Wushuki Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 You'd expect that carrier vs fighter combat works exactly like normal fighter vs fighter combat. In both cases it just represents air vs air combat. It works very differently however, because the technology level of the fighter is not taken into account in most situations. Basically there are 7 different situations that can occur. Below I show what happens when a level 5 fighter is battling with a level 5 carrier in the different situations. Situation A: The carrier is in fighter mode Carrier intercepts the fighter: Carrier does 6 damage, fighter does 1Carrier attacks the fighter: Carrier does 6 damage, fighter does 1Fighter intercepts carrier: Carrier does 1 damage, fighter does 1Fighter attacks carrier: Carrier does 1 damage, fighter does 1 Situation B: The carrier is in tactical mode Carrier attacks the fighter: Carrier does 6 damage, fighter does 1Fighter intercepts carrier: Carrier does 0 damage, fighter does 6Fighter attacks carrier: Carrier does 0 damage, fighter does 6 First note, that it works very different from normal air combat. When the fighter is attacked, the technology level of the fighter is simply not taken into account and thus it takes massive damage. The only time when a fighter can damage a carrier is when the carrier is in tactical mode. When it is in fighter mode however, the fighter unit doesn't have any chance to fight the carrier and will either get killed by being intercepted by the carrier (situation A-1) or by the carrier attacks on the fighter (situation A-2). It seems very strange that the fighter technology is not taken into account in all situations as it makes carrier based aircraft far more powerful then land based aircraft. Is this intentional or is it a bug? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macg Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 Though I've not seen it printed, I have to believe the carrier air groups are like only 20% the size of the fighter groups. So it should be tweaked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
U8led Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 Very interesting observation Wushuki. I decided to test it out in my WWIII Mod. First note, that it works very different from normal air combat. When the fighter is attacked, the technology level of the fighter is simply not taken into account and thus it takes massive damage. That is not quite exactly true but I understand what you are trying to say. In the next screen Shot the adv air5 carrier is attacking a adv air5 jet. Carrier is using its air attack of 6 but the Jet is using it carrier defense of 1. :confused: Either fighters need to use there air defense rating or the carrier attack and defense needs to increase with the advanced air tec. In this next screen shot the level 5 jet is attacking the level 5 carrier (set to CAP/auto). This time the Jet is useing its Air attack rating of 6 minus 5tec for a 1 The Carrier is using its Air Defense rating of 6 minus 5tec for a 1 but... The Jet Fighters will still take more damage because when they are intercepted by the Carrier they will only use there Carrier defense rating of 1 while the intercepters will be using a 6 Like you said this does make Carriers much stronger than they should be in the air2air combat. I would like to mention a Big Ass thanks to Hubert for adding the visible stats at the top of the screen as this has really helped me understand the combat resolutions in many situations. Lets hope it is easy for Hubert to adjust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubert Cater Posted June 1, 2010 Share Posted June 1, 2010 I would like to mention a Big Ass thanks to Hubert for adding the visible stats at the top of the screen as this has really helped me understand the combat resolutions in many situations. No problem at all and I think if I understand correctly the simplest solution would be to have Fighters also increase their 'Carrier Defense' value for each level of Advanced Air. In this case this would resolve all the issues correct? Hubert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
U8led Posted June 1, 2010 Share Posted June 1, 2010 Yes, I think that would fix the issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts