carrier intercept range?

carrier intercept range? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command WWII: World at War

Message

CaesarAug -> carrier intercept range? (12/27/2021 2:56:03 PM)
In my homemade mod testing, I’m getting the impression that carriers on fighter CAP or mixed modes (with auto or intercept settings), should only really be allowed to intercept enemy air or carrier air attacks in the same hex as the carrier being attacked, that is with a carrier intercept range setting of zero (0). With a possible research bonus of two levels allowing to go from carrier intercept range 0-1-2. Does this seem to represent a more historically realistic mode of typical carrier fighter CAP intercept operations? What I mean is: it seems that carrier fighter CAP should be more restricted to protecting the carrier itself, that is, the carrier that is being attacked by enemy air or carrier air strikes, i.e., not behaving as fighters on the ground with longer intercept ranges. But maybe allowing for a moderate intercept range increase as mentioned above. Any thoughts on this?

DrZom -> RE: carrier intercept range? (12/27/2021 7:57:05 PM)
Little about sea combat in the game seems historically realistic, IMO, given the size of the hexes and length of a turn. But that is OK; it makes the game playable. If you are going to modify, you might consider CAP intercepting anything that flies through the same hex as the carrier, not just attacks on the carrier... if that is something that can be done.

CaesarAug -> RE: carrier intercept range? (12/28/2021 7:06:10 AM)
I don’t think that can be modded since it may already be the way things work by default, hard-coded in the game .exe. What you mention already works that way when enemy surface units and submarines go through an enemy carrier hex. In fact, battle may automatically ensue when any naval unit traverses an enemy naval unit’s hex. There may be an algorithm that determines whether or not battle does take place during movement through an enemy occupied sea hex, since I get the impression it doesn’t happen each and every time. Can’t say for sure the same occurs with air traversing an enemy carrier occupied hex. My original post was merely suggesting that a carrier-based fighter complement historically was primarily for that specific carrier’s protection against land-based and carrier-based air attacks. And for air cover for accompanying naval units as escort or as part of a task force. Hence the suggestion for a low intercept range.

Elessar2 -> RE: carrier intercept range? (12/29/2021 12:49:48 AM)
As a recent thread I started indicates, it was discovered that carriers in Fighter mode get the full Fighter Defense + Tech bonuses against other air units attacking them, while those in Naval/Tactical don't (Mix Mode halves said bonuses). This works completely independently of any actual Intercepts which occur prior to the actual bombing run. So while your idea has merit in isolation, given how the game works it would just make carriers who had just done their own bombing runs on their own turn even more vulnerable to retaliatory attacks since the number of possible intercepting allied carriers would soon drop to zero. I'd like to see adjacent non-carrier ships provide a modest AA boost to the carrier, but at this stage we won't see any major game engine overhauls.

CaesarAug -> RE: carrier intercept range? (12/29/2021 6:52:13 AM)
Interesting observation, Elessar2. Yes, Fighter CAP mode provides full defensive fighter values, Naval/Tactical Bomber mode provides no defensive fighter values, while Mixed mode halves the defensive fighter values and bomber values. So if I understand aright, what you’re fundamentally saying is that a low carrier intercept range (say 0-1-2) will tend to make carriers more vulnerable to air and carrier air strikes since they cannot count on defensive fighter CAP from relatively nearby friendly carriers if needed, because they may not near enough to provide such short-ranged CAP? Could this not be taken into consideration, requiring a more careful placement of friendly carriers in a fleet, i.e., adjacent to each other or two hexes away for mutual fighter CAP (with the proper carrier mode, of course)? And perhaps a readjustment of fighter, bomber and carrier defence ratings to compensate somewhat? You see, my main point is that it seems a bit off (to me, anyway) that a carrier-based fighter complement should not overly behave as mere floating airbases with comparable land-based intercept ranges. A shorter carrier intercept range restricts those carrier-based fighters primarily for its own carrier defence, and yes, a marginal fleet CAP of no more than 2 range with research. In observing multi-carrier battles, it just seemed a bit odd that other carriers were providing friendly CAP to nearby allied carriers under air/carrier attack. Shorter-ranged carrier intercept ranges will tend to have each carrier provide its own CAP, which of course forces it to be in Fighter CAP or Mixed mode, of course, at the expense of not being in Naval/Tactical Bomber mode, thereby forfeiting an increased naval strike. But of course, if in that mode after a bombing run, the problem of being more vulnerable to air/carrier attack without fighter CAP of its own, and also not in the shorter range of friendly carrier fighter CAP. Hmmm… I do get your point about how the game plays with carrier modes. I was just speculating if it was possible to take everything into account for a more historical simulation…

Elessar2 -> RE: carrier intercept range? (12/29/2021 11:32:17 PM)
As I said in the other thread, carriers in a task force had a communal cap covering everybody, with on the US side at least Combat Information Centers to direct fighters to incoming threats. But here thanks to the no-stacking feature they are each separated by 40 miles, not the usual 1-5 miles as in the actual war.

CaesarAug -> RE: carrier intercept range? (12/30/2021 3:35:48 PM)
I understand the difference in distance. The no-stacking system in SC games makes for a welcome streamlined playing experience, though without some of the benefits of stacking. But the scale in World at War is more around 50-60 miles / hex, as confirmed by Bill Runacre when I inquired about it in these forums. So we have to compensate with some necessary abstraction. Still, the old Third Reich boardgame and its PC equivalent only permitted two land units maximum stack in a hex, excluding air and naval units. And it worked well enough. In fact, no-stacking in SC works surprisingly well, too, plus any unit—land, naval, air—can be modded for two strikes if the player wishes, and that could compensate somewhat for no-stacking. Regarding carrier fighter CAP, maybe the intercept range could be lowered to a game-start 2 and give it a two level research increase with Advanced Fighters for a maximum intercept range of 4.

hansondavid4 -> RE: carrier intercept range? (12/31/2021 1:09:22 AM)
The US would have each carrier at the center of its screening vessels and then have each of these groups spread about 10 miles. They would have radar coverage out 100+ miles and coordinate cap from all the carriers within the task force. Later in the war this radar coverage was extended by radar picket ships. The net effect is that the carriers were mutually supporting across the task force. There is a certain abstraction with the way they do naval combat. I think the default cap range works within the bounds of the abstract nature of the naval combat. Do not think of the naval units to game scale when actually fighting. A taskforce may be spread over 5 or 6 hexes in SC but would realistically all be in the same hex if working in a game of this overall map scale. It works if you accept the abstraction of the tactical and strategic level of the game. Japan would put there carriers, with no or limited radar, close together and again the cap from the carriers would support the taskforce. Same basic net result as the American cap. The Japanese were a little more vulnerable as there eggs were all in one basket. While the Americans had 1 CV per basket. Usually a raid would hit 1 basket so only one US carrier was usually in harms way for the raid.

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.171875