1.21d Air OHQ skill usage and death

[Thrake]

While they do lead infantries from their OHQ unit, my understanding is that they should not get skill usage for leading land troops as they can not give benefits to their own unit.

Besides the skill usage is pretty high and requires roughly two times 90 airplanes fighting in a given turn so that the air skills have more usage than land skills.

Air OHQ can also die when planes they command get shot in offensive missions. Shouldn't this behaviour be restricted to land units? I have a hard time imagining a general jumping on a plane to attack the enemy.

[BlueTemplar]

That last one might be more one of these situations where realism is sacrificed for gameplay balance ?

[Don_Kiyote]

Air OHQ can also die when planes they command get shot... I have a hard time imagining a general jumping on a plane to attack the enemy.

In "Flying Leathernecks" (1951), John Wayne's character as a Captain (?) in the Marine Air Corps often flies on missions with his airmen. He is teaching, and developing at the same time, a new 'close air support' doctrine. I suppose for Air Force commanders to improve their formation's tactics, they must often study existing methods in person, as a pilot on the scene.

not a General, but there his is...

flying-leathernecks-1951-ievenn-1.jpg (119.58 KiB) Viewed 782 times

An Air Force has some different rules. It is not troop-intensive, or extensive, in terms of the number of persons actually entering combat. On the other hand, the ratio of machine resource power to each of those fighting individuals is orders of magnitude higher than for an individual ground infantry soldier...

This is perhaps not all entirely on your topic. But it's about what an Air Force is. I've also taken a look at how the Air OHQ skills are working, and wished there were working better, and were more varied and investment-worthy, especially for Intelligence-based skills and Air Force -specific skills. It never bothered me to see a leader get capped in the process of using her skill though, if it ever happened.

In-game, I have the idea that "Lead from the Front" and "Personal Combat" are the most important skills for an Air Commander, but can't confirm. Also, has the Air OHQ 'Readiness' and 'Morale' recovery in-effectiveness (bug) been fixed?

[BlueTemplar]

Oh, by the way, even SHQ commanders can be killed in a combat involving a unit they lead (I assume, directly, without an OHQ, and regardless of distance ?) :

5.8.6.1. KILLED IN ACTION
Commanders do not always stay in their HQs and tend to visit their Units
in the field. During combat this can result in losing a Leader.
A Commander, if having a very high Heroic personality, can be considered to
always be present with one of all his/her Troops. If minimal, the Commander
will always hug his/her desk in the HQ.
SHQ Commanders have half less chance to be present with their Troops
due to the nature of their jobs.
If the HQ is directly involved in combat, the Commander will always be
present in the frontline, even if the Leader is a coward.
If the HQ is lost, the Commander has to make a Personal Combat roll to see
if he/she can avoid being killed in action.
[...]

[Thrake]

Yes, I already lost SHQ and I'm fine with it. It makes sense in my mind that high ranking leaders can pay a visit to troops, it doesn't imply that they took a rifle and decided to charge with their men but rather got caught in the combat during their visit. For air OHQ I can't imagine a plausible explanation. Not that it would be a big deal or that the game has to be realistic in all situations.

Either way I figured that I would report this, I imagine it's hard for one man to do all the coding while making sure everything's working as intended.

I'm not aware of a readiness/morale bug with air OHQ but I didn't check out if everything is working as intended.

[Soar_Slitherine]

In-game, I have the idea that "Lead from the Front" and "Personal Combat" are the most important skills for an Air Commander, but can't confirm.

I wouldn't call those two "most important" in terms of actual performance, but they sure seem to rack up a lot of Lead from the Front usage for some reason. Personal Combat is only really important because the amount of time they spend on the frontline is oddly high.

[Don_Kiyote]

Personal Combat is only really important because the amount of time they spend on the frontline is oddly high.

If 'Lead from the Front' triggers, during a mission run by the Air OHQs aircraft and not when the command post is attacked on the ground, doesn't that mean 'Personal Combat' will also be applied during the battle?

[Thrake]

Perhaps to illustrate, here's an exemple from an OHQ with one air wing of fighters (intercept order) and one air wing of transports under his command.

This turn an air bridge has been executed, for 1 point usage for the relevant skill. Defensive works is at 3 points in usage, defensive tactics at 4. The manual also doesn't mention mobile tactics being used and it's at 2 points.

air log skill.jpg (355.16 KiB) Viewed 688 times

air land skill.jpg (328.48 KiB) Viewed 688 times

[Soar_Slitherine]

Personal Combat is only really important because the amount of time they spend on the frontline is oddly high.

If 'Lead from the Front' triggers, during a mission run by the Air OHQs aircraft and not when the command post is attacked on the ground, doesn't that mean 'Personal Combat' will also be applied during the battle?

Yes, or at least a leader is much more likely to have the occasion to roll Personal Combat if they decide to use Lead from the Front, but as far as I know, the only effect of Personal Combat is making the leader more likely to survive when they are in a position where they could be killed.

(As far as I know, the only positive effect of Lead from the Front is maintaining morale, which I only find to be relevant in a minority of cases, so most of the time leaders using the skill are just endangering themselves for no good reason.)

[Don_Kiyote]

As far as I know, the only positive effect of Lead from the Front is maintaining morale

laaame...

Too bad, I mean. Solzhenitsyn wrote a book about the 1914 White Russian advance at the opening of WWI, a sort of Military Procedural, all about how commanders at the front had a much better grasp of the situation on the ground. Especially for maneuvers. But how would this translate to in-game, where engagements are abstracted?

I mean, putting your forces in the right place at the right time can make all the difference. Yes, it helps 'morale' for the people fighting to have a sense that the individual with absolute authority over their lives and fate is on the ball. But the main effect isn't to feel good. Its instrumental.

On the other hand, the pulp fan in me simply wants to see a hero with exxxtra attack values, laying in to enemy positions like Ragnar the Viking in a battle suit. For the Air Force, I would settle for either Blackhawk or John Wayne, inventing on the fly ways to make the mission come off smooth.

Still, thanks for clearing that up.

[BlueTemplar]

A Leader that happened to Lead from the front could perhaps also increase your in-combat gain of Recon DRAMATICALLY faster ? (IIRC changes in Recon matter even *during* those rounds... not certain about Air Combat ??)