返回列表 回复 发帖

[AE] 关于飞机扩展航程的问题

本帖最后由 redpeacock168 于 2012-2-17 11:35 编辑 3 l% w) H9 S0 M3 B1 _3 g0 C

: ]  e6 H; N. U9 l+ @! c' H+ {2 S7.2.1.6.1 EXTENDED RANGE3 ]# V/ \3 l, y- P1 S
The term takes on new meaning in AE. Less forgiving rules are in place to make Extended
/ [$ o/ a; X6 d* E7 Q# f, X9 krange operations, both Clean and Drop Tank equipped, unsustainable. WWII is abound with# r: A. X6 b7 {  R) K( V9 u3 `/ Q
instances of extreme operations such as the Doolittle raid and the Battles over the skies of% u: ?! t% i/ f: d6 f
Guadalcanal. These operations were possible and had an effect of one kind or another, but
9 ~5 F) w$ G* C8 Ucould not be considered normal or sustainable. As such, combat effectiveness as a whole will! K1 F5 O4 f/ Q5 ]- R
suffer at these ranges. The smallest scratch could mean the difference between a warm meal
  f) t: V+ a0 E' A) @$ Wand a rack, and a survival situation. If you value your Air Forces you will use discretion when
" \- w: F4 [% M# I; m$ [planning operations that require such high risk.
1 ]! l' u/ u% Q! m; l% `谁能分析下这句话,我粘贴的,不知怎么中间有空格了,麻烦高手给翻译下,好像是说AE的扩展航程概念与原版不同了。
求翻译
看懂一点点,意思是扩展航程战斗会有风险?
本帖最后由 jay102 于 2012-2-17 11:45 编辑
2 _0 [% f0 n% s& O* N9 y; {; t% n/ J8 k8 S$ ]
中心意思就是AE里使用扩展航程所致的风险比WitP时代更高了。
意思就是 用扩展航程就像杜立特空袭那样 并不应该被看作常态 除非你觉得有必要用
AE里日本是架0战就可以从拉包尔sweep瓜岛,还可以把盟军的CAP扫的生活不能自理: N- u: D8 H% S& w' G, B* Q
扩展航程仍然做的不够好,当然损失率是大大提高了的,作战效能也会下降
"I have nothing to offer but supplies, fuel and women."
扩展航程的概念在AE里具有了新的内涵,更苛刻的规则使得扩展航程任务(包括普通的和增挂副油箱的)无法持久。尽管二战里存在着大量极端型的行动,如杜利特轰炸和瓜岛空战,确有可行性且产生了某种特定影响,但其不应被视为常规的和可持续的。在扩展航程上作战,综合作战效率必然下降,机身最轻微的擦挂都有可能决定飞行员的存亡。一个珍惜空军的人在计划此类高风险行动时将会谨慎从事。
返回列表