Page 1 of 2
Air HQ Question
Posted: Tue May 18, 2010 10:53 am
by hbrsvl
Hi- Can a US Air HQ support Aussie,Brits, Dutch?
I want to move a US Air HQ into Port Moresby. Will it supply torps to RAAF?
Japanese BBs are killing me, US subs can't hit anything larger than a DD(except merchants) and I think if I get some Beauforts with torps into PM, I can at least slow them down. This is 5/42 and a squadron has just converted to TBFs.
Thanks, Hugh Browne
RE: Air HQ Question
Posted: Tue May 18, 2010 10:59 am
by LoBaron
Yes this should work.
RE: Air HQ Question
Posted: Tue May 18, 2010 11:07 am
by topeverest
Command range is far more important than what command it is attached to. This is a pretty handy trick to remember.
RE: Air HQ Question
Posted: Tue May 18, 2010 6:27 pm
by hbrsvl
topeverest- Thanks. But, where do I find "command range" for a HQ? I looked in the manual under HQs, but got only a referece to "range", no numbers.
Also, I don't think command range extendes over water for LCUs.
WITP had a command range for a Corps HQ of 1, an Army 5, afaik.
A reference would be helpful. Again, thanks. HB
RE: Air HQ Question
Posted: Tue May 18, 2010 6:40 pm
by topeverest
Command range of an HQ is listed on the unit details screen on line 5 in the upper left hand corner in small white print.
It is titled Command Radius
RE: Air HQ Question
Posted: Tue May 18, 2010 7:56 pm
by hbrsvl
Andy M-Got it. Thanks.HB
RE: Air HQ Question
Posted: Tue May 18, 2010 9:40 pm
by John Lansford
One thing about command range; if it says the range is 5, the hex the HQ is in counts as the first hex. So, a range of 5 is only 4 hexes out from the initial hex, and the ability of the HQ to support other bases is halved with each hex outside the first one. An HQ with support of 200 and range of 5, for example, provides 100 support to a base one hex away, 50 to one 2 hexes away, 25 and then 12 on the furthest hex it can support.
RE: Air HQ Question
Posted: Wed May 19, 2010 12:08 am
by Oldguard1970
John,
Are you sure about the command range counting rule? I seem to recall reading that AE used a "normal" counting rule for range. The hex the HQ is in is "zero" and the next is "one".
I need to get this one right as I have been operating on the assumption that the hq's hex is "zero".
RE: Air HQ Question
Posted: Wed May 19, 2010 12:11 am
by USSAmerica
WitP always counted the hex the HQ was located in as "hex 1." Don't think it's different for AE....
RE: Air HQ Question
Posted: Wed May 19, 2010 1:33 am
by Nunya D.
ORIGINAL: USS America
WitP always counted the hex the HQ was located in as "hex 1." Don't think it's different for AE....
This came up about 6 months ago and BigJ62 said that the HQ hex was "0" and it was like that in WITP also....even though some said it wasn't.
Edit: Here is what was said and the thread (page 1...2/3rds down):
ORIGINAL: BigJ62
Both Witp and AE both regard HQ Radius as literal hex range meaning if radius says 1 hex it really means 1 hex distance.
There can be additional bonus for Corps HQs in same hex. The game will pick the first HQ that satisfies the range and HQ type requirement and if you fail any check then you do not get any bonuses so having a million HQs in range will not help you any more than having 1 very good corps and 1 very good command HQ and if lucky depending on randoms can boost av quite significantly for each unit checked.
tm.asp?m=2146627&mpage=1&key=Command%2CRadius�
RE: Air HQ Question
Posted: Wed May 19, 2010 10:20 am
by USSAmerica
I stand corrected. Thanks for pointing that out, Nunya. [:)]
RE: Air HQ Question
Posted: Wed May 19, 2010 11:53 am
by Q-Ball
This creates an important strategy change from WITP.
If you are the Empire, look for large potential, adjacent bases to create a "cluster" of dangerous air platforms. 1 Base can be easily shut down by 4E, but 3....alot tougher. By having a "cluster" you can launch Torp bombers from, you can contest landings easier. The larger AIR HQs give you the flexibility to form a Cluster with airfields over a much larger distance.
Good examples of 1-hex clusters: Lae and Nadzab; or, Koepang and Roti, the island next door. Normally there would not be a point to developing Roti, but with this HQ change, I think there is.
The only downside is that the Allies can take a developed airbase, but it's not like they can't build them in a couple weeks anyway (and, that is the beauty of Nadzab; can't be taken)
There are so many more bases now than WITP, it's harder to rely on Infantry to defend the perimeter. You have to be smarter on how you position air assets.
RE: Air HQ Question
Posted: Thu May 20, 2010 9:23 am
by topeverest
Base cluster defense works well on both sides.
RE: Air HQ Question
Posted: Thu May 20, 2010 12:43 pm
by John Lansford
Q-ball,
The AI uses that 'cluster' defense very effectively in my CG in the Marshalls. I've taken Miri and the bases south of there, but the AI keeps shifting the Betty squadrons from Kwajalein to Roi-Namur and several others, all just big enough to handle 2E bombers from. The only tactic I've got against this is to send heavily defended CV TF's through the area with all the bombers set to airfield attack but no specific target. Knowing where the Bettys are is like playing a shell game...
RE: Air HQ Question
Posted: Thu May 20, 2010 10:15 pm
by hbrsvl
John-I have a further question on "command range". In AE(or WITP), does "command range" extend over water?
An example of my question for AE-let's say I have AirSoPac at Lunga. At Tulagi assume I have a class 3 field and squadrons operating from there. Does the Lunga HQ help, affect,whatever the Tulagi units? (I'm assuming the Lunga HQ has a command radius of 5.)
Thanks, Hugh Browne
RE: Air HQ Question
Posted: Thu May 20, 2010 10:36 pm
by USSAmerica
Hugh, yes, they do extend over water. [:)]
RE: Air HQ Question
Posted: Fri May 21, 2010 7:16 pm
by crsutton
ORIGINAL: Q-Ball
This creates an important strategy change from WITP.
If you are the Empire, look for large potential, adjacent bases to create a "cluster" of dangerous air platforms. 1 Base can be easily shut down by 4E, but 3....alot tougher. By having a "cluster" you can launch Torp bombers from, you can contest landings easier. The larger AIR HQs give you the flexibility to form a Cluster with airfields over a much larger distance.
Good examples of 1-hex clusters: Lae and Nadzab; or, Koepang and Roti, the island next door. Normally there would not be a point to developing Roti, but with this HQ change, I think there is.
The only downside is that the Allies can take a developed airbase, but it's not like they can't build them in a couple weeks anyway (and, that is the beauty of Nadzab; can't be taken)
There are so many more bases now than WITP, it's harder to rely on Infantry to defend the perimeter. You have to be smarter on how you position air assets.
But you do still need AV support for each base don't you. That is, the HQ give support and torpedo capability to bases within its range but not AV support?
RE: Air HQ Question
Posted: Fri May 21, 2010 8:23 pm
by CapAndGown
ORIGINAL: crsutton
ORIGINAL: Q-Ball
This creates an important strategy change from WITP.
If you are the Empire, look for large potential, adjacent bases to create a "cluster" of dangerous air platforms. 1 Base can be easily shut down by 4E, but 3....alot tougher. By having a "cluster" you can launch Torp bombers from, you can contest landings easier. The larger AIR HQs give you the flexibility to form a Cluster with airfields over a much larger distance.
Good examples of 1-hex clusters: Lae and Nadzab; or, Koepang and Roti, the island next door. Normally there would not be a point to developing Roti, but with this HQ change, I think there is.
The only downside is that the Allies can take a developed airbase, but it's not like they can't build them in a couple weeks anyway (and, that is the beauty of Nadzab; can't be taken)
There are so many more bases now than WITP, it's harder to rely on Infantry to defend the perimeter. You have to be smarter on how you position air assets.
But you do still need AV support for each base don't you. That is, the HQ give support and torpedo capability to bases within its range but not AV support?
I just saw a plane on a base next to an HQ go inactive due to lack of AV support. So these statements (made upthread, not by Q-Ball) about an Air HQ providing aviation support to adjacent hexes is not true.
RE: Air HQ Question
Posted: Fri May 21, 2010 8:26 pm
by Q-Ball
Right, HQ only provides TORPEDO support to distant bases, not AV support.
If it provided AV support, now THAT would be powerful.
RE: Air HQ Question
Posted: Fri May 21, 2010 8:29 pm
by CapAndGown
ORIGINAL: Q-Ball
Right, HQ only provides TORPEDO support to distant bases, not AV support.
If it provided AV support, now THAT would be powerful.
Coordination support too.
EDIT: I mean administrative support: I.E. number of groups at a base.