燃烧的岛群军史学习论坛 - Powered by Discuz! Board

标题: 从官网上看到的一个CV上的航空队的问题 [打印本页]

作者: zhengxuacmilan 时间: 2007-9-4 09:39 标题: 从官网上看到的一个CV上的航空队的问题

原文链接http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=13121541 [6 g$ Y% W: V. Y2 W
这似乎可以解释老外为什么不喜欢把carrier capable的飞机调上CV
作者id: Don Bowen, 似乎很权威
Let me repeat that: * r8 e6 `9 e# k/ }5 v* |2 V. q6 f
Do not move your carrier air groups off of their home carriers. 6 i' _) t' y6 T' h- ^ a1 e
. \" K' {0 x! j% F: e
The game considers a carrier air group to be an entity and has logic to alter its composition over time. This reflects the historical changes that were made to airgroup composition. : v. d, H4 j% i

In order for this logic to work, the carrier air group MUST be intact and MUST be on it's home carrier. This routine works well if you do not alter the parameters that it uses. If you move a squadron to a different carrier you risk upsetting these calculations and having rather unusual sizes calculated as a result. (似乎说在op计算上会有问题? size的问题应该是指航空队容量升级吧?)

I understand that it is perfectly historical for squadrons to move between carriers. But the game logic will simply not support it and if you do it you are just beating your head against the wall.
-------------------------
另一贴:6 j9 R$ `$ Q5 B7 u- U7 O, e* l
A carrier air group is an entity. If it is intact, it can be on any carrier (and will resize to fit on the carrier).
5 g: D K. i% v- C) I
In fact, you make a good point. I should have labeled this thread "Do not move your carrier air groups off of their home carriers unless you transfer the entire airgroup to completely replace the airgroup of another, same type carrier of the same nation". Same type being CV, CVL, CVE.
( |/ R: Z# x- H. t: d/ m
You can also usually get away with trading squadrons of the same type between same carriers. That is, taking the VB squadron off of Carrier X and replacing the VB squadron from Carrier Y. 7 k: a, I9 f2 G* j
2 G4 Z. K$ z& \; I9 P! A
Where you get in trouble is mixing the types or adding additional squadrons. Many people want to "up-fighter" by adding a second fighter squadron to one carrier - usually taking it from another carrier that has been damaged or lost. This just does not work - the routines will get confused by the "extra" squadron and adjust squadron sizes incorrectly. (什么叫does not work? 不明白, 不出击了?出击少了?). h& _& z& Y+ `6 b8 N- O
2 c/ Z' @! a' ~' m
There are a number of things about this process that are "right". It correctly processes changes in carrier group composition over time, prevents overly "gamey" restructuring of carrier air groups (every player wants a 100% fighter carrier by January, 1942), and adjusts the carrier air group to properly fit on it's carrier (even if the carrier's capacity changes by upgrade).+ A, J) ^7 y: z
------------------------------
似乎调动航空队在岛群上是广泛使用的,不知道各位大大对文中所说的影响有什么观点?

作者: 飞龙 时间: 2007-9-4 10:19

沙发，英文的要慢慢看....

作者: hades1001 时间: 2007-9-4 10:25

几乎没遇到过
5 l4 b# O, J( D/ D
只有大凤的俯冲轰炸机队目前被改为15架，应该是上文所提的bug导致

作者: zhengxuacmilan 时间: 2007-9-4 10:44 标题: 回复 3# 的帖子

这应该是所谓的size problem' n- s f7 {2 h
那他提到的logic (or calculation) problem怎么理解?
看他说得信誓旦旦的样子

作者: harry 时间: 2007-9-4 10:54

老外的意思是一个航母上的所有飞机最好作为一个整体运输作战，要不然碰上航母几次飞机数量升级会出错

作者: wildcat 时间: 2007-9-4 10:55

這個問題我已經重複好幾次了

作者: harry 时间: 2007-9-4 11:05

他的logic和calculation都是指升级中的飞机数量问题，我看其实老外不上其他航空队主要原因还是那个关键词 "gamey"

作者: zhengxuacmilan 时间: 2007-9-4 11:25 标题: 回复 6# 的帖子

$ y7 k& P+ A8 b% n. W# m! `6 Y4 n- l9 O
我之前确实没看过这方面得讨论

看来可以先在岛群上找找

作者: zhengxuacmilan 时间: 2007-9-4 11:28 标题: 回复 7# 的帖子

也就是说倒数帝2段里的红字,他费了半天解释) d/ X* R# r- ]' W8 s
结果所谓的it does not work是说想把别的航空队放上来升级size或类似的是不可能的...
显然别人都是想要更多的护航而已...

作者: jy00794093 时间: 2007-9-4 12:02

我是个超级菜，说了半天我还是没明白过来。。。。。。。。。。。。。郁闷。。。。。。。

作者: 爱妻号 时间: 2007-9-4 12:14

CV原属航空队，会根据CV容量来自动调整升级时候的规模，若随意下船，容易造成不正常的编制

作者: reninhat 时间: 2007-9-4 12:23

可怜的free

作者: jy00794093 时间: 2007-9-4 12:29

哦，理解了，谢谢11楼的大大。。。。。。。。。

作者: xuanyuan 时间: 2007-9-4 16:42

原帖由 爱妻号 于 2007-9-4 12:14 发表 6 a; ?- ~# @9 c0 I. I
CV原属航空队，会根据CV容量来自动调整升级时候的规模，若随意下船，容易造成不正常的编制

这种调节有规律么？能控制战/爆/攻的比例么？记得刚出来的飞鹰是17/17/17，不就自动变成了19/17/17
6 Z6 ~2 K8 @4 A0 [
云龙的调整编制是否是24舰战24舰爆18舰攻？

作者: xuanyuan 时间: 2007-9-4 16:45

蝗军的航空队貌似必须经常下舰训练整编的，外籍人士难道都是舰上训练整编？

作者: zhengxuacmilan 时间: 2007-9-4 17:15 标题: 回复 15# 的帖子

原贴里有讨论训练的事
这位Don给出的建议是：如果要下舰训练，那就全部都下

作者: reninhat 时间: 2007-9-4 17:50

其实只要升级的时候，全套人马换成原装的就可以了。

作者: zhengxuacmilan 时间: 2007-9-4 17:52 标题: 回复 17# 的帖子

这个回答简单明了，赞一个

作者: xuanyuan 时间: 2007-9-5 11:08

回复 16# 的帖子
如果要求全上全下的话，那似乎也没多大影响，能升级的港口多在本土，而到了本土一般都是需要大修的，空舰肯定要分离，出击的时候才重新组合
回复 17# 的帖子3 t( P3 P6 X6 D0 ~5 c& J) D
reninhat高参的意思是全部换回服役时装备？那龙骧就要换96战了

作者: reninhat 时间: 2007-9-5 11:58

CVL不会升级的，CV上面装上原有编制就可以了。对机种没有要求。

欢迎光临燃烧的岛群军史学习论坛 (http://bikooo.com/)