Author Topic: Logistics  (Read 2885 times)

Offline Butcher

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5323
Logistics
« on: December 27, 2011, 08:37:47 PM »
I'd love to see a mix of European and Pacific theater logistics to attack, it wouldn't change the outcome of the game we have now, but here are some ideas:

Submarine Bases: A huge target in the european theater, would take quite a bit of ords to take them down, and cannot be captured.

V1 Weapon Sites would be a nice target to add to the game (although the V1 would not be used in game as a weapon) it would make a nice ground attack target.

Factories: Holy hell there are at least 6 major ones I can think of, Airframe production, Ball bearings, Chemical, Refinery, steel, and Power Plants. Although a larger map would be required before adding these, logistically it would not hamper what a player could fly in game, rather if bombed could pose a penalty to the country who does not defend it. For example if we  need 20% of each countries bases plus 90% of our own bases - we could throw in 60+% of industry must be undestroyed to win a war. Basically if your factories are bombed, you can't win the war.

Rain yards are a great idea, the trains like convoys would be used to supply bases - ship convoys would obviously deliver supplies to oversea bases, and even coastal bases. Rail yards would supply bases on land, however each "sector" of bases would require a railyard, which means it would have to be defended before you could knock out its resupplying methods.

The idea here is adding logistics to the game, which was a huge factor in World War 2, In aces high naturally logistics would be quite boring, however like above - if you don't defend it, you can pay a penalty.

Shooting in the dark with ideas, maybe some might be interesting enough to add one day  :aok
JG 52

Offline USRanger

  • AvA Staff Member
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10325
      • BoP Home
Re: Logistics
« Reply #1 on: December 27, 2011, 09:17:35 PM »
How about a V-2 site?


 :)

A rail yard could be in a terrain if a terrain maker took the time to build it piece by piece.  I plan on making one for an AvA terrain sometime in 2012.  Of course, rules for MA and AvA terrains are very different.
Axis vs Allies Staff Member
☩ JG11 Sonderstaffel ☩
Flying 'Black[Death] 10' ☩JG11☩

Only the Proud, Only the Strong Ne Desit Virtus

Offline wil3ur

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1990
Re: Logistics
« Reply #2 on: December 27, 2011, 09:18:08 PM »
OK... to start off before anyone says wrong room, this isn't a 'wish list' posting, but an area to discuss a possible enhancement we may wish would happen... so Nyah!

I've put this forth in a previous post, but I think it may deserve it's own thread since I see the same thread popping up again and again in regards to CV's.

My thoughts would be to have support fleets for CV's, much like the trucks that run to bases to resupply these.  These would be needed to maintain operations and also work towards rebuilding a damaged fleet.  Basically, the support fleet leaves the port of call and makes a B-Line for it's fleet (following water of course).  The cons of this become immediately apparent...  The farther away from port you get, the longer resupply will take, and the greater chance for interception (DUH?!?!).

This adds two great aspects to the game...  You now have the ability to utilize attack craft for one of their main purposes, attacking soft targets, especially trains and convoys, and also would correct the issue of hiding carriers.

Carriers would have a 'bleed' set on their resources based on an over time equation.  Over time would be used because if were based on planes or anything realistic people would be really really mad...  But basically, this bleed on effectiveness (Droptanks are disabled...  Ordinance is disabled) would make the use of a carrier under assault a much harder task.  In addition, the CV would always require supplies, so convoys would always need to be sent.  If the carrier is hidden, supply convoys could be tracked.  If the base is under enemy control, the convoys cease, and the carrier becomes nearly useless (25% fuel no ord fighters only?).

This would also add the use of scout planes, particularly PBY's which I'd love to see in game to the overall aspect of gameplay while not removing anything from anybody.  I see this is a 'win win'.  I'd love to hear any suggestions or thoughts in regards to /this/ topic...

(Image removed from quote.)

And this...
"look at me I am making a derogatory remark to the OP"


Offline MAINER

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 607
Re: Logistics
« Reply #3 on: December 27, 2011, 09:25:48 PM »
+1
Are those our bombers?-famous last words



 Member of the congregation of The church of David Wales

Offline SmokinLoon

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6168
Re: Logistics
« Reply #4 on: December 27, 2011, 09:25:53 PM »
I agree that there needs to be a whole gander more worth of target to hammer other than the near impenetrable city and industrial complex, and fields.

The old strat system offered targets spread clear out over the map.  

I urge HTC to figure something out.  
Proud grandson of the late Lt. Col. Darrell M. "Bud" Gray, USAF (ret.), B24D pilot, 5th BG/72nd BS. 28 combat missions within the "slot", PTO.

Offline Butcher

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5323
Re: Logistics
« Reply #5 on: December 27, 2011, 09:56:39 PM »
How about a V-2 site?

(Image removed from quote.)
 :)

A rail yard could be in a terrain if a terrain maker took the time to build it piece by piece.  I plan on making one for an AvA terrain sometime in 2012.  Of course, rules for MA and AvA terrains are very different.

V-1 sites for closer to the front, V-2 for the rear? sounds great to me!
JG 52

Offline Raptor05121

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 486
Re: Logistics
« Reply #6 on: December 27, 2011, 09:59:27 PM »
I'm tired of hitting FHs and town buildings. I want to do some real strategic bombing, but not being limited to some gay target 10+ sector away and right next door to a 163 pub
InGame: xRaptorx of the ***Alchemists***

Quote from: dirtdart
To suggest things that do not meet this basic criteria is equal to masturbation.  It may feel good to you, will not produce any tangible results, and you may be embarrassed if you get caught. 

Offline SpencAce

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 128
Re: Logistics
« Reply #7 on: December 27, 2011, 10:04:34 PM »
i like the idea about the v1 and v2 sites but i would like them to acctually be able to luan ch and attack ground targets as well
**SSgt**

Offline Butcher

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5323
Re: Logistics
« Reply #8 on: December 27, 2011, 11:35:53 PM »
i like the idea about the v1 and v2 sites but i would like them to acctually be able to luan ch and attack ground targets as well

Why add something that would be completely useless to the game? In strategic value, neither were accurate, with the perk value cost alone with the hit percentage, only people who would use it would be someone quitting the game and wanting to blow all their perks.

Even then, 25% of them might just hit their target, assuming its a dead on hit.
JG 52

Offline B-17

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2672
Re: Logistics
« Reply #9 on: December 28, 2011, 12:58:45 AM »
Maybe there could be random explosions within a certain radius of a town/airfield/city.

:D

Offline macdp51

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 92
Re: Logistics
« Reply #10 on: December 28, 2011, 08:22:36 AM »
+1 Butcher along with your proposed CV arrangements -  :banana:
HP

Offline 4deck

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1520
      • (+) Precision
Re: Logistics
« Reply #11 on: December 28, 2011, 09:29:01 AM »
+1 for all the idea's.
Forgot who said this while trying to take a base, but the quote goes like this. "I cant help you with ack, Im not in attack mode" This is with only 2 ack up in the town while troops were there, waiting. The rest of the town was down.

Offline Chilli

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4278
Re: Logistics
« Reply #12 on: December 28, 2011, 09:33:03 AM »
 :aok  Definitely headed in the direction I would like to see things develop.

Offline Butcher

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5323
Re: Logistics
« Reply #13 on: December 28, 2011, 10:10:06 AM »
Ranger made a V-2 rocket site, why not throw a few on a map, long as its no where NEAR a Me-163 base.

JG 52

Offline Peyton

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 228
Re: Logistics
« Reply #14 on: December 28, 2011, 10:44:00 AM »
I'm tired of hitting FHs and town buildings. I want to do some real strategic bombing, but not being limited to some gay target 10+ sector away and right next door to a 163 pub

+1   .........Will gay people be in these gay target areas?

Other non captured targets would be good to bomb as requested.  Disperse these throughout the map.  You still get points and it does affect the other side unless you bomb their main cities of course so they wil have a reason to defend these "small" areas of opportunities also.  Example:  a fuel plant bombed affects 25% fuel (and would go no lower than this) for all airfields and ports within a XXX mile radius provided by an area ring on map such as the dar rings do for radar.