|
silkworm -> (2/7/2001 2:22:00 PM)
|
This is what I'm think of in terms of an air combat model. It is simple. It preserves the air group as a unit of fighting force while removing the advantage of big groups.
When an air strike occurs, the defending fighter force will get a number of combat rounds to intercept the bombers before they reach the target and drop their loads. The number of intercept rounds can depend on a variety of factors such as the speed and combat radius of defending fighters, speed of the bombers, and the distance at which they were detected. There may be pursuit rounds on egress, as well.
For each round, planes on both sides may individually select a target and fire a "shot". A miss will still disrupt the effectiveness of return fire from the target. A defending fighter group can be given one of three tactical orders:
engage escorts - fire at escorts until they have been destroyed or sufficiently disrupted, then turn on the bombers. This is useful for a powerful defender that can disrupt escorts and still get a shot at the bombers. Defender air casualties is reduced.
engage all - divide your shots from the very first round between bombers and escorts.
engage bombers - fire at bombers until they have been destroyed, repeled, or have dropped their loads, then turn on the escorts. This can be used to provide a desperate defense for a high value target. It is useful for an inferior defending force that cannot out-muscle the escorts and needs to concentrate firepower on the bombers. Defender casualties may be high since attacking escorts receive less disruption and will fire with greater effectiveness.
Attacking escorts will actively engage the defender. Attacking bombers will return fire only when pursued. Escorts may be given one of three tactical orders:
engage threat to escorts - engage fighters that are attacking escorts first. When they have been destroyed or disrupted, then go after those attacking the bombers.
engage all - attack everybody
engage threat to bombers - protect bombers as a priority
Air group experience (and leadership?) can influence how precisely these orders are carried out. A inexperienced or poorly led unit might defend itself first before worrying about the bombers, regardless of what their orders were.
Of course the player can mix and match tactical orders to type of equipment, level of experience, leadership, etc. For example, one might want to use a inexperienced group flying less maneuverable but highly durable aircraft to go after the bombers. They don't need a lot of maneuverability, can take more damage, and are in any case expendable...
When targets can be selected from more than one enemy air group (for example when a defender can select from multiple escort groups), shots are distributed between all of them. Larger groups, more aggressive groups (due to leadership or experience), or those with more capable equipment may receive a bigger share of your fire.
This model can be summarized simply as this. Instead of firing a shot for each enemy air group, putting a force with a larger number of air groups at an unrealistic disadvantage, each plane fires a shot for each round of combat available. Targets are chosen based on tactical orders, aggressiveness, and threat factors. The number of rounds is based on time and space factors.
Anyway, just throwing an idea out there. I know that for me personally, I'd enjoy Pacific War a lot more if it modeled air combat this way. It's simple in concept, yet more realistic. The tactical orders feature places a minimal burden on the those who don't want to be bothered (most of the time "engage all" will do just fine), while giving the interested player more operational control. It makes equipment specialization more meaningful -- finally some use for those heavy fighters. If Pacific War was open source, I'd try to implement this myself.
[This message has been edited by silkworm (edited February 08, 2001).]
|
|
|
|
