Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Spanking of the Sheep! - JocMeister(WA) vs Pelton(Axis)

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the West >> After Action Reports >> RE: Spanking of the Sheep! - JocMeister(WA) vs Pelton(Axis) Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Spanking of the Sheep! - JocMeister(WA) vs Pelton(... - 2/6/2015 3:56:41 PM   
kgmussler

 

Posts: 2
Joined: 7/1/2013
Status: offline 		JocMeister, I am really enjoying your AAR. The detail is very interesting and 'educational'. Thanks. On the VP issue....I played a complete game against the AI on Easy (yeh, I know...Easy) I wanted to get a feel for the game, its systems. One thing I learned was the VPs are misleading at Turn 15, where you are. It seemed to me while I was playing that I would never get to positive territory. I too was faced with having to focus on U-Boats for bombing targets, and the German AI loaded up to defend against me. However, there was a point where the VPs began to shift, I think at the point in which I began to capture significant territory. At the end of the game, there were two things I realized. 1) As you capture cities, you get points for them...but as time passes you get more points for the capture of cities. If city X had a base worth of 2 VP. It might be worth 8 VP if captured in December 1943, but it would be worth 36 points if it was captured in January of 1945. 2) There is a HUGE bonus for capturing Berlin earlier than the historical time. In my game, I captured it in early February of 1945. At the time I had around 1700 VP. I was given an additional 1600 (approx.) VP bonus. It shocked me, it was that large. So, while the early VP count is a struggle, it should improve with time. Be mindful of the huge number of reinforcements you will get, both in air and ground units, and in additional aircraft for the pools. LR Fighters don't really become effective until you get the P38J/L and the P51B-10s (or even P51D), and you'll have many more than just a few squadrons. Thanks again for the AAR.

< Message edited by kgmussler -- 2/6/2015 5:17:33 PM >

(in reply to carlkay58)
Post #: 121
RE: Spanking of the Sheep! - JocMeister(WA) vs Pelton(... - 2/6/2015 4:05:54 PM   
marion61

 

Posts: 1688
Joined: 9/8/2011
Status: offline 		That's all I really wanted is to have the discussion. I realize there are other priorities to be fixed first, but I also want to be able to voice my concerns as I've seen it so far.

(in reply to carlkay58)
Post #: 122
RE: Spanking of the Sheep! - JocMeister(WA) vs Pelton(... - 2/6/2015 4:17:45 PM   
marion61

 

Posts: 1688
Joined: 9/8/2011
Status: offline 		I'm actually finding the reverse to be true. I had over 300 positive vp's in Jan.'44, I'd captured Rome and was advancing a little every few turns, but it's been a constant issue not to bleed vp's. There's always an ebb and flow to battles, but putting an artificial governor on it inhibits taking risk or chances. But if you don't take risk and chances, you won't make it in time to get all those extra points. We are in Feb. 45, and I'm already at -473 points, and there's not much possibility of reaching the frontier of Germany before May. Another turn or two and mud hits until the 1st or 2nd week of May. And the Russians declared peace back in '43.

The other problem with vp's are that you lose them for non-game play means. I have my rear areas covered, but on some turns I can lose 25 vp's and not even attack. Those are transport losses, which I have very little control over. Turn one starts you out with negative vp's and I guess I still don't understand why that's needed to balance out the campaign.

I want the game to be fun for each side, and I'm trying to be constructive and concise about the issue, but I do think it needs some consideration. I'm patient, I can wait. For now I just don't base my victory on the VP's, even if the game and my opponent do. It's all how you want to look at it.

I'm sorry I hijacked your thread Joc. I'll start a new thread about it so you can press on with your AAR.

< Message edited by meklore61 -- 2/6/2015 5:21:54 PM >

(in reply to kgmussler)
Post #: 123
RE: Spanking of the Sheep! - JocMeister(WA) vs Pelton(... - 2/6/2015 4:28:36 PM   
kgmussler

 

Posts: 2
Joined: 7/1/2013
Status: offline 		Hi Meklore61. There were times when I experienced ebb and flow of points, as you said. One other thing I noticed is there would be jumps in points. I think it might be related to the increase in the multiple for city capture VPs, but am unsure. Overall, I'm with you. Any new system needs re-evaluation to determine if it is working as intended...tweeking, by any other name.

(in reply to marion61)
Post #: 124
RE: Spanking of the Sheep! - JocMeister(WA) vs Pelton(... - 2/6/2015 4:29:43 PM   
decourcy2

 

Posts: 516
Joined: 1/29/2015
Status: offline 		There is not much i know in this game, and you guys have been quite helpful in answering my questions, but i played more BtR than any normal human should have and i know strategic bombing.
I may have to post a thorough strategic bombing guide for the allies.

I am playing with myself :) 43-45 and i have the uboats shut down by turn 6 or so with moderate losses and then go back and forth from other targets to uboats. I of course am expediting repairs of uboat factories as the German player. I guess one hard rule i have for all of you is that if past turn 2 if the allies take more than 99% air combat casualties compared to German casualties just quit the game and start over. Other than uboats pick a target type and stick to it, i am trying vehicles in my game and i can tell you as the German player that it is starting to hurt.

Use 2nd RAF Tactical and 9th AF to drive the German fighters back out of France, Belgium, Holland and even the north west edge of Germany. Keep your recon up to know where his planes rebase to and hit that new base with medium bombers. Never let up and he has to pull his fighters back behind the Ruhr and to Hamburg. That leaves all targets in front as easy pickings. Take advantage of easy pickings. I have seen AARs with Allied players hitting Regensburg in '43. No need to, plenty of closer targets, don't go for the further targets till you are out of closer targets. Also, railyard strikes can have a strategic effect, resources have to move as well, so you can isolate heavy factory concentrations from their resources.

(in reply to marion61)
Post #: 125
RE: Spanking of the Sheep! - JocMeister(WA) vs Pelton(... - 2/6/2015 5:51:27 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline 		Great discussion guys.

Glad to see there are a lot of different opinions and I do hope Iīm wrong about most things. But I have to stress my dislike for the current VP system. I donīt have a gripe with the actual scores yet and they may very well turn out to be perfectly reasonable. Although I would be very, very surprised if we saw any WA victories in the near future. Granted most AAR are from Pelton or people playing Pelton but we canīt all be that bad right?

Its hard for me to explain in English as I donīt know the English words or expressions when it comes to psychology. But you donīt design a system around "negatives". It doesnīt work well with the human mind. In games you award actions and progress. You donīt punish it. You also donīt tell people (in games) to "do A" or get punished for it. You donīt do that in games. Ever. It only creates anger and frustration.

What you also donīt do is to have a player trying to achieve a positive score against a player trying to give the other player a negative score. There is a very good reason you donīt see that in games. Its a negative scoring system (in the psychological sense) Now throw in the fact that "the game" gives the side trying to achieve a positive score a negative score (U-boats, combat losses). That gives the impression the game is biased and creates frustration for the player trying to achieve a positive score. Sorry if its sounds incoherent but I lack the English words for it.

Its just basic game design and a reason most games doesnīt work like that.

I could probably write an essay on the matter. But I highly doubt "tweaking" the VP system will do much good. It might get the numbers right but it will still be fundamentally flawed in the way the VPs are distributed. Its not just a matter of getting the points right when the game is over.

Simply put: You donīt take stuff (VPs in this case) from people. You give stuff to people. That is the most basic rule of game design. Donīt force people to do stuff like attacking and then take away VPs for it even though they are successful. I canīt stress how badly this works with the human mind and risk/reward system. You donīt force people to bomb u-boats with VP penalties. You award them VPs for bombing U-boats.

And donīt get me started on the issues of giving one of the sides a "free hand" (no VP penalties) while the other has them... You donīt do that either.

But Iīll guess I should get back to my Scotch and Axis AI game now.

< Message edited by JocMeister -- 2/7/2015 5:52:16 AM >

(in reply to decourcy2)
Post #: 126
RE: Spanking of the Sheep! - JocMeister(WA) vs Pelton(... - 2/6/2015 5:55:56 PM   
decourcy2

 

Posts: 516
Joined: 1/29/2015
Status: offline 		The Scotch are helping the Axis?? Those dirty traitors!

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 127
RE: Spanking of the Sheep! - JocMeister(WA) vs Pelton(... - 2/6/2015 6:42:19 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: decourcy2

The Scotch are helping the Axis?? Those dirty traitors!



(in reply to decourcy2)
Post #: 128
RE: Spanking of the Sheep! - JocMeister(WA) vs Pelton(... - 2/6/2015 7:11:52 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 7750
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline 		Joc, the phrase in English you are looking for here is "risk aversion." Human behavior is such that people experience losses more keenly than gains. So you are on to something here.

< Message edited by Flaviusx -- 2/6/2015 8:12:18 PM >

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 129
RE: Spanking of the Sheep! - JocMeister(WA) vs Pelton(... - 2/7/2015 4:51:50 AM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Joc, the phrase in English you are looking for here is "risk aversion." Human behavior is such that people experience losses more keenly than gains. So you are on to something here.


Ah, thats the one. Thanks.

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 130
RE: Spanking of the Sheep! - JocMeister(WA) vs Pelton(... - 2/7/2015 4:11:20 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline 		______________________________________________________________________________

Turn 16. October 1943
______________________________________________________________________________

Shortest update ever. Heavy rain sockets the entire British Isles. No missions are flow at all. Total losses for the turn is 23.

In the Med nothing happens. Started rebasing some planes to Sardinia but supply is still too low for me to start base expansion.

Started playing WitE in the meantime. The first turn is brutal. Been at it for nearly 4 hours and I still have a lot more to do...

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 131
RE: Spanking of the Sheep! - JocMeister(WA) vs Pelton(... - 2/8/2015 7:01:45 AM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline 		______________________________________________________________________________

Turn 18. October 1943
______________________________________________________________________________

More action this turn!

------------------------
Europe
------------------------
Still heavy rain over most of Europe. The the VP loss to U-boat continue to increase though so the 8th has to take off regardless of weather. -6 this turn after just a week of no missions.

I decide to break up the attack and hit two different targets. The U-boat factories at Bremerhaven and Bremen are hit for good damage. Especially when considering the weather.

Losses are exceptionally light. I guess the weather gave some shelter! Still losing more escorts then are arriving though. But with the pool of B17s looking more and more sturdy Iīll probably start flying unescorted when the weather is bad.

Bomber Command not surprisingly manage to do...nothing. Not even a full point of MAN is destroyed for the loss of 42 bombers....

Luckily...I have found other work for BC. More on that in the next couple of updates.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 132
RE: Spanking of the Sheep! - JocMeister(WA) vs Pelton(... - 2/8/2015 7:09:35 AM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline 		------------------------
The Med
------------------------
Heavy action over Corsica this turn. Tactical and Strategic lash out at German airfields on the small island. Allied Medium bomber take a trashing but over 200 German planes are destroyed on the runways. All German airfields are now closed.

This is done to support a 2 Corps landing on Corsica. Its not the best of landings and I will be quite exposed for a couple of turns before I can get CAP up from the island itself. Its a bit risky but I need to start hauling.







Attachment (1)

< Message edited by JocMeister -- 2/8/2015 8:27:22 AM >

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 133
RE: Spanking of the Sheep! - JocMeister(WA) vs Pelton(... - 2/8/2015 7:11:49 AM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline 		------------------------
Losses
------------------------





Attachment (1)

< Message edited by JocMeister -- 2/8/2015 8:28:45 AM >

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 134
RE: Spanking of the Sheep! - JocMeister(WA) vs Pelton(... - 2/8/2015 7:31:25 AM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline 		------------------------
The landing
------------------------

The rest of II CA Corps is on standby to reinforce. The powerful II US Corps is held back in reserve if Pelton counter attacks. We will close the ports on Corsica next turn using part of the relocated BC. Hopefully they will be useful in the Med instead of getting shot down for no gains over Europe.





Attachment (1)

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 135
RE: Spanking of the Sheep! - JocMeister(WA) vs Pelton(... - 2/8/2015 8:35:05 AM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline 		______________________________________________________________________________

Turn 19. October 1943
______________________________________________________________________________

Not the best of days over Europe.

I forget to cancel the raid over Bremen and loose 50 planes for nothing. I then take a gamble with the remnants of BC that Pelton wonīt have much fighters covering the border to Luxembourg. I was wrong and pay the price for it. But we do manage some damage.

U-boat VPs drop back down to -4 though. Always something.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 136
RE: Spanking of the Sheep! - JocMeister(WA) vs Pelton(... - 2/8/2015 8:44:05 AM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline 		______________________________________________________________________________

The Med
______________________________________________________________________________

No counter attack from Pelton. He continues to recon Sardinia quite heavily though. Not sure why? I make a mistake when moving 34th and 36th ID. Might end up losing the Northern Temporary port. Stupid mistake. I was to move only 1 of the IDs but misclicked or something so I ended up moving both.

Here is a screen from Europe as I forgot to take screens from the Med.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 137
RE: Spanking of the Sheep! - JocMeister(WA) vs Pelton(... - 2/8/2015 8:58:34 AM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline 		______________________________________________________________________________

Bomber Command
______________________________________________________________________________

Ran quiet a lot of tests last night. Not enough to say something definitive but I ran probably 50-70 weeks worth of bombing with BC. I varied my settings a lot and was mainly just trying to get a feel for it rather then anything else.

From what I could tell bombing at night with BC is indeed more or less a waste of time. While I did manage on occasion to do some good damage (2 or 3 times out of all attempts) it was mostly single digits. All test were done against good flak and NF protection with various degree of Recon. No point to try things under optimal conditions.

Some interesting reflections.

-Bomber losses is about the same regardless of escorts or not. No point in escorts?
-Damage doesnīt appear to be effected by altitude. Only losses?
-Most of the raids in fair or worse weather end up doing no damage at all?
-Recon really doesnīt matter that much?

Some odd observations to say the least. Could be a side effect of the overall damage being so low that its throwing numbers off.

So for now Iīll continue to use BC under the assumption night attacks are a waste of assets. That means Iīm going to strip Bomber Command.

-The Lancs will go the 8th and the Med.
-Halifaxes will stay with Bomber Command but stand down for now. Halifax pools are not looking good at all. Once it has recovered they will move to the 9th and cover the D-day landings.
-Stirlings will go mostly to the 9th but some will head to the Med.


In my next game I will do this from the start. If the Luftwaffe breaks down later in the war I might rejoin Bomber Command for daylight attacks netting Bomb VPs.

< Message edited by JocMeister -- 2/8/2015 10:38:19 AM >

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 138
RE: Spanking of the Sheep! - JocMeister(WA) vs Pelton(... - 2/8/2015 9:28:17 AM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline 		EDIT: Wrong thread!


< Message edited by JocMeister -- 2/8/2015 10:29:53 AM >

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 139
RE: Spanking of the Sheep! - JocMeister(WA) vs Pelton(... - 2/8/2015 9:48:05 AM   
loki100


Posts: 10920
Joined: 10/20/2012
From: Utlima Thule
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister


From what I could tell bombing at night with BC is indeed more or less a waste of time. While I did manage on occasion to do some good damage (2 or 3 times out of all attempts) it was mostly single digits. All test were done against good flak and NF protection with various degree of Recon. No point to try things under optimal conditions.

Some interesting reflections.

-Bomber losses is about the same regardless of escorts or not. No point in escorts?
-Damage doesnīt appear to be effected by altitude. Only losses?
-Most of the raids in fair or worse weather end up doing no damage at all?
-Recon really doesnīt matter that much?




don't want to derail this into another debate about BC, but have been doing some similar tests. I've two campaigns going at the moment, one vs the AI, one vs Smokindave34 (just started but soon to be a technicolour AAR).

I think if you want to do real damage with BC early on, and stick to night, hit the smaller towns with low flak values. Its pretty clear that flak+low experience = disrupted bombing patterns. Going for these I am far more likely to get one of those high value results than sticking to the Ruhr etc.

In neither am I far enough ahead to test the next stage of the feedback loop. In other words by building experience (which is what successful attacks do), can I then go back to where the air is full of flying bits of lead and still manage an effective bombing raid?

Escorts, should really show as higher fighter attrition for the axis, so that might be the variable to look for. If I understand right, it wasn't close escort as used by Tac Airforces (esp before the advent of genuine multi-role FBs), it was more a case of the fighters went along with the bombers to hunt axis fighters.

Recon, if I understand what has been said, isn't, as such an aid to bombing efficiency but instead tells you how effective your bombing has been? With poor recon, you need to be very cautious about those results - both good and bad - as they maybe misleading.


_____________________________


(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 140
RE: Spanking of the Sheep! - JocMeister(WA) vs Pelton(... - 2/8/2015 10:33:41 AM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100


quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister


From what I could tell bombing at night with BC is indeed more or less a waste of time. While I did manage on occasion to do some good damage (2 or 3 times out of all attempts) it was mostly single digits. All test were done against good flak and NF protection with various degree of Recon. No point to try things under optimal conditions.

Some interesting reflections.

-Bomber losses is about the same regardless of escorts or not. No point in escorts?
-Damage doesnīt appear to be effected by altitude. Only losses?
-Most of the raids in fair or worse weather end up doing no damage at all?
-Recon really doesnīt matter that much?




don't want to derail this into another debate about BC, but have been doing some similar tests. I've two campaigns going at the moment, one vs the AI, one vs Smokindave34 (just started but soon to be a technicolour AAR).

I think if you want to do real damage with BC early on, and stick to night, hit the smaller towns with low flak values. Its pretty clear that flak+low experience = disrupted bombing patterns. Going for these I am far more likely to get one of those high value results than sticking to the Ruhr etc.

In neither am I far enough ahead to test the next stage of the feedback loop. In other words by building experience (which is what successful attacks do), can I then go back to where the air is full of flying bits of lead and still manage an effective bombing raid?

Escorts, should really show as higher fighter attrition for the axis, so that might be the variable to look for. If I understand right, it wasn't close escort as used by Tac Airforces (esp before the advent of genuine multi-role FBs), it was more a case of the fighters went along with the bombers to hunt axis fighters.

Recon, if I understand what has been said, isn't, as such an aid to bombing efficiency but instead tells you how effective your bombing has been? With poor recon, you need to be very cautious about those results - both good and bad - as they maybe misleading.



Ah, I should have added I did the tests with a "beefed up" BC based on the Introductionary Campaign. So bigger and better then what you have in 43. I did all my tests over the Ruhr so big flak and lots of fighters.

EXP levels are around 75 for most squadrons with the lowest being 68 if I remember correctly. It was also done on the BETA with deadlier NFs.

If I find the time tonight Iīll try hitting lower Flak value targets as you suggest. Might work. Although my hunch is that with smaller targets comes even less damage. Doing 50% damage might sound good. But not if the target only has 4 MAN...



(in reply to loki100)
Post #: 141
RE: Spanking of the Sheep! - JocMeister(WA) vs Pelton(... - 2/8/2015 12:06:49 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Not being a WITW owner or anything, could the Axis be using heavy recon to play mind games with you? Make you think he has something planned there, the longer your attention is on Sardina, Corsica the better from his point of view?

Or to simply get his recon squadrons up in experience?

Feel free to flame me here.

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 142
RE: Spanking of the Sheep! - JocMeister(WA) vs Pelton(... - 2/8/2015 12:15:10 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Not being a WITW owner or anything, could the Axis be using heavy recon to play mind games with you? Make you think he has something planned there, the longer your attention is on Sardina, Corsica the better from his point of view?

Or to simply get his recon squadrons up in experience?

Feel free to flame me here.


Haha!

Yeah, I think he is doing the recon just to mess with me. He canīt counter land as I donīt think the Germans get any Amphibs. So the only thing he could do is airborne landings but with the powerful II US Corps and the British X Corps there is nothing he can do.

Doubt he is trying to get exp up as the P47s are tearing him up from time to time.

So when are you going to cave in and buy it? Obvert already did.

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 143
RE: Spanking of the Sheep! - JocMeister(WA) vs Pelton(... - 2/8/2015 1:44:46 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline 		______________________________________________________________________________

Turn 20. November 1943
______________________________________________________________________________

Yey, Second turn I have a positive VP score. +1 VP for a total of -60

------------------------
Europe
------------------------

What is left of Bomber Command again tries to outflank fighter cover. We again fail with that but crushes Schweinfurt in the process.

With the U-boat VPs dropping down to -2 I send the 8th to hit the oil/fuel around Hamburg. Losses are relatively light but results are extremely underwhelming.

The 8th receives some long awaited reinforcement as some 350 Heavies and 72 P51s arrive in England. P51 and P38 pools are empty though. And unless I missed something its not going to change until January 44 when the next P51 arrives. But it will only be produced at a rate of 36 per week. Not enough to keep up with losses by a long shot.

So I will most likely have to detach some groups and switch them over to P47s. That means the Med or the 9th though for those groups though.







Attachment (1)

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 144
RE: Spanking of the Sheep! - JocMeister(WA) vs Pelton(... - 2/8/2015 2:04:28 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline 		------------------------
The Med
------------------------

Tick, tick, boom!?

Very interesting day here as the newly renamed 15th AF launch a surprise attack at Ploesti. I gamble that Pelton hasnīt moved the Luftwaffe to cover and set them for 7 days straight.

It pays off I think. No sign of the LW but the Romanian AF makes an appearance. No doubt Pelton will transfer some LW fighters here first thing he does.

This is the new target for the Lancs from Bomber Command. They are flying from bases on Sicily and are escorted over the boot. They do take a pounding and over 150 Lancs are lost during the raid. But I have almost 900 in the pool and I will use them up if needed. We will send them as soon as MRL recovers. If anything it will hopefully lessen the pressure on the 8th over Europe.

During the week we lose close to 600 planes. Bloodiest week in the war. Sadly LW losses remain extremely low. Pelton are keeping them out range for anything put P51s and P38s. And those I cannot squander on anything but bomber escort.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 145
RE: Spanking of the Sheep! - JocMeister(WA) vs Pelton(... - 2/8/2015 2:20:22 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

So when are you going to cave in and buy it? Obvert already did.


My pocketbooks says I should try to hold off until next November and hope it goes on sale.

Reading this, made me start WITE again. But I am sticking to the 1.7something patch not that it makes a difference since I am such newbie with it. I think I have a total of 20 turns or so under my belt.

Can you rest your bombers for a week, or really focus them on something totally unexpected and use your lr fighters to get some air superiority? You probably already thought of that...but you do mention that escorts don't seem to help much.

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 146
RE: Spanking of the Sheep! - JocMeister(WA) vs Pelton(... - 2/8/2015 2:34:36 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

So when are you going to cave in and buy it? Obvert already did.


My pocketbooks says I should try to hold off until next November and hope it goes on sale.

Reading this, made me start WITE again. But I am sticking to the 1.7something patch not that it makes a difference since I am such newbie with it. I think I have a total of 20 turns or so under my belt.

Can you rest your bombers for a week, or really focus them on something totally unexpected and use your lr fighters to get some air superiority? You probably already thought of that...but you do mention that escorts don't seem to help much.



I just started a WITE game myself. Latest BETA patch (probably a mistake) Played it a lot at release. Did a full campaign on both sides before going back to AE. You have seen this mapmod I take?




My main problem is that the only fighters with the range to reach Peltons fighter at the ones I have run dry. But I will most likely start sending in the 8th completely unescorted shortly. I have a good pool of B17Gs and should be able to take the losses for a couple of weeks.

< Message edited by JocMeister -- 2/8/2015 6:48:44 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 147
RE: Spanking of the Sheep! - JocMeister(WA) vs Pelton(... - 2/8/2015 3:51:45 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		I haven't installed it, but I have seen it in in the AARs.

If you are not top notch players, then I think the game is more than playable and enjoyable. I just learned what refit is for! Trying to play the game logically without referring to the rules. Too much.

Get back to your AAR...how fast is Pelton flipping turns? He has got a lot of games going!




(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 148
RE: Spanking of the Sheep! - JocMeister(WA) vs Pelton(... - 2/8/2015 5:35:35 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

I haven't installed it, but I have seen it in in the AARs.

If you are not top notch players, then I think the game is more than playable and enjoyable. I just learned what refit is for! Trying to play the game logically without referring to the rules. Too much.

Get back to your AAR...how fast is Pelton flipping turns? He has got a lot of games going!


Yeah, I always enjoyed it. First turns are brutal though before you get into it.

We usually do 2 turns per day but today I think we managed 5.

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 149
RE: Spanking of the Sheep! - JocMeister(WA) vs Pelton(... - 2/8/2015 5:41:59 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline 		______________________________________________________________________________

Turn 21. November 1943
______________________________________________________________________________

+5 VPs!

Heavy rain in Northern Europe so nothing flies.

------------------------
The Med
------------------------
As predicted Pelton transfers a big chunk of the LW to Romania. Losses are brutal with 300 allied bombers lost over the oilfields alone. Good damage dealt though and I think it will be worth it in the end.

I reluctantly convert two of the P38 groups to P47 and transfer them to the Tactical. P38 and P51 pools are now competently empty. Reminds me of AE...

On Corsica we make good progress. Should secure the island next week. Base expansion started on Sardinia. Should hopefully have everything in place for the next move in 6-8 weeks.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 150
Page:   <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the West >> After Action Reports >> RE: Spanking of the Sheep! - JocMeister(WA) vs Pelton(Axis) Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.031