attaching Japanese naval air units to arm AIR HQ

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

attaching Japanese naval air units to arm AIR HQ

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> attaching Japanese naval air units to arm AIR HQ

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

attaching Japanese naval air units to arm AIR HQ - 5/4/2020 1:51:59 PM

guctony

Posts: 669
Joined: 6/27/2009
Status: offline

Is there any drawback to assign Japanese Naval Air unit to Japanese army air Hq. Will they fuction normally or they require Air HQ to function properly.

_____________________________

"Unless a nation's life faces peril, war is murder."
"Sovereignty is not given, it is taken."
"After having lost their lives on this land they have become our sons as well."
Mustafa Kemal

Post #: 1

RE: attaching Japanese naval air units to arm AIR HQ - 5/4/2020 1:58:31 PM

Dili

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline

You can't do that.

Edit: seems i was wrong and it can be done.

Maybe if the HQ unit is nearby might have advantage.

< Message edited by Dili -- 5/4/2020 2:00:51 PM >

(in reply to guctony)

Post #: 2

RE: attaching Japanese naval air units to arm AIR HQ - 5/4/2020 3:06:38 PM

Q-Ball

Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline

In the game, there is no functional difference between an IJN and IJA Air HQ. It doesn't matter.

In fact, other than whether the command is restricted or not, I don't think it matters what the HQ parent is of any air unit....that was always my understanding

_____________________________

(in reply to Dili)

Post #: 3

RE: attaching Japanese naval air units to arm AIR HQ - 5/4/2020 3:12:18 PM

dr.hal

Posts: 3335
Joined: 6/3/2006
From: Covington LA via Montreal!
Status: offline

The only advantage for air units to be from the same HQ is coordination. If an attack is made by multiple air units from the SAME HQ (not necessarily from the same base) and all attacking the same target, they stand a better chance (read dice roll) of a coordinated and thus possibly more effective strike.

(in reply to Q-Ball)

Post #: 4

RE: attaching Japanese naval air units to arm AIR HQ - 5/4/2020 3:45:41 PM

Lowpe

Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

The only advantage for air units to be from the same HQ is coordination. If an attack is made by multiple air units from the SAME HQ (not necessarily from the same base) and all attacking the same target, they stand a better chance (read dice roll) of a coordinated and thus possibly more effective strike.

I am not sure that is a proven game feature. Some players swear by it, others not.

(in reply to dr.hal)

Post #: 5

RE: attaching Japanese naval air units to arm AIR HQ - 5/4/2020 4:16:38 PM

RangerJoe

Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: offline

The Air Mission Coordination Guide v2.1

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2382494

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

�Illegitemus non carborundum est (�Don�t let the bastards grind you down�).�
― Julia Child

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 6

RE: attaching Japanese naval air units to arm AIR HQ - 5/4/2020 6:40:45 PM

dr.hal

Posts: 3335
Joined: 6/3/2006
From: Covington LA via Montreal!
Status: offline

I sit corrected Lowpe, you're right, there is nothing in the manual that talks about an Air HQ conferring better coordination. Section 7.2.1.5 details what the Air HQ does. The last bullet on 8.1.1 also elaborates. Clearly an Air HQ can help a strike by aiding in more aircraft in the strike, but it doesn't directly aid in coordination of that strike between differing elements that I can see. Sorry for the confusion.

< Message edited by dr.hal -- 5/4/2020 6:41:12 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 7

RE: attaching Japanese naval air units to arm AIR HQ - 5/5/2020 2:39:46 AM

Alfred

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

I sit corrected Lowpe, you're right, there is nothing in the manual that talks about an Air HQ conferring better coordination. Section 7.2.1.5 details what the Air HQ does. The last bullet on 8.1.1 also elaborates. Clearly an Air HQ can help a strike by aiding in more aircraft in the strike, but it doesn't directly aid in coordination of that strike between differing elements that I can see. Sorry for the confusion.

No, you don't stand corrected. You were correct in the earlier post.

Coordination chance is improved if groups are within flying range of their Air HQ. Confirmed by michaelm75au himself in January 2011.

Those arguing to the contrary is once again another instance of players relying upon their anecdotal evidence which is worthless because they don't actually rigorously observe what happens.

Alfred

(in reply to dr.hal)

Post #: 8

RE: attaching Japanese naval air units to arm AIR HQ - 5/5/2020 2:46:15 AM

dr.hal

Posts: 3335
Joined: 6/3/2006
From: Covington LA via Montreal!
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

I sit corrected Lowpe, you're right, there is nothing in the manual that talks about an Air HQ conferring better coordination. Section 7.2.1.5 details what the Air HQ does. The last bullet on 8.1.1 also elaborates. Clearly an Air HQ can help a strike by aiding in more aircraft in the strike, but it doesn't directly aid in coordination of that strike between differing elements that I can see. Sorry for the confusion.

No, you don't stand corrected. You were correct in the earlier post.

Coordination chance is improved if groups are within flying range of their Air HQ. Confirmed by michaelm75au himself in January 2011.

Those arguing to the contrary is once again another instance of players relying upon their anecdotal evidence which is worthless because they don't actually rigorously observe what happens.

Alfred

Thanks Alfred, I didn't see anything in the manual and didn't know about Michaeim's clarification. But I did operate under the impression that Air HQs did have a role. Thanks again for the input.

(in reply to Alfred)

Post #: 9

RE: attaching Japanese naval air units to arm AIR HQ - 5/5/2020 4:54:38 AM

Yaab

Posts: 4552
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: guctony

Is there any drawback to assign Japanese Naval Air unit to Japanese army air Hq. Will they fuction normally or they require Air HQ to function properly.

While there is nothing stopping you from making such assignments in game, you may want to refrain from it for role-play reasons. Remember, if you have no proper IJN air HQ, you can simply attach your IJN air groups to the same theatre command. Check how the IJA air groups are attached in Canton in December, 1941.

See this thread, with releveant info from michaelm

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/printable.asp?m=2693781&mpage=2

"Groups belonging to same theatre command have increased chance; groups in range of their Air Hq are further increased"

< Message edited by Yaab -- 5/5/2020 5:45:42 AM >

(in reply to guctony)

Post #: 10

RE: attaching Japanese naval air units to arm AIR HQ - 5/5/2020 6:08:38 AM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

I sit corrected Lowpe, you're right, there is nothing in the manual that talks about an Air HQ conferring better coordination. Section 7.2.1.5 details what the Air HQ does. The last bullet on 8.1.1 also elaborates. Clearly an Air HQ can help a strike by aiding in more aircraft in the strike, but it doesn't directly aid in coordination of that strike between differing elements that I can see. Sorry for the confusion.

No, you don't stand corrected. You were correct in the earlier post.

Coordination chance is improved if groups are within flying range of their Air HQ. Confirmed by michaelm75au himself in January 2011.

Those arguing to the contrary is once again another instance of players relying upon their anecdotal evidence which is worthless because they don't actually rigorously observe what happens.

Alfred

Thanks Alfred, I didn't see anything in the manual and didn't know about Michaeim's clarification. But I did operate under the impression that Air HQs did have a role. Thanks again for the input.

The HQs try to contribute on coordination but early in the game with low experience levels and lesser skilled leaders, the Allied air units have a lot of problems with coordination. I think that is why people were thinking the Air HQ must not help. Overall experience of the pilots is probably the biggest factor (other than weather which you have no control over).

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to dr.hal)

Post #: 11

RE: attaching Japanese naval air units to arm AIR HQ - 5/5/2020 7:55:03 AM

PaxMondo

Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

I sit corrected Lowpe, you're right, there is nothing in the manual that talks about an Air HQ conferring better coordination. Section 7.2.1.5 details what the Air HQ does. The last bullet on 8.1.1 also elaborates. Clearly an Air HQ can help a strike by aiding in more aircraft in the strike, but it doesn't directly aid in coordination of that strike between differing elements that I can see. Sorry for the confusion.

No, you don't stand corrected. You were correct in the earlier post.

Coordination chance is improved if groups are within flying range of their Air HQ. Confirmed by michaelm75au himself in January 2011.

Those arguing to the contrary is once again another instance of players relying upon their anecdotal evidence which is worthless because they don't actually rigorously observe what happens.

Alfred

Thanks Alfred, I didn't see anything in the manual and didn't know about Michaeim's clarification. But I did operate under the impression that Air HQs did have a role. Thanks again for the input.

Also what's-his-name that wrote the air coordination guide had confirmed it. Herb also has stated that it is part of his "secret" as well. This is well documented and used.

< Message edited by PaxMondo -- 5/5/2020 8:18:54 AM >

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to dr.hal)

Post #: 12

RE: attaching Japanese naval air units to arm AIR HQ - 5/5/2020 9:32:02 AM

LeeChard

Posts: 1099
Joined: 9/12/2007
From: Michigan
Status: offline

When in doubt do what makes sense IRL. In most cases it will have a positive effect on your game-play. At worst it will have no downside except maybe the cost of some PPs.
I think worrying too much about these details can spoil my game experience. I tend to look them up after the fact more out of curiosity. Never have I find it to be a big blunder.
If you decide to follow this philosophy and lose a carrier or two you are welcome to post something nasty about me

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 13

RE: attaching Japanese naval air units to arm AIR HQ - 5/5/2020 11:07:55 AM

RangerJoe

Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

I sit corrected Lowpe, you're right, there is nothing in the manual that talks about an Air HQ conferring better coordination. Section 7.2.1.5 details what the Air HQ does. The last bullet on 8.1.1 also elaborates. Clearly an Air HQ can help a strike by aiding in more aircraft in the strike, but it doesn't directly aid in coordination of that strike between differing elements that I can see. Sorry for the confusion.

No, you don't stand corrected. You were correct in the earlier post.

Coordination chance is improved if groups are within flying range of their Air HQ. Confirmed by michaelm75au himself in January 2011.

Those arguing to the contrary is once again another instance of players relying upon their anecdotal evidence which is worthless because they don't actually rigorously observe what happens.

Alfred

Thanks Alfred, I didn't see anything in the manual and didn't know about Michaeim's clarification. But I did operate under the impression that Air HQs did have a role. Thanks again for the input.

Also what's-his-name that wrote the air coordination guide had confirmed it. Herb also has stated that it is part of his "secret" as well. This is well documented and used.

What's-his-name is LoBaronn, the guy with Snoopy the pilot on his shot up dog house.

Here is the link again:

The Air Mission Coordination Guide v2.1The Air Mission Coordination Guide v2.1

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2382494

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

�Illegitemus non carborundum est (�Don�t let the bastards grind you down�).�
― Julia Child

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 14

RE: attaching Japanese naval air units to arm AIR HQ - 5/5/2020 1:20:16 PM

Lowpe

Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

I sit corrected Lowpe, you're right, there is nothing in the manual that talks about an Air HQ conferring better coordination. Section 7.2.1.5 details what the Air HQ does. The last bullet on 8.1.1 also elaborates. Clearly an Air HQ can help a strike by aiding in more aircraft in the strike, but it doesn't directly aid in coordination of that strike between differing elements that I can see. Sorry for the confusion.

No, you don't stand corrected. You were correct in the earlier post.

Coordination chance is improved if groups are within flying range of their Air HQ. Confirmed by michaelm75au himself in January 2011.

Those arguing to the contrary is once again another instance of players relying upon their anecdotal evidence which is worthless because they don't actually rigorously observe what happens.

Alfred

Thanks Alfred, I didn't see anything in the manual and didn't know about Michaeim's clarification. But I did operate under the impression that Air HQs did have a role. Thanks again for the input.

Also what's-his-name that wrote the air coordination guide had confirmed it. Herb also has stated that it is part of his "secret" as well. This is well documented and used.

LoBaron? Koniu, an excellent JFB, used it extensively with devastating results.

My problem, is having an air force left.

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 5/5/2020 1:21:04 PM >

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 15

RE: attaching Japanese naval air units to arm AIR HQ - 5/6/2020 11:31:04 AM

Alfred

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LeeChard

When in doubt do what makes sense IRL. In most cases it will have a positive effect on your game-play. At worst it will have no downside except maybe the cost of some PPs.
I think worrying too much about these details can spoil my game experience. I tend to look them up after the fact more out of curiosity. Never have I find it to be a big blunder.
If you decide to follow this philosophy and lose a carrier or two you are welcome to post something nasty about me

This is very sound advice.

Notwithstanding all its abstractions, the game design has always been to capture the real world historical essence. Everything possible, within the limitations of a computer game played on commercial hardware which is not state of the art, has been directed towards providing a window into the real life considerations which the historical leaders had to contend with.

It logically follows that decisions consistent with real life considerations, will always be appropriate. It is those players who are looking to game the system by looking for code loopholes and disregarding real world considerations, who expose themselves to being bitten in the arxx.

Alfred

(in reply to LeeChard)

Post #: 16

RE: attaching Japanese naval air units to arm AIR HQ - 5/6/2020 11:58:38 AM

PaxMondo

Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

I sit corrected Lowpe, you're right, there is nothing in the manual that talks about an Air HQ conferring better coordination. Section 7.2.1.5 details what the Air HQ does. The last bullet on 8.1.1 also elaborates. Clearly an Air HQ can help a strike by aiding in more aircraft in the strike, but it doesn't directly aid in coordination of that strike between differing elements that I can see. Sorry for the confusion.

No, you don't stand corrected. You were correct in the earlier post.

Coordination chance is improved if groups are within flying range of their Air HQ. Confirmed by michaelm75au himself in January 2011.

Those arguing to the contrary is once again another instance of players relying upon their anecdotal evidence which is worthless because they don't actually rigorously observe what happens.

Alfred

Thanks Alfred, I didn't see anything in the manual and didn't know about Michaeim's clarification. But I did operate under the impression that Air HQs did have a role. Thanks again for the input.

Also what's-his-name that wrote the air coordination guide had confirmed it. Herb also has stated that it is part of his "secret" as well. This is well documented and used.

LoBaron? Koniu, an excellent JFB, used it extensively with devastating results.

My problem, is having an air force left.

Correct on both points.

As to your last point, well, yes to that as well!!!

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 17

RE: attaching Japanese naval air units to arm AIR HQ - 5/6/2020 1:46:40 PM

dr.hal

Posts: 3335
Joined: 6/3/2006
From: Covington LA via Montreal!
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

Notwithstanding all its abstractions, the game design has always been to capture the real world historical essence. Everything possible, within the limitations of a computer game played on commercial hardware which is not state of the art, has been directed towards providing a window into the real life considerations which the historical leaders had to contend with.

It logically follows that decisions consistent with real life considerations, will always be appropriate. It is those players who are looking to game the system by looking for code loopholes and disregarding real world considerations, who expose themselves to being bitten in the arxx.

Alfred

Alfred, your statement encapsulates the foundational attractiveness of this game system. Yes there are some areas that are not as realistic as could be, thus a need for HRs if one likes that drive toward further historical accuracy. However the underlining attraction of this game is its adherence to history.

(in reply to Alfred)

Post #: 18

RE: attaching Japanese naval air units to arm AIR HQ - 5/6/2020 9:00:24 PM

RangerJoe

Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: offline

Well, by not using the HRs that strive for historical accuracy especially as concerns the cooperation between the Japanese Army and Navy, is also a "What if?" Then again, putting US Naval units in the IO as well as more air and ground units from the US went against the US unstated policy of not actively supporting the colonial empires. The Australians did not sent units there since they wanted to defend their homeland. So it does tend to balance out.

Not to mention, would the USSR really have allowed Allied units to operate out of its territory and would they have turned over areas to the Allies that they had captured? I don't think so.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

�Illegitemus non carborundum est (�Don�t let the bastards grind you down�).�
― Julia Child

(in reply to dr.hal)

Post #: 19