Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: EagleDNY on September 08, 2006, 03:23:26 PM
-
Lets face it - the 12 mi radar range circle for everything in AH is a bit primitive. It might improve gameplay (and be more realistic) if the radar ranges were adjusted a bit.
Some data for your consideration:
The 1944 Mk.12 (with Mk.22 Height Finder) Radar on an American CV had a range of 45,000 yds (thats about 25 miles).
Wurzburg GCI (ground control intercept) radars used by the germans to vector fighters to bomber interceptions had a range of 18 miles.
Freya early warning radars used by germany to detect bomber formations had a range of 125 miles.
The British Chain Home radar system used in the BOB had a range of 185 miles.
That said, lets propose some adjustments:
CV groups: why not increase the radar range to 25 miles? It might give the CV defenders a bit more of a chance to get up and intercept incoming bombers.
Small Fields: Small field, small radar - keep the 12 mile dar circle.
Medium Fields: Better field, better radar - how about an 18 or 25 mile radar circle?
Large Fields: Best radar available - 25 mile dar circle minimum, and we could give consideration to even larger ranges.
We also might want to consider Radar Strats - perhaps a very long range (5 sector - 125 mile?) radar based in the HQ and the major cities in each sector of the map.
Radar was a big part of the air war. I'd like to see it become a bit more useful here too. One thing we could definitely use is an altitude indicator - it would be nice to be able to look at a radar trace and know if the incoming is at 2.5K or 25K when I'm trying to do an interception.
It might be interesting to be able to man a radar scope (perhaps at a large field or strat) and vector your countries fighters towards those incoming pesky suicide lancs. I think it would also give the jabo & bomber boys one more thing to have to bomb out of existence on a regular basis at each base (besides ord & troops), and putting up strat radars at the cities & HQ gives us something strategic to defend (or pay the price for failing to defend).
Comments? Thats my $.02 worth.
EagleDNY
-
I think increasing radar range would be good on CVs for the point you made about defenders being able to see them, but when you are on relatively small maps, 25 miles is a hell of a big area.
-
some good ideas. especially for the CV groups.
now, WHERE THE HELL IS THE B-25!!!?????
-JoLLY
pigsonthewing
-
I definately support increasing CV radar range!
-
You presume AH terrains are 1:1 scale. They are not. You say the British radar had 180 miles range in real life, but the channel itself is over 100 miles wide at its narrowest spot. The radar is not historical because this is a game. It must be balanced.
Oh and just FYI a sector is 25 miles square. Having a CV with sector-wide dar (it's pretty close to this already) is a tad much.
As for the german radar, it could detect bomber formations that far out, but not like the perfect dot dar we have now. Most early radar was like that. General approximations. You had a spike on an oscilliscope, that was the "con".
-
Itīs a bit strange, but I have to agree on everything Krusty said.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
You presume AH terrains are 1:1 scale. They are not. You say the British radar had 180 miles range in real life, but the channel itself is over 100 miles wide at its narrowest spot. The radar is not historical because this is a game. It must be balanced.
its 21miles at its narrowest point, 150ish at its widest.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:France_manche_vue_dover.JPG
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Channel
back to the subject. I think the radar at bases is ok... maybe large airfields should have larger ranges.
But your point is a true one. In WWII the bases was 100s of miles apart, in AH, they are 25miles. Larger radar circles would end up overlapping the other side bases!
I would think a radar station add on would be better. Mappers could plop a radar station down that has a range whatever they want set. The radar station would be like a strat target, and would have many towers spread out and would be hard to bring down for a normal jabo.
-
I see both side of this debate and both are reasonable perceptions. But I will lean toward the side of improving radar (to an extent).
I agree that the radar should be proportional to the map size as related to historical abilities. To that end, I think the 12 mile circle is good for the individual bases. However, I will agree that CV radar should be extended as it is over ocean waters. The lack of land based objects provides less interefence and therefore ocean based radar should be more efficient and better ranged. I also agree with the point of having a few larger "country" radars in strategic locations that provide very wide coverage. For example, Radar factories could have 100 or 125 mile radius range. (but that is just pulling a random number -- not necessarily the right proportion, but just an example.)
-
You might wish to consider how the radar range changes would effect overall game play. Im not in anyway saying which way the radar should be, but I would not look at the change as having anything to do with realistic ranges of radar, because our radar simply simulates the complete aircraft tracking systems,including observers, radar, comunication, pilot reports,comand centers ecetera .
Wrather I would be interested in how the range change would effect game play.
HiTech
-
Wow, Hitech - your spelling is improving! A long post with only a few minor problems, (' in I'm, affect vs effect, an m in communication and command, etc.), but overall very much improved!
Keep up the good work! :aok
-
If dar was made more useful, there would just be more LA7 tards augering in to kill it, thus making future kills/vulches/HO's easier to be had
-
Originally posted by hitech
Wrather I would be interested in how the range change would effect game play.
HiTech
Already stated, but I will echo/expand . . .
There are a lot of complaints about heavy bomber formations sinking carriers (which I won't repeat). A longer dar range on the CVs would presumably make it more challenging to sink a CV with "low" buffs because the fighters would have more time to vector in and intercept. So the buffs would have to go higher, which makes hitting a moving CV more unlikely.
This would hopefully return the importance/prominence of the torpedo bomber and dive bomber to carrier combat.
-
Originally posted by hitech
You might wish to consider how the radar range changes would effect overall game play. Im not in anyway saying which way the radar should be, but I would not look at the change as having anything to do with realistic ranges of radar, because our radar simply simulates the complete aircraft tracking systems,including observers, radar, comunication, pilot reports,comand centers ecetera .
Rather I would be interested in how the range change would effect game play.
HiTech
Understood that the current radar system is only simulating aircraft tracking, and understoond that our terrains are not 1:1 with the european or pacific theatres. While we don't have realistic ranges between bases, what we do have is a realistic speed of the incoming aircraft on the attack, so early warning times are either unrealistically low (bombers detected 12 mi out from your CV), or unrealistically high (dar bar shows up 8 sectors away for a mission climbing out across the ocean to your HQ, or dar bar shows the location of an enemy CV long before it gets into radar range).
Increasing CV radar range gets you a more reasonable early warning time, which (hopefully) gets you more interceptions of the single player with his formation of bombers intent on suicide. I think this gives you larger CV air battles as it will be likely take larger groups of bombers coming in higher to get into a position to successfully attack. I think you might also get more people trying to sneak in low with torpedo bombers, which I wouldn't mind seeing either as mass torpedo plane missions are pretty rare.
On land, losing dar bars in favor of strategically placed long range radars that "show it all" in their ranges would tend to vector players to the fighting that much quicker, and again lead to larger air battles. I think you get this effect whether you do "strat" radars of very long range, or if you just increase the range of radars at large airbases only.
Like furballing? You'll still see where the big furball is near a base even if the short-range radar is porked.
Like intercepting bombers? Well, you'll see them coming (at 25, 50, 75 miles?) out, and you'll have a chance to get up, group up, and go do an honest-to-god interception before they get to target. Play your cards right and you might even STOP the raid before they get to target.
Like bombing? Well it'll be a lot more realistic for you since you'll probably want to start winging up in larger formations and taking escorts with you to get to target. You might want to take that tough old B17G instead of the Lancs so you have some defensive guns. In smaller faster buffs you'll have a better chance without escorts, but you won't have that huge bombload. We might see more Mossies, A-20s, or fast buffs like the Ki-67 being used.
Like capturing bases? Well, the equation is basically the same - get a cap on the enemy base, or sneak in under-dar and surprise your enemies in their bunks. You'd have some local strats to target that might mean something to your efforts (the big radar stations / large airbases), and you'll want to defend yours since being blind on one side of your country or the other will put you at a disadvantage.
Radar overlap doesn't bother me in this scenario. Being able to scan into enemy territory a bit just shows you how the air battle is developing. Seeing reinforcements, resupply missions, bombers climbing out behind the lines, etc. just gives you more things to consider in your mission planning.
It might also be interesting to consider terrain effects (radar blindspot behind a mountain anyone?) or aircraft size (larger aircraft detected sooner) as well. Although I don't see that as immediately necessary, it could be implemented later on.
As with anything else, we might not know all the effects on gameplay until a change is implemented. It might be worth giving this a try, or just setting all dars at 25 miles instead of 12 and seeing what that does to gameplay.
Lets not be afraid to experiment for a week here and there - it'll keep the game fresh and we might learn something ;)
EagleDNY
$.02
-
Originally posted by bj229r
If dar was made more useful, there would just be more LA7 tards augering in to kill it, thus making future kills/vulches/HO's easier to be had
Might be hard for the LA-7 to get 3-4 sectors behind the lines to take out a big strat radar station. At least you'll see him coming....
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Oh and just FYI a sector is 25 miles square. Having a CV with sector-wide dar (it's pretty close to this already) is a tad much.
As for the german radar, it could detect bomber formations that far out, but not like the perfect dot dar we have now. Most early radar was like that. General approximations. You had a spike on an oscilliscope, that was the "con".
Actually, I think a CV with a full sector dar would be about right. American CV groups normally had outlying radar pickets (DDs) with their own radars providing early warning of kamikaze attacks. At Okinawa, they had destroyers stationed 60 miles away as early warning pickets, and these pickets were themselves the targets of concentrated kamikaze attacks.
A little math - on station 60 miles out (+10 mile radar range) = 70 mile detection range divided by 280mph aircraft speed (for simplicity) = say 15 minutes of early warning before the enemy bombers get over target.
In AH2 we get 12 miles / 240+ mph bomber speed (when they aren't diving in) = 5 minutes early warning at most. That isn't really time enough to get off the deck, climb out and make an interception. 25 mile range will still only give you at most 10 minutes, which will still make it dicey if the bombers are high, but should give you a shot at low flying suicide bombers.
Not a perfect solution, but then again nothing ever is. Also - realize that although we get position, we don't get height on our supposedly perfect radar. At least the British and German radars had height finding - knowing that the bomber stream is coming in from 270 degrees at 25K is a lot better than seeing a dot 12 miles out that could be at 2K, 10K or 25K when you are trying to make an interception. Since the german stations would triangulate, you can be sure they had a real good idea where everything was and what height is was at, which is more than we have.
Lets try the experiment - double the CV radar range and see what happens.
EagleDNY
$.02
EagleDNY
$.02
-
Concur on the CV radar range. Easy to get some fighters up to altitude to deal with the B-24's at 6-8K if you see them a sector out. Also agree with the altitude function as well. Just got finished reading Wings of Gold--radar was an extremely important part of the U.S. Navy's defense as early as '43. Lots of the pilots quoted talked about the fighter directors giving them vectors on contacts.
Also concur with the extended range at all fields. The bombers have the additional advantage of 3 planes with all the guns and extra ord. If they hustle in at 15K, and you don't see them until they hit the dar ring, you've got about 2-3 minutes (240 true over 10 miles with ord drop at 2 miles) to get up to catch them before the hit the ordnance release point. There's not a plane in the game that can get there and make anything resembling a sane attack in that time.
Maybe as a compromise, give the DARBAR a limited range instead of the whole map. Maybe a 4 sector radius from each friendly base, and throw in an indication of altitude. Doesn't have to be a number, maybe a color coding for blocks of altitude, for example. 1 color/pattern for every 5K or something.
-
My first impression is that the current dar is sufficient. We have bar dar that gives us indication from sectors away to anticipate 15k+ bombers and/or mid-altitude bombers headed toward a CV.
I think anticipation is part of gameplay. I think you can count on a spotted CV being attacked, you just have to anticipate from which direction and get airborne to intercept.
-
Originally posted by SKJohn
Wow, Hitech - your spelling is improving! A long post with only a few minor problems, (' in I'm, affect vs effect, an m in communication and command, etc.), but overall very much improved!
Keep up the good work! :aok
A survey just in showed that 49% of millionairs are lysdexic . True factual survey.
It shows others can read OTHER things :aok
-
Originally posted by Rolex
My first impression is that the current dar is sufficient. We have bar dar that gives us indication from sectors away to anticipate 15k+ bombers and/or mid-altitude bombers headed toward a CV.
I think anticipation is part of gameplay. I think you can count on a spotted CV being attacked, you just have to anticipate from which direction and get airborne to intercept.
Part of what I think needs to be addressed is that the dar bar will give away the position of your CV long before it should've been detected - if you see a dar bar appear (even for a few seconds) 4 or 5 sectors out over the middle of the ocean, you've probably got the enemy CV spotted. All you have to do is up a group of buffs, fly out there, and since nobody is driving (why would they be driving with the CV still 4 sectors from shore?) you get a nice clean easy CV kill.
There are a few maps where you have ports on opposite ends of a long coastline - so what happens is that instead of a good CV air battle, you get a lame CV kill, a respawn, and another 8 sector drive back to enemy waters. Not too good for gameplay.
There's a reason they turn the dar bar off in FSO. Can you imagine trying to do a successful pearl harbor raid when a dar bar 5 sectors out shows the incoming raid the minute it launches?
I must also disagree that the dar bar gives the CV defenders sufficient warning. All it tells you is that a mass of planes might enter your sector anywhere along a 25 mile front, at any altitude. Even if you get up quick and go looking, you can still easily be out of position to make a successful intercept. Example: Dar Bar N, you up and head N or NE when the contacts are coming in from the NW. Even if you managed to guess the right altitude, you are still 12-25 miles out of position when the dot shows up on the CV radar. You might eventually intercept, but probably not before the target has made his attack.
EagleDNY
$.02 at a time....
-
its true..... and maybe the solution would be to have no darbar over the sea...and this is where my extended range radar towers would come in useful..... on the coast lines.
-
having more or longer range dot dars that are killable but resupplyable instead of dar bar does add demension to the game what I can think of.
-
Originally posted by EagleDNY
Might be hard for the LA-7 to get 3-4 sectors behind the lines to take out a big strat radar station. At least you'll see him coming....
Nah I meant the individual bases--I see now that you're putting forth a dar source from other than the airfield
-
EagleDNY,
Here's a little more why I think that way (in no order):
FSO is a completely different mindset than MA gameplay. I have to believe dar is more to create a battle than to end one in the MA. Pearl Harbor comparisons are more for scenarios than MA. The MA is kind of like StrategyLite. ;)
My observation is that 3-4 sector away CVS are sunk more by spies than by being given away from people upping above dar. It happens almost every morning as the 'day shift' enters the MA.
It is still easy to anticipate the direction of incoming bombers after a CV is known to have been spotted. You just look to the logical fields where bombers would up from that have a dar bar. Every CV-based fighter climbs at least twice as fast as bombers and the maximum altitude of any bombers capable of sinking the CV can be estimated. It will take B-26s about 25 miles to climb at least 10,000', depending on fuel load.
It isn't too hard to figure out a CV is near if all you see are carrier-based planes at a base. The object of those planes is to get control of the base (drop vh, ord and sb) before the fleet can get close enough to spawn LVTs.
The object of the defenders is to sink the CV if the base is overwhelmed quickly, so expect bombers...
I'm not in favor of no dar over water either. Attackers can fly a non-direct route under radar and pop up at a location that confuses defenders about the location of the CV. I do it all the time with my squad and we aren't the smartest guys in the world, so I suspect plenty of others do also. These things are all part of the game, don't you think?
I not convinced that 1944 radar in the main arena spanning 6+ years of technology is something needed. Compromises are made for the sake of gameplay (our GPS maps, aircraft icons and distance, no mixture, no blower limits/controls, no cowl flaps, no overheating, no gun jamming or mechanical or electrical failure, no engine start procedure). Not having these does not detract from gameplay, they enhance the MA for the sake of gaming vs. real-world simulation in an environment that is pretty close to anarchy, not under a structured command system with shared goals.
I don't think more information is needed to enjoy the game. I think more unknowns and surprises are good for gameplay.