Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Air system - change from AT to ATG?

 
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] >> Advanced Tactics Series >> RE: Air system - change from AT to ATG? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Air system - change from AT to ATG? - 5/21/2011 6:22:49 PM   
jjdenver

 

Posts: 2247
Joined: 11/2/2007
Status: offline
Ok Vic, thanks for the update. Sounds good.

_____________________________


(in reply to Vic)
Post #: 31
RE: Air system - change from AT to ATG? - 5/23/2011 5:33:22 PM   
GrumpyMel

 

Posts: 864
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: offline
Yeah, I'll say that I haven't been at my best form in the game so far...and that Vic is a very talented opponent.

I'll note that the chance for defending interceptors NOT to scramble on any given mission has thrown a much bigger monkey wrench into my typical mega-stack air war tactics then I anticipated.

Essentialy my typical tactic was to throw the mega-stack at the edge of the defenders intercept range...so that only some of his defending bases would be involved in the intercept and I could pick apart his air defenses peicemeal. Typicaly (in AT classic) I would use a recon flight of a single aircraft set to 5% retreat to determine exactly where this edge existed and whether the defender was on intercept.

The tangle in ATG is that if your recon flight doesn't turn up any resistance..... you don't know whether it's because no one is really there to intercept OR because the interceptors didn't happen to scramble on that particular mission due to random chance. End result is that you end up having to waste alot more aircraft on recon flights then you ordinarly would in order to profile the defenders air defenses. Furthrermore, even when you do identify a good target hex at the edge of the defenders intercept range to dogfight his fighters..... when you throw your mega-stack at it...there is no assurance that the defenders fighters will scramble to intercept THAT particular mission....and if they don't, you've pretty much wasted your offensive air capacity for that turn.

Honestly, that one little rule change from AT Classic to ATG has had a much more pronounced effect on the dynamics of the air war then I thought it would. I definately reccomend having that rule turned on for any games in which you want to reflect a more historical representation of air combat.

I still believe I'm beating the VVS in the air....and I still believe that the mega-stack tactic remains somewhat of an issue in ATG.... but it is (IMO) FAR less so then in AT Classic....the variable intercept rule really goes quite a way toward mitigating that tactic...much more then I expected it would.








(in reply to jjdenver)
Post #: 32
RE: Air system - change from AT to ATG? - 5/24/2011 5:13:26 AM   
Zaratoughda


Posts: 714
Joined: 11/15/2008
From: NE Pa, USA
Status: offline
Hmmmm... I've only had ATG a bit over a week now and have just gotten to the point where I am fighting major air.

One problem... I tend to send in dive bombers with fighter escort and, there isn't any ways to set the fighters to not bomb but just act as escorts. So, I guess what I could do is send in fighters to bomb first by themselves and hopefully suck out any interceptors and then I can attack with my dive bombers with impunity.

Also, I have units having 10 or 20 dive bombers in them, and send in a number of these units to bomb all at the same time, maybe 50 dive bombers total at a time, and just realized I am at a disadvantage if I do this.

In other words, sounds like, the way things are now with ATG, the best approach would be to individually bomb with waves of fighters, hoping to suck out any interceptors, and then bomb individually with any dive bombers.

Unfortunately, this would not work if the enemy has considerable air forces. You could send in all your fighters in hope of sucking out the enemy interceptors but they might now show which would mean it would be unwise to send in your dive bombers.

The way things SHOULD work in air combat, IMO, would be both attacking and defending forces are split up into waves (fighters first then any bombers), based on the stacking limit. In other words, with the stacking limit at 100, all the fighters in the attacking force would be divided up into waves of 10 each, and the same would then be done for each of the different types of bombers. The intercepting force would also be divided up into waves, though in this case it would just be fighters.

Then, these waves would be 'lined up' so to speak, and the first intercepting wave would fight the first attacking wave (just for a round or two), and if they got through that with enough force that they continue, then they move on to the second wave, etc. After the first wave of interceptors was done (usually reach the point where they retire due to losses including damage), then the second wave 'runs the gauntlet', and so forth. Waves from the attacker could, and usually would, also retire due to losses and damage.

Then, assuming there are still bombers left after any interception, they would go in on their bombing run in waves also, with no negative modifiers. But, any flak would get to fire at each wave in succession.

Uh, I think this could all be done on one combat screen.

Not sure I am explaining this all that well but, having played Grigsby's WitP and WitE, this is pretty much the way things are done, though in these cases the 'waves' are predetermiend by the aircraft in each squadron. In WitP, there are limits as to how many of a given type of aircraft that you can put in each air squadron. In WitE, the number of each in a given squadron is set and you cannot change that. But, given this, air combat is fought in a series of 'wave vs wave' combats and, IMO this is pretty realistic.

Yeah, it is conceivable that in ATG that there would be limits of how many aircraft could be in a given unit.... but that would be something ATG does not do right now so, better if the units were broken up into 'waves' at the point of air to air combat resolution.

I think an approach like this would resolve both the 'big stack' problem and also the 'picking off stragglers' problem.

Zaratoughda

(in reply to GrumpyMel)
Post #: 33
RE: Air system - change from AT to ATG? - 5/24/2011 2:31:42 PM   
mgaffn1

 

Posts: 175
Joined: 11/20/2009
Status: offline
Airfield stacking limits (per GrumpyMel & others suggestion) seems the best adjustment within current game mechanics.

(in reply to Vic)
Post #: 34
RE: Air system - change from AT to ATG? - 5/24/2011 2:53:59 PM   
Rander


Posts: 100
Joined: 4/18/2007
Status: offline
Hello.

I think that airfields stack limitations will be a good measure.
And gives the possibility (if implemented) of building different sizes of airfileds (small, medium, big).

Also could give extra penalties for big units and for attacks involving multiple units (reflecting coordinations problems).

Kind regards,
Rander.

(in reply to mgaffn1)
Post #: 35
RE: Air system - change from AT to ATG? - 5/24/2011 3:42:21 PM   
jjdenver

 

Posts: 2247
Joined: 11/2/2007
Status: offline
Thx for the updates GrumpyMel. Does the scenario designer have to turn on the "variable interception chance" rule? Or is that something players can do?

Hopefully Vic puts in the airbase overstack restriction.

Zara's idea sounds interesting as well.


_____________________________


(in reply to Rander)
Post #: 36
RE: Air system - change from AT to ATG? - 5/24/2011 6:30:08 PM   
GrumpyMel

 

Posts: 864
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jjdenver

Thx for the updates GrumpyMel. Does the scenario designer have to turn on the "variable interception chance" rule? Or is that something players can do?

Hopefully Vic puts in the airbase overstack restriction.

Zara's idea sounds interesting as well.



It's an editor thing. In the RuleVars.

Honestly, with the variable intercept rule and the airbase stacking limit, I think the dynamics of air combat are going to be much better in ATG.

The only thing I wouldn't want to see is some-one building a dozen air bases all adjacent to each other. But scenerio designers should be able to control that somewhat with the cost (& EP ) for producing airbases or possibly not making them buildable at all for certain scenerios.

(in reply to jjdenver)
Post #: 37
RE: Air system - change from AT to ATG? - 5/24/2011 7:36:54 PM   
phatkarp


Posts: 131
Joined: 4/14/2011
Status: offline
I like this idea. Lvl 1-3 airfields would be cool, upgraded by engineers like resources are now.

When fighting an air war, always keep in mind the airfield surprise rule, which I believe gives you a couple free rounds against enemy aircraft when you are bombing their field.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rander

Hello.

I think that airfields stack limitations will be a good measure.
And gives the possibility (if implemented) of building different sizes of airfileds (small, medium, big).

Also could give extra penalties for big units and for attacks involving multiple units (reflecting coordinations problems).

Kind regards,
Rander.


(in reply to Rander)
Post #: 38
RE: Air system - change from AT to ATG? - 5/24/2011 9:43:46 PM   
Vic


Posts: 8262
Joined: 5/17/2004
Status: offline
I am planning to do a somewhat bigger patch with new features in a few months time (at most) and the airbase stacking rule is on the list for added feature to ATG.

best,
Vic


_____________________________

Visit www.vrdesigns.net for the latest news, polls, screenshots and blogs on Shadow Empire, Decisive Campaigns and Advanced Tactics


(in reply to phatkarp)
Post #: 39
RE: Air system - change from AT to ATG? - 5/25/2011 4:01:26 PM   
Stardog


Posts: 93
Joined: 1/17/2006
From: Hickory N.C.
Status: offline
Was up Bro's.?!

Vic & other Bro's


I know this is not about Aircraft Stacking & I know this ability is already built in to the game but it works in the back ground.

So could a new Setting/Action for Fighter Aircraft help?...

First I would think that this should only work for Fighter Only Units if you have a Fighter and Bombers mixed in the same counter it would not apply.?.

INTERCEPT = Fighter's set to do Intercept Action . They have a "Curricular Area/Zone of Range/Intercept" . This Action would increase the Fighters Intercept/Air Attack ability by  " + #  <<< What ever" .

The Fighters could not be surprised " Thank you Radar! < O wait Radar or Radios/Communication is not research able << Hummmm?
Any ways  as soon as the enemy's Aircraft are in Detection/Intercept Range they would be Attacked.
If the Fighters do a Intercept Action on the  AI's (OPPONENTS) turn you can not use them on your turn. That way there are no double turns with Fighters.


FIGHTER SWEEP/ATTACK = Fighters Attack only the Airfields/Airbases to destroy Aircraft on the Ground or in the Air. They don't attack Troops they Attack Aircraft . This kind of works with "RECON" Action & Airstrike but this I think would be better as they attack Aircraft only.


Learning to LOVE  ATG  !!!
Thanks
Vic





   


_____________________________

Diplomacy without arms is like music without instruments.

Frederick the Great

(in reply to Vic)
Post #: 40
RE: Air system - change from AT to ATG? - 5/31/2011 12:59:13 PM   
EmTom

 

Posts: 40
Joined: 5/25/2011
Status: offline
Thats great news that you are going to change air war design. Is this an effect of the game you played against grumpy? ;)

Anyway... a question I wanted to ask: As I play mostly against AI I would like to know whether AI engine will take new rules into consideration when deciding its production?



_____________________________

I'm with you since People's Tactics and I love it!

(in reply to Stardog)
Post #: 41
RE: Air system - change from AT to ATG? - 6/1/2011 6:06:45 AM   
lion_of_judah


Posts: 2113
Joined: 1/8/2007
Status: offline
I keep seeing stacking penalty for artillery, infantry and whatnot, but cannot find how many in each hex will cause this penalty. How many artillery units in a hex will cause this penalty, as well as how many infantry units in a hex will cause a penalty.

(in reply to jjdenver)
Post #: 42
RE: Air system - change from AT to ATG? - 6/1/2011 9:43:58 AM   
EmTom

 

Posts: 40
Joined: 5/25/2011
Status: offline
You can see land unit's stack value in logistics (I think) stat. Also when you prepare an attack stack value of attacking units and max stack value allowed without penalty is shown in the status/message area between map and bottom stats. As for max artillery units in an attack I'm not sure... But I rarely use more than 4-5 and it works well for me.

(in reply to lion_of_judah)
Post #: 43
RE: Air system - change from AT to ATG? - 9/30/2011 5:39:10 AM   
bwheatley

 

Posts: 3650
Joined: 12/13/2004
Status: offline
Vic what is the new option number for airbase stack limit?

_____________________________

-Alpha Tester Carrier Force
-Beta Tester ATG
- Mod Maintainer (past) for ATG's WAW mod
- Mod Maintainer (past) for ATG's GPW mod
-Beta Tester WITE
-Alpha Tester WITW
-Alpha Tester WITE2
-Alpha Tester Wif
-Beta Tester Command

(in reply to EmTom)
Post #: 44
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Advanced Tactics Series >> RE: Air system - change from AT to ATG? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
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

0.719