Carrier Battles for Guadalcanal Forum Index

Carrier Battles for Guadalcanal


 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Play at the scale of the airplane

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Carrier Battles for Guadalcanal Forum Index -> Topics -> New Features
Previous topic :: Next topic  
Author Message
Bladerunner
Administrateur

Offline

Joined: 25 Jan 2016
Posts: 863
Localisation: France

PostPosted: Fri 17 Nov - 23:20 (2017)    Post subject: Play at the scale of the airplane Reply with quote

Looking to improve the search pattern, I realize that a change of scale would be necessary 
From the 4-planes air unit to single-plan ce counters


This would be a big chance and needs to be carefully tested to see if viable for the game


Effects
- much bigger stacks to handle 
- bombs and torpedo will have less chance to hit
- the AA should be more deadly
- no change for air combat
- losses due to hit on airfields or carriers will increase
- VP should be reworked 


Back to top
Publicité






PostPosted: Fri 17 Nov - 23:20 (2017)    Post subject: Publicité

PublicitéSupprimer les publicités ?
Back to top
larsenjp
Beta-testing

Offline

Joined: 19 Aug 2017
Posts: 218

PostPosted: Sat 18 Nov - 14:17 (2017)    Post subject: Play at the scale of the airplane Reply with quote

Bladerunner wrote:
Looking to improve the search pattern, I realize that a change of scale would be necessary 
From the 4-planes air unit to single-plan ce counters


This would be a big chance and needs to be carefully tested to see if viable for the game


Effects
- much bigger stacks to handle 
- bombs and torpedo will have less chance to hit
- the AA should be more deadly
- no change for air combat
- losses due to hit on airfields or carriers will increase
- VP should be reworked 




Fully agree with all of this.
Actually probability figures won't change but of course an individual plane has less probability to hit than considering an air unit of 4 planes.
The same for the losses: losing currently one air unit mean losing 4 planes. Actually it will be more precise: you may lose 3 or 5 planes instead of 1 air unit...

I think one of the biggest practical problems will be handling plane stacks. Actually i don't think it will be possible to handle stacks of 30 or more individual planes...

I suggest to have still air unit counters but with a figure giving the number of individual planes inside: 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9 or 12 (maximum) and each air unit counter may be broken down to smallest ones e.g. one air unit counter of 4 planes (division in the USN) may give two air unit counters of 2 planes (elements) or one buntai counter of 9 planes may give three shotai counters of 3 planes) or the contrary just by gathering the individual planes/air units counters into biggest ones. If you take loss, just break down the air unit counter (e.g. a buntai counter of 9 planes taking 2 losses => 2 shotai counters of 3 planes each +1 individual plane counter or one buntai counter of 6 planes + 1 individual plane counter).

Of course, lot of testing will be needed.

This will add a lot of flexibility and, besides, allows to take into account both binary and ternary historical systems used in the USN and IJN. Cool


Back to top
USS Archerfish
Beta-testing

Offline

Joined: 16 Mar 2017
Posts: 510

PostPosted: Sun 19 Nov - 20:18 (2017)    Post subject: Play at the scale of the airplane Reply with quote

BR. Maybe you can use a merge system similar to the surface ships. Instead of Task Force you would have Squadrons or Air Groups. This is a system you already have in the game and might be the easiest to implement. It might be necessary to have a 2nd Air Ops page to manage this.  


Or you can do something similar to the iPad/iPhone when merging apps into files.  If you drag one airplane on top of another it will automatically create a squadron or air group. 


Just a thought.


I would like to have an option to name the squadron/air group like the iPad folders if possible. I would like to do that with TFs too but that can wait. 


Back to top
SBD


Offline

Joined: 28 Oct 2017
Posts: 26
Localisation: UK

PostPosted: Mon 20 Nov - 22:46 (2017)    Post subject: Play at the scale of the airplane Reply with quote

Are we constrained by the use of card counters from the source board games?

The Admiral (us) would have the hierarchy as follows, either historical or as per a game ‘what if’ scenario 
TF
CV
VF, VB,VS,VT..... sub divided by VF1,VF2 etc; each having a number of planes
So no sub division of “counters”, but the historical organisation, as we are not constrained as board games were.


So the player would allocate VF 1 to CAP, VS 2-3 to scouting, and the remainder would wait for the radio message “Enemy carriers at .......”


Historically below a squadron, eg VF, would be a division and section, but we are trying to simplify things on a computer?
- we are not constrained nor concerned with organising dozens of planes within a carrier.


The reduction of a squadron below a certain level would reduce its effectiveness, and if a campaign it would be merged within another squadron, and depending on required complexity, gaining in experience, but lacking in co-operation.


I don’t think I am too far away from larsenjp?


Back to top
larsenjp
Beta-testing

Offline

Joined: 19 Aug 2017
Posts: 218

PostPosted: Mon 20 Nov - 23:58 (2017)    Post subject: Play at the scale of the airplane Reply with quote

SBD wrote:
I don’t think I am too far away from larsenjp?


Yes indeed. Okay

I agree that getting the unit's information would be great.
I fully agree with the fact that a plane, actually a crew, is fully efficient among a given organization, typically a squadron or possibly sub-unit. The question is to which point we want to go down...

Actually I disagree with the idea of committing a full squadron to a CAP or to any mission as a whole... this would be too much as a simplification and a step back compared to what we have currently... and it would be unhistorical. As you may know, in 1942, there was only one VF squadron aboard US carriers and its planes were performing simultaneously CAPs and escort or even offensive missions (cf VF-6 in the raids against the Marshalls). The same for VS and VB.

So, to me, on the US side we may go down to elements (2 planes) or divisions (4 planes) for the USN fighters; for the bombers, it should be sections of 3. For the US Army, i don't really know, i think they were still flying with a ternary organization but at the moment, they were short of planes and just sent all they had (especially B-17, they were flying within groups of 2, 3, 4, 5 etc. depending on availability).
On the Japanese side, this should be sections of 3; the shotai was really the basis for the Japanese air units, Navy and Army alike. They switched to binary organization only much later in the war, although some experienced leaders tested it as early as 1942.

However, we may keep ability to handle single planes, first in case of losses (if a division of 4 takes 3 losses, then it is left with 1 plane only until, as you say, it merges with some remnants to form a new division, preferably staying within their own squadron) but also in case of future special mission e.g. antisub patrols...

BTW, naming carrier-borne air units means that these air units are attached to a carrier and that they need to come back on this specific carrier (unless it is disabled). Currently, when there are 2 (or more) carriers in a given TF, when planes get back from a strike, we cannot know on which carrier they are going to land. The distribution of returning air units on the carriers is still quite difficult to understand for me, it seems to be pure hazard. With this system, there won't be any hazard... And this is historical since we know that pilots generally did all their possible to land on "their" carrier, with their own landing officer...


Back to top
USS Archerfish
Beta-testing

Offline

Joined: 16 Mar 2017
Posts: 510

PostPosted: Tue 21 Nov - 02:29 (2017)    Post subject: Play at the scale of the airplane Reply with quote

SBD wrote:
Are we constrained by the use of card counters from the source board games?

The Admiral (us) would have the hierarchy as follows, either historical or as per a game ‘what if’ scenario 
TF
CV
VF, VB,VS,VT..... sub divided by VF1,VF2 etc; each having a number of planes
So no sub division of “counters”, but the historical organisation, as we are not constrained as board games were.


So the player would allocate VF 1 to CAP, VS 2-3 to scouting, and the remainder would wait for the radio message “Enemy carriers at .......”


Historically below a squadron, eg VF, would be a division and section, but we are trying to simplify things on a computer?
- we are not constrained nor concerned with organising dozens of planes within a carrier.


The reduction of a squadron below a certain level would reduce its effectiveness, and if a campaign it would be merged within another squadron, and depending on required complexity, gaining in experience, but lacking in co-operation.


I don’t think I am too far away from larsenjp?


While I think this is a very cool idea, I'm concern this might add too much complexity to the game.


Back to top
USS Archerfish
Beta-testing

Offline

Joined: 16 Mar 2017
Posts: 510

PostPosted: Tue 21 Nov - 02:32 (2017)    Post subject: Play at the scale of the airplane Reply with quote

Perhaps the simplest solution to this is to increase the number of planes you can choose in the "Variable" selection.  Right now I think the number of planes it will do is 9. But there is still the counter stacking issue.

Back to top
currymutton
Beta-testing

Offline

Joined: 27 May 2016
Posts: 577

PostPosted: Tue 21 Nov - 02:33 (2017)    Post subject: Play at the scale of the airplane Reply with quote

It is very hard to imagine how it plays out handling individual plane counters. All I know it is gonna be very troublesome.

One  way to balance this out is the use of "hit points" or "strength counter". Each plane counters still count as 4 planes, for fighters okay, and it ha a strengh/hit point of 4. Being shot down reduces the value by 1, if the values reaches 0, then the counter is gone.

Effects
- no big stacks to handle 
- bombs and torpedo hit can still be taken individually and will have less chance to hit, but since it is automatically done I really do not care much
- the AA do not have to be more deadly
- no change for air combat, amen
- losses due to hit on airfields or carriers do not have to increase
- VP will need to be reworked
- Compatible with new search method
- a little bit tricky to handle both "damaged" and "destroyed" planes in the same unit


Back to top
Contenu Sponsorisé






PostPosted: Today at 11:56 (2017)    Post subject: Play at the scale of the airplane

Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Carrier Battles for Guadalcanal Forum Index -> Topics -> New Features All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  

Index | Administration Panel | Create own nforum | Free support forum | Free forums directory | Report a violation | Conditions générales d'utilisation
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group