If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register or login before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
I've been wondering why this, and many other games, handles aircraft in such an abstract way?
I mean, with the 'power' that computers have now............
What would you like to see?
Air seems more like random artillery in these games. I wouldn't mind seeing some more uses for it like plotting interdiction point. Also I wouldn't mind having some sort of indication of enemy interception chance.
Consider a campaign game like Normandy or Sicly - so much of the Allied Air power flys in from OFF Map. Consider any smaller scns - the air bases wold likely be off the sub map. Consider the extra coding required to base construction, base movement, base suppression ect. Now consider that this is an operational game where your role is the operational commander. You need to have access to air strikes and rcon, but you don't really care where they come from.
Our guess our thinking is that adding more complex air power rules adds only complexity without reallly adding much to the game.
John Tiller Software
Well, I think this one of those things that fall into the 'either you think its needed or its not' category!
There are also many games where much, if not most of the 'air units' would be on the map!
Kursk comes to mind. Any game that 'models' any aspects of the simulation in more detail, will only benefit in greater realism!
I really like the 'Panzer Campaigns' series, I have them all! Though some need updating to incorporate features found in later releases (hint), its a very good system!
Would it be improved if a more realistic 'air unit' aspect where available?
Some obvious questions come to mind. If 'details' are not important, why have different types of tank units? Why have different artillery units?