Open beta forum.
This is what you think until you look at all the maps.uran21 wrote:This would make a good approach.Kerensky wrote:Ahh interesting, and quite enlightening. Sorry, this is something I've never really understood myself, I was honestly curious.
If top speed, or cruising speed, divided by a variable is too severe. Aircraft could be divided up into ranks.
Planes falling into the 200-300 mph range will have movement 10 or 11.
Planes falling into 300-400 mph range will have movement 12 or 13.
Planes falling into 500-600 mph range will have movement 14 15.
Me163 will be 16 movement probably.
It's not a big deal though, just throwing ideas around.
Range movement effect the location of air fields.
If this is changed it can effect game balance.
Need to re-examine airfield locations and review it's impact.
I went into the equipment file and arbitrarily changed all aircraft speeds the reflect "turns" aborne. Most fighters were given Half (-1) their fuel putting them at 20+ range (jets were given 30+) but never more than half their fuel so that they could always retrun to base. Bombers were given in the high teens to mid 20s. In this way, fighter could fly out, do their thing, and return home. Bombers could "loiter" longer in the airspace looking for targets.
To update my comment, I took the fuel allocation in the equipment file and divided in by combat radius percentage for each type aircraft to determine their movement allowance. From WWII data, virtually all aircraft had a combat radius of 1/3 their operational range (fuel allowance) except single engine bombers which had a combat radius of 1/4 (with their normal bomb payload). Most bombers multi-engine aircraft also had an "extended" combat radius of 9/20 by exchanging approx. half their bomb load for extra fuel.