|
Alfred -> RE: Something Very Peculiar (3/20/2011 1:34:40 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: augustinus
I've been reflecting a bit, Alfred, but you did not really answer my question. I wanted to know the reason that kept carrier operations against land bases to only one attack per day in AE. We know from the history of WWII, that carrier air groups attacked enemy bases more than once in a day. One example is the carrier strikes against Truk on February 16, 1944 when Enterprise launched its air group in a morning and afternoon attack. If it weren't for the American sinking of KB on June 4, 1942, Nagumo would have launched a second air attack against Midway. I just want to understand the reasoning of the game designers and programmers. Bu the way my carrier strike force was only 160 miles from Roi Namur and Kwajalein, giving plenty of time for round trip travel to accommodate two attacks. I can understand why a B-17 strike against Rabaul from PM or Iron Range in Australia would only allow one attack, but I'm having a problem understanding the restriction on carrier raids against land bases.
augustinus.
I'm not a dev nor am I privately privately privy to their design philosophy, so what follows is pure speculation. I thinkly soundly based, but speculation none the less.
It appears that you believe air operations in the game has been structured contrary to what was the praxis in WWII. I think you are completely wrong and the only reason why naval attack is the only offensive mission which
(a) can be flown in both the AM and PM phase, and
(b) allows for an alternative secondary mission,
is precisely because of standard USN WWII operations.
IMHO, you are not taking into account neither the "bigger" picture nor coding issues/difficulties.
Take the "bigger" picture. Firstly, in game there is a clear distinction between land based and sea based planes. This is evidenced by there being two separate global air unit lists; press "A" and up comes a screen showing all the units currently on land, press "N" up comes a screen showing all the units on ship.
Secondly, look at the primary ordnance carried by aircraft models and who operates them. Any plane whose default ordnance (= primary ordnance) is a torpedo, clearly was designed with naval operations foremost in mind. If a plane is carrying anti vessel/boat radar, again its design was meant for it to understake primarily naval operations. If a plan's primary ordnance is a single big armour piercing bomb, I would again say that naval operations were foremost in mind. If a plane is equipped so that it can land on water, or be launched by ships, it too would have been designed with naval operations being foremost in mind. That being so I would say that in this game, planes designated as TB, DB, FF, PA and FP are viewed primarily as naval planes. When you then take into account the replacement/production rate of these "naval" planes, which nationality is the single major producer of them (no marks awarded for guessing the USN which surely must be considered to be predominantly a "naval" nationality), combined with the weight in the airframe park these planes represent, I would argue these airplane models are intended primarily for naval operations. In the game's offensive bomber mission terms, that means "naval attack" whether high, low or torpedo focussed.
With the conclusion that "naval attack" is for naval operations whereas airfield, port or ground attack are all primarily land operations (note how there is no separate airfield or port skill, they both subsumed within ground skill), the fact that "naval attack", as previously mentioned is the only offensive bomber mission which can occur in both day phases, or allows for an alternative mission in the event that the primary mission fails to locate an enemy TF, means that your comments should be seen in a new light.
As to why a carrier TB can only bomb a port once per day, I believe the answer basically stems from coding issues/difficulties. Remember the underlying game engine and philosophies go back a long way, not just to Uncommon Valour but at least back to PacWar in the early 1990s (and probably back even earlier to Carrier Strike +). To me it is quite plausible that offensive bomber operations which are primarily land focussed are coded for 1 operation per day whereas those primarily naval focussed have separate code to allow for 2 operations per day specifically to reflect USN carrier operations in WWII. When your carrier TB is given a port to attack either as its primary or secondary mission, it calls upon the land focussed code and it is too difficult/out of scope to have modified the code.
So once again, I think we have a case where the devs stand accussed of being ahistorical/not knowing their stuff, when in reality they have come up with an acceptable compromise and it is the claimer who discloses their own lack of understanding of the real world issues which force compromise upon the devs.[:)]
Alfred
|
|
|
|
