Small airfeilds aricraft instead of hangars

[Traveler]

Why not both hangers and parked aircraft, to shut down an airfield you would need to do both, destroy hangers that repair aircraft and destroy the parked aircraft.   That way HTC would only have to ad the parked destroyable aircraft.  They could be added to each of the airfields.   Perhaps in a later version or upgrade they could tie the destroyable aircraft revetments to certain types of aircraft.  Once the aircraft revetment is down the type of aircraft associated with that revetment would be unavailable until that revetment is restored.  A small airfield could have three hangers to repair fighter aircraft with 6 aircraft revetments associated with each hanger and each aircraft revetment associated with 6 different fighters.  When a base is captured, the only aircraft available would be those flown in and parked in an open aircraft revetment.  Down times for Hangers would be 15 minutes with aircraft revetments are down until resupplied.
You could do the same thing with Bomber Hangers and bomber revetments. 

This idea could even be expanded out to allow control of the number and type of aircraft available at an airfield.  This would add a new element  to the  strategy of the game.  After all, there were no airfields in WWII that contained every type and model of aircraft both fighter and bomber in any theater of war that I know of.   

[TheCrazyOrange]

1) would make it harder to shut a field down,  especially for bombers, unless you put the revetments all right next to each other, in which case there's little point.

2) seems like there's little point if you still have to destroy the hangers as well.

3) limiting number of aircraft at a field isn't good. "Sorry, you've got to fly an extra 35 miles to the fight, because in real life, they're were only a certain number of aircraft at a field. Don't worry, we'll still let you shoot down aircraft from your own, and allied countries though  ".

[DREDIOCK]

1) would make it harder to shut a field down,  especially for bombers, unless you put the revetments all right next to each other, in which case there's little point.

2) seems like there's little point if you still have to destroy the hangers as well.

3) limiting number of aircraft at a field isn't good. "Sorry, you've got to fly an extra 35 miles to the fight, because in real life, they're were only a certain number of aircraft at a field. Don't worry, we'll still let you shoot down aircraft from your own, and allied countries though  ".

Not really. It could still work the way it does now. Replace a hangar with parked AC in the same location. The only real difference would be you could see visibly what percentage was down. That one last bomb it takes to drop on a hangar location could still be all it takes to destroy the remaining plane/s by way of cuncussion

This idea is as much for aesthetics and to add a some visible realism as anything.

[Schen]

 At the very least add aircraft on the ramps vehicls on the roads, supply trucks moving between storage and hangers, make the airfields active and maybe each object worth .01 to .04 of a perk and 2-5 damage points.

[TheCrazyOrange]

Not really. It could still work the way it does now. Replace a hangar with parked AC in the same location. The only real difference would be you could see visibly what percentage was down. That one last bomb it takes to drop on a hangar location could still be all it takes to destroy the remaining plane/s by way of cuncussion

This idea is as much for aesthetics and to add a some visible realism as anything.

So say they're are 4 planes per hanger. What's the hardness for each plane? Are they all tied together (best if they aren't strafe-ably soft)

If they're 1/4th the hardness of the hanger, all this will do is make near misses by small bombs less effective.

[PJ_Godzilla]

+1 I suggested similar in the BnZs jabo-bail thread.

[DREDIOCK]

So say they're are 4 planes per hanger. What's the hardness for each plane? Are they all tied together (best if they aren't strafe-ably soft)

If they're 1/4th the hardness of the hanger, all this will do is make near misses by small bombs less effective.

Think concussion. And wouldnt be any less effective then near misses are now.

Course if small bombs are a factor one could always use larger bombs.

To be honest though on a personal level. I dont really feel bad if bombers find it more difficult to completely shut down a field. There are usually no shortage of targets for bombers to hit map wide. And no shortage of bombers looking to shut down fields.  And Its hard enough as it is to find a reasonably balanced fight to get involved in now. And often as soon as you do. Some group of schmucks feels they absolutely HAVE to shut it down even though there has been no indication of a capture intent on either side.
If your not looking to destroy the town too. Dont shut down the field. There is no point to it. And in such cases not only are you being annoying to the enemy. But to your own side as well.

Dont get me wrong. I enjoy a good struggle to capture or defend from a capture as much as anyone. And to that I say. have at it. But not every fight is a capture attempt.

If field capture is the goal when shutting down a field. Then those few planes that are missed by small bombs can be easily offset by the fighters in the area (which there never seems to be a shortage of) simply finishing the job by strafing.
And if your goal is to prevent a field from capturing your base. Thenyou would be more effective bombing the VH, Ammo bunkers and barracks then you are by shutting down any of the aircraft

[TheCrazyOrange]

Think about it. Say a 500lb bomb lands 20yds off to the side of the pad. While sufficient to destroy the the fighters nearest it, the others survive due to the diminished damage at the greater distance (I assume my observations are correct; bombs do have diminishing damage further towards the edge of the blast radius?).

This will only further decrease usage of bombers like the Ki-67, the Ju-88, the G4M, the Boston. Decreasing diversity also decreases fun.


Also, it would kill immersion for me to see tank rounds impacting a fighter, and see nothing happen. If you want fighters, make them weak and plentiful.

Unless overall hardness is decreased,