Can Air Transport be removed from land combat? +other paratrooper Qs.



  • If an air transport drops some paratroopers, seems pretty ridiculous to me that it can participate in the ensuing land combat. Presumably with 0 attack but that really means that the transport protects the dropped paratrooper much like classic transports protected warships.

    I can't see any way the XML can be coded to enable this, even though sea transports work precisely this way in the later maps. Is that done with map options hard coded to the transport unit type? Really? Surely there should be an option in the unit attachment to allow it to be chosen as a casualty after other units. Also, I would like a way of only allowing paratroops to attack territories which are already under attack as per Global 1940, but without being magical flying infantry.

    Honestly, I feel this is a bit of a show stopper. Apparently the makers of TWW view it differently to me because they tolerated the present functionality and even gave the air transport an attack.

    I also don't really like that they can retreat.

    @Hepps said in Air Transports:

    The Paratrooper attachment no longer does anything. That was depreciated some time ago.

    Actually this doesn't appear to be true. Without the paratrooper tech it is impossible to load units onto air transports. Also, it seems that air transports can't be used in NCM. Interesting.


  • Moderators Admin

    @simon33 How about implementing the Classic paratroopers, then building up from there, since it looks to me your idea of paratroopers is closer to Classic than Anniversary.

    Differences between Classic and Anniversary paratroopers:

    In Classic everyone has it at start game (3rd edition only), in Anniversary it is a technology.

    In Classic the option is specific, while in Anniversary it is the whole technology system (having paratroopers) that is optional.

    In Classic paratroopers are not restricted flying over enemy owned territories, in Anniversary they are.*

    In Classic paratroopers are not restricted to Combat Move, in Anniversary they are.*

    In Classic the transporting bomber attacks at 0, in Anniversary it attacks normally.

    In Classic the paratrooped infantries can never retreat, in Anniversary they can retreat with all other land units, but only as long as any of them can (paratrooped infantry alone cannot retreat).

    * TripleA already has properties for the Classic behaviour.

    However, there are the following things I don't know, about the Classic paratroopers:

    If the attacked territory has only AA gun and no other units, beside factory, and it is attacked by paratrooped infantry only, will the AA gun be captured without a fight or will they get to fire at the transporting bombers first?

    If the transported bomber is hit by AA guns that are in the attacked territory, will the paratrooping infantry be also destroyed in this step (I'm almost sure it should be, and virtually sure about the flyover case).

    @Panther Can you confirm that for Anniversary if the attacked territory has only AA guns and no other defending units, and it is being invaded by paratroopers as the only land unit, the AA guns are automatically captured without firing at anything?



  • Looked that idea up. From the notes:
    "Paratroopers = Not supported by TripleA (but you can used edit mode to move the infantry around as if they were with a bomber). Rules for it below: 1 infantry may be loaded into a bomber, or 2 infantry into a heavy bomber. If during combat move, infantry and the bomber must begin in the same territory, and not yet have moved. If noncombat, the infantry may not have moved, but can be picked up anywhere along the flightpath of the bomber. The bomber may drop them off into any territory, after which they may not move. The bomber does not participate in any battles or strategic bombing raids. If dropped off into a battle, the bomber is subject to AA fire and may die from AA fire, however the infantry is considered offloaded and does not die if the bomber dies. After the AA fire, the bomber is removed from the combat, while the infantry may participate in the combat. "

    So basically, Triple-A doesn't support it.

    Regarding attacking a territory with only an AA Gun, in most rulesets the aa gun would get a shot at the bomber and if it missed it would happen as you suggest. Obviously, if only one unit attacks and it is shot down, the combat achieves nothing. The ruleset I quoted above is an exception, not the rule. I don't think that's a Larris Harris innovation - it's only in Triple-A isn't it? I suppose it is possible that it was.


  • Moderators Admin

    @simon33 said in Can Air Transport be removed from land combat? +other paratrooper Qs.:

    If an air transport drops some paratroopers, seems pretty ridiculous to me that it can participate in the ensuing land combat. Presumably with 0 attack but that really means that the transport protects the dropped paratrooper much like classic transports protected warships.

    I can't see any way the XML can be coded to enable this, even though sea transports work precisely this way in the later maps. Is that done with map options hard coded to the transport unit type? Really? Surely there should be an option in the unit attachment to allow it to be chosen as a casualty after other units.

    Such an option is not available. However, you can make air units into infrastructures, behaving as such. However, this has the limit that they can never be taken as casualties from normal hits (they can be taken as casualties from AA hits), but they will be all captured/destroyed if alone. The other behaviour that may be an issue is that if only infrastructure air units remain in attack, they will be immediately captured/destroyed, without a chance to retreat from battle.
    However, this would be possible if you or @redrum finish developing this feature:
    https://forums.triplea-game.org/topic/328/unit-option-can-submerge-hide-for-land-units-partisan-guerrilla-spy-diplomat-munition?page=1
    that currently has the limit of applying only to first strikes and either avoid targeting only air units or avoid being targeted only by air units.

    Also, I would like a way of only allowing paratroops to attack territories which are already under attack as per Global 1940, but without being magical flying infantry.

    This is also not possible, but I'm not following you here. Why would you want this? Paratroopers don't need other units to attack a territory (historical example: Crete). Of course, it is very far from realism that you can conquer much with paratroopers only, but this is due to the fact that the cost of a paratrooper, all considered, is a lot greater than the cost of a normal infantry. Theorically you could do D-Day with only paratroopers, and supply all of them with transport planes, once they are in France, but that would just cost enormously more than shipping the same infantries (and you would have to renounce to the heavy stuff) and supply them with ships, that being the only reason you would not do such a thing, not the fact that they need any non-paratrooper units (so that would just have to be represented by paratroopers being so costly that you rarely want to do major operations with them only).

    I also don't really like that they can retreat.

    You don't like that paratrooped land units can retrat? Are you aware that they can do so only if other land units have valid retreat zones. Anyways, I guess this can go both ways, but, if paratroopers would act like offloaded units when you have the ability of retreating partially, you would need to be able to assign hits to the same units depending if they have been land transported or not, as this is an item that TripleA currently fails to support for partial amphibious retreat.

    @Hepps said in Air Transports:

    The Paratrooper attachment no longer does anything. That was depreciated some time ago.

    Actually this doesn't appear to be true. Without the paratrooper tech it is impossible to load units onto air transports. Also, it seems that air transports can't be used in NCM. Interesting.

    Maybe that is referring to the very old "isParatroop" unit option. No point talking about that; it is very far in the past.


  • Moderators Admin

    @simon33 said in Can Air Transport be removed from land combat? +other paratrooper Qs.:

    Regarding attacking a territory with only an AA Gun, in most rulesets the aa gun would get a shot at the bomber and if it missed it would happen as you suggest. Obviously, if only one unit attacks and it is shot down, the combat achieves nothing. The ruleset I quoted above is an exception, not the rule. I don't think that's a Larris Harris innovation - it's only in Triple-A isn't it? I suppose it is possible that it was.

    My guess actually is that, in Anniversary, if you have a bomber transporting 1 infantry into an enemy land territory with 1 AA gun only in it, the AA gun is captured without any battle (thus no risk for the bomber of getting destroyed with the infantry, in this case), but I really don't know. @Panther can you let us know what is going to happen, in this case? Would be also good to know the same thing for Classic (3rd Edition).



  • Ok, that could be a goer.

    Regarding why I would want to enforce the rule from G40 that for a paratrooper to attack, there needs to be other units attacking, well it seems to make total sense to me. While it is true that Crete was an exception to this, in most cases paratroopers had to meet up with other units quite quickly or they would run out of supplies. I think the standard was 48hrs. In Crete, the paratroops took the airfields and they got air supply. I think it is more realistic this way as compared to taking most of the med islands without any shipping. Anyway, not everyone agrees and I might be able to live with it being player enforced.

    Regarding retreat, yeah something like partial amphib retreat would be what I was thinking. I thought that worked perfectly!?



  • Hmm, looks like that isInfrastructure works great except for making the air units capturable (as you might expect). Is there a way to make them destroyed? No matter if not, I can live with forcing Edit Mode in this case.

    BTW, I'm pretty sure that the AA Gun in v3 will get a shot but if it misses will be captured. It's just like air attacking a solo AA Gun in G40, it gets to shoot back but then dies (usually).


  • Moderators Admin

    @simon33 Yes, you can set any capturable unit as being destroyed, instead of captured, by a list of players or from a list of players (don't forget Neutral, in case). However, I believe this is still not good enough. I think that if only air infrastructures remain in the battle against, say, a bunch of infantries, what should happen is that the combat ends with the air infrastructures hovering the territory, like when retreating, not getting immediately captured/destroyed, with no chance to retreat. So, that would need a property to avoid offending air infrastructures getting captured if alone, when the battle is over (for only infrastructures remaining in attack). Can you code that?


  • Moderators Admin

    @simon33 said in Can Air Transport be removed from land combat? +other paratrooper Qs.:

    BTW, I'm pretty sure that the AA Gun in v3 will get a shot but if it misses will be captured. It's just like air attacking a solo AA Gun in G40, it gets to shoot back but then dies (usually).

    Unless you have an official clarification on that (I mean v3, not v5, in which, of course, is as you say), how can you be sure of that? What I infer from v3 rules is that if only AA guns are in the territory (maybe with a factory), the battle is not made, but the territory is automatically captured (during Conduct Combat), so there is no AA fire step, but I'm totally unsure, so waiting for @Panther (could totally be you are right; I really don't know).


  • Moderators Admin

    @Cernel From the AA50 rulebook, page 12, Paratrooper technology:

    "... The infantry is dropped after any antiaircraft fire is resolved, so
    if the bomber is hit, the infantry it carries is also destroyed. ..."


  • Moderators Admin

    @Panther Ok, but are you sure that is also in case the AA gun is alone in the territory? How about if in a territory defended by an AA gun alone I invade with 1 infantry moving from an adjacent land territory and 1 air transported infantry (and nothing else) on the same combat move phase?


  • Moderators Admin

    @Cernel Yes, I am. Antiaircraft guns fire only before the first round of combat. Capturing a territory (and the AAA) occurs later (during step 7 of the combat sequence).


  • Moderators Admin

    @Panther Ok. Since you can easily test that, instead, in TripleA AA Guns alone (or with factory only) are captured by paratroopers without any AA fire, would you mind opening a bug report in GitHub about this? I never did, despite having always being dubious about this behaviour, because I never managed to find any official answers or clarifications in which the matter was specifically addressed, so I didn't feel to raise the matter (as I always doubted any developers would have been sure either; so no point if nobody is sure).

    Do you have any, beside the one that you just gave here?

    Also, I wonder if I invade a territory having only 1 aa gun, with any number of attacking land units only, am I supposed to roll for all of my attackers, despite having nothing to actually hit, since this step happens before the one in which I capture the territory (and the aa gun returned to it, already, from the battle board)?


  • Moderators Admin

    @Cernel A bomber flying into a hostile territory is still attacking this territory, regardless of transporting a paratrooper or not. A bunch of Infantry units moving into an AAA containing enemy territory attacks this territory, regardless of its defenders.
    I think the trouble is caused solely because of the engine's (known) behaviour to change ownership of the territory (and the AAA) incorrectly at the time when walking in there - already during Combat Move Phase. If TripleA would correctly change ownership at the end of the combat sequence instead, all of this likely would not occur.


  • Moderators

    @simon33 said in Can Air Transport be removed from land combat? +other paratrooper Qs.:

    Honestly, I feel this is a bit of a show stopper. Apparently the makers of TWW view it differently to me because they tolerated the present functionality and even gave the air transport an attack.
    I also don't really like that they can retreat.

    We used the functionality that existed within the engine. Not that it was ideal or how we wanted to design it. The Air Transport was given an attack because it was the only way to give the Paratrooper a combat bonus as its special ability when conducting an air born attack.

    It is also why it is also part of the few player enforced rules within the game.


  • Moderators Admin

    In my opinion, all aircrafts should be infrastructures, that can be hit only by AA attacks (it is possible to target infrastructures with AA; so all good here), as it really doesn't make sense that you can pick either an infantry or a fighter for the same normal hit. However, for this to really work, we need a developer that adds a property for attacking air infrastructures not to be automatically captured/destroyed, when all non-infrastructure units in attack are removed, but just ending the battle hovering the territory, like when retreating air. This would also be realistic the most for an attacking flying infrastructure, as, since it flies over the territory, I don't see how it can be possibly captured, that way.

    I'm having hopes that @simon33 might add such a property to the engine, since that is what is needed for his paratrooper designs.


  • Moderators Admin

    @Panther said in Can Air Transport be removed from land combat? +other paratrooper Qs.:

    @Cernel A bomber flying into a hostile territory is still attacking this territory, regardless of transporting a paratrooper or not. A bunch of Infantry units moving into an AAA containing enemy territory attacks this territory, regardless of its defenders.
    I think the trouble is caused solely because of the engine's (known) behaviour to change ownership of the territory (and the AAA) incorrectly at the time when walking in there - already during Combat Move Phase. If TripleA would correctly change ownership at the end of the combat sequence instead, all of this likely would not occur.

    Ok, but I still wonder, theorically if I attack an empty territory or a territory with only 1 aa gun in it with 10 infantries only, should I roll 10 dice at 1, hitting nothing regardless of results, because this step happens before the one in which I capture the territory? As I said, I'm not contesting anything, and just always said that I'm not sure, but I was wondering if the battle was supposed to just end anytime at least one side has no units beside aa guns and factories (thus not even starting, if the territory is empty), as that is what would feel most sensible to me.

    Actually, in this case, if you test it, this is not a matter of capturing empty territories during Combat Move. The territory is taken during Conduct Combat, but the AA gun fails to fire. So, since there is not a specific case for this in the official FAQ, I was hoping you could open a bug report about it (but, at this point, I guess I could do it, linking this thread).



  • Looks like in v3 it works incorrectly in the case where there is only an aa gun defending and a paratroop attacking. In all other cases, I believe it does work correctly.

    @Hepps said in Can Air Transport be removed from land combat? +other paratrooper Qs.:

    @simon33 said in Can Air Transport be removed from land combat? +other paratrooper Qs.:

    Honestly, I feel this is a bit of a show stopper. Apparently the makers of TWW view it differently to me because they tolerated the present functionality and even gave the air transport an attack.
    I also don't really like that they can retreat.

    We used the functionality that existed within the engine. Not that it was ideal or how we wanted to design it. The Air Transport was given an attack because it was the only way to give the Paratrooper a combat bonus as its special ability when conducting an air born attack.

    It is also why it is also part of the few player enforced rules within the game.

    Ah right. Didn't notice the note about this. Given that low luck is the default, so long as that is left on there's no downside to this. Could you use a support attachment for cases where you aren't using low luck, such as the way artillery works? Does Cernel's isInfrastructure+destroyedWhenCapturedBy idea appeal? I guess if you're using that idea you then probably can't use the support attachment because the units aren't in combat - or perhaps are near enough?

    @Cernel said in Can Air Transport be removed from land combat? +other paratrooper Qs.:

    all aircrafts should be infrastructures

    I think you're changing game mechanics a lot in this suggestion. Seems a big move. I don't feel this is likely.

    @Cernel said in Can Air Transport be removed from land combat? +other paratrooper Qs.:

    I'm having hopes that @simon33 might add such a property to the engine, since that is what is needed for his paratrooper designs.

    Hmm, given that everyone still uses 1.9 and it might be difficult to even get such a change a merged, it's something I might have to think about.

    It isn't perfect the way it is but use of edit mode should be rare. I think it's workable as is. EDIT: Ok, maybe not as rare as I thought. It seems the air_transport units are destroyed even in a retreat. Not ideal but still workable IMO.


  • Moderators

    @simon33 To be honest I have not revisited this for more than 4 years as it was never a priority. As with many things in TWW we bent many of the basic engine functions to suit our will, and since many of the desired behaviors conflicted with "Larry's Laws" we never really pushed for any mechanics changes that would conflict with his gospels. Instead, formulating ideals around mechanics that could extend engine functionality but at the same time not cause conflict with the "Old Testament".

    Ideally for me... an Air Transport would be present in the first round of combat only. It/they would retreat from the battle immediately following the first turn of AA fire if it/they survived.... similarly it would be ideal if the paratroopers only received a bonus to combat IF paradropped into combat, independent of whether or not the Air Transport is still present in the combat territory.

    Sadly none of this conforms to any of the sacred text... and the last time I examined it the discussion ground to a halt because of how these changes would affect old archaic scriptures.


  • Moderators Admin

    @Hepps said in Can Air Transport be removed from land combat? +other paratrooper Qs.:

    Ideally for me... an Air Transport would be present in the first round of combat only. It/they would retreat from the battle immediately following the first turn of AA fire if it/they survived....

    Sadly none of this conforms to any of the sacred text... and the last time I examined it the discussion ground to a halt because of how these changes would affect old archaic scriptures.

    This actually might be how "Classic" paratroopers are supposed to work. Though I'm not sure if either this or them having attack 0, but still eligible casualties.

    similarly it would be ideal if the paratroopers only received a bonus to combat IF paradropped into combat, independent of whether or not the Air Transport is still present in the combat territory.

    How about making paratroopers movement 0 units, so that they can be sent into battle with air transports only? I know paratroopers fought mostly not as paratroopers, especially for Germany (and 100% for Italy, that never actually got its paratroopers to actually paratroop), but that was actually mostly defensive.


Log in to reply
 

44275
2216
2405
Who's Online
Visitors Today