RE: # of Groups on a runway? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition



Message

jomni -> RE: # of Groups on a runway? (12/30/2009 1:43:24 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy
same goes for only a hundred B-29s on Tinian, when you know how many there were in real life... don´t know what the devs really were thinking about this one. I guess we´re only told we should stop bitching around though.


Ah. But looking at the wwengr's post seems to say that Tinian was overstacked. [:D]
If the Japanese were to bomb that air base, there will be a lot of easy targets.

No one is stopping you from stuffing a lot of air groups and air planes in an airfield in the game anyway. You will just get more damaged planes and operiational inefficiency.

But the case of overstacking by having too many groups with one plane each is sort of funny. Could there be some balance between administrative and the number of planes?



ETF -> RE: # of Groups on a runway? (12/30/2009 1:54:57 AM)

Bsq thanks for bringing up some excellent points. I hope the dev's see some of your logic!



ckammp -> RE: # of Groups on a runway? (12/30/2009 2:58:58 AM)

The following post may be helpful to this discussion:

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2219116&mpage=2&key=aircraft%2Crestrictions?

Have a nice day.[8D]



Marty A -> RE: # of Groups on a runway? (12/30/2009 3:34:56 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ckammp

The following post may be helpful to this discussion:

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2219116&mpage=2&key=aircraft%2Crestrictions?

Have a nice day.[8D]


I see post 43 on this where elf say bad rule. i fail to see how you use this as your argument in support.



wwengr -> RE: # of Groups on a runway? (12/30/2009 3:39:06 AM)

Not going tit for tat, but I have been seeking sources about how many B-29's were on Tinian. I found this SeaBee history that says that Tinian accomodated 450 B-29's by the end of the war. See TINIAN IN WWII – TEAMWORK AND EFFORT.

Another interesting link: From the memoirs of Col. Charles T. VanVliet.

Crews did one day mission prep, mission day (15.5 hour round trip), and one day rest. This would equate to having each unit do a cycle of one day training, one day bombing mission, and one day rest. That implies 1/3 of all aircraft flying missions on any given day (at the maximum rate).



michaelm75au -> RE: # of Groups on a runway? (12/30/2009 9:58:41 AM)

Whole purpose of the stacking is to limit planes (using engines as the yardstick) and active groups (from an administrative or control perspective) on a AF for offensive missions.

You can "overstack" an airfield.

It wont stop air ops.
But it will affect how many aircraft fly per phase, makes them more prone to taking hits when attacked on the ground, affects air support.




bsq -> RE: # of Groups on a runway? (12/31/2009 12:19:09 PM)

It ramps up losses to the point where offensive ops are unsustainable in any shape or form, aircraft take a month (sometimes) to repair and average over 14 days - clearly an effect of an over-stacked airfield.

BTW this is Tinian/Saipan and Guam in late 44 early 45, just where are the air attacks going to come from to cause me damage? The losses I saw were entirely due to the overstacked operation of these bases and not from any Japanese attack.

ckammp - I see your post, I see The Elf's comments and with the greatest respect it does not seem to work like that. Level 7 airfields with a resident HQ overstack and suffer penalties, so the rule is right (as per the manual), the interpretation as presented elsewhere is wrong. You like quoting - so here's a quote for you...

when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth (Arthur Conan Doyle) [;)]



Ghertz -> RE: # of Groups on a runway? (12/31/2009 10:47:13 PM)

deleted



pompack -> RE: # of Groups on a runway? (1/1/2010 12:19:18 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cannonfodder

I am not a moderator or anything but.... here goes

I see a lot of good arguments here and I am pretty sure the design team would fix any problems. I also see comments here that would make me think "screw this" if I was a dev.....

Just my 2 cents, keep it civil and constructive. We are all human and we all love the game....



What he said (the silver-tongued devil [:D])



88l71 -> RE: # of Groups on a runway? (1/6/2010 6:38:30 PM)

I love this game but I must ask who in their right mind thought of such a complicated, confusing, multi-faceted answer to a simple question like "how many planes can I have at an airfield"?

I like this game and I enjoy the level of detail but things like this are downright tedious and unneccisarily time-consuming.



Marty A -> RE: # of Groups on a runway? (1/6/2010 9:54:48 PM)

interface is not 'user friendly' either. you do not know how close to over stack until you are over stack. same with units of ground. no idea how much room they are on a 6000 island until you have them there.



bsq -> RE: # of Groups on a runway? (1/6/2010 10:15:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marty A

interface is not 'user friendly' either. you do not know how close to over stack until you are over stack. same with units of ground. no idea how much room they are on a 6000 island until you have them there.


Air units I'd agree with, you need to stack it to over-stack it, however you know exactly how many front line and second line troops are in each unit and you know the limit on each island as it is clearly there on the base display.



Dante Fierro -> RE: # of Groups on a runway? (5/23/2015 10:43:06 PM)

After reading this discussion, I remain mystified regarding air stacking limits at a base.

If for example, if you have a base at 4AF level (with no HQs nearby), does that mean you can have 4 active air groups with any number of engines? Or you can only have 4 groups AND they must meet engine level limits as well?

I think the whole problem here is the semantic use of the word OR in the manual regarding air limits. Is it an Exclusive OR or an Inclusive OR?





Itdepends -> RE: # of Groups on a runway? (5/24/2015 12:05:41 AM)

If you exceed either limit, groups or engines, its overstacked



Dante Fierro -> RE: # of Groups on a runway? (5/24/2015 1:15:50 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Itdepends

If you exceed either limit, groups or engines, its overstacked

Thanks.



Reg -> RE: # of Groups on a runway? (5/24/2015 3:33:00 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121 Post #13

So, Reg, you don't consider that if a group was reduced to just a single plane in a Level 1 airfield that it would occur to ANYONE to tell all of the guys NOT required to service that single plane to take up positions a bit farther away from the airfield in order to allow another airgroup + pilots + support groups into the airfield?

I'm sorry but that just beggars belief.



I only just saw this and will answer the question rather belatedly.....

The answer is "not if you want the air group to stay operational and be able to accept replacements." The logistical tail doesn't necessarily decrease in proportion to the number of aircraft supported. The facilites they occupy is a great part of their operational capability.

You can make the ground element vacate their facilities and disperse the personnel to make facilities available for another unit which is what you are doing when you DISBAND an air group. Just don't expect them to setup and be able to conduct operations if you need them tomorrow.

If you just want the air group to temporarily move over to make space, just transfer them to another base (intact).



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.017578