Air Unit Range

Ciladen W wrote:

Air units should be able to move between airbases at double their combat range. If a unit can fly from Berlin to Cologne and back, it should be able to fly from Berlin to London and not back.

If you were to double the range for relocation purposes, even ints level 1 could already reach airports that would currently only be accessible at level 6, and for bombers then even more distant airports would be reachable, from which they might attack in their usual range then.

That on one hand saves a lot of airports (or carriers) or the cost of their construction and the respective time required for refueling there, and beyond and much more serious, even planes on lowest level and already in the early game could moved to provinces (on the 22p map eg beyond the Mediterranean, the Baltic or other seas, or even beyond other countries), for which they should not be able to do due to their level and the general progress in the game.

All that would mean a massive intervention in the game balance especially of early maps (would cancel the "time-brake"), because while everything around is still on the lowest level planes at level 1 would have a mobility as level 6 planes has now.

Restrisiko wrote:

If you were to double the range for relocation purposes, even ints level 1 could already reach airports that would currently only be accessible at level 6

If Ciladen's proposal was to be realized, you'd have to reduce combat range to 75% of what it is now and increase relocation range to 150% of what it is now (or maybe 70% and 140% or something alike).

Implemented that way, the change would not only make things more realistic, but also improve gameplay and the strategic options you have. It often sucks it's so difficult (and even impossible in some regions like Siberia on 25 player world map) to span your net of airbases over your entire country to enable planes flying from one end to the other. On the other hand, after that change, you'd have to have an airbase really close to the front for using your airforce. Which I would also approve.

Only disadvantage I can imagine is that displaying two circles for two ranges would look too confusing, especially when it comes to selecting a stack of several types of planes. Showing the relocation range with a dotted circle might help a bit, but still. Guess that only combat range should be shown and players should get some kind of assisting tool like for example drawing a circle around a selected province with a radius the player can enter or choose.

Anyhow, probably that change would imply too much implementation and balancing effort, considering the "medium" benefit(?)

ah yes give them double range because people spamming air didnt already dominate the game anyways

Please just read.

As I said in my last post:

Hans A. Pils wrote:

Yah, of course you might not just double the relocation range.

If Ciladen's proposal was to be realized, you'd have to reduce combat range to 75% of what it is now and increase relocation range to 150% of what it is now (or maybe 70% and 140% or something alike).

Aircraft "relocation range" is properly called "ferry range" in the terminology of the era. It's why heavy bombers and long-range fighters with drop tanks could fly from Maine-Nova Scotia-Labrador-Greenland-Iceland-Scotland, and it played a critical role for the Allies in quickly building an American strategic air force in Britain, and in replacing combat losses of numerous other long-range aircraft types. In the last decade aerospace archeologists salvaged a P-38 Lightning fighter that had crashed on the Greenland ice cap and had been gradually subsumed into the glacier -- one of many still buried in the ice there.

This is one of those proposed changes where I would come down on the side of more realism in the game. IMHO, far from contributing to the purported "over-powered" abilities of the in-game tactical bomber unit, it would permit the quick movement of the in-game interceptor unit, which IS THE MOST EFFECTIVE COUNTER-WEAPON to the tactical bomber. I say this as a player who makes extensive use of the in-game tactical bomber unit, knows how to use it properly, and knows how to defend against it properly.

Hmm, I like the idea, and I side with Montana, but I would expect it to end up just being a tactic for experienced players to crap on new players from a very great height(and range) than they already do. This can be further backed up with the fact that, afaik, most of the player base of this game seems to be children between the ages of 12-18, with older players catching on very quick and dominating the game as they mostly play against robots and kids.

The fact that the player base is mostly kids also explains the huge drop out rate, as they have no patience. This will just make it worse in my opinion. I would however support some form of extended range for relocating via the use of drop tanks, but not massively so. Maybe, say, 20% of combat range?

Aircraft movement beyond normal flight range just have its speed reduced in half. And become inactive for double the time it would take to refuel. Realistically you must consider the logistics involved moving an airforce.