Danube Front 85 - Air Interdiction Query - some insight please

[Aaron]

I still say the air game needs to be redone to the point cdrs have control over squadrons and their assignments and areas. There should be an air map with ranges for the a/c to operate and be assigned missions, offensive and defensive, including interdiction missions. I sugessted an idea some time ago, if nothing else, at least a starting point to do it.

Agreed, mentioned it myself in the past. It doesnt have to be anything complicated, Tiller has an air system in the Strategic War series that could be modified and ported over.

Perhaps a small petition to Rich Hamilton might get John's attention at this point?

Hey 100 posts could do it....lol. I do believe it doesnt need to be complicated, the old Microprose Nato commander always comes to mind when i think of simple but effective. In the scale of the MC series yes i dont believe we should be controlling the whole air war but there should be a simple system that at least lets you put air units on air superiority, interdiction or ground attack and of course the cpu takes care of everything from there as in modifiers and combat losses except in ground attack where we can still choose who to strike, simple yet effective for this scale and shows losses all around.

Aaron

There is actually a system similar to what you are requesting in the First Blitzkrieg series. You put air units on ground attack/superiority etc with losses then being determined and the remaining units available for tactical support. It's quite elegant and could work well in PzC....

Ps That series of games needs to be played more - it's quite a good system...

David

Yes it would, thats actually the game i was referring to. I own the first blitzkrieg and believe it would be a great system for MC. Read somewhere it was the strategic series

---

Keep it simple stupid. I think the airpower aspect is well represented here. The ground commander is provided a list of available ground attack squadrons and recon flights. The area of operations is small enough to assume the airbases are to the rear. A limit of range for interdiction/ground attacks would be just another complication. Meanwhile, the airwar overhead is taken care of by simple percentages for interception.

I'm no code expert, but I also notice the A.I. will attack smaller/less defensible units in it's artillery and direct defensive fires. So, perhaps there is a built in algorithm concerning interdiction strikes and which units trigger an attack.

I think the biggest issue with it is no losses. First Blitzkrieg series has what i believe would work for this series, simple but effective.

[goomohn]

Wow that was a lot of replies to replies. Yeah battalion > division at 10km per hex does sound better. You'd need an expanded airpower aspect. I stand by the management of TOC's system though. At 1km I'm already too worried about command and artillery range. As, a ground commander I'd only want a list of ground attack sorties. Allowing my fellow air commanders to deal with their front.

To further deviate from the original topic. The ultimate command overview wargame would be a cross between matrix's command ops series and hps's modern airpower. Where you'd have real time land and air assets battling over a topographic map. At company > battalion / flight.

[Aaron]

Wow that was a lot of replies to replies. Yeah battalion > division at 10km per hex does sound better. You'd need an expanded airpower aspect. I stand by the management of TOC's system though. At 1km I'm already too worried about command and artillery range. As, a ground commander I'd only want a list of ground attack sorties. Allowing my fellow air commanders to deal with their front.

I could deal with not having a choice at all which in a sense leads to being more realistic at this scale. A % based system between air superiority,interdiction and ground attack that leaves the whole system like the existing interdiction system in that after certain fighter wing assignments are made by the player then all ground battles have a variable % chance of having ground support. So after all said and done each turn you might end up with a 20% chance that all battles that turn have a ground attack modifier and units that are moving have a 6% interdiction value but this would change every turn with assignment and units and of course the roll of the dice

[JDR Dragoon]

The problem in the MC/PzC system is, that airpower retains its strenght while on-map units get whittled down. The simplest solution would be a dial in the .pdt editor, where you could set the % chance that a strike mission, which is intercepted by aircraft or SAMs, would lose 1 or more airplanes (so a setting of 125% would mean, that a succesful intercept would mean the airunit losing one plane for certain, with a 25% chance of losing another and so on). Having a seperate "game within a game" for juggling "air points" seems to much to ask for. Certainly nice, but would probably take more coding time than it is worth for the developers. As for the above suggestion, similar changes to the ditor has already been done with regard to invasion losses, mine probability and night disruption, so it should be doable within the already existing parameters.

[goomohn]

Yes, the fact that the squadrons don't reduce in strength is pretty lame. Another aside; low visibility air effects should (logically) mean that each squadron which has become available should be checked for the LVA percentage or get lost and return to base.

As to setting superiority, interdiction, ground attack; would be a neat addition for large campaigns. Really the theater commanders of world war 2 did have that control. On the operational level the ground commander is tasked with assigning close air support. While the air commander would have orders over which squadron to interdict with, which to fly air patrol.

TOAWs airpower rules are very good (till he screwed with AAA effects). They are geared toward theater command though. Today we have real divisions in airforce and army. Still at the operational level brigade/division commanders wouldn't order air patrols or interdiction of enemies supply and reinforcements.

I'd consider choppers as an on map airbased unit which responded to the ground commanders orders though. Sort of in the same fashion that artillery fires in defense.

[Liquid_Sky]

Hmmm. I wonder if the aa values for the units on map shouldn't be raised. It would represent not only the aa at target, but the damage the planes would have taken on its way to and from the target.

Interdiction, however, is just a percentage. If it seems too effective, then it can be lowered. Perhaps it should be tied to existing squadrons (in game) and only planes not used (ready) will be used for interdiction...and suffer aa.

[Dog Soldier]

Yes, the fact that the squadrons don't reduce in strength is pretty lame.

I know interdicted flights do not lose strength. These flights are poorly labeled. They are aborted not necessarily interdicted. There are many reasons they abort that would not involve taking casualties.

Flights that attack ground units can take losses. They also take fatigue which is more significant to their effectiveness for future ground attacks. A highly fatigued squadron is near ineffective in game terms.

Dog Soldier

[goomohn]

I had thought I err'ed there. Thanks for clearing that up.