Extended level bombers off small airfield: design intent?

Gary Grigsby's strategic level wargame covering the entire War in the Pacific from 1941 to 1945 or beyond.

Moderators: Joel Billings, wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami

Post Reply
User avatar
rader
Posts: 1240
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 6:06 pm

Extended level bombers off small airfield: design intent?

Post by rader »

Hi all,

My PBEM partner and I are playing a CHS 160 game and we're having a minor disagreement and are looking for advice. Specifically I'm looking for people who are "in the know" - designers/developers/playtesters of the original WiTP and AE.

I know the manual is wrong in some (many?) places, but this took me completely by surprise after a long time of playing several games. I was specifically counting hexes and airbase sizes to determine where the 4E bombers could reach. I thought that 4E bombers (load = 6800) could not fly extended range off level 4 airbases and would fly as if extended up to their normal range. This is specifically what the manual says (yes, it is often wrong) and I think it may be the intent of the designers, but is sort of a "bug", or something that had been overlooked. I look at many of the innacuracies in the manual as changes. So I was basing a large degree of my strategy around this (staying 11+ hexes away from as many SPS 1 airfields as possible). My opponent knew that the 4Es would still fly at extended range.

We have house ruled 4Es to a large extent: no naval attack under 15,000 ft etc. If I had known that level bombers could fly off a small airfield to their extended range, I probably would have suggested a house rule against this (and at a minimum played differently). Of course, my opponent would have played differently if we had restricted level bombers in this way.

So my question really comes down to intent. What do the designers/developers/playtesters intend? Are level bombers supposed to be able to fly to their extended range from a small airfield? How is this handled in AE? Is this basically an error/bug that has never been corrected for whatever reason, or is it intentional that the bombers should be able to fly at full range and just wrong in the manual? Was it changed in a patch or update one way or the other?

Thanks!

Rader
User avatar
Japan
Posts: 754
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 1:45 pm
Location: Heaven on Earth (Scandinavia of course)

RE: Extended level bombers off small airfield: design intent?

Post by Japan »

I imagine that  the problem with flying at long range from a small airfield would be the Gross Weight of the Aircraft on Departure.
If filled with Fuel and also having bombs the Gross Weight may be so large that a longer runway is required for the departure.
 
In the game im playing in, we have a House rule saying max 11 hexes range from level 5 Airfields and no limits from level 6 and above.
 
It works pritty good for us I think.
AAR VIDEO
THE FIRST YEAR + THE SECOND YEAR
tm.asp?m=2133035&mpage=1&key=&
User avatar
Howard Mitchell
Posts: 449
Joined: Mon Jun 03, 2002 11:41 am
Location: Blighty

RE: Extended level bombers off small airfield: design intent?

Post by Howard Mitchell »

I think this has always been there. Japan's post gives the rationale for it very well.
While the battles the British fight may differ in the widest possible ways, they invariably have two common characteristics – they are always fought uphill and always at the junction of two or more map sheets.

General Sir William Slim
User avatar
rader
Posts: 1240
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 6:06 pm

RE: Extended level bombers off small airfield: design intent?

Post by rader »

No, my point is that it *is not there*. I agree that it *should* be there, but apparently it is not. Try it yourself - apparently level bombers WILL fly at extended range off a small airbase. My question is whether this is intentional (and just wrong in the manual), or a programming error/bug?
Yamato hugger
Posts: 3791
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 5:38 am

RE: Extended level bombers off small airfield: design intent?

Post by Yamato hugger »

ORIGINAL: rader

No, my point is that it *is not there*. I agree that it *should* be there, but apparently it is not. Try it yourself - apparently level bombers WILL fly at extended range off a small airbase. My question is whether this is intentional (and just wrong in the manual), or a programming error/bug?

Intentional. Cant for the life of me figure out why, but it is.
User avatar
rader
Posts: 1240
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 6:06 pm

RE: Extended level bombers off small airfield: design intent?

Post by rader »

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

ORIGINAL: rader

No, my point is that it *is not there*. I agree that it *should* be there, but apparently it is not. Try it yourself - apparently level bombers WILL fly at extended range off a small airbase. My question is whether this is intentional (and just wrong in the manual), or a programming error/bug?

Intentional. Cant for the life of me figure out why, but it is.

So it is staying in AE? Is this the way you play it? Do many people house rule it or just leave it? Do you know if there is a double penalty for ops losses, etc? (extended and small runway)?
User avatar
USSAmerica
Posts: 19199
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2002 4:32 am
Location: Graham, NC, USA
Contact:

RE: Extended level bombers off small airfield: design intent?

Post by USSAmerica »

What bomb load to they carry at extended range from a lvl 4 AF?  I would guess the bomb load should be cut in half for extended range, and cut in half again (1/4) for the small AF.  Not saying that's how it works in the game, just that I think it "should" work that way. 
Mike

"Good times will set you free" - Jimmy Buffett

"They need more rum punch" - Me

Image
Artwork by The Amazing Dixie
User avatar
rader
Posts: 1240
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 6:06 pm

RE: Extended level bombers off small airfield: design intent?

Post by rader »

Well, if they got a quarter bombload, plus they get triple ops losses (for small airfield AND extended range), I wouldn't really have a problem with it. Does anyone know if this is how it works?
User avatar
tanksone
Posts: 390
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2004 7:30 am
Location: St Paul, Mn.

RE: Extended level bombers off small airfield: design intent?

Post by tanksone »

ORIGINAL: rader
ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

ORIGINAL: rader

No, my point is that it *is not there*. I agree that it *should* be there, but apparently it is not. Try it yourself - apparently level bombers WILL fly at extended range off a small airbase. My question is whether this is intentional (and just wrong in the manual), or a programming error/bug?

Intentional. Cant for the life of me figure out why, but it is.

So it is staying in AE? Is this the way you play it? Do many people house rule it or just leave it? Do you know if there is a double penalty for ops losses, etc? (extended and small runway)?



Hi, don't the op loses start to go up from smaller bases also....


dhuffjr2
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 4:53 pm

RE: Extended level bombers off small airfield: design intent?

Post by dhuffjr2 »

Small island airfields were used to stage bombers for attacks on Tarawa for one. I can't remember the island in question off the top of my head.

How does this impact the conversation?

Post Reply

Return to “War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945”