May 23, 2013, 05:16:46 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: Do you live near Cincinnati? Join us this weekend for A&A Spring Gathering XI on April 5-6, 2013. Search me
  Articles  
   Home   Help Login Register Chat  
Loading
Pages: 1 2 3 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Scrambling - Too strong?  (Read 1404 times)
gtg21
A&A.org Mechanized Infantry
**
Posts: 48


"Germany is Truly Your Friend"


View Profile
« on: March 20, 2010, 02:01:52 pm »
0

Intended solely as a discussion - but does anyone think the scrambling rules as they currently stand (i.e. unlimited scrambling of fighters & tacs located on an island with airbase) is too strong?

It doesnt seem to make sense that an airfield on an island (for example - Wake) could feasibly scramble - say - the ENTIRE Japanese airforce (or US airforce for that matter).   Aside from being logistically impossible, it seems to be very  heavily skewed in favor of the defender.

Im not proposing limits on units allowed in a single space - but maybe limit the number of planes you can scramble to the IPC value of the island, with zero value islands considered a value of 1 for scramble purposes.  Or perhaps a 2 planes per IPC scramble rule considering how many islands are valued at 1 or 0.  

It just seems odd to me that airbases can be limited via damage - but they aren't limited in terms of max capacity for scrambling purposes.  Or that the island of Japan can effectively scramble as many planes as Midway.  It just seems strangely off scale.  

Does anyone else think the unlimited scrambling of planes seems a little out of whack?




  
« Last Edit: March 20, 2010, 02:03:51 pm by gtg21 » Logged
oztea
A&A.org Destroyer
*****
Posts: 1500



View Profile
« Reply #1 on: March 20, 2010, 03:23:45 pm »
0

I could see it getting out of controll if its abused, but to concintrate that much air power on a single space detracts from airpower you can project on other spaces on the board.

If you are spending that much on air, i bet you'll be having other problems on other fronts
for instance, if the US is only buying air....they can scrable 20 planes from somewhere eventualy, but that will drasticly effect thier other units, and by that i mean they might not have any.....

Its a valid strategy, and exploitve...but not wise.
Logged
Gharen
A&A.org Artillery
**
Posts: 149


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: March 20, 2010, 06:16:29 pm »
0

Well I was thinking since you can only do 6 points of strategic bombing damage to airbases why not limit the amount of aircraft it can scramble to 6.  Although, if the base is at all damaged it can't scramble to begin with, even 1 point of damage.  I think that is the counter balance to your "infinite" amount of planes that could scramble from one base.  I do understand the arguement, allowing 10+ planes to scramble is quite alot.  You also have to think that you can put dozens of ships into one seazone, so in the end, I think the scramble option is fine the way it is.

Same arguement could be made for naval bases and their enhancement they offer.  Good post.
Logged
Razor
A&A.org Submarine
****
Posts: 850


A&A addict


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: March 21, 2010, 12:31:54 am »
0

Just for the sake of discusion.

The factories have limited production. Major IC cost 30 and build 10 units. Minor IC cost 12 and build 3 units. In light of this, it would not seem unreasonable to say an Airbase has a scrambling limit of 6 fighters. And as a factory, it may take some damage before it close. For each damage point one less scramble. So it can scramble 3 fighters with 3 damage points, just like a factory. Now a rule like this would make sense, and it propably will be a house rule in some communities.

Then we can look at Naval Bases. Lets say one base can only repair 6 capital ships, when fully operational, that would fit the math.
Logged
Razor
A&A.org Submarine
****
Posts: 850


A&A addict


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: March 21, 2010, 12:37:45 am »
0


Im not proposing limits on units allowed in a single space - but maybe limit the number of planes you can scramble to the IPC value of the island, with zero value islands considered a value of 1 for scramble purposes.  Or perhaps a 2 planes per IPC scramble rule considering how many islands are valued at 1 or 0.  


I dont want to pick on you, buddy, but imagine who will pay 15 IPC for an Airbase that can scramble one fighter only, opposite to an 16 IPC carrier that absorb two hits and "scramble" two fighters. That math look bad
Logged
WILD BILL
A&A.org Fighter
*****
Posts: 1372


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: March 21, 2010, 06:35:38 am »
0

In many games we have played, the unlimited scramble seems to promote super stacks. I agree w/Razor. Only minor IC can only produce 3 units, and take 6 points of damage (2X). I propose the same ratio for scramble.  Only 3 units can scramble, and take 6 points of damage. If you have 3 damage markers, then you can't scramble, just like you can't produce units in minor IC. With these limits in mind you could possibly allow scramble in any AB, coastal or even land locked AB (land tt). I don't think it would be to over bearing w/limits.
Logged
Omega
A&A.org Bomber
*****
Posts: 2459



View Profile
« Reply #6 on: March 21, 2010, 12:05:40 pm »
0

Do you seriously think you can bomb an Airbase with fighter that can intercept huh huh huh

That being said, liming the number of planes to scramble based on the AB status seem a good idea. Not sure though. The only "stacks" I've seen were between HAW and Carolinas
« Last Edit: March 21, 2010, 12:07:12 pm by Omega » Logged
WILD BILL
A&A.org Fighter
*****
Posts: 1372


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: March 21, 2010, 12:30:34 pm »
0

I've seen games where ��� places 10-15 air units on Phil or Caroline + fully loaded carriers. There is no way you could attack it. The only good thing is they aren't using them to destroy you in Asia.

As far SBR, does anyone attack facilities/IC in this game anymore. We don't see much.
Logged
mike55
A&A.org Infantry
*
Posts: 26



View Profile
« Reply #8 on: March 21, 2010, 05:00:35 pm »
0

I think scrambling should be expanded, not restricted.  If someone wants to pile on the aircraft, let them.  It means I can attack elsewhere.  As for expanding, I think any coastal land zone should be able to scramble into the adjacent sea zone. That would eliminate the issue of island or not.
Logged
Gharen
A&A.org Artillery
**
Posts: 149


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: March 21, 2010, 06:49:30 pm »
0

I like letting any airbase scramble rather than island only airbases.  And as stated before, you could just go around the mass of aircraft that are parked in the Phillipines.  I think this could be a problem for why people can't win with Allies, they are always worried about taking out huge clusters of units and/or letting that deter any attacks they might make.  Its a nickel and dime war.  Back to topic, I think its fine overall, just have to know when to attack near an island that can scramble or just bypass it.  Hell, the Allies won the war cause we just said the hell with attacking strong points far away from anything, move past and strike deeper into enemy territory.  I think the same notion applies here, just attack around stacked airbases.
Logged
Veqryn
A&A.org Bomber
*
*****
Posts: 2167



View Profile
« Reply #10 on: March 22, 2010, 04:00:00 am »
0

airbases can take 2 damage then they are out of commission,

so why not, an airbase with no damage (3 health left) can scramble 6 aircraft
an airbase with 1 damage (2 health left) can scramble 4 aircraft
an airbase with 2 damage (1 health left) can scramble 2 aircraft
an airbase with 3-6 damage (0 health left) can scramble no aircraft

simply: you can scramble 2x the amount of health left
Logged
finnman
A&A.org Tank
***
Posts: 348



View Profile
« Reply #11 on: March 22, 2010, 10:31:37 am »
0

I think scrambling should be expanded, not restricted.  If someone wants to pile on the aircraft, let them.  It means I can attack elsewhere.  As for expanding, I think any coastal land zone should be able to scramble into the adjacent sea zone. That would eliminate the issue of island or not.

I agree mike air bases should work on costal territories. Thats how I play. They should also give some bonus for territories that aren't even coastal. I mean other then extra moment.
Logged
Gharen
A&A.org Artillery
**
Posts: 149


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: March 22, 2010, 10:52:15 am »
0

finnman:  From what I understand in the global game, they will give more benefits, I read it somewhere on this site.  I assume the same would go for naval bases.  If anything, there should be more airbases at the start, maybe 1 for flying tigers etc etc.
Logged
finnman
A&A.org Tank
***
Posts: 348



View Profile
« Reply #13 on: March 22, 2010, 01:39:54 pm »
0

I would hope so because how many islands are in Europe
Logged
Sgt. Wonko
A&A.org Destroyer
*****
Posts: 1627


And they shall beat their swords into ploughshares


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: March 22, 2010, 07:38:19 pm »
0

simply: you can scramble 2x the amount of health left

This setup sounds reasonable, some type of limitation on scrambling would be in keeping with the rest of the game. I completely agree about air bases defending mainland coastal areas, it doesn't make sense that they wouldn't. However, if you're looking at this in terms of real-world parallels, that would mean limitations on the amount of unit's that could been on any island at any given time. It's not that Japan's entire air force couldn't scramble from Midway, it's that they wouldn't physically fit.

On a side note, air force should be able to be scrambled to defend against transports attempting an amphibious assault.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

2013 Support Drive
Support Level
Forum Username
Buy Axis & Allies
  • Axis & Allies 1942 [Amazon]
  • A&A Pacific 1940 [Amazon]
  • A&A Europe 1940 [FMG]
  • [eBay]
  • [eBay]
  • A&A D-Day [Amazon]
  • A&A Battle of the Bulge [Amazon]
  • [eBay]
  • [eBay]
  • WWII Themed Combat Dice [FMG]


Axis and Allies.org Official Sponsor: Field Marshal Games
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!