I'm a real world pilot and also spent some time in the Air Force so this one resonates with me so hopefully I can explain myself.
With air units, their movement range should essentially be twice what their combat range is. If I am flying from Point A to to attack or patrol at Point B and then return to Point A, the current system is great.
If I instead intend on moving from Point A to Point C and staying there, that range should be much much longer since you wouldn't need the fuel reserves to return to Point A. I understand there are game mechanics issues but the same confirmation that comes up when you launch rockets or missiles could be used.
Follow along.
I have an air unit I wish to reposition. I select the "Move" command that already exists, the range window then recalculates with a new distance, I would use 40% longer than the combat range because real pilots always hold fuel in reserve for unexpected needs. You would then select the new airbase/airstrip/carrier and the confirmation window would appear to confirm that this movement is one you want to do so you cant then redirect it somewhere for an out of range attack.
Thoughts?
Please log in to post a reply.
I thought them not that useful, but someone played a nasty trick on me : use the strat bombers to remove the airports below you. That is incredibly effective. It worked better when you saw the airports on the map though.z00mz00m wrote:
The only time I could think of using strat bombers is in the Battle of Britain event.Otherwise, you really want to capture whole cities.
And there is no point in destroying a city you will soon own.
Oh really ? Wow. Where ?GrandEmpire wrote:
I DID earn that nickname.
I cant discuss where, but i DID earn it from friends, colleuges etc
Youre arguments, tho may be accurate in real life {?} are not supported in this game
Any aircraft can use any airbase albeit an airbase built on an island or a core province. It also makes no difference on the level of the airfield.
I for one like the idea of the plane 'using its reserve tank' to fly one way to an airfield and that one way travel could be up to twice its present range - but travel only - once outside its normal {present range} of operation it can no longer be redirected or patrol - it becomes a ONE WAY flight path - no deviation allowed once outside normal operation area. This adds a risk for the user that if the destination airbase is destroyed or province captured then the plane grounds at the destination as a convoy
it wouldn't be the first time combat planes have been used in this way - probably the most recent well known case would be the RAF Vulcan raid on the Falklands - a distance of nigh 6600miles when the plane had an operating range of 1700 miles - i admit this is slightly different as the planes refueled in flight and got back but pushes the point that the planes reached maximum range and needed refueling in flight as they would not have made it back - or forward if not refueled
z00mz00m wrote:
Runways. Bigger, heavier planes require longer runways.Repair facilities. Every type of plane requires different, specialized repair facilities, equipment, and trained mechanics.
Ordnance. Bullets, cannon rounds, mines, depth charges, bombs of different shapes and sizes. Supply depots and factories used to produce those things.
Every time the air force, or the navy, build a base, they construct it for certain types of missions, performed by certain types of planes. Changing over to a different mission would be hugely expensive, wasteful, and time consuming. Like transforming an amusement park into a university or a residential neighborhood. It's months-to-years of construction.
Let's say you have a huge air base with long runways and bunkers full of bombs that can level an industrial city. This base is far from the front line, because it's expensive and strategic bombers have a long range. Are you going to use this base for fighter planes, which will spend half their fuel getting to the front?
Flip the script, build a fighter plane base on a tropical island. It's good for scouting missions and providing air cover for the navy. How are you going to base long-range bombers? Where are the runways going to go? Where will you find space for bunkers and hangars? How are you even going to bring enough bombs and fuel to this island to operate the bombers?
The whole idea of moving a bomber wing is ridiculous. There's a reason the US Air Force couldn't bomb Japan until around 1945. By then, the war was already won, and US forces owned the entire Pacific Ocean.
Refuelling in the air was not possible in the 1940's and shouldn't be discussed here.
am not saying it was possible indeed i specifically stated in the Falkland's war which obviously was not a conflict of ww2 - but purely giving an example that airforces have in the past used planes to the maximum range of travel prior to refueling albeit in the air or on land
K.Rokossovski wrote:
Refuelling in the air was not possible in the 1940's and shouldn't be discussed here.
though i didn't know - actually in flight refueling dates back to 1921 so was possible during ww2 tho again agree more refined to the 1921 way of doing soTelmah69 wrote:
am not saying it was possible indeed i specifically stated in the Falkland's war which obviously was not a conflict of ww2 - but purely giving an example that airforces have in the past used planes to the maximum range of travel prior to refueling albeit in the air or on landK.Rokossovski wrote:
Refuelling in the air was not possible in the 1940's and shouldn't be discussed here.
The only way I can think of a possible workaround (I really agree that your suggestion should exist in this particular game... But today mechanics make it impossible as they would be reeaaaly OP AND kind of unrealistic due to the points mentioned by z00mz00m... Is that range may vary by air base level. But would have to be balanced with also refuel time and even consider a lvl 2 base for repairs... So as to generate new situations for use of planes.
Please log in to post a reply.
