Matrix Games Forums

Wondering if it is a good way to have useful Close air support aircraft. Say a cooperation aircraft with 10x 15kg bombs, 50x 3kg bombs and so on.

ORIGINAL: Dili

Wondering if it is a good way to have useful Close air support aircraft. Say a cooperation aircraft with 10x 15kg bombs, 50x 3kg bombs and so on.

Cluster bombs have been with us as devices available for aircraft since WITP days. They also work.

The problem with cluster bombs is that the compound a code issue related to bomb devices. They work too well!

Now small bombs ARE more effective - which is why cluster bombs and bombs releasing bomblets are so widely used
today. But their effects should be limited to certain kinds of targets.

The code issue is this (quoting a programmer): "When attacking ground units, basically one device = 1 squad."
It should be modified so other factors also matter - notably accuracy. But that may have to wait for a new engine.

All bombs - including clusters - should be defined so accuracy and effect and penetration are correct - against the
day that code uses these values. For a cluster - the chance of a hit is the square root of the number of bombs
released times the accuracy of a single bomb of that type. The effect and penetration are equal to a single bomb
of that type.

Thanks.

Dili,
 
Small bombs are not more effective.  And other factors are already taken into account in the abstractions.
 
1.  Assuming everything else is the same, the difference between dropping 50x3kg bombs and dropping 10x15kg bombs is with the former it is more likely to get more hits but each hit from a 15kg bomb will on average inflict much less damage than a hit from a 3kg bomb.  Considering that a hit can cause zero damage, it is just impossible to assert that small bombs are more effective.
 
2.  You need to factor in fortification levels against the effect (and where relevant the penetration) value.
 
(a)  Airfields are not technically fortified but the larger airfields are more difficult to damage than are smaller airfields.  Using the 50x3kg, in order to maximise the potential number of hits, will make more sense if used against a small airfield just be big enough to register some damage whereas against a large airfield the hit may not translate into any damage at all.
 
(b) Against LCU the defensive bonus of terrain and forts will be more obvious.  Out in clear terrain small effect bombs are not as handicapped as they are in 3x defence terrain.
 
3.  Used against armoured ships, small bombs just bounce off and you are reliant on starting fires.  Considering the amount of system damage and fires which are necessary to make a real impact on an armoured ship, no amount of square roots of bombs released will make up for the few aircraft that will drop their payloads.
 
 
As to the suggestion that:
 
"All bombs - including clusters - should be defined so accuracy and effect and penetration are correct"
 
begs the question, what value would that be el Cid as accuracy, effect and penetration in AE represent several different concepts within each value and are used differently in each algorithm.
 
Sure, if one wants to over simplify, basically 1 device could be seen as one squad but I bet the unnamed programmer did not say that in the context of this thread.  One should never rely on unnamed sources and certainly not "quotes" out of context.  Very difficult to sasses the credibility otherwise.
 
Alfred

Thanks Alfred, my idea was just regarding close support/cooperation aircraft to have at least some modicum of anti LCU capabilities. It is usual to have a squadron of 27 aircraft each with 2x50kg bombs to not even make a casuality in an LCU in mountainous terrain. Being planes that can go to places and fly in a way that a level bomber can't and have loiter capability to spot enemy patrols should be expected better results than what occurs. If witp was being developed i would defend that this planes should be less affected by terrain and vegetation. Instead level bombers have always better results regardless.

Maybe a trick is to make all cooperation aircraft dive bombers too.


PS: i believe you mean each hit from 3kg inflict less damage than 15kg.
"1. Assuming everything else is the same, the difference between dropping 50x3kg bombs and dropping 10x15kg bombs is with the former it is more likely to get more hits but each hit from a 15kg bomb will on average inflict much less damage than a hit from a 3kg bomb. Considering that a hit can cause zero damage, it is just impossible to assert that small bombs are more effective."

ORIGINAL: Dili

.. PS: i believe you mean each hit from 3kg inflict less damage than 15kg...

No, not what I meant.[:)]

1. A hit may do no damage at all. Think of it in terms of sub launched torpedoes where the combat animation records a hit but no explosion etc. IOW a dud hit. Same thing applies to aerial bombs, its just we are not shown a similar message such as "bomb embedded in sand, no detonation".

2. Your 3kg bomb will have a smaller "eff" value than the 15kg bomb. The damage inflicted is a random based on the "eff" value of the bomb. The 3kg damage die roll may be higher than the die roll for the 15kg in any specific occasion.

On average, due to probabilities, each hit from the smaller bomb will inflict less damage but not if you get a favourable die roll.

It isn't the size of the plane which is affected by the terrain/vegetation; it is the "eff" value which is affected for the reasons I gave in the earlier post. Your level bombers get better results because they are dropping bigger bombs, not because they are level bombers.

Same factors apply to designating the observation aircraft as a dive bombers. A dive bomber tends to get more hits because the load is released at a low attitude, where it also meets "small arms" fire.

You should look at aircraft such as the Lysander or Wirraway in the official scenarios to get a feeling for how the devs handled the same issue. The Wapiti is probably the closest to your intent. They are all designated as Light Bombers, some with cameras. their bomb ordnance tend to be bigger than what you have in mind.

Alfred

I didn't say it was the aircraft size, it is obvious that is the fact that it is because they have bigger bombs, that is why i was trying to bypass bomb weight precisely with more hit probabilities, more die rolls.
I mean cooperation aircraft had more probabilities of detecting enemy units specially if the troop concentration isn't heavy and also attack them.

Overall from what you say i think the dive bombing tag is probably another good complementary solution, these cooperation aircraft to make damage had usually to bomb from low altitude ~1000m make a small dive and also had to be at that altitude to be able to detect enemy patrols, small parties, an artillery position etc.