Matrix Games Forums

Distant Worlds: Shadows Final Teaser!Distant Worlds: Legends gets Updated!Recruiting Testers for Commander: the Great War on Mac!Armageddon invasion starts in 2014Command Rommels Panzers in Battle Academy!Servers UpdateThe Deal goes Fourth!Command Ops gets a Massive Update!Lost Battles AAR: Smolensk 41War in the East: Lost Battles is here!		 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Airfield bombing or Ground?

 
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] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Airfield bombing or Ground? Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Airfield bombing or Ground? - 7/15/2010 4:56:45 PM   
jay102

 

Posts: 180
Joined: 8/15/2005
Status: offline 		Which is the fastest way to burn enemy supply?
Post #: 1
RE: Airfield bombing or Ground? - 7/15/2010 5:01:01 PM   
EUBanana


Posts: 3811
Joined: 9/30/2003
From: Little England
Status: offline 		Pretty sure airfield bombing is best. You don't get supply hits from ground bombing. Ground targets under attack do burn up supply quicker but I don't think it's as quick as supply hits on airfields. I'm not aware of any actual tests on this subject though. It perhaps depends on how many ground units are there? If there aren't many then presumably "not many" using combat supply levels still amounts to not much.

It likely also depends on how much supply is actually at the base as I believe supply hits knock off a percentage of the total supply present, so if you have a massive stockpile each supply hit will blow away a pretty hefty chunk of supply.


_____________________________


(in reply to jay102)
Post #: 2
RE: Airfield bombing or Ground? - 7/15/2010 7:36:02 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 6196
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline 		You bomb the airfield to kill supply, planes and close the field.

Use ground bombardment before attacks to disrupt the enemy and possibly give you a shift in odds. From my experience, bombing ground units in good terrain or cities will not be worth it. (except for free training) However, if you catch units moving in the open you might do pretty well if you lay into them.

_____________________________

"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one." Godwin's Law

(in reply to EUBanana)
Post #: 3
RE: Airfield bombing or Ground? - 7/16/2010 5:25:32 PM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 6172
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

Pretty sure airfield bombing is best.


Has anyone ever tested airfield bombing versus port bombing for burning up supplies?

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to EUBanana)
Post #: 4
RE: Airfield bombing or Ground? - 7/16/2010 5:33:26 PM   
cap_and_gown


Posts: 2691
Joined: 3/6/2001
From: Virginia, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58


quote:

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

Pretty sure airfield bombing is best.


Has anyone ever tested airfield bombing versus port bombing for burning up supplies?


Port bombing has the possibility of hitting fuel as well as supply.

Overall it is way too easy to hit supply, whether through bombing or bombardments.

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 5
RE: Airfield bombing or Ground? - 7/16/2010 5:40:25 PM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 6172
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: cap_and_gown

Port bombing has the possibility of hitting fuel as well as supply.

Overall it is way too easy to hit supply, whether through bombing or bombardments.



But does port bombing burn up MORE than airfield, on average?

I think it's too hard to hit supply, myself. I think fire is under appreciated. Looking at photos of WWII supply dumps, they were usually huge piles under tarps, for security and easy issue. Permanent underground or in-mountain magazines were also pretty rare in the Pacific until post-war. I've been in the magazines on Guam, and they are pretty immune to air attack, even with smart weapons. But that's today, not WWII. After Tinian the USN and USAAF used a LOT of napalm and WP as well. Supplies--food, ammo, rubberized parts and gear--burn Real Good.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to cap_and_gown)
Post #: 6
RE: Airfield bombing or Ground? - 7/16/2010 5:56:23 PM   
cap_and_gown


Posts: 2691
Joined: 3/6/2001
From: Virginia, USA
Status: offline 		These are 40 NM hexes. Don't you think they could spread the supply around a bit so it doesn't all go up in flames?

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 7
RE: Airfield bombing or Ground? - 7/16/2010 6:00:37 PM   
Q-Ball


Posts: 5265
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

You bomb the airfield to kill supply, planes and close the field.

Use ground bombardment before attacks to disrupt the enemy and possibly give you a shift in odds. From my experience, bombing ground units in good terrain or cities will not be worth it. (except for free training) However, if you catch units moving in the open you might do pretty well if you lay into them.


You won't kill or disable much in good terrain/cities with Ground bombing, true. But doesn't it still cause DISRUPTION ahead of an attack? For this reason I always bomb ahead of attacks, just to disrupt the troops.

Ground bombing also slows movement; the units will go to Combat mode out of Move mode

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 8
RE: Airfield bombing or Ground? - 7/16/2010 6:19:04 PM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 6172
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: cap_and_gown

These are 40 NM hexes. Don't you think they could spread the supply around a bit so it doesn't all go up in flames?


They could, but they didn't. Do you think it would be convenient to stock all the spare aircraft tires 40 miles from the airfield? The food 40 miles from the mess tents? On many islands, that wouldn't even be geographically possible.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to cap_and_gown)
Post #: 9
RE: Airfield bombing or Ground? - 7/18/2010 9:00:39 PM   
topeverest

 

Posts: 1609
Joined: 10/17/2007
From: Atlanta, GA - USA
Status: offline 		I have more success and been hurt more with port bombings than airfield bombings. I have never expereinced a supply hit from a air-ground attack.

_____________________________

Andy M

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 10
RE: Airfield bombing or Ground? - 7/18/2010 9:23:07 PM   
Misconduct


Posts: 1777
Joined: 2/18/2009
From: Cape Canaveral, Florida
Status: offline 		You have to bomb AF and Ports till neither "repair" anymore, when that happens the units are out of supply, then you can ground bomb with any real success.

Bombardment groups work wonders when troops are out of supply, or using them to give the base a quick shut down before planes go overhead.

Right now I tend to keep Dive bombers working ground attacks till I start seeing casualities then I bring in 4e's at 4k which I've had some nuke successes.


_____________________________

ASUS Maximus IV Extreme-Z Intel Core I7 2800k Corsair Hydro Heatsink Corsair Vengeance DD3 24GB EVGA GTX 580 Western Digital 1.5TB Raid 0 Windows 7

(in reply to topeverest)
Post #: 11
RE: Airfield bombing or Ground? - 7/19/2010 2:44:48 AM   
michaelm


Posts: 8198
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
quote:

27. Gameplay Change: Changed supply loss due to AF/Port hits to be relative to the
effectiveness of the device hitting the base.

This will change how much supply gets wiped out.
The original method was a fixed amount (+ some random value) per device hit.


_____________________________

Michael

(in reply to Misconduct)
Post #: 12
RE: Airfield bombing or Ground? - 7/19/2010 4:38:09 AM   
aprezto


Posts: 820
Joined: 1/29/2009
Status: offline 		Hi Mike, can you elaborate on this a bit?

_____________________________



Image courtesy of Divepac

(in reply to michaelm)
Post #: 13
RE: Airfield bombing or Ground? - 7/19/2010 9:45:39 AM   
michaelm


Posts: 8198
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline 		Basically, the bigger the bomb, the more supply destroyed. In reverse, small bomb, less supply.
I have based it on the device's anti-soft value as the key factor.


_____________________________

Michael

(in reply to aprezto)
Post #: 14
RE: Airfield bombing or Ground? - 7/19/2010 1:13:16 PM   
Misconduct


Posts: 1777
Joined: 2/18/2009
From: Cape Canaveral, Florida
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm

Basically, the bigger the bomb, the more supply destroyed. In reverse, small bomb, less supply.
I have based it on the device's anti-soft value as the key factor.



So basically nothing changes?

_____________________________

ASUS Maximus IV Extreme-Z Intel Core I7 2800k Corsair Hydro Heatsink Corsair Vengeance DD3 24GB EVGA GTX 580 Western Digital 1.5TB Raid 0 Windows 7

(in reply to michaelm)
Post #: 15
RE: Airfield bombing or Ground? - 7/19/2010 1:34:29 PM   
Misconduct


Posts: 1777
Joined: 2/18/2009
From: Cape Canaveral, Florida
Status: offline 		My only problem with the idea of "Bigger the bomb, more supplies destroyed" is fact we can't load out 2E's or 4E's with a specific bombload, if this is the case,
why can't my B-24's fly with 4x 2,000lb bombs or 8x1000's rather then typical load of 8x500's?

_____________________________

ASUS Maximus IV Extreme-Z Intel Core I7 2800k Corsair Hydro Heatsink Corsair Vengeance DD3 24GB EVGA GTX 580 Western Digital 1.5TB Raid 0 Windows 7

(in reply to Misconduct)
Post #: 16
RE: Airfield bombing or Ground? - 7/19/2010 3:19:56 PM   
michaelm


Posts: 8198
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Misconduct


quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm

Basically, the bigger the bomb, the more supply destroyed. In reverse, small bomb, less supply.
I have based it on the device's anti-soft value as the key factor.



So basically nothing changes?


The original code treated all supply hits as if they were by the equivalent of 250lb GP bombs based on the new calculations.
So smaller bombs will do less damage, and bigger ones more.

_____________________________

Michael

(in reply to Misconduct)
Post #: 17
RE: Airfield bombing or Ground? - 7/19/2010 3:21:24 PM   
michaelm


Posts: 8198
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Misconduct

My only problem with the idea of "Bigger the bomb, more supplies destroyed" is fact we can't load out 2E's or 4E's with a specific bombload, if this is the case,
why can't my B-24's fly with 4x 2,000lb bombs or 8x1000's rather then typical load of 8x500's?

Well if the plane carries less bombs, then there is less chance of actually hitting something in order to make a bigger crater.

_____________________________

Michael

(in reply to Misconduct)
Post #: 18
RE: Airfield bombing or Ground? - 7/19/2010 8:45:48 PM   
Rob Brennan UK


Posts: 3677
Joined: 8/24/2002
From: London UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm


quote:

ORIGINAL: Misconduct

My only problem with the idea of "Bigger the bomb, more supplies destroyed" is fact we can't load out 2E's or 4E's with a specific bombload, if this is the case,
why can't my B-24's fly with 4x 2,000lb bombs or 8x1000's rather then typical load of 8x500's?

Well if the plane carries less bombs, then there is less chance of actually hitting something in order to make a bigger crater.


all depends on what % more damage a 500lb bmb does compared to a base 250Lb one. I'm hazarding a guess here but it would make diminishing returns as your only still hitting one spot with any given bomb (albeit with larger blast radius).

Personally i would prefer to hit a 'supply dump' with 100 20Lb mixed frag/he bomblets than one 2000lb monster. assuming theres not much in bunkers (AE doesnt model this anyway(think sevastapol)).

Just my 2p on this , and i like the idea of mixing up damage based on bomb/shell size anyway.

Actually , Michael , does AE comsider fort size in the calculations on supply hits at all ?

_____________________________

sorry for the spelling . English is my main language , I just can't type . and i'm too lazy to edit :)

(in reply to michaelm)
Post #: 19
RE: Airfield bombing or Ground? - 7/20/2010 12:13:18 AM   
michaelm


Posts: 8198
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline 		Yes, fort and terrain affect both port and af supply hits.

_____________________________

Michael

(in reply to Rob Brennan UK)
Post #: 20
RE: Airfield bombing or Ground? - 7/20/2010 2:52:28 AM   
Mynok


Posts: 12069
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline
Has the ground bombing changed from Witp such that more than just the 'top' unit gets hit?



_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown


(in reply to michaelm)
Post #: 21
RE: Airfield bombing or Ground? - 7/20/2010 5:00:15 AM   
michaelm


Posts: 8198
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline 		Random ground target selection was a change made during the development of AE.
This also means that more than one ground target may be hit during a raid - you see the 'Also attacking ...' messages in the combat report.

< Message edited by michaelm -- 7/20/2010 5:01:53 AM >

_____________________________

Michael

(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 22
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Airfield bombing or Ground? Page: [1]
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

0.277