A new option for factories

redrum

@Schulz I believe you can have air battles without infrastructure.

Schulz

What properties and options are needed for 3.rd option? I am fine with the current air warfare in factory zones. If it would drastically change battle warfare than I would simply put infastructure to all territories.

But other problem is I won't be able to add infastructure to sea zones.

redrum

@Schulz If you want to just allow a bombing raid in any territory so that it can spawn an air only battle then you'd just need to add some unit with these attributes:

    <attachment name="unitAttachment" attachTo="airfield" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.UnitAttachment" type="unitType">
      <option name="isInfrastructure" value="true"/>
      <option name="canBeDamaged" value="true"/>
    </attachment>

Then either add a unit image say an airfield/airport image and place one in every territory.

Then update any air unit to have bombing capability:

    <attachment name="unitAttachment" attachTo="fighter" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.UnitAttachment" type="unitType">
      <option name="movement" value="4"/>
      <option name="isAir" value="true"/>
      <option name="attack" value="3"/>
      <option name="defense" value="4"/>
      <option name="isStrategicBomber" value="true"/>
      <option name="bombingBonus" value="-99"/>
      <option name="airAttack" value="3"/>
      <option name="airDefense" value="4"/>    
    </attachment>

Cernel

@redrum I'm not sure I'm getting what you intend, but, if I do, the problem with that is that air battles preceding bombing raids cannot force defending units to take part in the air battle.

So, there is no point in spawning air battles, if the bombed target does nothing else.

redrum

@Cernel Yeah, you'd have to "player enforce" that rule. I was just showing him if he wanted SBR air battles everywhere how to achieve it.

Cernel

@redrum Well, this is also probably the simplest way to obtain something like this (bombing raid aimed at engaging and killing the enemy air force), if just adding a property for obliging the defender always using all its interceptors. The way it works now doesn't really make full sense, anyways, since you either want to use all or none.

Schulz

@redrum but after doing this enemy can decline dogfighting which I don't want.

Schulz

Is it possible to add infastructure option to air units? Thus without adding invisible infastructures to every territories, air battles will be exist without land battle in non/factory territories?

redrum

@Schulz Yes, that is option 3 above where you can turn certain planes to infra so they can he bombed.

Schulz

When I added only infastructure option to air units, they turned enemy fighters after the battle than Once I added both infastructure and "canbedamaged" options then enemy fighters gained to decline air battle option.

redrum

@Schulz Yeah, if you go that route you would be "bombing" enemy planes rather than a true air battle.

Schulz

Transports don't land to friendly territories in combat movement. How do I solve this issue?

Captain Crunch

@Schulz I'm just curious ... do you really need this function or you just bored and trying to ask about 3 or 4 questions a day?

Hepps

@Captain-Crunch LMAO!

Schulz

Yes I am bit perfectionist I don't want any defect,

redrum

@Schulz You can't. That's what non-combat move is for.

Schulz

In almost all maps landing to friendly territories in combat phrase is allowed but probably I've added additional property, trying to find this one.

Cernel

@Schulz Assuming with transports you mean the air transported units, it's just one of the few cases where TripleA enforces the intended rules about not using the Combat Move phase to make non combat movements (the most common supported "exception" is the AA gun being totally unmoveable). The rest is not "allowed", just currently unsupported (some may argue being able to combat move air without sending it in combat is a bug), and it may be unwise to make a map based on unsupported rules, as, then, the map would risk to be broken any point in the future. I'm in particular wondering if you are making a map with Combat Move but without Non Combat Move, as this is the only way I can understand why that would be an issue. Anyways, no air lands at any point of the Combat Movement or Conduct Combat phase; they are just staying there, but landing only at the end of the subsequent Non Combat Movement phase or sometime thereafter.

I would morally support a feature request for having a Combat Movement phase in which you can make Non Combat Movements too, if a custom map wants to go with a single phase (as the Empire map does (and it is currently broken because of this (while it was not broken in the past (this goes back to what I said about making maps based on unsupported rules))))

Schulz

Ive' asked it for sea trannies. Not a big issue but still annoys a bit when you are accustomed to land units to friendly zones in combat phrase.

I didn't know that making a game without non combat phrase possible since need to replace air units.

Cernel

@Schulz Ah. Since you said "land" instead of "offload", I wonder if @redrum understood that too. Anyways, I assume the matter is offloading during Combat Movement from a hostile sea zone to a friendly land territory, right? Yeah, that is one of the other few cases where, for Revised rulesets, the intended rules are enforced, in forbidding non combat movements during Combat Movement.

I guess you can make a feature request for something to always allow non combat movements during a Combat Movement phase, as that would also open actual support for maps having a single phase per turn (like the currently broken Empire).