Stopping the German Air onslaught

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Stopping the German Air onslaught

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 East Series >> The War Room >> Stopping the German Air onslaught

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Stopping the German Air onslaught - 3/11/2019 3:58:18 PM

Crackaces

Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline

I think everybody on this forum knows I am a German fanboy under the tutelage of Telemecus in two MP games. Though this experience I have been able to understand the game at a very basic level. One point of controversy within the forums is the use of the German Air force and the attrition of the Soviet Air force. I can only say that the 2x3 game is a great example of what happens when the Germans let off the gas pedal ..The Soviet air force blooms quickly ....

The German operational steps to achieve maximum optimization for Soviet air attrition are suggested as follows:

1. Recon every air base to at least detection level 5. At that level you will see what groups are present (bombers, fighters, fighter bombers), how many groups attached to the base, and how many aircraft per group.

2. Once all air bases are detected -- start reconnoitering around the bases to detect the following:
2a: What groups are responding? What type of aircraft?
2b: At what distance will a group intercept? Do aircraft come from multiple directions?
2c: What additional units show up incidentally to the recon operation? Enemy units are needed within the targets' range circumference to perform the fighter "sweep".
2d: How much flak does each hex elicit? (In case as the German you decide to send bombers).

3. With all this information -- Now sweep at the furthest distance from the target airbase closest to the German airbase. Note what groups respond and the losses.

4. Check the target bases for distribution of losses. Assume 20 fighters per group TO&E. Number present / maximum TO&E determines the percentages present.

5. Repeat step 3 and step 4 noting each time the percentages and groups responding. At some point you will note that some groups are not flying. You can estimate percentage to fly as patterns erupt. Group 'A' stops flying with 9 planes. Group 'B' is flying with 10 planes. Group 'C' stops flying with 9 planes. The percentage to fly is likely 50%.

6. Decision time: There is a constraint of the FIRST 33% of air miles to be flown in airbase attacks. Once an air group exceeds 33% it cannot participate in an airbase attack. That means escorts too! So one has to access whether all the fighters can be reduced to below required to fly or save air miles for an escorted attack. The other option is to just use all the fighter miles up and go in unescorted.

Now to present a counter-strategy:

One thought is that there are 3 constraints:

1) airbase attacks are restricted to 33% of the first air miles.

2) a single hex can be attacked only twice.

3) the Germans lack fighters.

We are assuming that the Soviets desire to project fighter cover over a part of the battle space outside of Stuka range.

A stack of 3 airbases in 3 hexes stacked with 6 groups of 20 fighters each is over 1000 fighters that can be mutually supporting . Even at 50% required to fly, I do not believe the Germans can shoot down 500 Soviet fighters from one area in the first 33% of air miles. Then escorted bombing is the only other tactic, or sweeps until the fighter mileage is used up. In either case the required to fly threshold will not be crossed.The Germans will take losses. Over time they will run out of fighters.

One thing I have seen M60 do, which is ingenious in my opinion, and that is reducing targets within the fighter circumference. If there are no targets -- there are no fighter sweeps as a fighter sweep is a "ground attack" without bombers. Certainly, cities are game as well as the airbases. However, reducing targets reduces opportunities for fighter sweeps.

One must never post an airbase in Stuka range. Otherwise the escorted attack will devastate the airbase(s).

The Soviets must allocate fighters to protect key assets out of escorted fighter range. The Germans must not be able to attack factories deep in the motherland unescorted without Soviet fighter attrition. If only to cause "turn aways".

The furthest I have played this game is turn 55 just completed with M60. With that in mind, I am not sure the Soviets can extend fighter coverage over the ground tactical battle space in 1941 - late 1942. I project that with mutually supporting airbases defending critical targets that the German fighter reserve might be depleted for a 1943 Soviet air offensive.

I am hoping that the game with M60 extends that far.

I certainly invite the forum to respond. I hope for an intelligent dialog without rants.

_____________________________

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so"

Post #: 1

RE: Stopping the German Air onslaught - 3/11/2019 6:13:10 PM

Crackaces

Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline

Not to double post .. but I think one concept needs to be addressed. Maybe if Morvel comes back we can see a change.

Very simply, too much information is gained at an airbase detection level of 5. This information is exploitable. The number of ready aircraft should never be known to the opponent at any level - I would propose that always there should be a FOW. The Germans certainly could keep sweeping until the Soviets stopped flying, but it would be harder to predict the required to fly with such accuracy. The current information provided gives the Germans too much information for deciding the 33% problem. This is the one piece of information that can make the Luftwaffe vs Soviets unbalanced.

The other change might be to randomly intercept or allow to not intercept recon missions. However, this change will have little effect on the first problem of detection level 5. With the 2 recon per hex throttle .. recon within a circumference will have little effect now on fatigue.

_____________________________

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so"

(in reply to Crackaces)

Post #: 2

RE: Stopping the German Air onslaught - 3/11/2019 6:18:31 PM

SparkleyTits

Posts: 898
Joined: 10/7/2016
From: England
Status: offline

Great step by step post to help everyone on the airwar bud!

One other constraint I find since the past couple of updates is AA is a much bigger factor than it used to be in airbase bombing
I find since the TOE changes in AA both sides have ample assets to deflect sustainable air missions in most places forcing me to find soft underbellys to not take unsustainable losses

(in reply to Crackaces)

Post #: 3

RE: Stopping the German Air onslaught - 3/11/2019 6:35:00 PM

Crackaces

Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SparkleyTits

Great step by step post to help everyone on the airwar bud!

One other constraint I find since the past couple of updates is AA is a much bigger factor than it used to be in airbase bombing
I find since the TOE changes in AA both sides have ample assets to deflect sustainable air missions in most places forcing me to find soft underbellys to not take unsustainable losses

Great post!

Yes .. once it comes to "send in the bombers!" flak will extract a toll. I have not seen too many fighters on sweep shot down by flak. I have seen it . especially with escorting bombers to targets. But .. unescorted bombers are a juicy target for Soviet fighters and flak .. so protecting the factories in the heartland is very doable ...

_____________________________

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so"

(in reply to SparkleyTits)

Post #: 4

RE: Stopping the German Air onslaught - 3/11/2019 7:03:36 PM

Crackaces

Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline

BTW) In the current game vs M60 The Germans have in the field 668 fighters of all types. About 300 are in reserve. Of these about 225 in the field are German Me 109's. The rest are Allies. Thus the Germans weakness is their strength. Over a period of time I believe the Soviets can break the Luftwaffe.

What cannot happen is:

1) Place airbases full of planes in Stuka range.
2) Leave fighter groups out devoid of ready planes and a high percentage to fly (they can be unescorted bomber targets)
3) Leave Airbases full of planes on hexes where the planes cannot fly. The swamps are not frozen into clear hexes in the winter (although they take less movement points.)
4) Place singular airbases full of fighters out an a location full of hexes to sweep. Eventually 6 groups of Soviet fighters (120 in at full strength) will be overwhelmed and destroyed.

These are the mistakes I know of that have led to masses of Soviet fighter losses.

You take 225 fighters massed on a single 1000 plane fighter target at least 19 hexes from a Stuka base and keep back from staging bases you are not going to see 500 plane losses in a turn. The range of a ME 109 is 21 hexes. If your intercept points are close to your bases and far for the Germans .. there will be fewer sorties with each sortie gaining higher fatigue. Then there is a 33% problem.

Interlocking bases with 1000 fighters or so will reduce the number of German fighters over time. Eventually in 1943 - 1944 the Soviets dominate the air ...

_____________________________

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so"

(in reply to Crackaces)

Post #: 5

RE: Stopping the German Air onslaught - 3/12/2019 2:44:04 PM

EwaldvonKleist

Posts: 2038
Joined: 4/14/2016
From: Berlin, Germany
Status: offline

Good points Crackaces. One could add that for counterattacks on Axis air bases, altering the path by flying from certain staging bases can help to avoid AA gun concentrations.

_____________________________

The Library of Gary Grigsby's War in the East resources.
Do you want total war? Guide for WitE players

(in reply to Crackaces)

Post #: 6

RE: Stopping the German Air onslaught - 3/13/2019 3:42:22 PM

M60A3TTS

Posts: 4014
Joined: 5/13/2011
Status: offline

One other thing. If you do not intend to have fighters fly during your turn, do not set the group range to 1. Instead, set the group range to some low multiple of 40, such as 40,80,120. That way if you neglect to reset the range when you end your turn, you will still have them available to respond to airbase attacks during your opponent's next turn.

(in reply to EwaldvonKleist)

Post #: 7

RE: Stopping the German Air onslaught - 3/13/2019 4:53:54 PM

Crackaces

Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS

One other thing. If you do not intend to have fighters fly during your turn, do not set the group range to 1. Instead, set the group range to some low multiple of 40, such as 40,80,120. That way if you neglect to reset the range when you end your turn, you will still have them available to respond to airbase attacks during your opponent's next turn.

The range is miles . not hexes as M60 points out ..

_____________________________

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so"

(in reply to M60A3TTS)

Post #: 8

RE: Stopping the German Air onslaught - 3/13/2019 6:17:22 PM

M60A3TTS

Posts: 4014
Joined: 5/13/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

quote:

ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS

One other thing. If you do not intend to have fighters fly during your turn, do not set the group range to 1. Instead, set the group range to some low multiple of 40, such as 40,80,120. That way if you neglect to reset the range when you end your turn, you will still have them available to respond to airbase attacks during your opponent's next turn.

The range is miles . not hexes as M60 points out ..

It's not even that as the manual states clearly that 1 hex = 10 miles. Where someone came up with 40 is a mystery and should be the first thing corrected in a future patch. Group range should simply be defined as hexes.

(in reply to Crackaces)

Post #: 9

RE: Stopping the German Air onslaught - 3/13/2019 7:05:17 PM

Crackaces

Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

quote:

ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS

One other thing. If you do not intend to have fighters fly during your turn, do not set the group range to 1. Instead, set the group range to some low multiple of 40, such as 40,80,120. That way if you neglect to reset the range when you end your turn, you will still have them available to respond to airbase attacks during your opponent's next turn.

The range is miles . not hexes as M60 points out ..

It's not even that as the manual states clearly that 1 hex = 10 miles. Where someone came up with 40 is a mystery and should be the first thing corrected in a future patch. Group range should simply be defined as hexes.

This is interesting.. 40 miles per hex is WITP AE :) somebody might have forgot the difference between the games ? But hexes is what we do .. I have a hope but Morvel has not been around in awhile ..

_____________________________

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so"

(in reply to M60A3TTS)

Post #: 10

RE: Stopping the German Air onslaught - 3/13/2019 8:56:51 PM

Telemecus

Posts: 4689
Joined: 3/20/2016
Status: offline

My guess is it has to do with the multipliers in the game for air miles flown depending on mission. 10 miles per hex flown only applies to air transfers. Combat air flights are either multiplied by 3 or 4 etc, so you would be flying 30 or 40 miles per hex. After all aircraft in combat would be zig zagging, flying straight would be suicide.

(in reply to Crackaces)

Post #: 11

RE: Stopping the German Air onslaught - 3/14/2019 1:35:53 AM

thedoctorking

Posts: 2297
Joined: 4/29/2017
Status: offline

Very interesting and helpful post, thanks Crackaces!

(in reply to Telemecus)

Post #: 12

RE: Stopping the German Air onslaught - 3/14/2019 2:01:32 AM

Crackaces

Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Telemecus

My guess is it has to do with the multipliers in the game for air miles flown depending on mission. 10 miles per hex flown only applies to air transfers. Combat air flights are either multiplied by 3 or 4 etc, so you would be flying 30 or 40 miles per hex. After all aircraft in combat would be zig zagging, flying straight would be suicide.

I think when you set up a combat radius it is a straight line out specifying a sector. Then the pilot tatically does what the need for the mission and subsequently travel a greater distance and use more fuel. For planning purposes the planners don�t draw an 80 mile radius and the pilots return to base after flying 80 miles including zig zagging ..� we came back as soon as the odometer hit 80 ..�

That is what is happening if you are right ..

_____________________________

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so"

(in reply to Telemecus)

Post #: 13

RE: Stopping the German Air onslaught - 3/14/2019 4:32:08 AM

ledo

Posts: 59
Joined: 11/6/2017
Status: offline

Although if that were the case the longer the journey the radius the less difference there should be between the mile radius and the 10 miles per hex ratio. Assuming if you're travelling 80 miles to a battle you still spend roughly the same number of miles on sorties as if you were travelling 10 miles to a battle. If the relationship is completely linear 40 miles per hex, then its likely that sortie distance is not the reason that its not 10 miles per hex.

(in reply to Crackaces)

Post #: 14

RE: Stopping the German Air onslaught - 3/14/2019 2:04:45 PM

Telemecus

Posts: 4689
Joined: 3/20/2016
Status: offline

If I understand what Ledo is saying it is that the relationship should not be completely linear? At the moment in WitE it is completely linear. Even if an airgroup is travelling to an action, it still would not fly straight but would be zig zagging as it is in an area it could potentially be intercepted in by enemy air. I know in the case of the Battle of Britain the actual dogfights and action between the RAF and the Luftwaffe was surprisingly short - usually about 30 seconds. This may be an extreme case, but would still mean the miles flown per hex at a battle site was about the same as the hexes they flew through to get to it. But I can understand the argument that perhaps it should not be linear but perhaps should be flying more miles/hex when actually engaging the enemy as opposed to potentially engaging the enemy?

< Message edited by Telemecus -- 3/14/2019 4:00:01 PM >

(in reply to ledo)

Post #: 15

RE: Stopping the German Air onslaught - 3/14/2019 8:49:48 PM

ledo

Posts: 59
Joined: 11/6/2017
Status: offline

Oh I wasn't saying it shouldn't be linear (although linear wasn't the correct word). From a gaming point of view linear and consistent would be a far better and easier abstraction. I think I misunderstood your point about the zig zagging. I assumed you meant that they were using more fuel once they were in the area of combat, not the whole way through. In which case it would just be a simple relationship i.e. 40x=y. If combat or sortie fuel is calculated separately it might be 30+x=y, still linear but 1 hex might be 40, 2 hexes 50 etc, since the 30 is combat fuel or range or whatever. Anyway I haven't played around with the ranges yet so I don't know.

(in reply to Telemecus)

Post #: 16

RE: Stopping the German Air onslaught - 3/22/2019 3:01:49 PM

Telemecus

Posts: 4689
Joined: 3/20/2016
Status: offline

Interesting film made by the first motion picture unit of the US army air forces during world war two for new bomber pilots. They suggest making 20 degree changes in direction plus changes in altitude every 30 seconds while in any air space in which they could face enemy action. In terms of flak this meant from 3 mins before they hit the enemy coastline. So I guess this was their definitive zig zag pattern. Click on the picture to see the you tube video