiastically the AARs of the game. One thing that has me puzzled, though, concerns weather and air strikes. I've seen air strikes against land or ship targets that take place during severe storms or similar hazardous weather. Is there no provision for aircraft to abort when the target hex is inhospitable due to weather?

I would think dive bombing a ship during severe storms problemmatical for even the most experienced pilots and likely to raise operational losses for groups making such attacks.

[Sardaukar]

ORIGINAL: doc smith

I apologize if this was answered earlier - 40+ pages are too intimidating a hurdle to getting an answer.

I've read enthusiastically the AARs of the game. One thing that has me puzzled, though, concerns weather and air strikes. I've seen air strikes against land or ship targets that take place during severe storms or similar hazardous weather. Is there no provision for aircraft to abort when the target hex is inhospitable due to weather?

I would think dive bombing a ship during severe storms problemmatical for even the most experienced pilots and likely to raise operational losses for groups making such attacks.

It was answered by Terminus in other thread. If I recall right, air strikes do abort due to weather and you see it in combat text and there is graphic for it in hex. I think he also said that bad weather will also adversely effect on accuracy of those strikes that do not abort too.

[Dili]

An escort will fail if the fighter is slower than the bomber or instead the bomber drops its speed?

[bigbaba]

now if your fighters are slower then your bombers, you should escort them instead of the bombers.[:D]

i realy would like to know more about pilots training for the japs. as i knew, the function of sending your crack pilots back to home to train the replacement pilots (faster) was not activated some weeks ago.

i would like to know if this is inside the game yet or not?

[Sardaukar]

BTW, did aircraft rockets make it into AE?

[vettim89]

I know AE just went Gold. I know we have not even seen the game yet. I know it will take a lot of playing by non-AE team members to iron out some of the wrinkles.

But...................

Would you guys look at the AB stacking restrictions for the first patch? I think the restrictions on very large AB's is too much. The Allies especially get shafted because of the whole 4E thing. I know it would be simplest to just soften up the restrictions a but but I would really like to see is a step wise increase in AB stacking. By that I mean that once an AB gets to a certain level it represents significant investment by the owning side to expand beyond a crude forward base.

In RL, PM had seven fields, Guam had four major fields by the end of 1944 (same for Tinian and Saipan), Oahu had seven at the start of the war. Perhaps after say level 6, we could see a big jump in the stacking allotment? I know it would be hard but you could have a concomitment spike in the amount of engineer work need to go beyond level 5 AB. You already have that sort of thing in for forts. Just transport the code over to AB's.

Like I said, hate to grip before the game comes out, but this may be the only thing that really bugs me about AE that I have heard so far.

[stuman]

ORIGINAL: vettim89

I know AE just went Gold. I know we have not even seen the game yet. I know it will take a lot of playing by non-AE team members to iron out some of the wrinkles.

But...................

Would you guys look at the AB stacking restrictions for the first patch? I think the restrictions on very large AB's is too much. The Allies especially get shafted because of the whole 4E thing. I know it would be simplest to just soften up the restrictions a but but I would really like to see is a step wise increase in AB stacking. By that I mean that once an AB gets to a certain level it represents significant investment by the owning side to expand beyond a crude forward base.

In RL, PM had seven fields, Guam had four major fields by the end of 1944 (same for Tinian and Saipan), Oahu had seven at the start of the war. Perhaps after say level 6, we could see a big jump in the stacking allotment? I know it would be hard but you could have a concomitment spike in the amount of engineer work need to go beyond level 5 AB. You already have that sort of thing in for forts. Just transport the code over to AB's.

Like I said, hate to grip before the game comes out, but this may be the only thing that really bugs me about AE that I have heard so far.

Well, if the allies get shafted, it's ok with me. Until I start playing the Allies of course [;)]

[gvierstra]

When I'm bearing down for a CV vs. CV conflict I am trying to optimize my alt. settings for each aircraft type. I have played around with this by saving and replaying CV battles. I think things went best when I put the TB's groups at 3k and 5k, the DB groups at 10k, 15k and 20k and the escorts at 10k, 15k and 20k. I know that performance varies by plane and alt. but could you suggest a good alt. combo? Also, do TB's always attack at 500ft even if their set alt. was say 10 or 20k on the ride to the target.

Thanks for the advice...

[Splinterhead]

I'm pretty sure the P-36 shouldn't be amphibious

[jwilkerson]

ORIGINAL: vierstra

When I'm bearing down for a CV vs. CV conflict I am trying to optimize my alt. settings for each aircraft type. I have played around with this by saving and replaying CV battles. I think things went best when I put the TB's groups at 3k and 5k, the DB groups at 10k, 15k and 20k and the escorts at 10k, 15k and 20k. I know that performance varies by plane and alt. but could you suggest a good alt. combo? Also, do TB's always attack at 500ft even if their set alt. was say 10 or 20k on the ride to the target.

Thanks for the advice...

Many aircraft have a different "ordnance release" altitude than their "approach" altitude. Torpedo bombers can approach from almost any altitude but will release at very low altitudes. Similarly, dive bombers may approach at medium altitudes but will release at low altitudes.

Optimal altitude also depends on whether you are trying to perform multiple simultaneous missions. For instance if a TBF carrier unit is both flying ASW and Naval Strike then 5000 Feet might be good - but this will mean that the TBFs will rarely join up with the SBDs if the SBDs are flying naval search and naval strike at 15,000 feet.

So optimal altitude is a combination of optimal aircraft performance altitude and optimal mission altitudes.