Airfield strikes and squadrons in campaign
-
It seems that @Atze-0 already did the test.
Nope, just looked at aircraft, squadron stores and fuel in MC.
But from my experience, even if all buildings are destroyed, the airbases will still scramble fighters. But I could do such a test and tell my experiences, will take some self fragged singleship missions in the MiG-29 at Hwangju, Set by HQ off, then after destroying the base except runways -> set by HQ back on. -
@Atze-0 said in Airfield strikes and squadrons in campaign:
Ever since Falcon came out, we have the same behavior: When striking an airfield, just hitting the runways has an effect (as on/off triggers to shut down the entire base). Bombing all the other buildings has absolutely no impact (except EW radars).
As sometimes mentioned here, nowadays bombing runways is not so often the main goal in real life. Strikes adress the entire airbase because runways can be repaired fairly quick. Even if we bring the base to 0 percent only destroying buildings, the base is still able to launch fighters if the runways are active.Having this in mind, we have in our extreme realistic Sim the most unrealistic airbase attacks since Ace Combat 7 or Iron Eagle.
To adress other assets than the runways makes absolutely no sense, it has no impact. I tested this to be sure: Got a MiG-29 in Hwangiu and hammered different assets there in several treacherous attacks (one after another, always loading the game, no other flights were fragged). Then I compared before / after in Mission Commander:
- Hangars: no impact on squadron aircraft (as we know)
- Munition storages: no impact on squadron munitions
- Fuel Tanks: no impact on squadron fuel
So we also have no motivation planning follow on strikes when the runways are out of order (except the runways are getting repaired).
I thought about it a bit but donāt want to demand anything (I hear the Devs āSighā) but just let this settle:
What if the campaign system could be enhanced just for the purpose of decreasing aircraft, stores and fuel on airbases if the other buildings are attacked? By no means the intention is to allocate single aircraft to hangars or such bullsh*t, itās just for decreasing numbers to some extend but taking care not too much.
Here some pseudo-code for aircraft:
HANGAR_DESTROYED_EVENT
Every hangar type could get a store value (HAS a smaller, big hangarsā¦ you know)If hangar destroyed (just damaged ones shouldnāt be taken into account):
DestroyedAircraft = SingleNowDestroyedHangarStoreValue Ć AircraftNumberOfAllSquadronsOnBaseMinusThoseInFlights / AllCumulatedStoreValuesMinusBeforeDestroyedHangars
DestroyedAircraft = DestroyedAircraft Ć Randomize 20-80 percentHere we need a maximum limit, letās say 5 (so when theater builders just place 3 hangars and 5 squadrons on a base, not entire squadrons will be wiped out)
The losses should be spread over the existing squadronsā¦ randomized, of course
Now we need a minimum limit: each squadron should not be depleted below 3 aircraft through this system (should be destroyed only when in-flight), so we have a motivation to still adress the runways later on
ENDThe same system with alterations can also be used for:
- Fuel of the squadrons and fuel tanks
- Munitions of the squadrons and storages (losses per squadron and then weapon type)
As said, this is not meant to permanently distribute aircraft, fuel and ammunition to certain hangars, tanks and storages. It should only deplete ressources somewhat. For example, if all hangars are destroyed, the airbase should still have aircraft, fuel and weapons (in lore they could be hidden).
It is independend from experimenting with lengthening spawn/despawn times for more traffic on the airfields (which will easily lead to jams).There are concerns that this system could falter balance of the campaigns but I donāt think so. It would almost only affect planning of player generated packages (HQ will still frag the runways).
But we would have a very immersive and encouraging mechanism to plan an attack to the most threatening installation in campaign. Because since all the years it is a bit frustrating to see the system we have now, well knowing it wasnāt completed back in 1998.
Sorry for this lengthy text and my not native english.
EDIT: if (DestroyedAircraft > 0 and < 1) {randomize 0 or 1} else always round down
(for the case theater builders place 20 hangars with 200 cumulated store value and a campaign builder puts just one squadron with 10 fighters onto the base)EDIT2: The AllCumulatedStoreValuesMinusBeforeDestroyedHangars is wrong. It should be just AllCumulatedStoreValues. Else the less hangars are intact, the more impact would the destruction of another one have.
Or simply can be defined factors regarding the resupply rate and mission generation rate. If the fuel tanks are destroyed planes still can be serviced other way, but much slower.
I like the point of the initiation. An airbase in RL is much more than runways.
Just think about Falkland. From Stanley in theory it could be operate some airplanes, it had a functional runway. But the other elements a real airbase were totally missedā¦ -
Or simply can be defined factors regarding the resupply rate and mission generation rate. If the fuel tanks are destroyed planes still can be serviced other way, but much slower.
I like the point of the initiation. An airbase in RL is much more than runways.
Just think about Falkland. From Stanley in theory it could be operate some airplanes, it had a functional runway. But the other elements a real airbase were totally missedā¦I think those things are already funktional in a sufficiant way way with the existing systems. (see following post)
-
OK, I found some time to do tests:
After setting my Squadron at Hwangju to not āSet by HQā I hammered the base with single-ship Mig-29s every 10 minutes, everytime destroying assets on āmy own airbaseā except runways. Those court martialsā¦
The finding was: At some point the HQ did not frag new missions. The already fragged ones where launched if planned. Buildings seem to have a hard percentage value, so that destroying some of them brings the base to 0%.
There is a somewhat hidden āhintā for this: Iām not exactly sure if it is at 0% or already at a higher value (since I re-enabled āSet by HQā after destroying most of the buildings). But if no flight is selected, you see below the mission list (were you normally see the flightās aircraft) the text āAirbase Destroyedā. You see this when your list gets emptied completely or if you delete a flight over ATO - in the second it needs to select the next flight.We as players are absolutely able to take over such a squadron and plan our own packages, this is still possible.
INTERCEPTIONS are NOT affected. AI HQ even plans and launches them if everything except the runways is destroyed and no normal missions are planned because of the shutdown. That covers with my experience that nearby bases will always launch fighters against my packages (as long as runways are intact). This can lead to huge numbers of interceptors of course, especially if the aircraft numbers on the destroyed base are still high.
-
Great @Atze-0 ,
So, to summarize :
-
Status level of AirBase drives the Sorties Fragging (and its rate as mentioned by @tiag).
- When it comes to 0%, the AI HQ stop Fragging new Sorties, except for Interception Flights
- But you can still manually plan Flights/Packages if there is sufficient Aircrafts.
-
All Fragged Sorties will be launched :
- Regardless of the actual reported Aircrafts remaining in Squadrons.
- Until the Runways are destroyed.
-
When Runways are destroyed
- All Fragged Sortie are deleted.
- Manual planning is no longer possible.
-
The more buildings destroyed, the more ressources are needed for reconstruction (so continue to Strike it as said by @tiag )
-
-
@CheckPoint
IMO, if both runways are destroyed all mission types, including the ability of manually fragging, should not be available anymore from that AB.
We also need a stronger affect of the building destruction on the sortie rate.
TY, guys. -
@CheckPoint @tiag
If all runways are destroyed, the message when trying to frag a mission is always āNot enough ACā. -
This is a very good discussion. Iād like to point out that even with the entire runway destroyed it is still possible to take off from taxiways it they have enought lenght. This would be use for sure in desparate wartime. There are A LOT of civil airports that uses its taxiways for T/O and LDG operations when the main runway is taking some regular maintenance. And I am not talking about small airportsā¦ But I donāt know if this should be considered for BMS, just small talk hereā¦
-
@sasah320 If Iām not mistaken even if a single runway section is damaged/destroyed you canāt frag flights (you can still frag if only the threshold is damaged/destroyed), so itās quite hard to find a case where you can take off from a taxiway.
Maybe if you land on the taxiway of some FOB/alternate just to refuel and take off again from the taxiway. But it also wouldnāt make sense gameplay-wise. You would be forced to pretty much carpet bomb airbases just to make any flights unable to take off as persistent people would certainly find enough space to take off even if you bombed the taxiways and runways.
-
@CheckPoint said in Airfield strikes and squadrons in campaign:
Great @Atze-0 ,
So, to summarize :
-
Status level of AirBase drives the Sorties Fragging (and its rate as mentioned by @tiag).
- When it comes to 0%, the AI HQ stop Fragging new Sorties, except for Interception Flights
- But you can still manually plan Flights/Packages if there is sufficient Aircrafts.
-
All Fragged Sorties will be launched :
- Regardless of the actual reported Aircrafts remaining in Squadrons.
- Until the Runways are destroyed.
-
When Runways are destroyed
- All Fragged Sortie are deleted.
- Manual planning is no longer possible.
-
The more buildings destroyed, the more ressources are needed for reconstruction (so continue to Strike it as said by @tiag )
I didnāt want to open a new topic, so Iām sharing my very interesting discovery here.
I have found an example where airbases CAN frag sorties even at 0% (!!!)
After months of real life stuff Iāve found some time to push my Rolling Fire campaign a bit further and I watched Shenyang to stay at 0% because of the J-20s.
But suddenly, there were plenty of them so I thought a new squadron could have been activated, but nada.To investigate what dark witchcraft they are doing up there I joined the J-20 squadron in Shenyang.
In the following screenshot you see that the airbase frags BARCAPs along the FLOT even if it has 0%.
Of course, the 2 segments of the broad runway are repaired, the 0% come from other destroyed assets on the base:Another thing: From time to time Iām suspecting the campaign engine to do its math wrong. Me and my wingmen shot down 4 J-20 and damaged 1, myself flying 2 missions. It was clearly stated in the debriefing. But the number in Shenyang only dropped from 13 to 11! When should the aircraft be subtracted from the OOB?
Another other thing:
Wow, is this campaign tough - day 5 and my ground troops seem to travel from east to west and back all the time but almost not northward (enemy has still a high ground power level). So when fragging missions I saw some strange loadouts: F-16 on STRIKE missions almost always loaded with 2 single Mavericks? Also the Air Interdiction loadouts are often far from usefull. Is there a reason for that? I just wonder, because enemy troops and i.e. war production assets are still high. Could those loadouts have a negative impact?
I forgot to mention: Iām still on 4.37 without updates for savegame compatibility.But now Iāll go back to the sim. With day 5 Russia entered the war as stated in the *.tri file and now I will have a good time.
-
-
@Atze-0 thank you Atze. I dont want to say too much here otherwise Max wil ban me , but check next version please. These bugs and many others in the campaign have been solved.
-
@tiag
That sounds awesome! I agree with Atze 0 above, itās frustrating if it counts wrong. Glad to see some fixes! -
@Atze-0 said in Airfield strikes and squadrons in campaign:
@CheckPoint said in Airfield strikes and squadrons in campaign:
Status level of AirBase drives the Sorties Fragging (and its rate as mentioned by @tiag). When it comes to 0%, the AI HQ stop Fragging new Sorties, except for Interception Flights ... All Fragged Sorties will be launched : Regardless of the actual reported Aircrafts remaining in Squadrons. Until the Runways are destroyed.
I didnāt want to open a new topic, so Iām sharing my very interesting discovery here.
I have found an example where airbases CAN frag sorties even at 0% (!!!)
In the following screenshot you see that the airbase frags BARCAPs along the FLOT even if it has 0%.
Of course, the 2 segments of the broad runway are repaired, the 0% come from other destroyed assets on the base:Yes that match. The sorties should have been fragged before the status came to 0.
-
Would it be possible to set all fragged sorties status to aborted once AB status reaches 0% operational (or even better once key elements as center section of runways, tower and such are destroyed).
-
@CheckPoint said in Airfield strikes and squadrons in campaign:
@Atze-0 said in Airfield strikes and squadrons in campaign:
@CheckPoint said in Airfield strikes and squadrons in campaign:
Status level of AirBase drives the Sorties Fragging (and its rate as mentioned by @tiag). When it comes to 0%, the AI HQ stop Fragging new Sorties, except for Interception Flights ... All Fragged Sorties will be launched : Regardless of the actual reported Aircrafts remaining in Squadrons. Until the Runways are destroyed.
I didnāt want to open a new topic, so Iām sharing my very interesting discovery here.
I have found an example where airbases CAN frag sorties even at 0% (!!!)
In the following screenshot you see that the airbase frags BARCAPs along the FLOT even if it has 0%.
Of course, the 2 segments of the broad runway are repaired, the 0% come from other destroyed assets on the base:Yes that match. The sorties should have been fragged before the status came to 0.
Hmmm, Iām pretty sure I kept Shenyang at 0% for a looong time after my first strike (also see my initial strike here), always building follow on strikes manually so the J-20 will not recover. There are many other assets on the base destroyed. But it was sufficient for them to repair the one runway with just 2 segments to frag those BARCAPs again (see screenshot).
Of course, this is an absolutely special case here. My experience has always been that they cannot frag at 0%, even in this present campaign.But thats no problem, I wanted to solve this anyway with challenging the J-20 in the air so I can wipe them out. No, wait, it is a problem, Russia entered the warā¦ Dāoh!
My strategy now: PAKS back to FLOT, sliders for defensive counter air up. Maybe taking out the Kuznetsov and fragging another mega-multi-package assault against Uglovoye airbase. I think that will do it until the J-20 are down, then I let Uglovoye come back repaired, draining their huge fighter complement in air-to-air combat.@Xeno said in Airfield strikes and squadrons in campaign:
Would it be possible to set all fragged sorties status to aborted once AB status reaches 0% operational (or even better once key elements as center section of runways, tower and such are destroyed).
This would be nice, but it really is a minor problem, because HQ is always fragging the runways first. Letās see what the Devs did in 4.37 U3. But as I said, this should not be high priority.
-
Hi @tiag , I didnāt want to open a new thread for this question, because it is somewhat related to the topic:
One annoying thing about the current state of Oca Strikes is that, no matter the load out or package composition, the engine only destroys one runway in the attacked airbase (the top one in the target list), making it quicker to repair. Are there any changes planned around this in the next version?
Thanks for all the hard work! -
@Rasetti wait for U3 at this stage
-
@Atze-0 this is a great idea, it upsets that all that target variety in an airbase doesnt actually matter.
-
@VDK said in Airfield strikes and squadrons in campaign:
In order to the base to be repaired, is there need to be an engineering ground unit close to the base, or the base has an āautonomousā system of repair?
Airbases can repair themselves, but I believe there is a slight advantage with time if there is an Engineering battalion on location.
-
@JollyFE said in Airfield strikes and squadrons in campaign:
@VDK said in Airfield strikes and squadrons in campaign:
In order to the base to be repaired, is there need to be an engineering ground unit close to the base, or the base has an āautonomousā system of repair?
Airbases can repair themselves, but I believe there is a slight advantage with time if there is an Engineering battalion on location.
I was told that no autonomous repairs were possible. Repairs would require presence of engineer battalions ?