Page 2 of 2
Re: Airfield & Port Damage
Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2024 6:54 am
by Yaab
Allies have engineer units (AVG Ground Echelon in Burma, PAF Aviation on Luzon) that consist solely of aviation support devices. It seems their mere presence at a base should be an equivalent of 5 engineer squads if this eng bonus is real.
Re: Airfield & Port Damage
Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2024 8:57 am
by Chris21wen
Yaab wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 6:54 am
Allies have engineer units (AVG Ground Echelon in Burma, PAF Aviation on Luzon) that consist solely of aviation support devices. It seems their mere presence at a base should be an equivalent of 5 engineer squads if this eng bonus is real.
Not sure what is meant by eng bonus? It's the number of engineer sqds/devices that matter. If a unit has none it will not construct anything in a base. Forts can be constructed in the field by any unit.
Since posting last I've realised that no testing is needed other than the mode thing I've just noticed. The info needed is all available in tracker.
The base tab lists port, AF and fort sizes as well as any expansion towards the next level. It also shows the number of eng sqd available at the base (but not their mode). If picka bas then use the Basic History button it will show construction and expansion for all three. It becomes obvious that the more eng sqds there are the fast the construction occurs.
For instance in by current game using bases with level 3 forts the appox time taken to increase construction by 10% is:
12 sqd - 35 days
28 sqd - 18 days
48 sqd - 13 days
73 sqd - 7 days
All the bases had they engs set to combat mode, with nothing moving in of out and sufficient supply.
I have another base with 180 sqds but they were resting so nothing built. I've now set them to combat mode.
Re: Airfield & Port Damage
Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2024 9:04 am
by Yaab
I guess this eng bonus must be hidden, since base screen "Engineers" value is simply a number of all engineer squads (active+disabled) present at a base.
To test this eng bons, you would have to compare building times between an eng unit with 0 engineer devices and an eng unit with 5 engineer devices. If the eng bonus is real, the first unit digs as having 5 eng squads, and the second unit digs as having 10 eng squads.
Re: Airfield & Port Damage
Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2024 9:57 am
by Chris21wen
Yaab wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 9:04 am
I guess this eng bonus must be hidden, since base screen "Engineers" value is simply a number of all engineer squads (active+disabled) present at a base.
To test this eng bons, you would have to compare building times between an eng unit with 0 engineer devices and an eng unit with 5 engineer devices. If the eng bonus is real, the first unit digs as having 5 eng squads, and the second unit digs as having 10 eng squads.
Sorry the bonus is wrong it does not exist and I don't think it ever did. I think the person who posted originally was 'confused'. Units without eng sqds will not construct anything. I have numerous bases with units but without eng sqds and they do not constuct anything.
Re: Airfield & Port Damage
Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2024 10:09 am
by Platoonist
Chris21wen wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 9:57 am
I think the person who posted originally was 'confused'.
The original post was made back in WitP/AE antiquity before the first patch had even been released. Back then there were a lot of opinions flying about but not a lot of practical experience with the game which certainly warrants a good dose of skepticism.
Re: Airfield & Port Damage
Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2024 12:05 pm
by Sardaukar
One of my pet peeves is that units without engineers cannot construct forts in base...but they can when outside base.
I mean, spade is a spade and most soldiers can use it...
Re: Airfield & Port Damage
Posted: Wed Jul 10, 2024 6:03 am
by Chris21wen
Sardaukar wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 12:05 pm
One of my pet peeves is that units without engineers cannot construct forts in base...but they can when outside base.
I mean, spade is a spade and most soldiers can use it...
I agree. If they can constuct to level 3 outside why not at base??
Re: Airfield & Port Damage
Posted: Wed Jul 10, 2024 9:22 am
by LargeSlowTarget
At a base, the troops may have other priorities? Base means PX means beer (or Sake, depending which side) - coincidence?^^
But I agree, the option to stop repairing doomed airfields and ports and concentrating on digging forts instead would be welcome.
Re: Airfield & Port Damage
Posted: Wed Jul 10, 2024 12:29 pm
by BBfanboy
LargeSlowTarget wrote: Wed Jul 10, 2024 9:22 am
At a base, the troops may have other priorities? Base means PX means beer (or Sake, depending which side) - coincidence?^^
But I agree, the option to stop repairing doomed airfields and ports and concentrating on digging forts instead would be welcome.
Not just forts. Many of the small islands in the Pacific have a poor Port SPS and it is difficult to unload supply quickly or to unload artillery pieces, tanks, engineer vehicles and radars - even amphibiously. I often need to repair or boost the port size before building the AF further. Can't do it if the AF is damaged. E.G. - having a secret Patrol base with AVP/AVD but needing the supply and engineer points to build the base further.
Re: Airfield & Port Damage
Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2024 7:50 am
by Chris21wen
Having to repair existing port and AF facilities first is a tactic the attacker can exploit. Keep the base damaged and no fort building.
Not saying it's right but perhaps if they changed the rules so you could repair forts as and when the whole concept of attacking a base would have to change?
Re: Airfield & Port Damage
Posted: Mon Jul 15, 2024 12:56 pm
by Chris21wen
Chris21wen wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 8:57 am
Yaab wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2024 6:54 am
Allies have engineer units (AVG Ground Echelon in Burma, PAF Aviation on Luzon) that consist solely of aviation support devices. It seems their mere presence at a base should be an equivalent of 5 engineer squads if this eng bonus is real.
Not sure what is meant by eng bonus? It's the number of engineer sqds/devices that matter. If a unit has none it will not construct anything in a base. Forts can be constructed in the field by any unit.
Since posting last I've realised that no testing is needed other than the mode thing I've just noticed. The info needed is all available in tracker.
The base tab lists port, AF and fort sizes as well as any expansion towards the next level. It also shows the number of eng sqd available at the base (but not their mode). If picka bas then use the Basic History button it will show construction and expansion for all three. It becomes obvious that the more eng sqds there are the fast the construction occurs.
For instance in by current game using bases with level 3 forts the appox time taken to increase construction by 10% is:
12 sqd - 35 days
28 sqd - 18 days
48 sqd - 13 days
73 sqd - 7 days
All the bases had they engs set to combat mode, with nothing moving in of out and sufficient supply.
I have another base with 180 sqds but they were resting so nothing built. I've now set them to combat mode.
OK 180 sqds take approx 4 days to expand by 10%.
I can also confirm that eng only construct when in combat mode. There is a small glitch. If the eng start in stat mode and switch them to combat mode they immediately start to construct. Unpacking plays no part here. Conversely, change from combat to stat mode immediately stops constucting.
Re: Airfield & Port Damage
Posted: Thu Jul 25, 2024 4:31 pm
by Bella
If you bomb a ground unit, is there supply loss even if none is reported?
It seems logical that if a bombing raid was effective enough to cause casualties, there would be associated materiel loss, also.
Re: Airfield & Port Damage
Posted: Thu Jul 25, 2024 7:15 pm
by RangerJoe
Bella wrote: Thu Jul 25, 2024 4:31 pm
If you bomb a ground unit, is there supply loss even if none is reported?
It seems logical that if a bombing raid was effective enough to cause casualties, there would be associated materiel loss, also.
You asked this here and then started another thread to ask the same question.