Ever wanted to crush the Soviet Air Force and feel like you changed history?
This is how an accident changed my game.
1. Set up game with the AI controlling the Luftwaffe. 2. Clear all air directives. (Because you want learn how to do it). 3. Become distracted by real life and walk away from computer. 4. Come back and without thinking immediately press button to complete Air Phase. 5. Sit back and watch nothing happen. Zero missions flown. 6. Feel like a dunce. 7. Realize you have to restart game. 8. Mentally say screw it and move the ground forces. 9. Watch as your fighters completely dominate the air space. 10. Feel dirty and elated all at the same time.
Screen shot says it all. Soviet pilot loses through the roof. German loses minimal.
I'd like some other players to try this. Let us know what your results are.
This has become my new opening air tactic. Lure the Soviet air force into the sky and beat it there instead of the ground.
This was done a week ago. Had to wait to be able to post screenshot. Thanks for reading.
To me it is actually a much better opening for the air than bombing airfield because of the Pilot kills. Not to mention this is defiantly for people that want to take the easy road on the first turn instead of spending hours on bombing missions ;-)
Soviet starting ADs should probably not be set to "make the Imperial Japanese Navy Air Service circa 1945 look like a responsible air force that values its pilots' lives".
...though that's probably not even the problem; the Luftwaffe should have much higher losses if the VVS is left free to fly in the opening days of Barbarossa. Or auto-intercept of enemy ground support should be less deadly or happen less often - I doubt the Luftwaffe could have CAP everywhere along the entire line of contact at all hours of the day, so if the VVS was left free to fly you'd expect a not-insignificant number of ground support missions to drop their payload and get out before the Bf-109s show up. I feel like you should only get nearly guaranteed intercept when fighting under an Air Superiority directive representing proactive fighter sweeps of the battlespace - at the cost of miles flown, fatigue, and higher ops losses.
In any case, you can improve those numbers by bombing around Romania at least. Bombing some fighter bases will shift losses away from fighter-bombers and toward level bombers.
I imagine sometime in the future this will be adjusted to better recreate the A2A battles that result from not bombing airfields. Until that day, this works well. I'll play around with it and incorporate some airfield attacks, recon missions and ground support.
Currently trying out retraining all Me-110's from bombing to fighters. Takes 8 weeks.
Really enjoying this wargame. The endorphins it produces makes me a happy gamer.
Posts: 410
Joined: 9/20/2000 From: San Francisco, CA Status: offline
I wonder if it's worth it to send unescorted bombers on D1 against Mech/Armor units instead of airfields. Most Mech/Armor units don't have flak covering them, and this way, you get to use your TAC/LBs against targets instead of having them useless. Then have your fighters do the normal coverage and nail the soviet airforce in the air.
ORIGINAL: TheFerret Soviet starting ADs should probably not be set to "make the Imperial Japanese Navy Air Service circa 1945 look like a responsible air force that values its pilots' lives".
LOL! I love that sentence.
Random fun fact, I heard once that apparently the VVS actually *did* do desperation kamikaze attacks (crippled plane, out of ammo in desperate fight, that sort of thing), but with one important difference from the IJN in '45: The pilot would bail out after lining up the attack because they couldn't see any point of dying with their plane.
"I let plane crash into tank. I get new plane, I try to do better tomorrow."
ORIGINAL: TheFerret Soviet starting ADs should probably not be set to "make the Imperial Japanese Navy Air Service circa 1945 look like a responsible air force that values its pilots' lives".
LOL! I love that sentence.
Random fun fact, I heard once that apparently the VVS actually *did* do desperation kamikaze attacks (crippled plane, out of ammo in desperate fight, that sort of thing), but with one important difference from the IJN in '45: The pilot would bail out after lining up the attack because they couldn't see any point of dying with their plane.
"I let plane crash into tank. I get new plane, I try to do better tomorrow."
I think the logic was actually more grim. I read of Soviet night fighter pilots (without radar etc) who got lost and didn't dare land at an airfield as they weren't sure if it was Axis or Soviet - if it was Axis they would be accused of defecting with consequences for their family (so better to crash without fuel and hope they were in Soviet territory). A few of the Soviet 'ramming' outcomes could have been driven by a similar calculation
ORIGINAL: TheFerret Soviet starting ADs should probably not be set to "make the Imperial Japanese Navy Air Service circa 1945 look like a responsible air force that values its pilots' lives".
LOL! I love that sentence.
Random fun fact, I heard once that apparently the VVS actually *did* do desperation kamikaze attacks (crippled plane, out of ammo in desperate fight, that sort of thing), but with one important difference from the IJN in '45: The pilot would bail out after lining up the attack because they couldn't see any point of dying with their plane.
"I let plane crash into tank. I get new plane, I try to do better tomorrow."
I think the logic was actually more grim. I read of Soviet night fighter pilots (without radar etc) who got lost and didn't dare land at an airfield as they weren't sure if it was Axis or Soviet - if it was Axis they would be accused of defecting with consequences for their family (so better to crash without fuel and hope they were in Soviet territory). A few of the Soviet 'ramming' outcomes could have been driven by a similar calculation
Well, I had heard it an interview with an old Russian pilot talking about it, he seemed kinda proud of it. But I also have no doubt that what you describe happened as well. That is kinda the nature of the Soviet side of the war, acts of bravery and heroism, and other acts where they were more afraid of their own side than they were the enemy.
In WITE1 I stopped doing Axis air missions on T1 very early on. Posted several times. Just some recce. I think it also screws up the Soviet supply system as the Red Air Force demands supply.
Did you turn on and off ground support to maximize VVS losses and minimize Luftwaffe losses? I've decided to start a new campaign testing out this method, and I have had higher LW losses already - 132 pilots, 134 Fighter-Bombers, 3 fighters - only with Army Group North done and the northern half of AGC infantry battles done.
Did you turn on and off ground support to maximize VVS losses and minimize Luftwaffe losses? I've decided to start a new campaign testing out this method, and I have had higher LW losses already - 132 pilots, 134 Fighter-Bombers, 3 fighters - only with Army Group North done and the northern half of AGC infantry battles done.
Could probably leave the ground support off for the first turn until the VVS fighter fleet is thinned out? Just a thought, haven't tried it.
That indeed seems to have helped out, neuromancer. I turned off ground support for the initial Army Group North moves with the infantry into Lithuania. I've turned it on for the few border battles with 16th Army, and I've scored over 800 VVS pilot deaths for about 54 Luftwaffe pilots in total so far, without advancing the bulk of 16th Army towards Kaunas and without moving PzGr 4.
The more I see of the air war, the less I believe in it as an abstraction of reality. Combat losses are brutal, often total, AI interception is indiscriminately aggressive, Soviet early war fighters are far more effective than historical accounts suggest, if realistic numbers of Axis aircraft are damaged, they are repaired too quickly but it seems too many of both sides are destroyed. This part of the game really looks unfinished to me.
_____________________________
“Old age is the most unexpected of all things that can happen to a man.” -Leon Trotsky
ORIGINAL: Jango32 That indeed seems to have helped out, neuromancer. I turned off ground support for the initial Army Group North moves with the infantry into Lithuania. I've turned it on for the few border battles with 16th Army, and I've scored over 800 VVS pilot deaths for about 54 Luftwaffe pilots in total so far, without advancing the bulk of 16th Army towards Kaunas and without moving PzGr 4.
Cool.
I noticed that in my games, when I flew my ground support my losses would climb in both bombers and fighters, but if I didn't, the Bf-109s would just chew up the VVS in the air when the Soviets flew their own ground support missions.
As Mehring says, perhaps the air war needs some serious tweaking. Right now I am starting to question the usefulness of ground support, the main result seems to be to kill attacking planes more than anything else.
As Mehring says, perhaps the air war needs some serious tweaking. Right now I am starting to question the usefulness of ground support, the main result seems to be to kill attacking planes more than anything else.
once you get into close/marginal battles you'll see the impact ... and if you don't do GS then you will get hit by the secondardy rule that the side with the most GS gets extra disruptions over what is hit.
Now on T1, yes, its a tool for damaging the VVS, the number of marginal ground combats is minimal
before I'd agree with Mehring on this, I'd want to see what his evidence is - I don't see any of his claims in any of the games (vs AI or HtH) that I'm involved with
once you get into close/marginal battles you'll see the impact ... and if you don't do GS then you will get hit by the secondardy rule that the side with the most GS gets extra disruptions over what is hit.
Now on T1, yes, its a tool for damaging the VVS, the number of marginal ground combats is minimal
before I'd agree with Mehring on this, I'd want to see what his evidence is - I don't see any of his claims in any of the games (vs AI or HtH) that I'm involved with
Fair enough.
quote:
ORIGINAL: MakeeLearn
Did not ground support missions contain a subset of air superiority missions?.
More or less. The bombers are usually escorted by fighters. If the combat is in range of a fighter base (and possibly if it flies within range of one) then they will fly up to engage the attacking formation. IIRC historically there were some pretty epic air battles over some battlefields, and the early IL2s didn't have a rear gunner which meant they were defenseless if a German fighter got behind them, making fighters even more important. How the results of those battles compare to the game I couldn't say.
< Message edited by neuromancer -- 4/20/2021 2:19:15 AM >
I'm finding I lose more damn planes to operational losses than to the enemy! Like, a lot more! Do the pilots not know how to fly? Do the wings just fall off? What is wrong with these planes!?
(sorry, not strictly on topic, but I felt the need to vent)
I'm finding I lose more damn planes to operational losses than to the enemy! Like, a lot more! Do the pilots not know how to fly? Do the wings just fall off? What is wrong with these planes!?
I still find it interesting how op losses almost always result in the death of the pilot.
Now, it may very well be that I don't fully understand what "operational losses" mean in this game, but in my mind it means wear and tear, landing gear failing, engines cutting out etc., but if such things, in real life, had had a mortality rate of about 99% as I see in the game, I guarantee you that nobody would have ever been able to talk me into grabbing a yoke ever
Loss of airframe/damage, sure, but almost assured pilot death?
Posts: 973
Joined: 4/30/2010 From: The Old Northwest Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: neuromancer
I'm finding I lose more damn planes to operational losses than to the enemy! Like, a lot more! Do the pilots not know how to fly? Do the wings just fall off? What is wrong with these planes!?
(sorry, not strictly on topic, but I felt the need to vent)
There was a long thread on this and its because op losses are set high. Whether they are set too high vs history or not is up for debate, but its by intentional game design.
< Message edited by Bamilus -- 4/24/2021 12:35:36 PM >
MushaTX: they had parachutes in those days too, no ejection seats, but if your engine dies in flight you could certainly still hit the silk. And as long as your landing isn't a tumbling flaming wreck, you'd think you could still have a decent chance of walking away from it; plane may be done (propellers snapped off, undercarriage crushed, severe structural damage) but the pilot isn't.
Bamilus: Ah, I see. WAD - whether it is a good design or not is another matter. Well, I've been learning ways to mitigate ops losses, but they still tend to outweigh combat losses unless I really end up mixing it up with the Soviets. Should be one of the things they let us pick a level on, and have it automatically apply to both sides.
MushaTX: they had parachutes in those days too, no ejection seats, but if your engine dies in flight you could certainly still hit the silk. And as long as your landing isn't a tumbling flaming wreck, you'd think you could still have a decent chance of walking away from it; plane may be done (propellers snapped off, undercarriage crushed, severe structural damage) but the pilot isn't.
Exactly what I mean. Every turn I've looked at the total air losses, Pilot KIA pretty much always correlates exactly with airframe losses, even though ops losses make up at least half of my losses.
Some pretty lethal "ops losses", if you ask me Or perhaps "ops losses" in the game doesn't mean what I'm used to it meaning.
Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East 2 >> The War Room >> Mistake turns into a game changer for the Air War. 
Mistake turns into a game changer for the Air War. - 
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