Planes Loading Up Into Trucks

Von Eisenschmitt wrote:

I have a suggestion: Please stop altogether the practice of planes loading up into truck convoys and driving into a battle if their target is out of range.

If their target is out of range, the solution (just like in the Pacific in WW2) is to acquire/build/capture airfields closer to the target. It isn't "load the planes onto trucks and just drive into combat".

Yes, infantry load up into trucks and tanks were loaded onto trains but the idea that somehow you tear down a plane, load it and the crews onto trucks and those trucks drive into combat is, frankly, absurd.

Thanks Kindly

Stop doing that build an Air base first

What do you mean? Generally I do build air strips as I acquire/build, but sometimes a larger province can eat into the plane's range and if the target is one pixel beyond the plane's range, it auto defaults to trux mode.

Easier to just get rid of altogether. It makes zero sense in any contextual analysis.

SamPGS_17 wrote:

Von Eisenschmitt wrote:

I have a suggestion: Please stop altogether the practice of planes loading up into truck convoys and driving into a battle if their target is out of range.

If their target is out of range, the solution (just like in the Pacific in WW2) is to acquire/build/capture airfields closer to the target. It isn't "load the planes onto trucks and just drive into combat".

Yes, infantry load up into trucks and tanks were loaded onto trains but the idea that somehow you tear down a plane, load it and the crews onto trucks and those trucks drive into combat is, frankly, absurd.

Thanks Kindly

To be honest, if you haven’t built an airfield, just build one so you can attack directly using planes. It’s pretty simple.

I'm not asking for planes to turn into dragons, I'm just asking that the ludicrous be excised

But then if planes don’t have the range to travel to a province center in like say Siberia, you will need to wait ages to make use of them. Early on in HWW low level planes will simply be unable to cross Siberia, no matter where you build airstrips; their range is too low. This would definitely screw that up. While you can’t easily load planes onto trucks you can load them on railways so that could be what’s happening if you really hate trucks. If you don’t want to use them then you don’t have to, you can leave them in the airbase and build them. I see no real gain out of removing the feature. Unless you send your planes to the frontline it won’t really hurt you. And what will happen if you destroy an air base, do they still remain planes there or do they get destroyed automatically?

This game has no sense or logistics with you being able to theoretically send a stack of 100 Railway guns across the pacific from Australia, into the mountains of Chile and through the Amazon, then across the Atlantic, through the Sahara and Arabian desert across the Persian mountains, all the way through the Indian subcontinent and South East Asia down to Indonesia through the Outback all the way back to Sydney Australia in just a week or two tops. Planes loading on trucks doesn’t seem more ludicrous than that.

Carking the 6th wrote:

But then if planes don’t have the range to travel to a province center in like say Siberia, you will need to wait ages to make use of them. Early on in HWW low level planes will simply be unable to cross Siberia, no matter where you build airstrips; their range is too low. This would definitely screw that up. While you can’t easily load planes onto trucks you can load them on railways so that could be what’s happening if you really hate trucks. If you don’t want to use them then you don’t have to, you can leave them in the airbase and build them. I see no real gain out of removing the feature. Unless you send your planes to the frontline it won’t really hurt you. And what will happen if you destroy an air base, do they still remain planes there or do they get destroyed automatically?

This game has no sense or logistics with you being able to theoretically send a stack of 100 Railway guns across the pacific from Australia, into the mountains of Chile and through the Amazon, then across the Atlantic, through the Sahara and Arabian desert across the Persian mountains, all the way through the Indian subcontinent and South East Asia down to Indonesia through the Outback all the way back to Sydney Australia in just a week or two tops. Planes loading on trucks doesn’t seem more ludicrous than that.

Why did you let them? Or do you mean that the transports sailed out of range and the planes decided to follow them on land?

If that is so, then you should be patrolling. It does the same amount of damage as attacking within 30 minutes and does not require refueling. Always check on planes when you use them to attack.

Carking the 6th wrote:

Why did you let them? Or do you mean that the transports sailed out of range and the planes decided to follow them on land?

If that is so, then you should be patrolling. It does the same amount of damage as attacking within 30 minutes and does not require refueling. Always check on planes when you use them to attack.

Not to mention the sheer stupidity of such a possible interpretation of orders:

"Herr Schultz, load up the stuka for a bombing run on this ship."

"Mein Herr oberst, the target is 200' beyond our range. We can't make it."

"Dummkopf! Have the mechanics break the planes down and load them up on trucks. Then we will drive the trucks into the sea and attack the convoy using pirate tactics. Yes, I said drive the trucks into the sea, why??"

Canceling it would screw over other things like I mentioned earlier. What would planes become without airstrips if they are destroyed? Can I just no longer move them to a province without an airstrip? That would be very annoying since I like to move convoys across large amounts of land that I won’t use. You have to address this if you want it removed.