Author Topic: Idea for trains and roads.. (Read 654 times)

Wobble · « **on:** October 16, 2001, 09:22:00 AM »

Why not make it so that train tracks and roads can be damaged by bombs and rockets?
that way you could hinder a city/field's rebuild time before attacking.. kind of a cut off and isolate kinda thing like happened in real life.. make it so that when a train/convoy reaches a damaged section it takes X miniutes to rebuild it before proceeding. the amount of track/road repair time would be commensurate with the size of the ord used..

It seems that would be a usefull way to increase the number of strategic targets.. and thus give the buffs something to hit besides fields.. afterall historically railways and roads were very very commin targets for bombers..

????

Rojo · « **Reply #1 on:** October 16, 2001, 05:05:00 PM »

Actually, it was not the roads and tracks that were attacked, but the trains, trucks and (of course) bridges. Tracks and roadways were quick (relatively speaking) to repair, but it took much longer and much more skilled workers to build trains, vehicles and bridges. The Germans became quite skilled at repairing damaged tracks and road sections.

Remember that in the MA, the effects of strategic targets is compressed in time. The time required in the MA to produce another train is only 5 minutes (the delay to spawn a train when it's destroyed); destroy an entire refinery and the most it's down for is two hours. Applying the same time compression to the act of repairing a section of damaged track or road, and it would be back up in the blink of an eye in the MA. Besides that, bomb craters only last for a few minutes anyways.

What I would rather see is for trains and convoys to affect not only rebuild times, but also limit supplies. Not limit aircraft, but just the availability of expendable supplies such as fuel, ordnance, and troops. I would also change the resupply effect of goons and M-3s such that it would take several to completely resupply a base that is short of supplies because its convoy got nuked.

I would even go so far as to suggest that a field stay down and short of supplies indefinitely in the absence of a successful resupply by goon/M-3/convoy/etc. I would also suggest that a successful resupply should not cause the instantaneous rebuild of all damaged facilities. Rather it should rebuild things after a certain amount of time, and in the order that they went down.

If we keep auto-rebuild such as we have now, then the effect on rebuilds from resupply should change. Right now, base objects will rebuild in a certain amount of time (15 minutes for hangers, 30 minutes for ack, etc) unless a convoy arrives or a supply drop is made. If a convoy or supplies make it to the base, everything comes up almost instantly and simultaineously. Instead, every convoy or supply drop that makes it should simply reduce the remaining rebuild time for each object, individually, by 50 percent. That way, there is always a small delay between supplies reaching the base and the objects returing to operation. Plus, objects should rebuild in the order they went down, just as they do now.

[ 10-16-2001: Message edited by: Rojo ]

Wobble · « **Reply #2 on:** October 16, 2001, 06:06:00 PM »

oh, good idea. Hmm, maby we'll get some bridges and there will be something ya can bomb to slow convoys and trains...

moose · « **Reply #3 on:** October 16, 2001, 07:16:00 PM »

hehe

i had the bridges idea first!

texace · « **Reply #4 on:** October 16, 2001, 09:58:00 PM »

Perhaps the trains and convoys could deliver ammo to fields? Each field could have a set limit of bombs and rockets (not MG or cannon, except the 40mm) at the dump. Every time a plane takes some, the suppy goes down. At set intervals, another truck or train delivers a new load. The dump is destroyed, no more bombs and rockets.

Could that work?

Wobble · « **Reply #5 on:** October 16, 2001, 10:17:00 PM »

thats a good idea!! i bet the furball monkeys would hate it though.. afterll it would take away from the MAs only real purpose

killing convoys and trains is a good target, but I think their roads and tracks should somehow be worked into the strat. .. like have switching yards.. that could be hit.. anything.. there are just too few deacent strat targets right now.. the more the marrier.

majic · « **Reply #6 on:** October 16, 2001, 11:19:00 PM »

Roads may be too long to defend, but bridges would be a great target, say 2000lbs to kill a bridge. (Mebbe ack by each end of the bridge?) Doesn't have to be a bridge over water either, so they don't have to waste time adding rivers...

darling · « **Reply #7 on:** October 17, 2001, 08:23:00 AM »

Rojo is incorrect. One of the main target categories for the 8th AF in WW2 was in fact transport centers. These included for the most part train yards and switches. Granted, a bombed track is not that hard to repair, but dropa couple hundred 250-500lbs bombs in a train yard, and destroy switches, repair shops, etcetera, and you have limited the transport capabilites of that sector for a considerable period of time.
The tactical squadrons on the other hand, in their Jugs and Typhoons/Tempests took care of the trains on the tracks.

BTW, I seem to be back.

deSelys · « **Reply #8 on:** October 17, 2001, 08:33:00 AM »

Heheheeee....tired of shooting down dragons and magic carpets in Everquest, Darling?

Welcome back!

MadBirdCZ · « **Reply #9 on:** October 17, 2001, 08:49:00 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Wobble:
thats a good idea!! i bet the furball monkeys would hate it though..

Maybe it would force them to leave MA and go to TA od DA where they can furball as long as they want.... Speaking for myself I would really appreciate those Quake style players who only care for furballs and do not care for strats nor teamplay to leave... I joined AH because of templay and strat system but as time goes there is more and more of those Quakers who just do not care... I'm geting fed up and I was already considering account cancelation... Well I will just wait a bit longer....

_____________
MBirdCZ

[ 10-17-2001: Message edited by: MadBirdCZ ]

Rojo · « **Reply #10 on:** October 17, 2001, 09:14:00 AM »

Darling:

No, not incorrect; just not clear enough in what I meant. Wobble's original idea was to hit the rail lines and road's between stations/bases/facilities (at least that was my interpretation). The stations we have now represent the marshalling yards you speak of. In fact, in an earlier post of mine, I suggested that they should be redesigned to look like a railroad marshalling yard.

You are absolutely correct in that these were a prime target, especially during the build up to D-day, when the 8th AF put into effect their "Transportation Plan," which was the systematic attack on rail yards and bridges. The idea was to isolate, logistically, the Normandy area from the rest of France. The main reason the rail yards were good targets was that area bombing would not only tear up LOTS of track (rather than one, easily repaired stretch out in the countryside), but kill lots of engines, rolling stock, and repair shops.