Spinflight wrote:

Depends upon how it is done!

There is already an interesting dynamic between the number of strikes per hour, the speed of the aircraft, and the distance to the target. You can hit something 3 times an hour for instance if it is right next to the airfield.

There is a blanket 15mins refueling period regardless of the number of aircraft. Which encourages stacking, which is a bit naff.

I think this 15 minute period should be dependant upon the number of aircraft stationed there, the level of the airfield and the condition of that airfield. Would add lots of flavour, Soviet aircraft for instance would be able to operate more effectively from damaged airfields. Helicopters too don't use the runways so wouldn't take up as much airbase capacity...

So, for instance, you are defending your lv 3 airbase from a stack of 8 in a lv 1. Your airbase can service your entire stack of 3 in 15 minutes, whereas the lv1 can only service 1 at a time. So you can hit every 45 minutes ( half an hour flying time) whereas he can only alpha strike you every hour flying time due to stacking speed penalty + some multiple of the 15 minute servicing.

Hell with ASF you could hit them on the way in and on the way home.

You culd also have reduced range with a stack from a low level airfield as smaller airfields have fewer runways, taxiing etc, and it actually takes some time for a large formation to form up properly.

Basically investing in higher level airfields makes your aircraft more efficient plus a lot more could be done with aircraft speed doctrinally or stacking wise..

I thinkit would be an interesting dynamic which would properly favour the defence, encourage things like cab ranks and give more counterplay against stacks.

Spinflight wrote:

Only for overstacking that I've seen thus far..

Not sure it is really a nerf. I'd advocate for ADFs to be considerably faster than strikes ( supersonic with AAMs, little is whilst carrying external bombs) and this would effectively be a defensive buff as most will be building higher than a lv1 airfield at some point on their home cities.

737373elj wrote:

Air Defense Fighter and Air-toAir Missile seemingly.
BTW Spinflight we call ADFs ASFs here (Air Superiority Fighter, using the in-game name.)
ASFs are already one of the fastest units around (in fact, they're the fastest controllable unit).
I don't really support this apparent nerf, I like my air forces way too much besides, most militaries have no problems about refuelling multiple aircraft at a single airport. Even most civilian airports could refuel squadrons in a pinch.

Jee F wrote:

I don't agree it wouldn't add anything to the gameplay. It would make over expending territory harder to defend and homeland more powerful. A defense buff in a game heavily favoring the attacker. I don't see how that would be annoying to manage, it's a very simple concept.

Of course, artillery and other units might need to be balanced to avoid airforce going "out of style". IMO, combat should last much longer and this is a good way to nerf the air force. Perhaps artillery could debuff the attack/defense/speed of units instead of doing HP damage? Anyway, I'm just saying you don't have to be against this idea because you like planes.

As for the refueling time in real life: First, its refuel and rearm. Second, we have no idea how big a level 1 or level 5 airfield is - you can imagine it however big or small you want. Third, a plane represents a squadron (i think), so a stack of 5 would be around 100 planes. Refueling and rearming 100 planes in 15 minutes seems quite fast to me, not even accounting for landing and take off. Anyway, as it's been said, realism shouldn't be an argument.

And I don't get what's all the fuss about replays. That would add zero value for me.

Spinflight wrote:

There doesn't seem to be any limit to the number of aircraft that a single airfield can operate? Seems a bit odd. Especially with provincial airfields.

Maybe scale the number of squadrons that can be operated with airfield size? For instance 2 at size 1, 4 at size 2 etc.

Carriers are limited as to their capacity so why shouldn't airfields be? For instance if you wanted to operate a stack of 5 out of a level one airfield then the refueling times could become punitive.

Jee F wrote:

I don't agree it wouldn't add anything to the gameplay. It would make over expending territory harder to defend and homeland more powerful. A defense buff in a game heavily favoring the attacker. I don't see how that would be annoying to manage, it's a very simple concept.

Of course, artillery and other units might need to be balanced to avoid airforce going "out of style". IMO, combat should last much longer and this is a good way to nerf the air force. Perhaps artillery could debuff the attack/defense/speed of units instead of doing HP damage? Anyway, I'm just saying you don't have to be against this idea because you like planes.

As for the refueling time in real life: First, its refuel and rearm. Second, we have no idea how big a level 1 or level 5 airfield is - you can imagine it however big or small you want. Third, a plane represents a squadron (i think), so a stack of 5 would be around 100 planes. Refueling and rearming 100 planes in 15 minutes seems quite fast to me, not even accounting for landing and take off. Anyway, as it's been said, realism shouldn't be an argument.

And I don't get what's all the fuss about replays. That would add zero value for me.