Air Units in Cities and CVs in ports

[metolius]

I'm wondering if air units based in cities get any sort of defensive benefit when directly attacked by other air units. For example, if I have an Axis fighter in Amsterdam, and it is attack by a UK air unit, does the Axis air unit get any sort of defensive bonus?

Second question: if I have a CV in port, does it get any defensive benefit from the port if it is attacked by another air unit?

In both cases, I'm talking about a direct attack, for example a fighter attacking the city or port hex, not an interception involving the fighter or CV unit.

Thanks!

[OxfordGuy3]

I'm wondering if air units based in cities get any sort of defensive benefit when directly attacked by other air units. For example, if I have an Axis fighter in Amsterdam, and it is attack by a UK air unit, does the Axis air unit get any sort of defensive bonus?

Second question: if I have a CV in port, does it get any defensive benefit from the port if it is attacked by another air unit?

In both cases, I'm talking about a direct attack, for example a fighter attacking the city or port hex, not an interception involving the fighter or CV unit.

Thanks!

Good question, I don't know the answer to this either and would add to this whether an air unit gets any benefit from being in a fort and attacked directly?

[esde56]

An excellent question ...

Kind regards

[trulster]

Indeed a good question, if there is no defensive bonus for fex being in a city there should be one. CVs in particular I feel are a bit too brittle in GS.

[pk867]

Most resource hexes (Cities, Capitals, ports,etc) have Air Defense factors.
So any unit there gets the benefit if attacked by air.

[Peter Stauffenberg]

I'm not sure if air units get a bonus from defending in cities. I think the game will use the air defense of the air unit directly. The same with land units in the city being bombarded. I think the intrinsic air defense of the hex will only be used if the hex is empty.

Maybe this is something we should change, but how?

[metolius]

Well, I'm not sure how it should be. It would seem reasonable that ships (including CVs) in port would get some sort of defensive air bonus... but then again, Pearl Harbor was not an ideal location for the Pacific Fleet when it was attacked there.

Same with air units based in cities. Seems like you could make a reasonable argument either way.

[trulster]

Maybe an easy change is to make a "two-step" attack. Ie, when attacking a unit in a hex w intrinsic anti-air (cities etc), then first the hex intrinsic AA fires, then the unit AA defence fires. This way you get the defensive advantages of being in a place stacked with air defences, as it should be.

[timhicks]

I don't agree that CV's in port and Aircraft in a city, should get a defensive bonus or other sort of assistance. Whether based in a city or clear , the aircraft will still be based on a airfield. They will be attacked either on the airfield or in the air, so there's no reason why they would benefit from the AAA that's in place to defend the city.

With the case of a CV, when it's in port , it would not be able to fly off any aircraft in it's own defense, CV's have to steam into the wind to generate enough airspeed over the deck, which assisted the aicrafts takeoff. CV's didn't have catapults in those days.

They would of course be protected by the AAA of the port, for example Illustrious was attacked continuously by the Luftwaffe while docked at Malta, and escaped, so the AAA should have some effect. But I don't believe that a CV should get any net benefit from being docked.

[metolius]

OK, fair enough. But I would also like to know, if anybody can figure it out, where things are in the current version. Any thoughts?

[Clark]

I don't agree that CV's in port and Aircraft in a city, should get a defensive bonus or other sort of assistance. Whether based in a city or clear , the aircraft will still be based on a airfield. They will be attacked either on the airfield or in the air, so there's no reason why they would benefit from the AAA that's in place to defend the city.

With the case of a CV, when it's in port , it would not be able to fly off any aircraft in it's own defense, CV's have to steam into the wind to generate enough airspeed over the deck, which assisted the aicrafts takeoff. CV's didn't have catapults in those days.

They would of course be protected by the AAA of the port, for example Illustrious was attacked continuously by the Luftwaffe while docked at Malta, and escaped, so the AAA should have some effect. But I don't believe that a CV should get any net benefit from being docked.

I disagree, unless trulster's suggestion takes effect. When you are sending aircraft to bomb a city, you will be facing both flak and aircraft stationed in the city. If it's a "one step" operation in the game, then the defensive bonus is needed to take this into account.

[rkr1958]

I disagree, unless trulster's suggestion takes effect. When you are sending aircraft to bomb a city, you will be facing both flak and aircraft stationed in the city. If it's a "one step" operation in the game, then the defensive bonus is needed to take this into account.

Here's a defensive "tactic" that I learned from Neil in a game where playing now. He based a fighter in sentry mode in a German Sync oil facility that I intended hit with two strategic bombers. The first strategic bomber, which attacks the resource and not the air unit based there, hit the facility. Since the axis fighter was on sentry it didn't intercept. Then when I tried to send the second strategic bomber in it "refused" to go. After thinking about I realized that the presence of the fighter on sentry limited the number of air attacks against that hex, or targets in that hex, to one.

[Clark]

I disagree, unless trulster's suggestion takes effect. When you are sending aircraft to bomb a city, you will be facing both flak and aircraft stationed in the city. If it's a "one step" operation in the game, then the defensive bonus is needed to take this into account.

Here's a defensive "tactic" that I learned from Neil in a game where playing now. He based a fighter in sentry mode in a German Sync oil facility that I intended hit with two strategic bombers. The first strategic bomber, which attacks the resource and not the air unit based there, hit the facility. Since the axis fighter was on sentry it didn't intercept. Then when I tried to send the second strategic bomber in it "refused" to go. After thinking about I realized that the presence of the fighter on sentry limited the number of air attacks against that hex, or targets in that hex, to one.

Nice! Althought that kind of sounds like a bug to me.

A related offensive tactic - I had a good defensive line set up in Iran along the Russian border. I also had a couple of mechanized infantry corps sitting in the oil fields as a reserve for counterattacks. Theoretically, they were out of reach because there was no way a ground attack could reach them in one turn, and they were far enough back so that they could not be seen through the fog of war. But my opponent was able to hit my mech infantry with air attacks even though they were hidden by FOW because he was able to strike at the resource that the mech infantry were "defending."

[rkr1958]

I disagree, unless trulster's suggestion takes effect. When you are sending aircraft to bomb a city, you will be facing both flak and aircraft stationed in the city. If it's a "one step" operation in the game, then the defensive bonus is needed to take this into account.

Here's a defensive "tactic" that I learned from Neil in a game where playing now. He based a fighter in sentry mode in a German Sync oil facility that I intended hit with two strategic bombers. The first strategic bomber, which attacks the resource and not the air unit based there, hit the facility. Since the axis fighter was on sentry it didn't intercept. Then when I tried to send the second strategic bomber in it "refused" to go. After thinking about I realized that the presence of the fighter on sentry limited the number of air attacks against that hex, or targets in that hex, to one.

Nice! Althought that kind of sounds like a bug to me.

Strictly speaking it's not a bug but a programming/simplification tradeoff. I think it would be a programming nightmare to try to handle this special case and, in my opinion, not worth the effort and risk. As it is now air attacks against all HEXES (not units) is limited to 2 per turn with the exception of HEXES that contain an air unit at the start of the turn, in which case air attacks are limited to 1. This logic is nice, clean and simple. If we were to implement logic that were to handle this special tactic then I think you see how complicated and convoluted it could get and how much risk there would be that we would break something.

A related offensive tactic - I had a good defensive line set up in Iran along the Russian border. I also had a couple of mechanized infantry corps sitting in the oil fields as a reserve for counterattacks. Theoretically, they were out of reach because there was no way a ground attack could reach them in one turn, and they were far enough back so that they could not be seen through the fog of war. But my opponent was able to hit my mech infantry with air attacks even though they were hidden by FOW because he was able to strike at the resource that the mech infantry were "defending."

If the unit isn't spotted does the first air attack (assuming a tactical bomber or fighter) attack the resource or the unit? I always thought the resource but I'm not sure at all on that.

[pk867]

IMO the FTR on SENTRY does intercept the SAC unit or any air type that attacks a resource hex. If you counter-air with a FTR the FTR on sentry does defend the hex. In Clark's case resource hexes are known where they are on the map whether there is FoW or not.

So you can bomb those targets at will. That is how you find subs repairing in Port So sometimes it is best not put units that can not defend in a city to move out
so it can not be bombed.

Regards,

pk867