Air Attack on Naval Vessels .....? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> WarPlan



Message

scout1 -> Air Attack on Naval Vessels .....? (12/3/2019 12:52:29 AM)

So looking for insight as to approach the game uses for say Land based Air assets on Naval interdiction with enemy naval assets passing within range …..

Ex. German surface fleet "passing" by Northern Scotland in route to the Atlantic.... part of its path passes with Air attack range of assets in Scotland … The ultimate move for the German surface fleet goes completely past Britain and into the British shipping lanes ….
1) Do the British air assets get to attack while the German fleet passes within range as they go by ?

2) With two Op pts, and the surface fleet is spotted, can there be two naval strikes from the air asset in question ?

3) Other ?



Twotribes -> RE: Air Attack on Naval Vessels .....? (12/3/2019 1:01:33 AM)

If you set air assets to attack naval they will try and find any naval that moves in range up to 10 hexes. You can also put them on the setting for them to do anything rather then only mission and they should try to intercept. Remember they have to actually find the fleet to attack it.



scout1 -> RE: Air Attack on Naval Vessels .....? (12/3/2019 1:05:38 AM)

So the actual combat hex will be something other than where the surface fleet ends its turn … ?



Michael T -> RE: Air Attack on Naval Vessels .....? (12/3/2019 1:07:40 AM)

Any air/naval unit will only try to attack an enemy naval unit at it's *destination* only. This a key understanding of the air/naval war, and dare I say, limitation of the design. Air/naval will not attack enemy naval leaving a port or passing by.



scout1 -> RE: Air Attack on Naval Vessels .....? (12/3/2019 1:12:35 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

Any air/naval unit will only try to attack an enemy naval unit at it's *destination* only. This a key understanding of the air/naval war, and dare I say, limitation of the design. Air/naval will not attack enemy naval leaving a port or passing by.


Bummer …. That means the Bismark can sail directly to the Altantic, far west of Britain and out of range of the land based air and have no chance of being observed as it passes within 50 miles of the British Naval base, Scapa Flow while they wave (or Moon as appropriate) as they go by ?



Michael T -> RE: Air Attack on Naval Vessels .....? (12/3/2019 1:16:00 AM)

True.



scout1 -> RE: Air Attack on Naval Vessels .....? (12/3/2019 1:22:38 AM)

So there is NO REASON to swing wide North to avoid Scapa Flow … Is FAR BETTER to pass as closely to it as possible to maximize the distance into the Atlantic which the surface fleet can go .…



Michael T -> RE: Air Attack on Naval Vessels .....? (12/3/2019 1:39:34 AM)

You can take any *route* you like with impunity. The only consideration is where you end either of the 2 OP's.



scout1 -> RE: Air Attack on Naval Vessels .....? (12/3/2019 1:45:44 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

You can take any *route* you like with impunity. The only consideration is where you end either of the 2 OP's.


True, but if the goal is to be farther west into the Atlantic, the straighter the horizontal line the better …. and that path is either the northern or southern British coast …. not around it which the actual Bismark took to avoid recon …..



Michael T -> RE: Air Attack on Naval Vessels .....? (12/3/2019 1:55:15 AM)

You can't do a channel dash. Unless you control both sides of the channel (assumed, as I have not actually tested that result).



Meteor2 -> RE: Air Attack on Naval Vessels .....? (12/3/2019 6:41:05 AM)

But the concept, that the route is of no importance and the end-point of the route is the decision-point, is seconed-best.
Maybe, not so easy, because it is a little bit WEGO, but Alvaro should consider something different for the Pacific.

The Bismark and the UBoats had to use the longer route and bypassing Scapa Flow in one hex distance "feels" not right.



scout1 -> RE: Air Attack on Naval Vessels .....? (12/3/2019 11:42:57 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Meteor2

But the concept, that the route is of no importance and the end-point of the route is the decision-point, is seconed-best.
Maybe, not so easy, because it is a little bit WEGO, but Alvaro should consider something different for the Pacific.

The Bismark and the UBoats had to use the longer route and bypassing Scapa Flow in one hex distance "feels" not right.



Agreed, but is a game design trade off … I'm sure it complicates coding to target hex by hex movement of naval assets and check for recon & attack possibilities throughout the movement of a naval asset (similar to AE WitP …. I've played it for years).

But agree, naval movement needs a in path check for recon and air attack. Most important for pacific operations since it is mostly a naval conflict …..

But at the end of the day, will be a trade that AV needs to make for his system ….



scout1 -> RE: Air Attack on Naval Vessels .....? (12/4/2019 12:01:15 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: scout1


quote:

ORIGINAL: Meteor2

But the concept, that the route is of no importance and the end-point of the route is the decision-point, is seconed-best.
Maybe, not so easy, because it is a little bit WEGO, but Alvaro should consider something different for the Pacific.

The Bismark and the UBoats had to use the longer route and bypassing Scapa Flow in one hex distance "feels" not right.



Agreed, but is a game design trade off … I'm sure it complicates coding to target hex by hex movement of naval assets and check for recon & attack possibilities throughout the movement of a naval asset (similar to AE WitP …. I've played it for years).

But agree, naval movement needs a in path check for recon and air attack. Most important for pacific operations since it is mostly a naval conflict …..

But at the end of the day, will be a trade that AV needs to make for his system ….


Though in fairness, AE WitP is more of a WEGO approach from my experience ….



scout1 -> RE: Air Attack on Naval Vessels .....? (12/4/2019 12:37:24 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: scout1


quote:

ORIGINAL: scout1


quote:

ORIGINAL: Meteor2

But the concept, that the route is of no importance and the end-point of the route is the decision-point, is seconed-best.
Maybe, not so easy, because it is a little bit WEGO, but Alvaro should consider something different for the Pacific.

The Bismark and the UBoats had to use the longer route and bypassing Scapa Flow in one hex distance "feels" not right.



Agreed, but is a game design trade off … I'm sure it complicates coding to target hex by hex movement of naval assets and check for recon & attack possibilities throughout the movement of a naval asset (similar to AE WitP …. I've played it for years).

But agree, naval movement needs a in path check for recon and air attack. Most important for pacific operations since it is mostly a naval conflict …..

But at the end of the day, will be a trade that AV needs to make for his system ….


Though in fairness, AE WitP is more of a WEGO approach from my experience ….


My description is flawed for AE WitP …. The primary difference is the turn length …. naval vessels can only move so far in 1, 2 or 3 day turns in AE … War Plan is two weeks in length so the end of naval movement risk t air attack in AE doesn't exist in a 2 week War Plan approach …..



AlvaroSousa -> RE: Air Attack on Naval Vessels .....? (12/4/2019 3:47:39 AM)

The naval system is a combination of sea zones and hexes. Which is why there is no pathing for movement. If the enemy is 24 hexes away you can move and attack.

If the enemy is 25+ hexes away you are out of position.

Where the enemy is determines if you want to approach.

I don't want to burden players with tracing a path to avoid possible air attacks along the way. You also can't program that in a game where it's my turn your turn. You need to ask if they want to intercept and if so turn back, etc. If I put a decision tree for the players to make on these situations then I now complicate what is an easy to use game.



toddtreadway -> RE: Air Attack on Naval Vessels .....? (12/4/2019 1:32:32 PM)

Honestly, this is one of the VERY few criticisms I have of the game. I keep wishing naval interceptions were done on a closer interval, to allow more interceptions by air units. As it stands, air units are simply passed by in most cases, without having any ability to intercept.



AlvaroSousa -> RE: Air Attack on Naval Vessels .....? (12/4/2019 2:32:27 PM)

I didn't say it was off the table. I would love to do it. But I need to do it in an effective way where a player doesn't get this message.

Your Japanese fleet was destroyed BY X, Y, Z air groups at x1,y1... x2,y2....x3,y3!!!!

But I had 3 carrier groups, 3 battle groups, and 3 patrol groups WTF!!?!?! HOW?!?! WHY COULDN'T I REVERSE COURSE!!! *sounds of Seppuku can be heard in the background*



scout1 -> RE: Air Attack on Naval Vessels .....? (12/4/2019 10:26:04 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alvaro Sousa

I didn't say it was off the table. I would love to do it. But I need to do it in an effective way where a player doesn't get this message.

Your Japanese fleet was destroyed BY X, Y, Z air groups at x1,y1... x2,y2....x3,y3!!!!

But I had 3 carrier groups, 3 battle groups, and 3 patrol groups WTF!!?!?! HOW?!?! WHY COULDN'T I REVERSE COURSE!!! *sounds of Seppuku can be heard in the background*


Don't sweat it AV …. I think the primary challenge is the turn length … most naval vessels could cross the Atlantic in 2 weeks …. so I believe that is the crux of the issue …. AE Witp gets around this with 1 ,2 or 3 days turns ….
Short of doing multiple naval turns to land turns, there will need to be some comprimaize … far more difficult than first observations ….



AlvaroSousa -> RE: Air Attack on Naval Vessels .....? (12/4/2019 10:45:01 PM)

I am aware of that. I am not sure how to tackle that except loops.



Chocolino -> RE: Air Attack on Naval Vessels .....? (12/4/2019 11:22:08 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: scout1

So the actual combat hex will be something other than where the surface fleet ends its turn … ?


Reading this late - sorry.

Just in case you refer to an occasion in our game - I believe your sub interdicted my navy leaving port. That usually happens when you set them to fleet mode instead of raider mode.

The British fleet actually fighting moved on and there was another fleet nearby at the end of the turn - which however was not involved. That may have caused confusion as to what actually happened.

BTW - I have zero luck so far attacking your subs with my air assets when you pass by Scotland - and that is probably realistic especially in early war.



toddtreadway -> RE: Air Attack on Naval Vessels .....? (12/5/2019 9:36:30 AM)

Sub interdicted a fleet leaving port? I didn't think that is possible under the current rules.



AlvaroSousa -> RE: Air Attack on Naval Vessels .....? (12/5/2019 12:25:31 PM)

It is not. The interception rules were created this way in Beta. Give the Beta testers a lot of the credit here. They presented the requirement for it and how much it would improve the game. We talked about it and the current solution is elegant and easy.

As is almost every naval battle took place near a coast. That I can think of only the hunting of the Bismarck took place in open sea and that took 1/2 the British navy.

As is I do not see any non-exploitative way to do interception along the way.



Essro -> RE: Air Attack on Naval Vessels .....? (12/5/2019 7:28:08 PM)

I think the current system is pretty decent for ETO.

But I wonder...

If subs had shorter range?

If fleets could be intercepted from their start point?

Evacuations...
A Dunkirk situation will almost always result in the unit surviving an evacuation (without escort) provided the receiving port is far away (out of enemy air range) regardless of overwhelming enemy air presence.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.4375