Static Aircraft Targets

The common meeting place for SEOW veterans and noobs alike, sharing feedback, ideas and experiences.

Moderator: SEOW Developers

Post Reply
Flak Bait
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri 21 Dec 2007 5:42 pm

Static Aircraft Targets

Post by Flak Bait »

I notice that the MP generates static aircraft targets around airfields. I'm wondering:

1. Are these generated randomly?

2. Are these planes in any way related to the totals of flyable aircraft in the campaign? If so, does the loss of any of them impact the # of flyable aircraft?
IV/JG7_4Shades
Posts: 2202
Joined: Mon 08 Jan 2007 11:10 pm
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Post by IV/JG7_4Shades »

Hi Flak Bait, and welcome!

SEOW has a rule: there is no auto-generation of combat objects in the missions, apart from searchlights, sirens and (optional) barrage balloons at airbases.

What this means is that every other combat object (ship, plane, gun, vehicle, tank) on the map is part of the forces of the human commanders. Destruction of any one of these reduces the available forces by one. Unit tallies are maintained automatically by SEOW, and are affected by combat losses, factory production of reinforcements, and by desertion/surrender of low-morale units.

For static aircraft at bases, the idea is simple. If your base has 45 planes, and in the mission you order 12 to fly somewhere and then return, at mission spawn time you will see the 12 idling on the runway (airstarts ignored). The remaining 33 non-tasked airframes will be parked around the airbase (assuming the aircraft parking rate is set to 100%). These static airframes conform exactly in type and nationality to the actual remaining airframes in the MP airbase listing.

The parked airframes are valid targets. Assume an enemy aircraft (AI or human) flies in and strafes the base, destroying 6 aircraft. Once the 12 planes have returned, the airbase will have 39 airframes left for the next mission, with 12 refueling/rearming. The 6 destroyed aircraft are decremented from their respective flights, so the types and affiliations of destroyed aircraft are also tracked by SEOW.

For mission frame rate/performance purposes, you can adjust the percentage of non-tasked aircraft to appear as parked airframes in each mission - this is what the aircraft parking rate setting is used for.

So, to recap, if you destroy a combat object in SEOW then you are actually depriving the enemy of that object permanently. It never comes back, unless the enemy builds or is issued with reinforcements. You can also destroy bridges and designated factories and fuel dumps - these may be rebuilt over time.

Cheers,
4Shades
IV/JG7_4Shades
SEOW Developer

Image
Flak Bait
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri 21 Dec 2007 5:42 pm

Post by Flak Bait »

Thanks, 4Shades. Fair warning: If you persist in providing timely, clear, complete & concise answers herein, you run the risk of attracting many more folks here :wink:

Seriously, though, a couple more questions come to mind:

1. Assuming the aircraft parking rate is set at 100%, what happens if I plot a mission for a flight to launch in one hour, in a campaign with (for example) 2-hour mission "turns?" I'm guessing that these planes would not be spawned as parked at mission start, right?

2. If the aircraft parking rate is set at below 100% (for example, say 20%), which aircraft at a base (assuming that base has more than one type) are exempted from spawning as parked aircraft? Would it be 20% randomly, or 20% by each type?
IV/JG7_4Shades
Posts: 2202
Joined: Mon 08 Jan 2007 11:10 pm
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Post by IV/JG7_4Shades »

LOL, I do try to be helpful with my answers, but it doesn't always work out perfectly!

1/ SEOW is a little schizoid with respect to mission duration and the campaign clock. Basically SEOW assumes that each day is divided into 24 potential mission slots, each called an "hour". This is purely for sequencing purposes. There is no actual restriction on the length/duration of each hosted mission. You can, at will, run missions for 2 minutes, or 4 hours game time. However, at the end of each mission, when the results are analyzed, SEOW bumps the campaign clock forward by 1 hour regardless of the actual hosted duration. This does not mean that combat results of the previous mission are lost or disregarded. Just think of SEOW offering 24 mission slots per day, loosely identified with hours of the clock. What happens within each of those hosted coops, at whatever time, is incorporated into the SEOW campaign situation automatically before the next mission slot is planned and generated.

2/ The Parking Rate calculation (like a random dice roll) is applied to each individual aircraft, regardless of aircraft type, in each mission. So, for 20% parking rate, an airbase with 100 assorted aircraft permanently parked there will show roughly 20 parked airframes each mission (give or take), and it is likely that the numbers and types of parked airframes will vary from mission to mission, depending on the rolls of the dice. This variation in parked airframes can be thought of as reflecting ground crew operations as planes are rotated in and out of revetments and hangars for maintenance.

Cheers,
4Shades
IV/JG7_4Shades
SEOW Developer

Image
Hitcher
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed 10 Jan 2007 9:30 pm
Location: The Red States

Post by Hitcher »

Is it possible to change the number of available parking spaces at an airfield/carrier and, if so, how?
Hitcher
IV/JG7_4Shades
Posts: 2202
Joined: Mon 08 Jan 2007 11:10 pm
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Post by IV/JG7_4Shades »

Hi Hitcher,

You can change the maximum number of aircraft carried by any aircraft carrier by editing the Carrier_Specifications table.

For airbases, you need to edit the relevant airbase layout by removing ACHS entries. The total number of ACHS entries is the maximum capacity of the airbase. Of course, changing the layout will affect all airbases that use that layout.

Cheers,
4Shades
IV/JG7_4Shades
SEOW Developer

Image
Hitcher
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed 10 Jan 2007 9:30 pm
Location: The Red States

Post by Hitcher »

Excellent, thank you!
Hitcher
Post Reply