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: Panzers, rückwärts! Gunnulf (GHC) vs QBall (WA)

 
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: Panzers, rückwärts! Gunnulf (GHC) vs QBall (WA) Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Panzers, rückwärts! Gunnulf (GHC) vs QBall (WA) - 12/26/2016 7:39:31 PM   
Gunnulf


Posts: 686
Joined: 10/31/2012
Status: offline
Yep, it's certainly a mistake. I was fairly convinced right up to D-day that despite the delays he would come at Anzio as his main effort. I had the Gustav where it was as the maximum I felt I could hold while concurrently covering this threat. Then when he did come at Bari I thought I had just 2, maybe 3 weeks until he would be through Naples in more force than I could handle at short notice. On balance it's still better than I envisaged a couple of months ago for sure.

We roll the Panzers forward against 1 US Arm Div and discover actually Guards Armoured Divison on the west flank as well as 3 CAN inf div on the other (2 more UK divisions from 21 Army Group), we had a recce air directive but nothing flew, not checked why yet. Anyway, we commit Herr's LXXVI Pz Corps for the first time (16 Pz, 26 Pz, 15 PzGn & regiments from 1 & 4 Fallshirm). Results are pretty good with half his divisions AFVs out of action and 2.5K casualties.





Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Gunnulf -- 12/27/2016 8:31:54 PM >


_____________________________

"Stay low, move fast"

(in reply to loki100)
Post #: 91
RE: Panzers, rückwärts! Gunnulf (GHC) vs QBall (WA) - 12/26/2016 9:16:38 PM   
bomccarthy


Posts: 414
Joined: 9/6/2013
From: L.A.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gunnulf

Turn 16 - 16 October '43

Simple to summarise, this turn QBall pretty much bombed everywhere in North Germany. Quite impressive really with 150 city bombing raids in total on a total of 47 different hexes, a new high. I've not been though all of them but they are 50 plane raids. Losses inflicted were maybe the best in a while with 98 level bombers, and 45 P38s, versus 67 Bf109s and 18 Me410s. Some quick maths puts that at at a 1.28% loss rate combined 8th AF & Bomber command. Hardly going to set the high command scurrying around for a new tactic due to overwhelming casualties. That its 47 different hexes for me makes it difficult for me to imagine this can be considered each wave as part of complex raid. This is not even a shotgun now, its a blunderbus! :)
I can't blame QBall, I've made plenty of mistakes which haven't helped my case and they are snowballing, but clearly the bombing experts have hit on the right formula to work the game mechanics to the best advantage to minimise intercepts, maximise escort coverage, increase interceptor fatigue and reap huge damage. Maybe if 8th Air force had adopted the strategy of fanning out everywhere in individual wing sized attacks on multiple different places in a free-for-all then they would have come back with 1-2% losses rather than 5-7% they sustained? Needless to say all the inteceptor gruppes in range (given the area, thats almost all) have fatigue between 57 & 84 as the bounce out and back each time, eventually no doubt asleep at the controls, underperforming in battles, increasing fuel use and operational losses. This has to be a big part of the difference between this game where I am getting raped, and the other where so far in '43 my air force has well over double the day fighter pilots remaining in Luftwaffe Reich?



How much damage is your industry suffering from these small raids?

(in reply to Gunnulf)
Post #: 92
RE: Panzers, rückwärts! Gunnulf (GHC) vs QBall (WA) - 12/26/2016 9:48:47 PM   
Gunnulf


Posts: 686
Joined: 10/31/2012
Status: offline
Worse than I've had in other games at this point, matching the VPs. Doesnt feel like disasterous levels yet but not good after 17 turns with 93 to go. As Carl says a brief respite to rebuild a little certainly welcome. Fuel levels only recently stopped dropping, oil still climbing marginally but I expect that to change when Romania starts getting hit.
Overall:
Fuel - 10% damage
Heavy Ind - 20% damage
Manpower - 1 % Damage
Oil - 10% damage
Resources - 10% damage
Syn Fuel - 29% damage
U-Boat - 19% damage but never more than -1VP
Vehicle - 9% damage




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

"Stay low, move fast"

(in reply to bomccarthy)
Post #: 93
RE: Panzers, rückwärts! Gunnulf (GHC) vs QBall (WA) - 12/27/2016 8:14:53 AM   
Helpless


Posts: 15793
Joined: 8/27/2004
Status: offline
So far it doesn't look so bad.

Btw, are you using priority factory repairs? Some of the u-boat sites are very lightly damaged, it should bring them back to 100% very quickly.

_____________________________

Pavel Zagzin
WITE/WITW/WITE-2 Development

(in reply to Gunnulf)
Post #: 94
RE: Panzers, rückwärts! Gunnulf (GHC) vs QBall (WA) - 12/27/2016 4:40:00 PM   
Gunnulf


Posts: 686
Joined: 10/31/2012
Status: offline
Feels pretty bad :) Maybe I've just been a bit lucky with opponents so far. I definately feel like under pressure from QBalls campaign. U-boats - Some are, some aren't on priority as i've put priority on some of the deeper fuel targets as being more of a long term investment in scarce AP points in industries I can actually use, rather than a just the 4.5 months of benefit to of a few VP points.

I've been fiddling about with the Luftwaffe in the lull this term. 4 NF gruppes get scrapped to switch pilots to day duty. Actually we have more pilots than airframes for the day team, I'm guessing this lends support to many of the losses being non-fatal operational losses due to fatigue?

_____________________________

"Stay low, move fast"

(in reply to Helpless)
Post #: 95
RE: Panzers, rückwärts! Gunnulf (GHC) vs QBall (WA) - 12/27/2016 6:06:53 PM   
Gunnulf


Posts: 686
Joined: 10/31/2012
Status: offline
Turn 18 - Oct 30 '43

Heavy rain in the north and south keeps the air activity pretty much zero. We take stock and reorganise to be hopefully in slightly better shape when the weather clears. I have a couple ideas to switch strategy a little, more on that later - but any ideas welcome obviously :)

On the Winter line the Allies close up to the front line. Some of their infantry seems relatively low CV so its possible that there are minor supply constrictions, but nothing major I'm sure, so its not a cunning ruse to avoid attrition and as above I apologise for doubting QBall's aggressive spirit for even a second :)
On the south end of the line, infantry replace 1 US Arm div in the city of Caserta which makes them a more formidable target. On the flank though Guards Arm Div is looking like 14CV, but only dug in to level 1 in the clear, and while its raining the ground is firm and the mud is yet to start so Herr's LXXVI Pz Korps forms up for a counter-attack. 8th Br Arm Bde activates in reserve but Herr again prevails and 16 Pz, 26 Pz, 15 PzGn & 10 SS PzGn force the Guards to retreat with 1700 infantry lost and half the allied tanks out of action. Looks like they reduced from 14 to 3CV and will join the Americans to rebuild in reserve.

Thats pretty much all the excitement this turn though. November just around the corner and the invasion clock ticks down once more...




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

"Stay low, move fast"

(in reply to Gunnulf)
Post #: 96
RE: Panzers, rückwärts! Gunnulf (GHC) vs QBall (WA) - 12/27/2016 6:36:58 PM   
Gunnulf


Posts: 686
Joined: 10/31/2012
Status: offline
Ok, actually while I was hovering on end turn this news flash came in. We saw a further opportunity to dish out some hurt on the north flank too. Ideal Panzer country, no rivers to cross and 53 Br Inf Div with 1st PO Para Bde and 2 Commando Bde in support but not yet dug in. Seemed originally like less of an opportunity, but this flank has the potential to be more vulnerable as he could stack an attack on the corner salient from 3 hexes. So Von Schweppenburg forms up LVIII Pz Korps on the start line (3 PzGn, 29 PzGn, 16 SS PzGn with elements of HG Pz in reserve and Nashorns attached), the attack goes in and we are filled with a little dread as air support starts to appear despite the weather. Luckily it seems to be just a single squadron of IIC's that didn't get the memo to stand down and our Luftwaffe massacres them as a bonus, while on the ground its a resounding success and we cause 4.5k losses, plenty of them Para and Cdo squads. Another triumph for the Panzerwaffe, which does something to avenge the bombing losses and hopefully go some way to instill fear in the allied ranks. In future of course I won't report every action but right now these are the only 2 actions. Definately no more attacks this turn. I think... But thats got to be at least 9VPs of casualties I reckon so I'll chalk that up as progress.






Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Gunnulf -- 12/27/2016 7:13:53 PM >


_____________________________

"Stay low, move fast"

(in reply to Gunnulf)
Post #: 97
RE: Panzers, rückwärts! Gunnulf (GHC) vs QBall (WA) - 12/27/2016 8:14:45 PM   
loki100


Posts: 10920
Joined: 10/20/2012
From: Utlima Thule
Status: offline
Very satisfying .. chapeau

_____________________________


(in reply to Gunnulf)
Post #: 98
RE: Panzers, rückwärts! Gunnulf (GHC) vs QBall (WA) - 12/27/2016 8:44:22 PM   
Gunnulf


Posts: 686
Joined: 10/31/2012
Status: offline
Yep quite satisfying for sure, allows us to set the initiative a little at least at a tactical level. Aside from Sardinia where we were unable to stand due to odds and isolation effects he has only managed to make one attack against Schmalz PzGn, which was a hold, but we have managed to find the right situations to launch 7 or 8 successful armoured attacks on ground of our choosing in Sicily and the mainland. Its still only 43, and the tables will turn when his air power gets stronger so we'll just have to enjoy it while we can. You just know that at some point full of memories of these salad days I will try to launch a Wacht Am Rhein attack and it will fail utterly miserably! :)

_____________________________

"Stay low, move fast"

(in reply to loki100)
Post #: 99
RE: Panzers, rückwärts! Gunnulf (GHC) vs QBall (WA) - 12/28/2016 11:08:48 AM   
Gunnulf


Posts: 686
Joined: 10/31/2012
Status: offline
Turn 20 - 20 Nov '43

All quiet on the southern front really. Light rain so air activity re-commences in ernest. He is hitting railyards and airfields, but while technically we can probably expect fresh invasions from now on with 2 TF, I expect he will delay to get a better weather window and at least 4 TFs ready with prep more than the 50 minimum given that this could be his last shot at Rome before he has to start thinking about NWE. Until then he will batter away with his air no doubt.
We have to jockey around garrison units in France when 21 Pz takes a drop in CV, possibly a ToE change, but luckily we have enough spare garrison elsewhere to avoid penalties. Does pay not to try to over-optimise the garrison levels but sometimes we sail pretty close to the wind...
In the meantime we wait, contemplate, study chicken bones for clues...


_____________________________

"Stay low, move fast"

(in reply to Gunnulf)
Post #: 100
RE: Panzers, rückwärts! Gunnulf (GHC) vs QBall (WA) - 12/28/2016 3:01:26 PM   
John B.


Posts: 3909
Joined: 9/25/2011
From: Virginia
Status: offline
I am really enjoying your AAR. Thanks for all the effort you're putting in to it! Forgive the obvious question but to the Germans only get VP for allied manpower losses or do AFV and artillery losses give VP as well?

(in reply to Gunnulf)
Post #: 101
RE: Panzers, rückwärts! Gunnulf (GHC) vs QBall (WA) - 12/28/2016 4:04:57 PM   
Gunnulf


Posts: 686
Joined: 10/31/2012
Status: offline
My pleasure John glad you are enjoying it, its been a fun game full of frustrations so far and far from being a chore writing it down helps collect my thoughts. It helps that works been fairly relaxed last month too :)
AFAIK Allied losses for VP purposes (at least its stated in the manual) are the sum of all personnel lost, and crew from AFV, guns and aircraft are counted per the size of the element lost.

Turn 21 - 20 Nov '43 is a work in progress
No land combat with light mud in Italy now so the Winter line is quiet aside from light patrolling. The weather is light rain and looks likely to switch to heavy rain next week so the invas-omter flickers around the zero mark. VPs from bombing climbs upward, we keep the Luftwaffe Reich day bombers grounded, rebuilding for when the weather turns a bit. To be fair the flak is doing almost as good a job as the fighters right now. He's broken through the -1000VP mark now so we fire our chief of staff and send him to command a division in Army Group North for the winter.








Attachment (1)

_____________________________

"Stay low, move fast"

(in reply to John B.)
Post #: 102
RE: Panzers, rückwärts! Gunnulf (GHC) vs QBall (WA) - 12/29/2016 12:18:19 AM   
Gunnulf


Posts: 686
Joined: 10/31/2012
Status: offline
Turn 23 - 4 Dec '43

Snow on the ground in Germany but the skies are clear, however we have switched up tactics a little. Early we mixed in some Air Superiority to try to prevent fighters straying over the Fighter command dead zone that is the Ruhr, but we combined that in with a majority of interception elsewhere. We have started an experiment with boxes of Air Superiority to take advantage of maybe a little Allied complacency (well founded of course). The majority of intercepts where he has P38s are still average but We catch a few bomber streams at the far end of their runs and dish a lot of kills, in the most extreme case we gang 160 interceptors on a 50 bomber raid on the run in to Berlin and down 20 of them, with others looking damaged. Overall this is probably his worst week by a long margin with 190 LBs reported lost and 100 fighter, double our losses overall. Compared to previous games I've regularly got 300 LB in a turn but this game QBall is smarter and has avoided anything like this before. He might not even notice and can certainly afford the losses. I can't keep these boxes static and will have to shift them about or he'll just avoid them, but hopefully we can make these deep missions less of a milk run until the Mustangs show up.

Elsewhere everything pretty quiet. We shuffle some infantry into the winter line to free up a PzGn div, and also II SS Pz Corp HQ moves out and is replaced by the LI Gebirgs Korps, now led by Gen Schoerner (with his level 8 ninja infantry skills).
And we wait for a clearer weather forecast to signal danger ahead...





Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Gunnulf -- 12/29/2016 2:41:35 AM >


_____________________________

"Stay low, move fast"

(in reply to Gunnulf)
Post #: 103
RE: Panzers, rückwärts! Gunnulf (GHC) vs QBall (WA) - 12/29/2016 11:52:44 PM   
Gunnulf


Posts: 686
Joined: 10/31/2012
Status: offline
Turn 26 - Dec 25 '43

Last couple turns flew by quickly and we are getting a healthy turnaround of 2 or 3 turns per day which is good considering the Chicago-UK time difference. I always like a speedy game and have fond memories of a couple great WITP games with RRoberson where we averaged 5-7 turns a day despite the Arizona-UK difference! Anyway before the really harsh weather kicked in he did a number on most of the V-weapon sites to get them pre-damaged ahead of time. These were supposed to be secret sites and a witch-hunt is launched. We get our best man, Canaris on the case via Enigma. We clearly can't trust the postman...

Otherwise we maintain a reserve around Rome in case the weather changes and he has a last minute invasion on standby, but I suspect he has mostly canned the idea. His recce flights have no doubt picked up there are troops in the area and that its not a soft target. We'll see, but while we watch this door our thoughts turn to NW Europe and we ponder where the blow might fall here... Right now of course its anybodies guess.

Anybody?






Attachment (1)

_____________________________

"Stay low, move fast"

(in reply to Gunnulf)
Post #: 104
RE: Panzers, rückwärts! Gunnulf (GHC) vs QBall (WA) - 12/30/2016 6:38:34 AM   
decourcy2

 

Posts: 516
Joined: 1/29/2015
Status: offline
Carlkay surprised me with a late December invasion... it was worse than I expected, lost Rome, several infantry divisions.

(in reply to Gunnulf)
Post #: 105
RE: Panzers, rückwärts! Gunnulf (GHC) vs QBall (WA) - 12/30/2016 7:54:00 AM   
loki100


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: decourcy2

Carlkay surprised me with a late December invasion... it was worse than I expected, lost Rome, several infantry divisions.


Smokindave did the same to me, you don't need to get the task forces back to the UK till mid January 1944 so there is time

_____________________________


(in reply to decourcy2)
Post #: 106
RE: Panzers, rückwärts! Gunnulf (GHC) vs QBall (WA) - 12/30/2016 9:31:17 AM   
Gunnulf


Posts: 686
Joined: 10/31/2012
Status: offline
Absolutely, there is still a chance and have not ignored the possibility. As is by magic the weather forecast does give a potential window of opportunity on the horizon... Though, the reality might be different, there will likely be light mud on the ground, he'll have missed the early Rome points, he already has his bombing bases in Foggia, I suspect he's done enough recce to know there are troops in the area though its been mostly recce to support bombing airfields. I think the points against weigh more for the pro's, but I'd like the excitement of him trying, very curious to see if he can pull it off at 11th hour. If he doesn't take a run at it though then likely Italy will stay like this through much of '44 though and thats at least a few missed city points.
On balance I wouldn't be surprised if QBall has already taken away alot of his UK troops already. Its possible he might try grab the channel islands as a consolation staging post, or overall he might prep to be on standby for a slightly earlier chance window in the North Europe. I think he'll value a possible early start there more. If he chanced an early Brittany against lighter opposition the disadvantages of time/distance to Germany are slightly reduced I guess.

But I've be wrong before, and likely will again... :)




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

"Stay low, move fast"

(in reply to loki100)
Post #: 107
RE: Panzers, rückwärts! Gunnulf (GHC) vs QBall (WA) - 12/30/2016 11:26:07 AM   
Gunnulf


Posts: 686
Joined: 10/31/2012
Status: offline
Turn 27 - 1 Jan '44

So here is 1944. We predict a big year ahead and we have the Allies exactly where we want them. We are surrounded on all sides so we can fire in any direction and hit them.
VPs not great but could be worse.
Production numbers, slightly worse than last time but not disastrously.
Ground losses have been quite low I think as aside from the 2 regiments and the fortress brigade lost on Sardinia the German army in Italy has fought and won on ground of its chosing. For example we have lost just 40 PzIII, 105 StugII, 24 PzIV, 5 Panther & 9 Tigers. On the other side 749 Shermans, 124 Churchills, 49 Crusaders, 330 Stuarts etc... He replaced those losses by noon, but still, i'm still going to list that as a positive!
I feel like we have Italy locked down reasonably well, while the NWE Europe defenses are taking shape. Every major port is fortified to at least level 4 and some on the way to level 5. We still have a bit of shuffling around to do as the fresh divisions arrive.

The Luftwaffe has taken a battering, but is so far in more or less fighting shape over Germany. That won't last long. QBall definitely got the better of me and somewhat disappointed I was rarely able to make a dent. Thats only going to get worse obviously but we'll try and get a few good results along the way. We do still have a very potent bombing force. Time will tell if we get a chance to use it a few times at least.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Gunnulf -- 12/30/2016 3:36:43 PM >


_____________________________

"Stay low, move fast"

(in reply to Gunnulf)
Post #: 108
RE: Panzers, rückwärts! Gunnulf (GHC) vs QBall (WA) - 12/30/2016 4:03:54 PM   
Gunnulf


Posts: 686
Joined: 10/31/2012
Status: offline
Turn 28 - 8 Jan '44

Pretty quiet over the Reich due to the weather. Down in the underbelly the weather is a bit mixed, the south of Italy is clear on the ground and in the sky. A perfect day for a trip to the beach. However, from Anzio to Pescara and further north its light mud and rain. Exactly in the right place to frustrate either an invasion on the north or south coasts. We run some Ju188 recon flights from Ciampino over Tunis which confirms two units there, though the photos are a bit light on detail. Obviously this could be a unit and a TF so seems likely he's not given up hope yet. Meanwhile we send a bunch of Bf109B8 recce behind the lines. To the north are 4 armoured units, very possibly deployed to attempt to exploit a breakthrough, or even (as our imagination runs riot) to link up with an invasion around Pescara... Or they could just be armoured brigades in reserve to protect against an opponent who has proven a few times willing to launch a counter-attack or two... If only we had a second Panzer division we could send that way.
Well, I'm very curious to see if he pulls the trigger on this. The forecast for next week goes back to light rain across Italy, but without risk there is no reward obviously...




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Gunnulf -- 12/30/2016 4:58:19 PM >


_____________________________

"Stay low, move fast"

(in reply to Gunnulf)
Post #: 109
RE: Panzers, rückwärts! Gunnulf (GHC) vs QBall (WA) - 12/31/2016 11:23:04 AM   
Gunnulf


Posts: 686
Joined: 10/31/2012
Status: offline
Turn 30 - 22 Jan 44

Snowfall over the Reich. Looks like he continues to fly but only 5 small raids find their targets; one night raid on Essen causes no damage (flying in the snow at night sounds like a particularly aweful job for sure!), but the day raids cause pretty impressive damage. Just 49 liberators cause 79% damage to a size 30 HI target at Braunschweig, while just 22 liberators cause 69% damage to the V-Weapon factory at Neustrelitz and 24 bombers cause 29% damage to the size 20 Griefwald factory. I cam't wait until we get back to 150+ raids finding their targets...!

However most discouraging is when we actually engage in the air as now there are already Mustangs flying AS missions over Hannover with devastating results. 3 battles on different days for the same interceptor groups; first on day two then 152 Bf109s thing they get the drop on 47 P38s and 50 Bombers, however we lose 10 to his 2. Then the next day come the Mustangs, we bring 216 and lose 25, they bring 72 and lose 4. Day 7 the same groups engage. The now battered Bf109s can only muster 130 and lose another 24(!) while the 65 Mustangs still serviceable lose just 2. Should we even bother flying? I'm expecting 44 to be devastating overall but I would hope that now and again we can get the odds to do some damage. None of this seems encouraging and we need to have a big think about our response. There is no doubt however that QBall has mastered the air war here.






Attachment (1)

_____________________________

"Stay low, move fast"

(in reply to Gunnulf)
Post #: 110
RE: Panzers, rückwärts! Gunnulf (GHC) vs QBall (WA) - 12/31/2016 9:31:40 PM   
bomccarthy


Posts: 414
Joined: 9/6/2013
From: L.A.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gunnulf

Turn 30 - 22 Jan 44

Snowfall over the Reich. Looks like he continues to fly but only 5 small raids find their targets; one night raid on Essen causes no damage (flying in the snow at night sounds like a particularly aweful job for sure!), but the day raids cause pretty impressive damage. Just 49 liberators cause 79% damage to a size 30 HI target at Braunschweig, while just 22 liberators cause 69% damage to the V-Weapon factory at Neustrelitz and 24 bombers cause 29% damage to the size 20 Griefwald factory. I cam't wait until we get back to 150+ raids finding their targets...!

However most discouraging is when we actually engage in the air as now there are already Mustangs flying AS missions over Hannover with devastating results. 3 battles on different days for the same interceptor groups; first on day two then 152 Bf109s thing they get the drop on 47 P38s and 50 Bombers, however we lose 10 to his 2. Then the next day come the Mustangs, we bring 216 and lose 25, they bring 72 and lose 4. Day 7 the same groups engage. The now battered Bf109s can only muster 130 and lose another 24(!) while the 65 Mustangs still serviceable lose just 2. Should we even bother flying? I'm expecting 44 to be devastating overall but I would hope that now and again we can get the odds to do some damage. None of this seems encouraging and we need to have a big think about our response. There is no doubt however that QBall has mastered the air war here.



Aren't these screens subject to a great deal more FOW than when you check the city itself for damage? I am not sure - I thought someone discovered that a while ago.

What are the experience levels in your fighter units? I seem to recall that this has a major effect on the Luftwaffe in 1944. Also, what were the altitude settings of your units and the P-51s? Above 25k ft, the P-51 had a performance advantage over the Bf-109 and FW-190, reflected in the game's high speed at altitude (which you can see in the Editor). The P-51's best speed starts at 28k feet (I believe) - this was its critical high blower altitude. Actually, all of the second-generation Allied fighters (except the Typhoon/Tempest, Spitfire V, XII, and the LF Spits) performed best at 28k ft or higher. You can try setting your Luftwaffe units at no more than 25k ft (best altitude for most Bf-109 models), but the Allied fighters will still get the altitude bounce if they are flying higher. I think the best altitude of FW-190A, F, and G models will be no more than 20k ft; FW-190D models will probably be the same as the Bf-109s. The Germans were never able to mass produce an adequate auxiliary stage supercharger; they had to use nitrous oxide for high altitude performance, and that only lasted 10-15 minutes.

(in reply to Gunnulf)
Post #: 111
RE: Panzers, rückwärts! Gunnulf (GHC) vs QBall (WA) - 1/1/2017 9:10:19 AM   
Gunnulf


Posts: 686
Joined: 10/31/2012
Status: offline
Good point, yes there is an element of FOW on the report, I haven't checked the actual damage, will take a look at that on the next turn. - edit: notwithstanding these are on priority repair the damage doesn't look like it was too far from the mark.

Re. The p51 engagements, these were at 28k from memory (not home at mo) which he has of course dictated in his AS directive. I'm not sure I can constrain my interceptors not to fly that high? He flies his bombers at 27k I think so going to have trouble on that one too. Will check all the details on the next turn this arvo...

Turn 32 passes without much incident as either nothing flies or everything misses. We ground the Luftwaffe anyway pending a new new plan.

In the south though he has been bombing the apexes of the line, no doubt softening up for a few weeks to hit hard when the weather improves.

< Message edited by Gunnulf -- 1/1/2017 11:53:27 AM >


_____________________________

"Stay low, move fast"

(in reply to bomccarthy)
Post #: 112
RE: Panzers, rückwärts! Gunnulf (GHC) vs QBall (WA) - 1/1/2017 5:39:57 PM   
Gunnulf


Posts: 686
Joined: 10/31/2012
Status: offline
Turn 33 - 12 Feb '44

One thing I was worried about was on the previous engagements with Mustangs our BF109s showed in the loadout screen to have droptanks whereas his P51s didn't. We had these on to allow a bit more range and overlap the intercepts. Jut in case this wasn't dropping the tanks before combat we took them off, however the impact on results seems to be zero and the Germans still get chewed up, at 24k versus his 25k despite in theory the interceptors reacting and being the ones to chose to engage. Why wouldn't you at least attack from above?
Elsewhere our mix of a BF109 interceptor screen and 2 'killer' AS boxes of 150 Fw190s & Bf110/Me410s works reasonably well (though not without a few engagements versus P38s where we lose 13-0) with a few isolated battles where we can pounce on just bombers, but results like this against the Mustangs make it unsustainable. Being able to limit the range gruppes intercept at would be really useful, as without it interceptor roam into danger too often. I'd be tempted to try again just AS missions but it just means more fuel burnt for less planes in the air over a smaller area i think and relies on just occasional ambushes.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

"Stay low, move fast"

(in reply to Gunnulf)
Post #: 113
RE: Panzers, rückwärts! Gunnulf (GHC) vs QBall (WA) - 1/1/2017 9:26:22 PM   
bomccarthy


Posts: 414
Joined: 9/6/2013
From: L.A.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gunnulf

Turn 33 - 12 Feb '44

One thing I was worried about was on the previous engagements with Mustangs our BF109s showed in the loadout screen to have droptanks whereas his P51s didn't. We had these on to allow a bit more range and overlap the intercepts. Jut in case this wasn't dropping the tanks before combat we took them off, however the impact on results seems to be zero and the Germans still get chewed up, at 24k versus his 25k despite in theory the interceptors reacting and being the ones to chose to engage. Why wouldn't you at least attack from above?
Elsewhere our mix of a BF109 interceptor screen and 2 'killer' AS boxes of 150 Fw190s & Bf110/Me410s works reasonably well (though not without a few engagements versus P38s where we lose 13-0) with a few isolated battles where we can pounce on just bombers, but results like this against the Mustangs make it unsustainable. Being able to limit the range gruppes intercept at would be really useful, as without it interceptor roam into danger too often. I'd be tempted to try again just AS missions but it just means more fuel burnt for less planes in the air over a smaller area i think and relies on just occasional ambushes.



I took a quick look at the Editor: Bf 109G-6 top speed is 400 @ 21k ft, while P-51B-10 top speed is 439 @ 25k ft. This means your units were a few thousand feet above their best altitude for speed. For comparison, the P-38's best altitude is also 25k (399 mph for the G/H model and 415 mph for the J/L model), while the P-47's best altitude is 29/30k ft (433 mph for the D-15 and 430 mph for the D-25) Unfortunately, there isn't much you can do about it - the Allies can choose the altitude at which you have to defend. To make matters worse, the B-17's best altitude for speed is 27k ft, so they will almost always bomb from an altitude higher than your best altitude. If it is any consolation, you'll never have to face the P-47N, P-51H, or F4U-5.

Keep in mind that you are in the months where the real-life 8th AF fighter units gutted the Luftwaffe.

(in reply to Gunnulf)
Post #: 114
RE: Panzers, rückwärts! Gunnulf (GHC) vs QBall (WA) - 1/1/2017 9:47:30 PM   
Gunnulf


Posts: 686
Joined: 10/31/2012
Status: offline
Turn 34 - 19 Feb '44

Little bit confused this week as on the last turn we pulled back the Bf109 interceptor groups out of range of the new Hannover 'dead zone'. Clearly he will just shift it when his fishing reels nothing in but I figure its probably quite a focused AD he has set up so we'll end up playing hide and seek. However what I thought was out of range as per the range circles on the left map proved to be wrong as the over-enthusiastic pilots find a way to go the extra mile to meet their grizzly fate. 114 Bf109 lost in a series of 7 battles in that one hex that I thought we didnt even cover, which has me pulling my hair out somewhat. Everything is grounded until we work it out. Maybe something simple about what those range circles mean but I thought that was fairly clear, but we'll be out of planes before we find out at this rate.

Otherwise 188 bombing raids over Germany, with a few over the channel V-sites. Elsewhere the weather is pretty wet and muddy down south. He continues to soften up the mountain troops at the south apex of the Winter line (soon to be renamed...). The line is still strong, if that corner falls he still has a long way to fight back through the hills and mountains and we welcome the action. This would be his first real attack on German troops, aside from the Sardinia skirmishes. Elsewhere the March garrison changes are looming but we are well over-garrisoned everywhere pulling in a couple of negative VPs per turn, and the extra garrison city, Toulouse has long been garrisioned already.

We are continually mulling over where the Allied landing might be but no recon flies yet, and all we can do is be best prepared for all eventualities. If I had to put money on it I'd bet he pulled back his TFs early and will take a run at Brittany against what will have to be the lightest opposition and use the extra time to make up the distance to Berlin. But he values (and plays well) his airpower so maybe he will feel the need to hit the channel islands first. OR, I might be wrong. Much more likely to be honest. We'll just have to wait and see.








Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Gunnulf -- 1/1/2017 9:48:38 PM >


_____________________________

"Stay low, move fast"

(in reply to Gunnulf)
Post #: 115
RE: Panzers, rückwärts! Gunnulf (GHC) vs QBall (WA) - 1/1/2017 10:44:43 PM   
Gunnulf


Posts: 686
Joined: 10/31/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: bomccarthy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gunnulf

Turn 33 - 12 Feb '44

One thing I was worried about was on the previous engagements with Mustangs our BF109s showed in the loadout screen to have droptanks whereas his P51s didn't. We had these on to allow a bit more range and overlap the intercepts. Jut in case this wasn't dropping the tanks before combat we took them off, however the impact on results seems to be zero and the Germans still get chewed up, at 24k versus his 25k despite in theory the interceptors reacting and being the ones to chose to engage. Why wouldn't you at least attack from above?
Elsewhere our mix of a BF109 interceptor screen and 2 'killer' AS boxes of 150 Fw190s & Bf110/Me410s works reasonably well (though not without a few engagements versus P38s where we lose 13-0) with a few isolated battles where we can pounce on just bombers, but results like this against the Mustangs make it unsustainable. Being able to limit the range gruppes intercept at would be really useful, as without it interceptor roam into danger too often. I'd be tempted to try again just AS missions but it just means more fuel burnt for less planes in the air over a smaller area i think and relies on just occasional ambushes.



I took a quick look at the Editor: Bf 109G-6 top speed is 400 @ 21k ft, while P-51B-10 top speed is 439 @ 25k ft. This means your units were a few thousand feet above their best altitude for speed. For comparison, the P-38's best altitude is also 25k (399 mph for the G/H model and 415 mph for the J/L model), while the P-47's best altitude is 29/30k ft (433 mph for the D-15 and 430 mph for the D-25) Unfortunately, there isn't much you can do about it - the Allies can choose the altitude at which you have to defend. To make matters worse, the B-17's best altitude for speed is 27k ft, so they will almost always bomb from an altitude higher than your best altitude. If it is any consolation, you'll never have to face the P-47N, P-51H, or F4U-5.

Keep in mind that you are in the months where the real-life 8th AF fighter units gutted the Luftwaffe.


Yep, the only choice I have really is fly and fight or not. Either way the bombing is pretty much unaffected. I'll keep on trying to through a couple of spanners in the works, and its very frustrating to not fully understand a few things that are happening here. But at least the ritual gutting of the Luftwaffe is on schedule :)

_____________________________

"Stay low, move fast"

(in reply to bomccarthy)
Post #: 116
RE: Panzers, rückwärts! Gunnulf (GHC) vs QBall (WA) - 1/2/2017 4:47:46 PM   
Gunnulf


Posts: 686
Joined: 10/31/2012
Status: offline
Turn 35 - 26 Feb '44

Finally some ground action, long expected obviously from the focused preparations he has been running. After 4 weeks of 300 bombers hitiing the hex 3 times a week then 170k men from 8 divisions get a 3-1 result. In fact I was just about to switch out the 2 regiments there so QBall timed in well. Maybe he noticed the activity behind the lines and pulled the trigger early. But with the firepower deployed (QBall really doesn't do things by half, its all or nothing) I'm not sure the new units will have held anyway and we are better defending in depth. No real problem as at 1 hex per month its going to be a long way to Rome let alone the Gothic line but I'm sure he has an invasion up his sleeve not the weather is starting to turn. Our big frustration this turn was we deployed 300 fighter forward to intercept the bombers this turn but they literally intercepted every recon flight, for no effect and ignored the bombers completely. Maybe I should have done a focused AS AD but I was fairly sure they would do what I expected. I think I need to employ a chief of staff to run the air war, clearly I am rubbish. Air skill 3 at best.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

"Stay low, move fast"

(in reply to Gunnulf)
Post #: 117
RE: Panzers, rückwärts! Gunnulf (GHC) vs QBall (WA) - 1/2/2017 10:19:49 PM   
Gunnulf


Posts: 686
Joined: 10/31/2012
Status: offline
Turn 36 - 4 Mar '44

This is the turn the railyard strikes in France commence. Nothing really in Brittany or the Netherlands yet (which makes me think he wants these even more... re-inforcement bias? (pun intended...) We'll see!).

Otherwise down in Italy he switches his unit bombing to 9 runs on a single hex in the centre. No prizes for guessing where the hammer will fall next in the next few turns! :)
Otherwise plenty of airfield recce behind the lines but no sign of a fresh invasion down here. We have ample reserves if/when it comes it will likely be successful in the end but hopefully at least a little painful to achieve. Again time will tell and we can only wildly guess when and where. There are a few more divisons than we need in Italy so we might have to send a few north in the not too distant future obviously.






Attachment (1)

_____________________________

"Stay low, move fast"

(in reply to Gunnulf)
Post #: 118
RE: Panzers, rückwärts! Gunnulf (GHC) vs QBall (WA) - 1/2/2017 10:36:57 PM   
Gunnulf


Posts: 686
Joined: 10/31/2012
Status: offline
In other news we have noticed that we are suffering from a severe lack of armaments and assault guns in our ToEs. Which is strange as none of the Stug factories are damaged and the armament factories pretty much the only things untouched. Across the board though divisons on refit fill up with infantry and tanks but miss artillery, anti-tanks guns and assault guns. Which isn't good obviously and I need to study the chain and work out why fast... There seem to be plenty in the pools; 3200 Pak40, 4500 81mm Mtr, 900 105mm howitzers, though only 24 StugIIIG. But none seems to be going where it is needed and artillery bltns arriving depleted at OKW stay empty too. The manual and forum need to be scoured again.

< Message edited by Gunnulf -- 1/2/2017 10:43:10 PM >


_____________________________

"Stay low, move fast"

(in reply to Gunnulf)
Post #: 119
RE: Panzers, rückwärts! Gunnulf (GHC) vs QBall (WA) - 1/3/2017 9:57:24 AM   
Gunnulf


Posts: 686
Joined: 10/31/2012
Status: offline
Turn 37 - 11 Mar '44

Railyard hits in NW & NE France continue but also a new element is a box of 130 interdiction raids by groups of 25 Hurricane IICs around Paris. Presumably either to cause a nuisance to traffic shifting around (although there are plenty of alternate routes south), a show of force, or fighter bait (its always seemed a bit strange that AS missions happen in complete stealth unless they connect, but presumably there are 500 spitfires buzzing around invisibly above this circus). QBall does share by email that he lost 500 planes to flak and operational losses this turn. None to my fighters as they stay grounded, we get a much better result clearly if we don't fly!). He is riding his hard in anything less than a blizzard, through right now its mostly cold or light rain in the north while down south its clear in the sky and dry on the ground.






Attachment (1)

_____________________________

"Stay low, move fast"

(in reply to Gunnulf)
Post #: 120
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the West >> After Action Reports >> RE: Panzers, rückwärts! Gunnulf (GHC) vs QBall (WA) Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   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

0.703