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
$ x9 V. U0 @$ H3 A
( G! e! S+ \1 S2 v$ h) d7 E5 U! F: h5 h7.2.1.6.1 EXTENDED RANGE
7 `1 i; u5 }$ t& v" S# }& A% ]% OThe term takes on new meaning in AE. Less forgiving rules are in place to make Extended; P9 @2 D# n2 m! ?+ }
range operations, both Clean and Drop Tank equipped, unsustainable. WWII is abound with0 k& j; p" M; a3 A9 B# T
instances of extreme operations such as the Doolittle raid and the Battles over the skies of
1 t/ r+ b: z# f& DGuadalcanal. These operations were possible and had an effect of one kind or another, but- M6 z6 [5 I0 k. P& F
could not be considered normal or sustainable. As such, combat effectiveness as a whole will
7 ?, R( t$ r8 H" h/ J2 osuffer at these ranges. The smallest scratch could mean the difference between a warm meal
8 \/ S* z  m9 ~/ C& gand a rack, and a survival situation. If you value your Air Forces you will use discretion when
9 k2 ]  R/ @" O9 lplanning operations that require such high risk.
% L- p9 f* [! a8 j" a$ W6 T. `& M7 W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 - y- U7 j+ G, n6 W; t
1 f4 g  v; n, B) t) d9 m- C
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
2 [2 [5 R$ H/ f- |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