airfield attacks

[wolflars]

how is an airfield attack different from targeting the aircraft that occupy it?
Also, what data should I be looking at when determining which of my aircraft I should assign to 'interdiction' as opposed to 'combat support'?
thanks in advance

[larryfulkerson]

ORIGINAL: wolflars
how is an airfield attack different from targeting the aircraft that occupy it?

As far as I know an airfield attack DOES attack the aircraft on the field.

ORIGINAL: wolflars
Also, what data should I be looking at when determining which of my aircraft I should assign to 'interdiction' as opposed to 'combat support'?
thanks in advance

It's my impression that the characteristics that you would use ( range, firepower in attacking ground equip. etc. ) are the same for both missions.

[Erik2]

I like to use fighterbombers like Me-110 for interdiction, the rationale being that the interdicting planes are roaming the battlefield without escorts. But I don't know if it means anything gamewise.

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: Erik Nygaard

I like to use fighterbombers like Me-110 for interdiction, the rationale being that the interdicting planes are roaming the battlefield without escorts. But I don't know if it means anything gamewise.

Typically I do the reverse- since fighter bombers etc. are particularly effective in combat support roles, especially against armour.

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: wolflars

how is an airfield attack different from targeting the aircraft that occupy it?

An "airfield attack" ignores any ground or naval units in the hex and only attacks the aircraft. If there are only air units in the hex anyway, the effect will be exactly the same as a regular attack.

[wolflars]

ah...i see, thanks. Also, if one is going after aircraft in such a manner is it best to use fighters? Regarding the inderdict/cs question any additional thoughts?

The reason I ask is based on my historical knowledge I know what aircraft would be more commonly used in such roles but recently played a scenario where I was not familiar with the aircraft used and really wasnt sure which aircraft might be better suited. But if there is nothing to distinguish them does it matter if say I use a Ju87 for cs versus He111 for interdiction?

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: wolflars

ah...i see, thanks. Also, if one is going after aircraft in such a manner is it best to use fighters?

Bombers. Fighters within range on air superiority should escort on their own.

The reason I ask is based on my historical knowledge I know what aircraft would be more commonly used in such roles but recently played a scenario where I was not familiar with the aircraft used and really wasnt sure which aircraft might be better suited. But if there is nothing to distinguish them does it matter if say I use a Ju87 for cs versus He111 for interdiction?

Naturally in the real world aircraft like the Ju-87 which can attack at low altitude were better for this sort of thing. In TOAW there are two effects of interdiction:
a) the game tots up the total strength of units on the setting each turn, converts this to a % interdiction level, and applies this as a penalty to the other side's supply. For this, the aircraft types involved don't appear to matter- only the aggregate strength (presumably AP).
b) during movement and at the end of each round, units are periodically subject to air attacks. So far as I can tell, these attacks are made by specific units. Here you see the impact of using different types of aircraft. In games where level bombers are used for interdiction to the exclusion of other types, you will find that armoured units are not seriously affected by interdiction, because in TOAW level bombers cannot harm armoured equipment.

Personally, I tend to put the worn-out level bombers on interdiction to rest (sounds a bit odd but it does work) and everything else goes on combat support. I find that much more important in TOAW anyway.

[wolflars]

thanks for the responses golden, I appreciate it. You seem to know the game and its system quite well[:D]

It seems to reason that if I attack an airfield with bombers, my fighters within range will escort, enemy fighters set to air sup will intercept, and anything else will be caught "on the ground." If this is the case, then if the target airfield contains only fighters set to air sup, would they not presumably "scramble" to intercept thus rendering my bombers with no targets....hmmmm I dunno.

Agree with use of the level bombers and cs, pretty much the way I do it too, but it is unfortunate that there is no seperate rating for an inderdiction mission as, in reality, these types of missions are crucial to reducing C3Si capabilities of enemy forces

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: wolflars

thanks for the responses golden, I appreciate it. You seem to know the game and its system quite well[:D]

Thanks. Six long years...

It seems to reason that if I attack an airfield with bombers, my fighters within range will escort, enemy fighters set to air sup will intercept, and anything else will be caught "on the ground." If this is the case, then if the target airfield contains only fighters set to air sup, would they not presumably "scramble" to intercept thus rendering my bombers with no targets....hmmmm I dunno.

They will do, unless the enemy is suffering from heavy air shock or the units are otherwise disabled, but you'll still do some damage. What I'd suggest is starting out by bombing the bombers until the enemy fighters are worn out from repeated interceptions. Then follow up with attacks on the fighter fields.

Airfield attacks are only effective in situations where you have really substantial superiority, or else if the enemy has air shock. Otherwise I'd be very careful with them.

[Erik2]

Good info, Ben.

I would like to be able to launch air attack on an airfield even when it's not observed.
After all, you probably know where the field is located...