Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Carrier planes

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> Carrier planes Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Carrier planes - 10/26/2006 2:44:13 PM   
ppglaf

 

Posts: 5
Joined: 9/27/2006
Status: offline 		Hi everybody:

I've been reading this forum for a long time before registering me, maybe because I hadn't got anything to tell or my poor english , but I've found something I think it's important to say:

Carrier planes usually change their carrier class every year, and in my group we are always looking the counters to verify that all planes fits OK in their carrier, after a port strike or an aeronaval combat.

Does MWIF change the carrier plane bitmaps to show which class has the counter every year?

Sorry for my english, again, and greeting from Seville, Spain (West European map, hex 2515).
Post #: 1
RE: Carrier planes - 10/26/2006 2:45:32 PM   
argaur


Posts: 277
Joined: 5/13/2005
From: Spain
Status: offline 		buah, tu seguro k conoces al sobrino (manuel) :)

_____________________________


"... tell the Emperor that I am facing Russians.
If they had been Prussians, I'd have taken the
position long ago."
- Marshal Ney, 1813

(in reply to ppglaf)
Post #: 2
RE: Carrier planes - 10/26/2006 2:47:31 PM   
ppglaf

 

Posts: 5
Joined: 9/27/2006
Status: offline 		Manuel juega con los alemanes y yo llevo los italo-japoneses en la partida que jugamos todos los lunes en mi casa.

Manuel plays Germany and I play Italy/Japan in our monday sessions of WiF.

(in reply to argaur)
Post #: 3
RE: Carrier planes - 10/26/2006 3:09:51 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ppglaf

Hi everybody:

I've been reading this forum for a long time before registering me, maybe because I hadn't got anything to tell or my poor english , but I've found something I think it's important to say:

Carrier planes usually change their carrier class every year, and in my group we are always looking the counters to verify that all planes fits OK in their carrier, after a port strike or an aeronaval combat.

Does MWIF change the carrier plane bitmaps to show which class has the counter every year?

Sorry for my english, again, and greeting from Seville, Spain (West European map, hex 2515).

Yes, the carrier plane counter does show the current class of the CVP. This changes with time.
So you've got no worries when you rebase CVP after missions.

(in reply to ppglaf)
Post #: 4
RE: Carrier planes - 10/27/2006 3:38:15 AM   
trees trees

 

Posts: 125
Joined: 6/6/2006
From: Manistee, MI
Status: offline 		The class changing right on the counter is going to be very, very nice.

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 5
RE: Carrier planes - 10/27/2006 11:19:21 AM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: trees trees
The class changing right on the counter is going to be very, very nice.

Yes, and when you access the counter's details, you also see all the future class changings. This is really neat.

(in reply to trees trees)
Post #: 6
RE: Carrier planes - 10/27/2006 11:39:34 AM   
christo

 

Posts: 99
Joined: 11/24/2005
From: adelaide, australia
Status: offline 		Does this also mean that other values that are variable will also change? The ones that I am thinking of are aircraft factors (eg night strategic bombing) or changes to ships values (ie the defence value if damaged).

Christo

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 7
RE: Carrier planes - 10/27/2006 11:45:07 AM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: christo

Does this also mean that other values that are variable will also change? The ones that I am thinking of are aircraft factors (eg night strategic bombing) or changes to ships values (ie the defence value if damaged).

Christo

I know that Air to Air factors of FTRs are changing once you activate them as Fighter Bombers (right click the unit and choose "fighter bomber") , but I do not remember if damaged ships have their factor changed. I seem to remember they have, but I'm not sure.
About night bombings (factor halved), I do not remember neither, but I'd bet they change, because you must activate the bombers for night missions (right click the unit and choose "night mission") the same way as fighter bombers, before sending it to the target.

(in reply to christo)
Post #: 8
RE: Carrier planes - 10/27/2006 11:53:45 AM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
quote:

ORIGINAL: christo

Does this also mean that other values that are variable will also change? The ones that I am thinking of are aircraft factors (eg night strategic bombing) or changes to ships values (ie the defence value if damaged).

Christo

I know that Air to Air factors of FTRs are changing once you activate them as Fighter Bombers (right click the unit and choose "fighter bomber") , but I do not remember if damaged ships have their factor changed. I seem to remember they have, but I'm not sure.
About night bombings (factor halved), I do not remember neither, but I'd bet they change, because you must activate the bombers for night missions (right click the unit and choose "night mission") the same way as fighter bombers, before sending it to the target.


I want to review all these (inherited from CWIF). In general, I would like the numbers to change if the player is aware that they have changed (actively did something, e.g., night mission). I might make it optional - a toggle. My reasoning is that WIF experienced players might be doing calculations in their head and get annoyed that the number shown on the counter has already been modified. Players new to WIF might find it very nice to never have to worry about modifications to, say, air factors, because the program takes care of that for them.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 9
RE: Carrier planes - 10/27/2006 11:54:21 AM   
christo

 

Posts: 99
Joined: 11/24/2005
From: adelaide, australia
Status: offline
On the night bombing question... I remember that when playing CWIF I would often/ occassionally forget to allocate the "night mission" when trying to bomb. This meant that the default was day mission and that they were much more vulnerable to the Luftwaffe. Without breaking the NDA, does MWIF play in the same manner and if so would it be better at the end of the phase to have a pop up question "do you want this to be a night mission" or something similar.

Christo

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 10
RE: Carrier planes - 10/27/2006 11:59:00 AM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: christo
On the night bombing question... I remember that when playing CWIF I would often/ occassionally forget to allocate the "night mission" when trying to bomb. This meant that the default was day mission and that they were much more vulnerable to the Luftwaffe. Without breaking the NDA, does MWIF play in the same manner and if so would it be better at the end of the phase to have a pop up question "do you want this to be a night mission" or something similar.

Christo

With the enormous number of air missions that you fly during a WiF FE game (say 3-4 air missions per impulse, plus the reaction ground support ones that are unlimited, multiplied by an average of 125 impulses per side -- 250 total impulses -- to go throught the game), and the tiny amount of Night air missions you actually fly during the same game (in my case not more than 3-4, maybe up to 10), having a pop-up at each air mission asking me if I want this to be a night air misison would make me crazy.

< Message edited by Froonp -- 10/27/2006 12:08:31 PM >

(in reply to christo)
Post #: 11
RE: Carrier planes - 10/27/2006 12:00:23 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: christo
On the night bombing question... I remember that when playing CWIF I would often/ occassionally forget to allocate the "night mission" when trying to bomb. This meant that the default was day mission and that they were much more vulnerable to the Luftwaffe. Without breaking the NDA, does MWIF play in the same manner and if so would it be better at the end of the phase to have a pop up question "do you want this to be a night mission" or something similar.

Christo


I could have it work many different ways. What would you suggest?

Night missions are rare and to have the program ask that question each time you want to fly an air mission could get old fast.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to christo)
Post #: 12
RE: Carrier planes - 10/27/2006 12:03:12 PM   
christo

 

Posts: 99
Joined: 11/24/2005
From: adelaide, australia
Status: offline
Fair enough, though in reality there was only very very limited use of the night mission in anything but strategic bombardment during the war. I know that there are the celebrated examples particularly by the russians when they did not have air superiority but if this was only an option for strategic bombing.....

Christo

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 13
RE: Carrier planes - 10/27/2006 12:07:17 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: christo

Fair enough, though in reality there was only very very limited use of the night mission in anything but strategic bombardment during the war. I know that there are the celebrated examples particularly by the russians when they did not have air superiority but if this was only an option for strategic bombing.....

Christo

If the pop up is only on strategic air missions, why not. Strat Air missions are very special, and planned differently than the others, so having an extra pop up have some sense.

(in reply to christo)
Post #: 14
RE: Carrier planes - 10/27/2006 1:00:45 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: christo

Fair enough, though in reality there was only very very limited use of the night mission in anything but strategic bombardment during the war. I know that there are the celebrated examples particularly by the russians when they did not have air superiority but if this was only an option for strategic bombing.....

Christo

If the pop up is only on strategic air missions, why not. Strat Air missions are very special, and planned differently than the others, so having an extra pop up have some sense.

ok

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 15
RE: Carrier planes - 10/27/2006 1:57:50 PM   
CBoehm

 

Posts: 113
Joined: 10/31/2005
From: Aarhus, Denmark
Status: offline 		I seem to remember air-transport also being used quite a lot historically at night ...ei. airlift to Stalingrad etc.  - ofcause only flying during the night hours such missions should have their capacity reduced by half too ...

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 16
RE: Carrier planes - 10/27/2006 3:14:55 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: CBoehm

I seem to remember air-transport also being used quite a lot historically at night ...ei. airlift to Stalingrad etc.  - ofcause only flying during the night hours such missions should have their capacity reduced by half too ...

The Air transport & paradrop missions flown at night are not affected in their capacity, but the effect on tranported units :

Quote from RAW :
**********************************
14.2.3 Night missions (option 52)
(...)
After it lands, turn any land unit you air transported, or paradropped, at night face-down. Paradropping units must still fight any required combat normally (see - 11.15).
**********************************

(in reply to CBoehm)
Post #: 17
RE: Carrier planes - 10/27/2006 6:36:21 PM   
Zorachus99


Posts: 1066
Joined: 9/15/2000
From: Palo Alto, CA
Status: offline 		A quick observation. 

When in air-to-air combat with carrier based naval air units, the number in the square is added to the backup fighters in increments of .1 for each size category that unit is.  In playing, we have always used the air unit size on the front of the counter, regardless of what type of carrier it was based from.  A blue size 4 air unit was always adding .4 to the air-to-air fighter calculation for backup fighters, even when based off of an orange size 2 carrier.

1)  Were we doing the calculation wrong for aircraft based off smaller carriers?
2)  Will the fractional additions as backup fighters be based on the current size of the plane or the original size?

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 18
RE: Carrier planes - 10/27/2006 6:56:22 PM   
lomyrin


Posts: 3741
Joined: 12/21/2005
From: San Diego
Status: offline 		Th CWiF program did change the factor numbers in most cases when an application should change it

A fighter used as a bomber, by a drop down table selection, had it's air to air factor visibly reduced by the program.

Night missions similarly had to be selected via clicking on a drop down table and a plane so selected had a 'night' wording superimposed on the plane counter. 

When bombers were used in ground strikes or support missions in CWiF their factor numbers did not change when flown to targets in rain, snow, or forest etc. but their effective factors were correctly determined by the program.

Lars

(in reply to Zorachus99)
Post #: 19
RE: Carrier planes - 10/27/2006 11:10:42 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99
When in air-to-air combat with carrier based naval air units, the number in the square is added to the backup fighters in increments of .1 for each size category that unit is.  In playing, we have always used the air unit size on the front of the counter, regardless of what type of carrier it was based from.  A blue size 4 air unit was always adding .4 to the air-to-air fighter calculation for backup fighters, even when based off of an orange size 2 carrier.

1)  Were we doing the calculation wrong for aircraft based off smaller carriers?
2)  Will the fractional additions as backup fighters be based on the current size of the plane or the original size?

This is the old rule. It changed from RAW6 to RAW7 in 2003.
In RAW7 aug 04, you add 0.1 x the Air to Air factor of the backup CVPs.

(in reply to Zorachus99)
Post #: 20
RE: Carrier planes - 10/28/2006 1:21:00 AM   
Zorachus99


Posts: 1066
Joined: 9/15/2000
From: Palo Alto, CA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99
When in air-to-air combat with carrier based naval air units, the number in the square is added to the backup fighters in increments of .1 for each size category that unit is.  In playing, we have always used the air unit size on the front of the counter, regardless of what type of carrier it was based from.  A blue size 4 air unit was always adding .4 to the air-to-air fighter calculation for backup fighters, even when based off of an orange size 2 carrier.

1)  Were we doing the calculation wrong for aircraft based off smaller carriers?
2)  Will the fractional additions as backup fighters be based on the current size of the plane or the original size?

This is the old rule. It changed from RAW6 to RAW7 in 2003.
In RAW7 aug 04, you add 0.1 x the Air to Air factor of the backup CVPs.


I like the new rule. Three years... It feels like less. My last game started with older ruleset I guess.


_____________________________

Most men can survive adversity, the true test of a man's character is power. -Abraham Lincoln

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 21
RE: Carrier planes - 11/15/2006 1:16:58 AM   
Larry Smith

 

Posts: 203
Joined: 4/14/2001
From: Williams Lake, BC, Canada
Status: offline 		Wasn't there a rule (one of many options I think) that allowed the CvP's to be based more than one to a carrier, as long as the sum of their classes did not exceed the carrier's class?

Oh, I forgot to add, could this be implemented (I'm not asking for it to be included, just curious as to the possibility)

< Message edited by Larry Smith -- 11/15/2006 1:31:14 AM >

(in reply to Zorachus99)
Post #: 22
RE: Carrier planes - 11/15/2006 1:18:30 AM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Larry Smith

Wasn't there a rule (one of many options I think) that allowed the CvP's to be based more than one to a carrier, as long as the sum of their classes did not exceed the carrier's class?

Yes. It's part of MWIF.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Larry Smith)
Post #: 23
RE: Carrier planes - 11/15/2006 1:30:25 AM   
Larry Smith

 

Posts: 203
Joined: 4/14/2001
From: Williams Lake, BC, Canada
Status: offline 		WOW!  That was quick.  I only asked as it couldn't be done in the old program.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 24
RE: Carrier planes - 11/15/2006 4:24:55 AM   
trees

 

Posts: 175
Joined: 5/28/2006
Status: offline 		Will option 56 have 'sub-optionals'l? Some folks play with double-stacking, some don't. Some allow CV planes to act like any other plane when not on a CV, some don't. Some people play with the extra counter sheets from Carrier Planes in Flames, some don't .... jes wonderin' ?

Except for the extra counters you could always agree amongst human opponents how to handle that without adding code.

(in reply to Larry Smith)
Post #: 25
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> Carrier planes Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.703