Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 2 of 2
  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Air Rules Posted on SG Boards
Moscovian
 Post subject: Air Rules Posted on SG Boards
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 6:36 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
How does it land?  Drop off troops?  Provide adequate fire support?  I doubt it comes in for a skid type landing.  If it can land and take off vertically, it can hover. :p

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
orangesm
 Post subject: Air Rules Posted on SG Boards
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:03 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2006 1:50 pm
Posts: 482
Location: Greater Los Angeles Area, CA
To fly it has to have some hover capability, it is not exactly the most aerodynamic craft.  I have already posted my responses to the proposed simple changes.  To the sound of it Neal's  alternate ruleset is going to go the opposite direction to what I would like to see, generally it seems that he wants to reduce the involvement of airpower.  But I would like to see it made more effective and worthwhile, to the point where an army without at least some Anti-Air will find itself at a disadvantage, but that is my opinion. I am looking for a very combined arms game.




_________________
Airspace - AeroImp Forum
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Dwarf Supreme
 Post subject: Air Rules Posted on SG Boards
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:11 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 8:45 pm
Posts: 11147
Location: Canton, CT, USA

(orangesm @ Apr. 19 2007,14:03)
QUOTE
To the sound of it Neal's ?alternate ruleset is going to go the opposite direction to what I would like to see, generally it seems that he wants to reduce the involvement of airpower.

As do I.

_________________
"I don't believe in destiny or the guiding hand of fate." N. Peart
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Moscovian
 Post subject: Air Rules Posted on SG Boards
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:23 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
Orangesm, I PM'd you so we don't bring this too far off topic.  Let's put our head's together, shall we? :)

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Mephiston
 Post subject: Air Rules Posted on SG Boards
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 10:40 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2005 12:52 pm
Posts: 4262

(Dwarf Supreme @ Apr. 19 2007,19:11)
QUOTE

(orangesm @ Apr. 19 2007,14:03)
QUOTE
To the sound of it Neal's  alternate ruleset is going to go the opposite direction to what I would like to see, generally it seems that he wants to reduce the involvement of airpower.

As do I.

I don't want to see Air power removed. I'd just like the rules to work better, regardless of how long my plane models stay physically on the battlefield.
Top
 Profile  
 
nealhunt
 Post subject: Air Rules Posted on SG Boards
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 10:51 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
To the sound of it Neal's  alternate ruleset is going to go the opposite direction to what I would like to see, generally it seems that he wants to reduce the involvement of airpower.


How so?   The purpose is definitely not to downgrade air, so I'd like to hear what you think tilts it against using air power.   I think the changes have a mix of factors that one might consider encouraging or discouraging use of aircraft.

The goal is to address general weirdness and things a majority of people think are cheesy.  Basically, to smooth out the operation.

_________________
Neal
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
orangesm
 Post subject: Air Rules Posted on SG Boards
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 11:21 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2006 1:50 pm
Posts: 482
Location: Greater Los Angeles Area, CA
It is just the way it reads to me,  I agree that currently the rules are not the best,  your corrections to the current rules set are fair.

_________________
Airspace - AeroImp Forum
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
nealhunt
 Post subject: Air Rules Posted on SG Boards
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 2:07 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
Orangesm:  I understand that's how it reads to you, but in order to take your concerns into account I need to know why.


The way it reads to me is that transport aircraft are taking a hit with the ability to grab objectives.  Fighters and fighterbombers get a nice bump with the +1 to attack and ability to loiter on CAP.  Flak units take a downgrade due to the flak rush issue.

To my sometimes befuddled logic, that means:

Bombers came out about even - reduced ground flak v improved intercept and should appear in approximately the same numbers.

Fighters and fighterbombers are ahead both on firepower and resistance against ground flak.  They only lose against other aircraft of their own type.  I would expect increased appearance of them.

Transports will likely be reduced slightly in number because they do lose proportional to pre-change state.  However, I dont' think they will be unbalanced post-change.  Most of their value is air assaults and as far as I recall the "objective grab" was not taken into account in a substantial way when assigning points because the tactic evolved later.

Flak units lose ability and will likely appear in lesser numbers as players choose formations optimized more for facing ground forces.  Possibly they will stay roughly the same.

Which of those conclusions do you disagree with?  What mix of abilities/changes makes you think that people will be less likely to want to use air units?

_________________
Neal
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
orangesm
 Post subject: Air Rules Posted on SG Boards
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 3:09 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2006 1:50 pm
Posts: 482
Location: Greater Los Angeles Area, CA
I think the Transports is where I am most concerned.  While I agree that aircraft should not be able to hold objectives (boots on the ground), I think aircraft should be capable of contesting them (hard to hold an objective when you are being shot at).

Also the 'reduction' of 'usability" of Transports I think would reduce the use of fluff armies like the Thunderhawk transported Space Marine force or Orca based, Manta, Barracuda, & Tiger Shark supported Tau.

**Just checking but I am refering to your alternate rule set and not this changes**

I also currently have an idea in my mind about trying to make aircraft useful in an Assault beyond landing them to better represent CAS.

_________________
Airspace - AeroImp Forum
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
nealhunt
 Post subject: Air Rules Posted on SG Boards
PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 3:24 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA

(orangesm @ Apr. 20 2007,15:09)
QUOTE
**Just checking but I am refering to your alternate rule set and not this changes**

Ah.  This is the source of the misunderstanding.  Thanks.

_________________
Neal
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 2 of 2
  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net