|
Dr. Duh -> RE: HQ for bases (9/16/2009 4:17:29 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: John Lansford
Better coordination on airstrikes, you can keep more squadrons at an airbase without penalty, the base gets more supplies, and land combat gets a bonus (all within the radius of the HQ).
Are any of these supposed to be benefits that accrue due to a base itself being attached to a given command HQ? I thought the first two items were benefits to air units at airfields (bases) within the command radius of an Air HQ (and a base cannot be attached to an Air HQ). Iirc the supply thing is for whatever base a command HQ happens to be in, and doesn't care who the owner of the base is. The land combat bonus is for Army/Corps HQ for attached units within it's command radius - again, if a base happens to be within the Army HQ radius it is incidental.
What got me thinking about this was seeing that in AE now, Noumea is attached to the Free French Command, which doesn't actually enter the game as a Command HQ unit until 1946. So if I put say... South Pacific Command HQ in Noumea does it make any difference at all to any aspect of gameplay to leave Noumea reporting to the Free French HQ vs. paying a bunch of political points to reattach it to the South Pacific Command HQ?
If the answer is "no difference", then attachment/reattachment of bases themselves to Command HQs would be meaningless and you should never pay PPs to reattach a base.
BTW, another question/clarification: In WITP the only benefit I recall for a Naval HQ was a ship repair bonus within its command radius. Is the sole embodiment of that function in AE the new naval support squads, or is there some other additional bonus inherent to Naval HQs? Hmmm, I didn't even check to see - do the Naval HQs even have a radius any more? A radius would be meaningless if the Naval HQ is now nothing but a container for naval support squads.
OK, yet another question: what difference do the qualities of assigned leaders make to Command, Air, Army, and Naval HQs?
|
|
|
|
