Author Topic: Trains?  (Read 1179 times)

dobbs-

  • Guest
Trains?
« on: December 28, 1999, 12:11:00 PM »
This got lost in the shuffle so I wanted to repost it to get some feedback.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tanks and Halftracks for attack/defence sound good, but for the delivery of supplies history dictates the need for trains. This could be a totally AI controlled feature as it wouldn't be too fun to engineir, (except for those few train nuts I know are out there), but it would be strategicly fun for the fighter/bombers who could effect rebiuld time of fields by hitting rail lines or trains. It's supposed to be a sim after all right?

Offline K-KEN

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 874
      • http://www.cutthroats.com
Trains?
« Reply #1 on: December 28, 1999, 08:32:00 PM »
Of course, trains make me wet! <g>
I would love to see the advent of a rail system connected to all bases, like clouds. Ever circling, and when ......and IF.....they arrive at a base or facility-it provides the needed supplies, troops, or planes and ammo to keep a base alive.  Maybe it would be a limited thing, like 50% of what was needed.  You know, if 1 troop failed to land, or 5.....then it would have the resourses on board.  Just 1 more birthday wish.....hehehe  but a c-cool one, IMO.
KKEN

VISCONTI

  • Guest
Trains?
« Reply #2 on: December 29, 1999, 12:32:00 PM »
Trains??
Is a must!

Hope this game will be very very realistic
then I can be happy to send 30$ par months :-)
good idea K-KEN

What do u think about trains connected whit city and truk connected whit fields?
Trains resupply city and city based truk resupply fields, more challenge.
Probably that is a lot of work but will be nice!

Offline lemur

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 58
Trains?
« Reply #3 on: January 02, 2000, 01:59:00 AM »
Reposting my suggestion from the gameplay/feedback group:
===================
HT has previously stated that there will be trains, but that they'll have NO effect on strat. He says it won't work because of the
complexity of field captures & strat.

Here's how it'd work:

Build a rail & truck system linking all bases, with tracks that even run between unfriendly bases. Essentially a combination of a web linking each base to its closest neighboring bases with a few lines running from the industrial centers into this web.

The rail system runs through a depot a short distance from the fields. From there a truck/road system runs to the field.

Trains run from the 'industrial center' to the depots, trucks run from the depot to the field (truly critical fields may just have trains running to the field directly)

When a field is captured, the trains begin running directly to that field, provided the tracks don't run through an enemy field (via the web of tracks). If the tracks from friendly bases do run through a captured field, automated c-47s begin ferrying supplies from the closest field. (this prevents enemy fields from being held deep inside enemy territory) without air support Also allow human c-47 drivers to suppliment these automated runs.

C-47s only carry supplies (automated or human pilots) from fields that are at 125%.

This basically allows people to have bases deep inside enemy territory, and hold them, but only if they open up a supply route either through good air defense (since damage to the field won't be repaired until supplies get through) or via gooneys.

Berlin airlift anyone?  

This also means that the side with fewer fields gets more rapid resupply. But it also allows low-level fighter bombers to get into a role they were designed for: Taking out smaller strat targets of opportunity.

If trucks are added that run from the depot to the fields, this provides targets of opportunity to drag vulchers covering a field. (A role currently being handled by suicide b-17s that take off just to drag vulchers down to try and pick them off with gunner fire.) The 17s should somehow be discouraged from this unrealistic behavior (since this buff has no intention of bombing ANYTHING, it's just a gun platform) Having the game provide an automated gunned convoy as a sort of mini-strat for the fighters fills this niche.


my dos (tres?) pesos

~Lemur

Offline flakbait

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 867
      • http://www.worldaccessnet.com/~delta6
Trains?
« Reply #4 on: January 02, 2000, 10:51:00 PM »
Here's something I posted on the "Brand W" boards in hopes of getting some trains. I figured here I might get a better response

[repost from "Brand W" boards]

I figured since Warbirds might, at some time, get moving trains you'd need configurations of the
train cars. Here is that information, reprinted in part, from "A handbook on German military
forces". This train configuration is given for German troop trains. Armored trains, antiaircraft
trains and other types will be posted when I can figure the layout.


^.---------/„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„//,,,,,,,,,,,,,,+++ =55
^.-------------------/„„„„„„„„/>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>+++ =51
^.--T---T---T--/„„„„/--T---T---T--+++ =32
^.-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|/„„„„---------+++ =33


Legend:
^.= guards car    "-"= 34.9 ft flatcar   "-|"= 27.6 ft flatcar with stanchions
„ = boxcar      /= 22 ft antiaircraft car   +++= locomotive
T= flatcar for Tiger tanks   >= 24 ft gondola   ,= 22 ft flatcar

Offline WOOD1

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 81
Trains?
« Reply #5 on: January 06, 2000, 12:11:00 AM »
Wow, I think you guys have hit on the next big on line simm. Combat Train Simm 2000!
 
WOOD1