Ian R
Posts: 3420
Joined: 8/1/2000 From: Cammeraygal Country Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Chris21wen I said 'Now am I missing something or is this a bug?'. I think this is a reasonable question considering what I found. You answered with 'maybe its weather'. This is not the case Post script to part 1: Every other variable in your "test" could be exactly the same, and different weather rolls could produce different fly/no-fly results in different hexes, with advanced weather either on or off. It is interesting that your no-flies (from groups on TF ships) seem to be happening up north near the JHI, in the middle of winter, whereas down at sunny Babeldaob they are flying around no problem. "I moved a AV in and out of Truk no joy. Once I sent it to Saipan it did??" This sounds WAD if the weather is different over Truk hex than it is over Saipan. I don't actually understand why you maintain weather is irrelevant, because it essentially means you can never set up a test in which you control all the variables to test your hypothesis. But moving on ... Part 2: I was suggesting you set up a sandbox that uses endurance expenditure as the metric to detect search ops by shipboard groups on ships not in TF. In the second part of your post you found that float-plane carrying ships disbanded in port, not in a TF, did not generate air missions by the embarked squadrons - except possibly Babeldaob. See manual 6.2.13. For every three planes launched on a Search or CAP Mission, the ships in the TF expend one Endurance. That means all ships in the TF, not just the airgroup carrying ships, because everyone has to speed up (carriers going flank speed into the wind) or slow down (float plane recovery) etc. So even if only one cruiser launches its search planes, everyone takes an endurance hit, including the cruisers who for whatever reason, don't launch. It also at least inferentially suggests that only ships in TF's will generate air ops. Anyway, ships in TFs is WAD - after you account for the weather variable, and maybe some other uncontrollable die rolls that are being failed by no-fly groups. So on to testing anchored ships in Babeldaob. If anchored ships, not in TF, are launching air missions, then they too should lose endurance. If there is fuel in the base they might top up and expend some ops points, however that is dependent on ship op points and base ops limits permitting the refuel (more variables to eliminate), so to create a 'pure' test environment you need to sandbox that by emptying Babeldaob of supply and fuel. You also need to remove any other possible sources of a refuel, i.e. other TFs, parked tankers or AOs and any other possibility anyone can think of that provide fuel replenishment. Once your test sandbox is fuel isolated, run the turn repeatedly and check the endurance levels. It is to be expected that your results will show all ships have no endurance loss. Edit: One thing was unclear from your original posting - you mentioned sending a TF with floatplane carrying ships to a port with a disband order, and seeing later that search ops were flown. Did you mean they flew them while at sea in transit? quote:
I politely suggest you try it yourself, only takes 5-10 min. No thanks, to edit up the sandbox to actually create a proper test environment will like take at least a couple of hours of work. It's your hypothesis that there is a bug - and if it survives the rigorous testing process I have outlined for stage 2 above, maybe it is - subject to weather rolls.
< Message edited by Ian R -- 1/31/2022 10:08:18 AM >
_____________________________
"I am Alfred"
|