Air and naval units guide?

[battletech7]

Is there any guide or manual about the use of air and naval power in TOAW III?
I'm a newbie and I think it 's a very interesting concern but quite hard to learn...

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: battletech7

Is there any guide or manual about the use of air and naval power in TOAW III?
I'm a newbie and I think it 's a very interesting concern but quite hard to learn...

Hmmm...no guide that I know of. Some bits I've discovered.

Naval units.

Ships sink easy. Always fire from range at other ships -- never from the adjacent hex. Often, I use a single weak unit to 'bird-dog' for the main fleet; it moves in and attacks from the adjacent hex while the rest fire from range. The bird dog gets sunk -- but the effectiveness of the attack in general seems to be improved.

Ships don't use supply when they move and will always receive full supply if they are in a sea where supply reaches an anchorage; there's no need to move them 'back to port' to rest.

Air units.

Air units -- like ships -- will always receive full supply as long as any supply at all is reaching their airfield. HQ's will make no difference -- no point in having HQ's for formations of air units.

The effectiveness of interdiction varies from scenario to scenario. Some it's useless, others it's a killer. Generally speaking, it wears out units less than combat support: in scenarios where I have a lot of planes, I tend to have the green/yellow ones provide combat support, and the yellow/orange ones go over to interdiction until they look healthier.

If you're on the receiving end of heavy and effective interdiction, be especially cautious about moving HQ's and artillery units by rail. They can really get wiped even when infantry and armor make the trip okay.

[desert]

If you're on the receiving end of heavy and effective interdiction, be especially cautious about moving HQ's and artillery units by rail. They can really get wiped even when infantry and armor make the trip okay.

 
That's what the "undo" button is for! [;)]

[el cid]

To attack the enemy artillery behind the lines, that there is no other way to get to it, what is better, high altitude bombers or low altitude bombers. I find that I am trying desperately to get the enemy artillery eithe to un-dig or to destroy it, but I am not having much luck.

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: el cid

To attack the enemy artillery behind the lines, that there is no other way to get to it, what is better, high altitude bombers or low altitude bombers. I find that I am trying desperately to get the enemy artillery eithe to un-dig or to destroy it, but I am not having much luck.

Neither one, in my experience. Unless the units are overstacked, I doubt if anything short of an overwhelming amount of airpower is going to inflict significant losses -- and I've found that aircraft rarely do much to make units 'un-dig.'

You're going to have to go in on the ground...

Otherwise, and peculiarly, low-altitude aircraft are somewhat worse for immediate tactical work than high-altitude aircraft, as they are subject to the AA fire of all those rifle squads and things.

[desert]

Rifle squads should have .1 AA.
 
Hgh interdiction can sometimes decimate a moving arty unit or worse. So the best way to destroy arty is actually to have total air superiority. Or paratroopers, preferably in conjunction with AS though.
 
There is the Centcom Vs. Axis scenario, where you get to use a few thousand B-52s and B-2s against the Nazis. Without them, the Germans' unlimited reserves of infantry will make short work of you. Otherwise, all attack by Axis ground units end in the loss of at least 30% of the attackers.

[cymloveselva]

I always wish for a more solid modelling for both air unit & navy in TOAW, like all the land unit, since TOAW2...[>:]

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: cymloveselva

I always wish for a more solid modelling for both air unit & navy in TOAW, like all the land unit, since TOAW2...[>:]

Hear hear.

[cymloveselva]

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

ORIGINAL: cymloveselva

I always wish for a more solid modelling for both air unit & navy in TOAW, like all the land unit, since TOAW2...[>:]

Hear hear.

Especially the Navy...
They are just named as Battleship, Cruiser, etc
I wonder if they can come out like Iowa Class Battleship, Yamato Class, etc...

[Erik2]

ORIGINAL: cymloveselva
Especially the Navy...
They are just named as Battleship, Cruiser, etc
I wonder if they can come out like Iowa Class Battleship, Yamato Class, etc...

That's what the BioEd equipment editor is for.

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: cymloveselva
Especially the Navy...
They are just named as Battleship, Cruiser, etc
I wonder if they can come out like Iowa Class Battleship, Yamato Class, etc...

See this thread:

tm.asp?m=1403648

[ColinWright]

I'd rather have generic 'battleships' and an improved naval engine than lots of cool new ship types and the same engine.

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

I'd rather have generic 'battleships' and an improved naval engine than lots of cool new ship types and the same engine.

BioEd support is already an implemented enhancement. So there's no reason not to have those cool new ship types. I think you've gotten it confused with a wishlist item.

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

I'd rather have generic 'battleships' and an improved naval engine than lots of cool new ship types and the same engine.

BioEd support is already an implemented enhancement. So there's no reason not to have those cool new ship types. I think you've gotten it confused with a wishlist item.

Well, see above. We were certainly off on the 'how about cool Yamato super-battleships' merry-go-round. I was waiting for the submarines to show up.

I'm perfectly clear on the use of the Bioeditor. I make all the ships I want. I just don't confuse that with substantial improvements.

[cymloveselva]

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

I'd rather have generic 'battleships' and an improved naval engine than lots of cool new ship types and the same engine.

I'll like both![:D]
Improved naval engine & cool new ship types!

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: cymloveselva

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

I'd rather have generic 'battleships' and an improved naval engine than lots of cool new ship types and the same engine.

I'll like both![:D]
Improved naval engine & cool new ship types!

As 'Curtis' felt it necessary to point out, there is the Bioeditor for the cool new ship types. For everything else, there's Ralph.

[cymloveselva]

Real sorry, but can anybody tell me again where can I get the Bioeditor...?

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: cymloveselva

Real sorry, but can anybody tell me again where can I get the Bioeditor...?

In the manuals folder, find the How to Edit the Equipment Database.pdf document. It explains the entire drill, including getting BioEd.