(02-13-2012, 12:47 PM)Strela Wrote: The good news is the system can adjust availability over time. There is a lot more flexibility in the air system than first meets the eye. You can make aircraft both available (reinforcements) or unavailable (withdrawal) as well as adjust the starting strengths. You can also look at the AA rating for ground units and make the environment much more unpleasant for air overall.
Finally, you can limit where air can bomb etc using the Low visibility air effects (reduced air availability) , indirect fire and air strikes by the map (prevents unsighted hexes to be attacked) and limited air recon (limits attacks based upon air recon).
Also finally remember that most scenario designers only included ground support / attack aircraft and recon. Fighter combat / raid interception is handled via the values in the parameter data file. Therefore to try and reconcile the numbers of available aircraft vs losses is a bit of mute point, as only a specific section of the air forces are modeled directly...
Personally, I believe the system is quite elegant and allows a clear representation of the air to ground support that is required in this kind of simulation. The modelling of overall air superiority is not required or done abstractly, as is the air portion of paradrops and air resupply.
David
David I think we all know we may edit the scenarios. That's not the point I think. We generally want the stock scenarios to be re-evaluated through discussion and feedback; since those scenarios are the ones we all play. What's more, it's practically impossible to get a large monster scenario like this passed through the H2H controls; as it requires 8 play-tests of a games that might last years to play. So re-designing the F 40 Campaign for play among the membership generally isn't going to happen unless you are a main guy. jonny
Archived Forums
Help
Calendar
Member List
Search
){kind=link}
