PDA

View Full Version : [AI] AI & Airpower



orangesm
05-10-2006, 16:36
I know it is easy to make comparisons and score points in a debate about little plastic toys by comparing them to real life events, but unless you want this thread, or specifically your comments, removed to P&R, then stop.
Alright so since discussion of historical examples is not premitted in the Rumors area in regards to Aeronautica Imperialis. This thread is for discussion of historical and current examples and how cool Airpower is and why AI will allow for a wide variety of gaming, the kinds of effects Airpower can have on a general game of say E:A or 40k if used probably.

For direct rules discussions click below:
[AI] Scenarios, Campaigns, & Integration w/ other Games (http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?p=990579#post990579)

Gen.Steiner
05-10-2006, 17:17
1,000 bomber raids.

Got to love 'em. Well, OK, not for the results, which are pretty nasty (firestorms, anyone?), but the imagery of 1,000 odd bombers bimbling along... oh yes.

And then being met by flak and fighters! Ahahaha!

Now there's an AI scenario for you. :D

Charax
05-10-2006, 17:48
A squadron of Ork bombers flying through a canyon flanked by Hydra batter...wait, this sounds familiar.

robertsjf
05-10-2006, 18:43
wait, this sounds familiar.


Can we have bridges in this scenario? Bridges built over rivers of lava or something?

Bravery exists
05-10-2006, 18:50
1,000 bomber raids.

Got to love 'em. Well, OK, not for the results, which are pretty nasty (firestorms, anyone?), but the imagery of 1,000 odd bombers bimbling along... oh yes.

And then being met by flak and fighters! Ahahaha!

Now there's an AI scenario for you. :D

I would be very interested to see how the bombers work in squadrens, if it easy to pick them off or if they become a solid wall of bolter death.

I wonder if you might be able to use marauder destroyers as pathfinder wich light up the targets with flares to increase the accuracy of the normal marauders? that could be a mission all in itself- manouver your destroyers to the objective through enemy airspace and carry out the flare dropping and then bug out at full speed.

Gen.Steiner
05-10-2006, 19:10
Can we have bridges in this scenario? Bridges built over rivers of lava or something?

Bridges made out of lava? :p

What I'd like to see is a GM running a mission, where the Imperial player has to carpet-bomb an area of enemy concentration, and is to expect heavy resistance at any time.

The resistance never arrives, and at the end, the GM grins and tells the IN player he's just carpet-bombed some Guardsmen. :D

Based off the incident in 1944 when the RAF day-bombed the Canadians... d'oh!

orangesm
05-10-2006, 19:47
I think it would be cool to setup some big scenarios possibly to have ready for things like Games Day and the like. Could have a bunch of players playing different flights of aircraft in the formation.

That is just a cruel scenario Steiner.

I think a Bridge attack scenario is an excellent demostration of air power. Could center an entire campaign along a river where their are a bunch of bridges. One side is retreating in campaign turns 1-5 and the opposing side is trying to cut off their lines of retreat to a few key bridges and then turns 6-10 the offensive player is trying to hold onto the few remaining bridges.

It is along the lines of the Rhine River bridges in WWII, each side tried to destroy certain bridges at different phases of the war to hinder the enemy's advance, supply lines etc. This feeds directly into the scenario building thread, so I will have to sit down and come up with some basic campaign ideas.

t-tauri
05-10-2006, 19:48
Alright so since discussion of historical examples is not premitted in the Rumors area in regards to Aeronautica Imperialis.
It wasn't the historic discussion per se, rather we were headed for rather graphic descriptions of the direct individual effects of historical examples. Try and remember the audience of Warseer can include younger people.

Gen.Steiner
05-10-2006, 20:00
It wasn't the historic discussion per se, rather we were headed for rather graphic descriptions of the direct individual effects of historical examples. Try and remember the audience of Warseer can include younger people.

...! It's a wargames forum! Have you read any Black Library publications recently? I seem to recall fairly graphic descriptions of death and destruction in them... and 'dexes as well for that matter.

Aaaaah screw it. Whatever. We've got this thread now, it's all hunky-dory.

orangesm
05-10-2006, 20:13
Young readers should be warned. But I have to guard what I post half the time and think through where my information is from (in regards to topics like this). But your right, describing the Bombing of Dressden and the number of civilians killed by the RAF towards the end of the WWII would a be a bit gruesome, but then again so is watching it on the history channel. We are discussing a wargame and thus some of it will be graphic.

Back to the topic though and not whether or not we were on topic in another thread.

AI seems like it is going to initially have a very modern air feel to it. The small number of aircraft does not even reach the numbers of some of the packages during ODS - fx 4 F-15Cs, 8 F-4Gs, 48 F-16s all going to attack a target near Baghdad, one of the most heavily defended locations on Earth at the time.
It also seems like a lot of it will happen within 10 km of the target, a table being ~ 10 km x 10 km. That is a kill box from ODS.

marv335
05-10-2006, 20:30
as it happens, the first aircraft over baghdad during GWII were RAF tornado F3s.

anyway air power does not win wars. boots on the ground win wars. however if you don't control the air, you can't win the ground war.

t-tauri
05-10-2006, 20:53
...! It's a wargames forum! Have you read any Black Library publications recently? I seem to recall fairly graphic descriptions of death and destruction in them... and 'dexes as well for that matter.Fantasy descriptions, not real ones, which will likely derail the discussion (and the thread) off into Politics and Religion. All we're asking is keep it 40k.;)

orangesm
05-10-2006, 22:42
Air Power can win Wars. If your political goals of the war are limited enough that Air Power alone can achieve them. The example being the NATO response to Serbia's ethnic cleansing in Kosovo, Operation Allied Force. This was an Air War with a little support from the Ground Forces in a few areas. ODS was a ground war with air providing a huge amount of support. So Air Power can win wars in the right situations.

In 40k there will be worlds where Air Power is where the battles are fought until you get to taking the city.

In response to fantasy descriptions vs real ones: I can come up with very graphic descriptions of death and destruction in our beloved 40k universe that are worse than describing the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Bravery exists
06-10-2006, 09:17
Air Power can win Wars. If your political goals of the war are limited enough that Air Power alone can achieve them. The example being the NATO response to Serbia's ethnic cleansing in Kosovo, Operation Allied Force. This was an Air War with a little support from the Ground Forces in a few areas. ODS was a ground war with air providing a huge amount of support. So Air Power can win wars in the right situations.

In 40k there will be worlds where Air Power is where the battles are fought until you get to taking the city.

In response to fantasy descriptions vs real ones: I can come up with very graphic descriptions of death and destruction in our beloved 40k universe that are worse than describing the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.


For example, you could have a scenario where the imperial navy has to cover and armoured advance towards a city (for those of us with epic armies) but the colum can only advance into areas controlled by the navy?

or they can only advance when the enemy are sufficiently outnumbered so the navy player has more initiative (was that one of the mechanics of the game?) and the defender has to desperatley regain it so that he can halt the colum.

ml2sjw
06-10-2006, 10:06
Air Power can win Wars. If your political goals of the war are limited enough that Air Power alone can achieve them. The example being the NATO response to Serbia's ethnic cleansing in Kosovo, Operation Allied Force. This was an Air War with a little support from the Ground Forces in a few areas. ODS was a ground war with air providing a huge amount of support. So Air Power can win wars in the right situations.


uhm ok pet topic of mine as i did quite a bit of work on this at university, but saying air power won the kosovo war is sadly buying into propoganda, for example about 80% of the ethnic cleansing did not start untill after NATO started bombing, The serbs had few in the way of targets for air power as most of their stuff was highly disperesed, etc etc. Kosovo would have much better served by troops on the gournd seperating the two sides which were every bit as bad as each other when it came to attrocities. ALthough bombing was un doubtably key it was not untill boots were on the ground that things were started to be sorted out.

orangesm
06-10-2006, 12:43
You are correct because the NATO Air Forces would have liked to concentrate the enemy forces on the ground and another ground force is needed to mass the enemy troops. But in the international politics at the time a ground force was out. The various NATO nations would not allow the Air Forces to conduct the war. Targetting was done by committee, you cannot hit this you can hit that. This resulted in there not being alot of Serb Targets of value to hit.

The few times the Air Forces were told do what you have to and were allowed to go downtown so to speak they were able to hit targets that produced the results the politicians where looking for.

I studied Air Power theory in college - my college being the USAF Academy (USAF equivelant to West Point). So I have seen the propoganda and recongize it as such, since I had it shoved at me for over 4 years. But even propoganda has some truth behind it alot of times.

War is an extension of diplomacy and politics, when everything else fails you go to war (paraphrase Clausawitz). Thus if Air Forces can achieve the goals of the war then Air Forces will be used. Operations Northern & Southern Watch had the goal of providing ethic groups in northern & southern Iraq protection from aerial attack. The way to do that was with CAPs and the goal was achieved.

In AI the goal is the utter defeat of the enemy most of the time (Tau & Human conflicts are not nessecarily looking to wipe the enemy out). So simply providing a CAP will not be a goal of the leadership and to force the enemy to mass you will need ground forces at some point to get him to mass.

This means that the Air Component will normally be supporting the Ground Component. In the case of worlds like Phanatine, the smog covered planet in Gaunt's Ghost novels, the Air Component is the primary component with the Ground Component making final take & hold actions at the 'cities'.