Air units in bad weather
Moderators: Slitherine Core, Panzer Corps Moderators, Panzer Corps Design
Air units in bad weather
I'm curious how Panzer Corp deals with this phenomenon. Namely, during rain or snow, air units in PG and PG2 could still fly around freely, acting as scouts and trapping enemy aircraft by using their ZOC while also being invulnerable to enemy AD and fighters.
-
deadtorius
- Field Marshal - Me 410A
- Posts: 5287
- Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 12:41 am
-
TheGrayMouser
- Field Marshal - Me 410A
- Posts: 5001
- Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 2:42 pm
Sounds almost unanimous that people prefer the current system, but what about when air units with weather invulnerability are used to prevent enemy units from reinforcing or resupplying? It makes sense when those air units are strafing and bombing, but when they are the equivalent of 'flying above the clouds' over those units? Perhaps an improvement to the system would be air units do not interfere with reinforce and resupplying during rain or snow conditions. In normal weather, or cloudy, they are unchanged.
Also, I think a one day forecast would be an improvement and allows some flexibility for planning ahead.
Currently, all you see is the weather today, and from that, you can only guess what's coming next. Knowing current weather and the weather next turn would make sense, but there would definitely have to be a limit on the forecast, all you get is what 'tomorrow' will be, not 2 or 3 days down the road.
So it'll be:
Today: Fair Tomorrow: Cloudy
Then
Today: Cloudy Tomorrow: Cloudy
Then
Today: Cloudy Tomorrow: Rain
Also, I think a one day forecast would be an improvement and allows some flexibility for planning ahead.
Currently, all you see is the weather today, and from that, you can only guess what's coming next. Knowing current weather and the weather next turn would make sense, but there would definitely have to be a limit on the forecast, all you get is what 'tomorrow' will be, not 2 or 3 days down the road.
So it'll be:
Today: Fair Tomorrow: Cloudy
Then
Today: Cloudy Tomorrow: Cloudy
Then
Today: Cloudy Tomorrow: Rain
-
TheGrayMouser
- Field Marshal - Me 410A
- Posts: 5001
- Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 2:42 pm
Well i vote for some changes to the way planes are handled in snowy weather. Cutting suppliies, indestructible scouting and trapping are all bugs if you ask me and i dont think would be recieved well in multiplayer, once it got going as they are gamey and not at all realistic. Of course the original is a great game but i dont think this situation was really properly covered. Nations did not launch air ops in blizzards. Of course how to fix it is another matter. Instantly grounding planes to base if caught out in bad weather is strange, especially if far away. Some ideas might be
1 - Severly reduce spotting to only the hex your above in snow.
2 - Increase fuel consumption during snow flight
3 - No air zone of control in bad weather to stop trapping enemy planes and then driving AA underneath.
4 - An Attrition system where planes might gradually lose strength, through crashes and bad navigation if they continue to fly in snowstorms. Also when they land
5 - No new take offs... gronded planes cant launch into a snowstorm.
These are just some ideas of how the unusual situation could be handled. Of course if everyones happy with the current system thats great too, but ithink it could be improved upon.
1 - Severly reduce spotting to only the hex your above in snow.
2 - Increase fuel consumption during snow flight
3 - No air zone of control in bad weather to stop trapping enemy planes and then driving AA underneath.
4 - An Attrition system where planes might gradually lose strength, through crashes and bad navigation if they continue to fly in snowstorms. Also when they land
5 - No new take offs... gronded planes cant launch into a snowstorm.
These are just some ideas of how the unusual situation could be handled. Of course if everyones happy with the current system thats great too, but ithink it could be improved upon.
-
deadtorius
- Field Marshal - Me 410A
- Posts: 5287
- Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 12:41 am
I always used to recall my planes to refuel and repair during snow. They weren't doing much out there anyway so that was the time to bring them back when they were pretty much useless.
Although I can't recall for sure I thought air units did not affect ground units for reinforcing etc in bad weather either, and their visibility was down to 2 hexes or something like that I think, trying to recall now....
Although I can't recall for sure I thought air units did not affect ground units for reinforcing etc in bad weather either, and their visibility was down to 2 hexes or something like that I think, trying to recall now....
Obsolete wrote = ("You are forgetting that often 1 turn is representative of 1 entire day here...")
I don't think so ?, I'm not sure how that relates to my suggestions
Deadtorious wrote = ("Although I can't recall for sure I thought air units did not affect ground units for reinforcing etc in bad weather either, and their visibility was down to 2 hexes or something like that I think, trying to recall now...." )
I played PZG for many years on Play station and played my uncle extensively for nearly 5 years. Moscow was our favourite and the toughest. You would usually get some turns of snow half way through and at the end. When it snowed you flew your MS 109,s over the russian lines in formations (i hex apart so they couldnt trap you under AA when good weather came) .The planes could spot the russian armys and cut reinforcements to damaged units. They would also stop all supplies to the big Russian 155mm guns unless they were in a town. next send some $12 pz1's or jaeger units in to run the reamaining shots then close in with your good Pz 3's with SPA behind. Strangely the tactic had a big impact on defending positions when it should have been negligible.
I know these tactics are "gamey" but it was the only way to approach the super strong tank and gun army that massed at the secind objective.
I don't think so ?, I'm not sure how that relates to my suggestions
Deadtorious wrote = ("Although I can't recall for sure I thought air units did not affect ground units for reinforcing etc in bad weather either, and their visibility was down to 2 hexes or something like that I think, trying to recall now...." )
I played PZG for many years on Play station and played my uncle extensively for nearly 5 years. Moscow was our favourite and the toughest. You would usually get some turns of snow half way through and at the end. When it snowed you flew your MS 109,s over the russian lines in formations (i hex apart so they couldnt trap you under AA when good weather came) .The planes could spot the russian armys and cut reinforcements to damaged units. They would also stop all supplies to the big Russian 155mm guns unless they were in a town. next send some $12 pz1's or jaeger units in to run the reamaining shots then close in with your good Pz 3's with SPA behind. Strangely the tactic had a big impact on defending positions when it should have been negligible.
I know these tactics are "gamey" but it was the only way to approach the super strong tank and gun army that massed at the secind objective.
When you mentioned attrition, it seems your plan is/was to simply fly around turn after turn just to use your planes as SCOUTS during bad weather.
But if you try to look at it realistically, a plane flying constantly for days is rather quite un-realistic. Now, I know SSI was aware of this fact, and that's why they forced aircraft to run out of fuel. Unfortunately, this was almost a game-breaker, and hence the fuel issue was removed starting with PG2.
But if you try to look at it realistically, a plane flying constantly for days is rather quite un-realistic. Now, I know SSI was aware of this fact, and that's why they forced aircraft to run out of fuel. Unfortunately, this was almost a game-breaker, and hence the fuel issue was removed starting with PG2.
Experience Ratio = (def exp level + 2)/(att exp level + 2)
Entrenchment Ratio = (def entr rate + 1) /(att entr rate + 1)
I see what you mean. Man i used to send those Fock Wolfe fighters out and range them all over the map for days at a time. Sometimes they never had to returm to base. I never really thought about it but that is very unrealistic. I guess you could look at it as an air group with orders to maintain a presence in a certain area and flying sorties out, rather the same squadron of guys flying all day and all night. When the group runs low on supplies it can no longer maintain the mission and is grounded at base. But this would mean fuel actually represents all sorts of things like organisation, spare parts, fatigue etc. I can't really explain planes flying well out of range of their airbases (unless their landing in a cow paddock for the night 
). thats another topic altogether.
Did'nt really play much PzG2, maybe there was a better air system in place for that game but i can't remember.
). thats another topic altogether.Did'nt really play much PzG2, maybe there was a better air system in place for that game but i can't remember.
PG2 was more UNREALISTIC with air-units, however the playability was much more better, with a lot of the micro-management catastrophies removed from play.
And now that I think about it, in the scenarios where the Axis had to take over the U.S.A., how exactly did they manage to get planes out over there for the initial attack? Seems very odd to me since flying over the English channel itself was quite a task, lol
And now that I think about it, in the scenarios where the Axis had to take over the U.S.A., how exactly did they manage to get planes out over there for the initial attack? Seems very odd to me since flying over the English channel itself was quite a task, lol
Experience Ratio = (def exp level + 2)/(att exp level + 2)
Entrenchment Ratio = (def entr rate + 1) /(att entr rate + 1)
doing some catch up post.
@ soldier: your 5 points are very good. I disliked the zoc capability of planes in PG. another was the ability to set up a grid across a map with your fighters so the AI could not penetrate your air space. Torch scenario is a good example. you could stop the AI airforce by placing 5 star FW's across the map and suck in the AI land units to their destruction while in your air zoc.
no zoc for planes is my vote.
@ soldier: your 5 points are very good. I disliked the zoc capability of planes in PG. another was the ability to set up a grid across a map with your fighters so the AI could not penetrate your air space. Torch scenario is a good example. you could stop the AI airforce by placing 5 star FW's across the map and suck in the AI land units to their destruction while in your air zoc.
no zoc for planes is my vote.
Another thing i hope they look at improving in the air war is the flight path of planes. Sometimes in the original PG, your aircraft would fly out into the middle of enemy controlled air space (bristling with AA) and then continue on down the line to bomb some unit on the flank. If your opponent had planes covering his force (which he would) you would run into them. Sometimes you couldn't even launch the raid because you knew your plane would take the suicide scenic course. I'm sure in real battles where the air war was being contested, bombers would have tried to avoid being intercepted rather than trip out into the danger zone. Considering the value of aircraft in PG it was damn annoying to lose a prize plane because of some dumb flight path.
One the other hand when your using spotter aircraft you might want to risk a trip down the enemy line to gain intel on the enemy's deployment. So how to fix it ?
1- planes could be set to aggressive or cautious flying (a bit of a band aid fix but it could be helpful)
2- planes could have the option of continuing their move once they have reached point A provided they have movement points left to give the player more control over where they go. (similar to way points)
3 - use of way points when setting long range flight missions
The more i think about it, the more controversial air ZOC is. You cannot "pin down" a plane and stop it from moving like you can some troops who wondered past your MG nest. In PG an air transport could even be used to stop a fighter when in reality the fighter could fly right past if it chose to. A more realistic approach might be an interception risk if you flew to close to enemy aircraft, the same as what happens when you try to bomb something that has fighter cover. That way your planes could still get where their going but might not make it one piece. I'm not really sure what purpose air zone of control serves.
One the other hand when your using spotter aircraft you might want to risk a trip down the enemy line to gain intel on the enemy's deployment. So how to fix it ?
1- planes could be set to aggressive or cautious flying (a bit of a band aid fix but it could be helpful)
2- planes could have the option of continuing their move once they have reached point A provided they have movement points left to give the player more control over where they go. (similar to way points)
3 - use of way points when setting long range flight missions
The more i think about it, the more controversial air ZOC is. You cannot "pin down" a plane and stop it from moving like you can some troops who wondered past your MG nest. In PG an air transport could even be used to stop a fighter when in reality the fighter could fly right past if it chose to. A more realistic approach might be an interception risk if you flew to close to enemy aircraft, the same as what happens when you try to bomb something that has fighter cover. That way your planes could still get where their going but might not make it one piece. I'm not really sure what purpose air zone of control serves.