RE: AAR swift vs fochinell (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's Eagle Day to Bombing the Reich



Message

medaloffairness -> RE: AAR swift vs fochinell (9/11/2007 12:30:16 AM)

Oh, great.... [:D][:D][:D]

Then it would be an honor for me to play a campaign with you Swift or one of the three others when the new version is released.

And what do you think about the evasion of fighters after an attaxk and the ability to reflect this in the game?

Best Regards and Servus from Vienna

Christian



von Shagmeister -> RE: AAR swift vs fochinell (9/11/2007 10:40:54 AM)

Sorry Swift, Graz is what I was thinking about



fochinell -> RE: AAR swift vs fochinell (9/11/2007 11:52:04 AM)

While the Osterreichers are busy chatting, sipping coffee and eating cakes the nasty Allies are back to destroy their beer supplies.... [sm=00000622.gif]

19th December 1943. A: 26/1892 (13 aa), X: 17/116 (11 gd).

MTO: The 15th AF hit Wiener Neustadt for an excellent raid - 100% damage for very low losses. The only resistance was a half-hearted attempt at a bingo-fuel assault on the bombers by some MC.205's as they exited the Adriatic coast, which cost Werner a couple of a/c for nothing. 0/240f 5/96b 5e. A couple of supporting 12th AF P-38H strikes hit AF's south of Vienna for cover, but they do little damage and no strafing. The MTO tac forces otherwise hit Italian industry with the mediums, doing some suprisingly high damage on some targets for once.

ETO: Quiet apart from a 9th AF P-47D strike on Hirson RR (93%) followed immediately by a further P-47D group and some FC Spit Vb sqns strafing Athies AF, which seems to have produced some ground kills. A supporting 2TAF Tiffie strike on Hazebrouk does little.

BC: 1 Group to Ludwigshafen for an excellent raid - everybody apart from the ABC Flight of 101 Sqn get their bombloads in the city area. Some NJG response, matched by NI claims of 3 kills for 1 loss. 1/291b. 205 Group hit Vienna, for heavy flak and some NJG resistance. Another excellent raid despite increased losses - all bombloads in the city area. 8/171b, including 7/120 Lib D's.






Hard Sarge -> RE: AAR swift vs fochinell (9/11/2007 2:58:47 PM)

I think that should be Ostonelinetypers

there is a bit more range between Alts for a fighter to make an attack on others

in old game, once a plane ran out of gas, it was close to dead meat, now planes with low fuel, have a better chance to defend themselfs and also a chance to start combat, it can be interesting, to see a red stream and a blue stream crossing and a number of fights breaking out

the dive to the deck to get away, you also got to remember, early on, the US fighters were under orders to stick with the bombers, later, once Gen Dolittle took over, he changed the order, US fighters job was to Kill the LW, no matter where they were seen, so while they were and did, stick with the bombers, they had much more leeway in chasing or not

plus, the hassle is, the same would be done with the Allied fighters, you got in trouble, you hit the deck, or you looked around and found other fighters to join, in the game, it does not model that part



fochinell -> RE: AAR swift vs fochinell (9/12/2007 12:20:01 PM)

20th December 1943. A: 226/2340 (28 aa), X: 176/2237 (0 gd). 148 B-17F, 20 P-47D, 20 P-38L, 8 Spit IX, 7 Spit Vb. Another day of heavy losses! [sm=happy0065.gif] But not as good for me as they first appear... [sm=00000003.gif]

MTO: The usual fighter strikes on Italian RR dodging between the clouds. The action is restricted to some balloon losses and collisions.

ETO: Major attack by the 8th AF on Leipzig AFACs - two forces of 160 B-17F with maximum escort. Werner takes a risk and OKL send the LW up en masse. This pays off, as despite some ferocious defence by the P-47D inbound escorts - the 359th and 56th FG's, with the 56th reaching 141 kills in total by the end of the turn - the bombers get hit hard as the escorts get overwhelmed [sm=00000106.gif]. This is compounded by what looks like a 20-40 minute weather delay of the deep penetration and target-leg escorts, who only catch up with the bombers just before Leipzig instead of after the bombers pass Hamm, as planned. The result is a massive loss of B-17's and Axis interceptors; virtually all the bombers going down are lost due to interceptor attack on the inbound leg. A worrying sign was one BG turning back early under this assault. Bombing results are suprisingly good considering, with Seibel AFAC 99%, although Erla AFAC seems to escape undamaged. Overall 33/565f 148/320b 192e. The 2TAF and 9th AF mediums are timed to support the return leg approaching Rheine, and miss a lot of the action, although the 9th do get a substantive score of LW fighters RTBing on their second interception of the day. Bombing results are again suprisingly good for the mediums - 9th AF 11/225f 2/64b 42e Klockner STEEL 99% and 2TAF 11/407f 1/70b 13e Hoesch STEEL 36%.

BC: 3 Group to Soest for a good raid with Mossie support; no NJG response. 0/263b and 2/23b for the Mossies who lost their casualties to flak at 24,000 feet while the 3 Stirling squadrons escape loss at 16,000 feet... Ludwigshafen RR PR'd at 40% and Mannheim at 19%, which is disappointing, but I have had a few 99% results from the Lanc raids so I can't really complain.

Normally anything better than 1:1 losses (or even 2:1 if Axis losses are high enough and Allied bomber losses low enough) counts as an allied strategic victory in attritional terms. Despite some hefty Axis losses, however (over 70 Zerstorer), Werner's got me closer to the 10% margin than I got him this turn, and worst of all I'm close to 1 strategic bomber loss per Axis fighter lost, which would give him a clear tactical victory. His relatively low attrition rate for LW sortie total, and the correspondingly high B-17 losses, were caused by OKL risking an early interception of major 8th AF raids in full LW strength. This paid off in full due to weather delays to my escorts, but them's the breaks; I think the interceptions were ordered before he could see this, and I put this down to good tactical play on his part - hitting the bombers early and hard - being rewarded by unforeseen circumstances. On balance I'd say this was a draw, although closer to a LW victory than the overall losses would indicate. Curses... [sm=00000643.gif]



wernerpruckner -> RE: AAR swift vs fochinell (9/12/2007 9:36:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: medaloffairness

Oh, great.... [:D][:D][:D]

Then it would be an honor for me to play a campaign with you Swift or one of the three others when the new version is released.

And what do you think about the evasion of fighters after an attaxk and the ability to reflect this in the game?

Best Regards and Servus from Vienna

Christian



schau mal dort hinein:
http://web2.delta442.server4you.de/vb/index.php
ist das forum der gamershall




wernerpruckner -> RE: AAR swift vs fochinell (9/12/2007 9:36:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: von Shagmeister

Sorry Swift, Graz is what I was thinking about


no problem



fochinell -> RE: AAR swift vs fochinell (9/13/2007 11:38:13 AM)

21st December 1943. A: 45/917 (24 aa), X: 10/517 (0 gd). Good ratio for OKL, but it's mostly down to heavy medium bomber losses to flak.

MTO: Mediums strike at Italian industry and get pasted by flak for their pains, plus the loss of some flak cripples to the Stab units lurking in southern Italy. 13/64 A-20C and 14/60 Baltimores. I should be losing some, and suffering more damaged, but this is too much [:(]

More significantly, the 15th AF hit WNF Daimler Motoren AFAC for 100% damage and no resistance until the usual bingo-fuel opportunists on the Adriatic coast exit leg discover the last wave of P-38L escorts do actually have some fuel left to defend themselves and the bombers. 1/240f 2/96b 2e. The main combat centers on the 12th AF P-38H airfield strikes south of Vienna again, with a total of 12/96f 5e. Fine by me, though - Werner can tire his pilots out on the expendable tactical fighters whilst the bombers get through unscathed.

ETO: A rare rest day, caused by the weather and the need to fill out some new 8th AF BG's and two new 9th AF P-47D groups as well as replace the losses of the last week's operations.

BC: 4 Group to Emden-Ems PORT. No NJG resistance, 3/216b and over 190 bombloads in target area for a concentrated raid, even if the Halifaxes don't have the bombload to devastate the target.




Hard Sarge -> RE: AAR swift vs fochinell (9/13/2007 3:22:26 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: fochinell

Would it be fair to interpret from the above, that if one plotted more "historical" style raids that the loss rates would look more historical?

No, IMO playing out 'historical' raids in BTR will give you double the historical casualties, easily. Interceptions tended to be less conclusive in RL, and especially when it involved relatively high-flying, fast and well-defended B-17 formations.



this statement kind of bugs me, while I do not totally disagree, I still think that most of the Game losses are more due to the player, then the system

now this is from

The Strategic Air War against Germany and Japan, by Haywood S. Hansell Jr.

(Co of the 1st Bomb Wing, one of the planners for the AWPD-1. AWPD-42, later Co of the XX Airforce)

phase one, the build up to 800 Heavy Bombers by July of 43, depth of Pen, "Generaly" limited to range of escourt fighters (with exception of Schweinfurt)

phase two, 1192 bombers on hand by Oct of 43, depth of pen, 400 miles from English bases

phase three, 1746 bombers on hand by Jan of 44, depth of pen, 500 miles

phase four, 2702 bombers on hand by June of 44, depth of pen, limited only by range of bombers

and that was the plan, based on the Casablanca Conference

of course, as we know, they wern't able to build up to the plan numbers and didn't follow there own plan that well, even with out the numbers

but so saying, I think most players, will go for the killer target, while the real planners, would be sitting back, saying, naw, not yet, we not ready, and remember, losses on raids to Schweinfurt, or the Big B, were murderous to the planners and they couldn't bring themselfs to replan them again, afterwards, until things were better, in the game, you can take double the losses and say, oh well, I will get them tomorrow




fochinell -> RE: AAR swift vs fochinell (9/13/2007 3:33:27 PM)

No, IMO playing out 'historical' raids in BTR will give you double the historical casualties, easily. Interceptions tended to be less conclusive in RL, and especially when it involved relatively high-flying, fast and well-defended B-17 formations.

this statement kind of bugs me, while I do not totally disagree, I still think that most of the Game losses are more due to the player, then the system

Sorry HS, I stand by it. I've played very conservative games, shallow penetration raids, etc, and the combat losses are significantly higher than they were in RL with higher sortie counts.

but so saying, I think most players, will go for the killer target, while the real planners, would be sitting back, saying, naw, not yet, we not ready, and remember, losses on raids to Schweinfurt, or the Big B, were murderous to the planners and they couldn't bring themselfs to replan them again, afterwards, until things were better, in the game, you can take double the losses and say, oh well, I will get them tomorrow

Try replicating the historical attack on Schweinfurt/Regensburg on the first turn - even with the historical supporting Typhoon strikes and Spitfire escorts for the B-17's you'll count yourself lucky to suffer the historical bomber loss rate. I still think the game modelling is good, and it replicates the trends of historical combat and operations, but it is a lot bloodier than it was historically.




Hard Sarge -> RE: AAR swift vs fochinell (9/13/2007 3:47:32 PM)

yes and no, overall,

it may be or look bloodier, but you still can't get units to do what they did during the war, you are not going to get 100 ground kills with a FG, your not going to have days like the 357th, and most times, a day like the 56th had on the starting turn of the game would be a pretty good one

your not going to have raids like the Kassel raid, were the Sturms found a hole and knocked down almost a whole BG in minutes (only reason we can say almost is it was way oversized) or, what happened just as they got done, and the Mustangs caught them, best guesses are between 50-70 planes were shot out of the skies in less then 5 minutes between the two sides


which as I said, I don't totally disagree, I think there is a reason for the losses, and yes, the first turn is going to be bloody

also, remember in my two wins that were posted about on the old board, I think I am the only Allied player who has won, and took less losses then the LW did (since that time, I have not been able to come anywhere close to finishing a game, with all the old testing and now new testing)

(which will also say, my games were vs the AI and not a human, all bets are off when people are at the controls)





fochinell -> RE: AAR swift vs fochinell (9/15/2007 6:16:18 PM)

22nd December 1943. A: 16/1064 (11 aa), X: 4/39 (0 gd).

MTO: Tactical medium bomber raids on Italian industry.

ETO: Quiet.

BC: 5 Group attack Mannheim for an excellent raid, all bombloads reported in the city area. 1/352b. 0/24 Mossies to Berlin. NI's claim 4 for no losses.

23rd December 1943. A: 26/1167 (12 aa), X: 10/408 (0 gd).

MTO: More medium bomber raids on Italian industry and fighter strikes on RR and PORTs. MAC Mitchells encounter some resistance attacking Turin AFAC from some LW staffels, but losses and claims are low.

ETO: Some escorting Spitfires lost from a Tiffie raid to Ford ARM in Belgium, while the Hurricanes visit Bonnieres VSITE.

BC: 6 Group raid Dresden for a concentrated raid although the NJG are active for once, 5/336b for 6 NI claims.




fochinell -> RE: AAR swift vs fochinell (9/16/2007 3:03:40 PM)

24th December 1943. A: 85/2538 (28aa), X: 19/459 (0 gd). 27 Spit Vb, 16 Spit IX, 9 P-47C plus various smaller losses.

MTO: Tactical fighter strikes, mostly focused on the three active northern Italian AF's, fail miserably, with high fighter losses for a minimal return.

ETO: The 8th AF return with another 1st Bomb Division attack. Three forces of 100 B-17G hit AFACs around Kassel with maximum escort and supporting tactical raids. Primary targets are hit effectively, and there was no resistance to the 8th until some flak-cripple hunting on the coastal exit leg. 11/620f 7/300b 20e for Waldau-Fieseler AFAC 30%, Fieseler AFAC 99% and Altenbauna-Henschel EFAC 100%. The 9th B-26's cover the return leg and hit Deutsche Nickelwerke STEEL for 99%, 0/231f 3/64b 0e. The main action is against a supporting fighter strike to Gladbach covering a 2TAF Mitchell raid on Venlo AF - 0/263f 0/72b 0e for the B-25's and 21/163f for the Spit Vb/IX strike, mostly lost on exiting the coast thanks to some ill-advised strafing of Vlissingen ahead of a swarm of following LW interceptors.

BC: 1 Group follow up the 8th with an excellent raid on Kassel, 2/291b, all bombloads in the city area, but no NJG resistance.




fochinell -> RE: AAR swift vs fochinell (9/20/2007 2:37:47 PM)

25th December 1943. Resting on all fronts and praying to Santa for Spitfire XIVs under the Christmas tree.[sm=innocent0001.gif]

26th December 1943. A: 0/310, X: 0/0. Bad weather turn.

BC: 3 Group to Herne - 0/284b - with Mossie support - 0/23b. No resistance, good bombing reports. 205 Group to Brasov give me my first LGO raid in a while - 4 Halifax IIs totally miss the target.

27th December 1943. A: 13/539 (6aa), X: 0/115.

MTO: 15th AF hit Dunai AFAC for moderate results, poor bombing but no substantial resistance - 0/240f 6/96b 0e. Various raids on Italian industry and RR by the tactical forces.

ETO: A Tiffie strike on Ghent RR goes astray in bad weather.

BC grounded due to weather.





fochinell -> RE: AAR swift vs fochinell (9/21/2007 12:50:46 PM)

28th December 1943. A: 139/3983 (40 aa), X: 89/1670 (0 gd). Major allied losses are 35 B-26B, 32 B-17F and 13 B-24J.

MTO: The 15th AF hit Obertraubling AFAC for 84%. No resistance on the inbound or target legs, with some combat on a seperated BG as the force exits the northern Adriatic coast. 0/302f 13/128b 15e. Two supporting 12th AF P-38H strikes on Zeltweg and Klagenfurt AF's designed to cover the exit route seem to work, for 5/96f 4e, while a MAC Baltimore raid on Split goes out too early and sees no combat. Otherwise the usual fighter and FB strikes on Italian transport and industry.

ETO: The 8th are back in a big way; the largest attack yet. Four forces of 128 B-17F's hit EFACs around the Kassel area. The three raids on Kassel produce excellent results - Wega Henschel EFAC 99%, Henschel Remsfeld EFAC 93%, Waldeck Henschel EFAC 99%, but the raid on BMW Eisenach does no damage. No resistance inbound, but OKL do try a major cripple-hunting on the way back. Combats break out as the force returns over the Ems, but the last leg P-38L escorts inflict some useful losses in the process. Overall 25/718f 32/512b 81e. The same can't be said for the supporting 9th AF raid on Kassel OILS, which does 100% damage, but suffers heavy losses from interception on the way back without the escorts entering a single combat. 1/283f 35/64b 15e. The 2TAF Mitchells hit Dortmund Hoerder STEEL for 42% without interception; 1/393f 2/72b 0e. Otherwise a Tiffie raid on Glacerie VSITE and Hurricanes hit St Pol RR as a ToO after missing another VSITE.

BC: 4 Group to Saarbrucken for what looks like a good raid; 1/216b. A couple of NJG gruppen come up to fight, but only get the one Halifax and lose 5 Ju88 C-6's to intruders over their base. [:)] Mossies return to Berlin to annoy Adolf and keep the populaton up at night; 0/24b. In revenge for their attempt to go down the pub instead of raiding Brasov last time, 205 Group get sent to Budapest. This time they all make it, but while most of the bombing is reported in the city area, it's not concentrated. Time for a long-distance raid on Berlin to shake these guys up, I think. [sm=00000612.gif]



fochinell -> RE: AAR swift vs fochinell (9/22/2007 5:38:02 PM)

29th December 1943. A: 246/2491 (27aa), X: 184/1683 (0 gd). Major losses include15 P-38L, 19 P-47C, 21 P-47D, 10 P-51B, 10 B-26B and 140 B-17G. Losses are heavy on both sides; the LW are over the 10% yardstick but the cost in bombers is too high for the poor bombing results gained; on balance a stalemate which it will take me several turns to recover from. [:(]

MTO: More tactical raids, including a P-47C strike on Bergamo RR which ends up trapped in a strafing cycle of Oria AF - easy meat for the Re2005's plus 8 Flak losses. Gnngh [:@]

ETO: The 8th AF are back, attacking aviation targets around Leipzig with three forces of 100 B-17G each. Werner takes a chance and intercepts them inbound over the North Sea before the P-47D initial escorts arrive before the Dutch coast is crossed. Some B-17 losses here, but nothing too critical. The main fight takes place as the bombers pass south of Hannover, and again when the bombers return over Holland. Bombing results are poor despite about 75% of the bombing forces reaching the targets and bombing the primaries - Erla AFAC esaping damage, Mittel Deutsche EFAC 12% and Junkers EFAC 20%. Bomber losses are heavy, and the escorts perform poorly overall, despite the 357th FG scoring 4 Ju88 C-6a in one pass on a ZG 1 Gruppen. Total losses 39/610f 140/300b 212e. The 9th AF supporting raid on Iserlohn RUBBER does next to no damage, but inflicts some useful casualties covering the southern side of the 8th's exit route for 9/279f 10/64b 79e, while the 2TAF Mitchells hit Ougree-Marihaye STEEL outside Liege for 83% after a minor skirmish en route, 4/266f 0/72b 3e. A Tiffie raid hits Belgian industry again, but more interestingly a low-level 2TAF Mossie strike hits Buchen OILS for 48% while the LW are busy fighting the 8th AF.

BC: 5 Group attack Augsburg for a good but not concentrated raid, with most bombloads in the city area for 2/352b. Mossies hit Berlin in another nuisance raid for 1/24b. A couple of NJG units are active and avoid the intruders for once, with the only WS losses taking place in the day fighting. PR reveals Kassel RR at 34% and Herne at 99% damage.



fochinell -> RE: AAR swift vs fochinell (9/22/2007 10:36:03 PM)

30th December 1943. A: 147/2129 (23 aa), X: 178/1825 (13 gd). 7 Halifax II, 14 P-38L, 12 P-47C, 5 P-47D, 71 B-17F and 15 B-25J. Another day of mayhem, except this time the attritional exchange is on the allied side, with 2 Axis fighters lost for every heavy bomber downed.

MTO: The 15th go for BMW Munchen EFAC, and face heavy opposition for zero damage to the target for once; but the Axis losses are serious when the combat errupts on the final approach to Munich - 12/240f 15/95b 62e. Supporting tactical raids by 12th AF A-20C's and MAC Baltimores are badly timed to cover the 15th AF return leg, coming in too early, but some satisfying minor combats take place, with 40 Sqn SAAF escorting Baltimores to Knin scoring 4 MC.205's. More fighter attacks and sweeps on Lonate Pazolo AF go badly, with another 10 P-47C's lost from one FG.

ETO: The 8th AF are back - again - with a single force of B-17F's attacking Bussing NAG EFAC and doing no damage. The air battle is fierce again, catching me by suprise as I thought Werner would rest his forces this turn. Nevertheless, the 50% escort coverage (2 P-47D, 2 P-51B, 2 P-38L and 1 Mustang III sqn) with added 9th AF P-47 sweeps along the same track giving sufficient force to compensate for the lack of tactical bomber & escort support. NJG and WS units attack on the return leg, but suffer from the attentions of the final escort leg P-38L's. Nevertheless, bomber losses on the return leg are heavy [:@]. 13/289f 71/127b 146e.

BC: 6 Group raid Hannover, with one of the PFF raid leaders missing the city entirely only to be redeemed by the main force crews getting the rest of their bombloads within the city area, although not concentrated. 7/336b. Oboe Mossies hit Krupp STEEL, getting 12 bombloads on target - o/24b. No NJG reaction.





Rebel Yell -> RE: AAR swift vs fochinell (9/23/2007 6:31:12 PM)

I enjoy reading this AAR every day, but I sure hope some balance can be achieved in the new version, despite all the talk of not being able to make combat losses run along historical lines.
It is amazing to see huge losses by the 8th AF, while BC, which was regularly getting hammered by night fighters during this period of the war, take almost no losses on each raid.

Time will tell...



wernerpruckner -> RE: AAR swift vs fochinell (9/23/2007 7:01:20 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rebel Yell

I enjoy reading this AAR every day, but I sure hope some balance can be achieved in the new version, despite all the talk of not being able to make combat losses run along historical lines.
It is amazing to see huge losses by the 8th AF, while BC, which was regularly getting hammered by night fighters during this period of the war, take almost no losses on each raid.

Time will tell...


in this PBEM I more or less ignore his BC raids.....we had other PBEMs with heavy losses, but why should I invest too much time into that this time...he still has a lousy score [:'(][:'(][:'(]



fochinell -> RE: AAR swift vs fochinell (9/24/2007 1:59:30 PM)

is amazing to see huge losses by the 8th AF, while BC, which was regularly getting hammered by night fighters during this period of the war, take almost no losses on each raid.

BC was taking around 5% losses on deep-penetration raids to Germany at this point; bear in mind Werner is ignoring my BC raids half the time and when he does oppose them it's usually with no more than a couple of NJG Gruppen. He could always use more, but he's running scared of high NJG losses for some reason. I'm also using small raids of between 200-350 bombers in relatively compact streams of 120-170 bombers per raid mission plan, and these are much harder for WS and TS to generate intercepts out of in the game. My plan was to minimise BC losses and maximise NJG attrition with regular small-scale RR raids; I need all my replacement pilots for the 8th AF bomber units....

The 8th AF losses are very heavy, but it's worth remembering that Werner is flying over 1,500 sorties on the big battle days, and almost all of these are dedicated to the strategic raids. That's around three times the defensive sortie rate the LW put up against the 1st Schweinfurt raid, and it's not too far out of whack to expect something like three times the losses as a result.




fochinell -> RE: AAR swift vs fochinell (9/24/2007 6:00:42 PM)

31st December 1943. A rest day for the ashen-faced B-17 crews to drown their sorrows and demand to know if anybody has ever completed an operational tour yet...



fochinell -> RE: AAR swift vs fochinell (9/24/2007 6:02:03 PM)

OK, here's some screen-shots for December 1943; first, the losses. Fochinell....[X(]



[image]local://upfiles/18818/B61FA5BAA45A4A52A554809D77BD0D9E.jpg[/image]



fochinell -> RE: AAR swift vs fochinell (9/24/2007 6:02:51 PM)

And now, the Allied aces;



[image]local://upfiles/18818/F8DE75BC9551473699A7FB19D5E01B48.jpg[/image]



fochinell -> RE: AAR swift vs fochinell (9/24/2007 6:07:42 PM)

And here's the unit listing -

In the ETO -

8th AF: 11 B-17G and 17 B-17F Grps plus 9 PFF B-17G dets. Leading unit 351st BG (B-17G) with 54 kills (respect!); 4 P-51B, 4 P-38L and 4 P-47D Groups. Leading units 56th FG (P-47D) with 159 kills, 55th FG with 138 kills and 355th FG with 121 kills (both P-39L); 2 RAF Mustang III sqns, leading unit 19 Sqn with 64 kills.

9th AF: 4 B-26B Groups and 2 B-26G PFF dets. Leading unit 386th BG with 27 kills. 5 P-47D Groups, leading units 354th FG with 57 kills, 358th FG with 55 kills and 362nd FG with 27 kills; three RAF Mustang III sqns, leading unit 66 Sqn with 24 kills.

2nd TAF: 6 sqn B-24D, leading unit 342 Fr Sqn with 18 kills. 5 sqn Mossie FB.VI, 10 sqns Typhoon and 2 sqns Hurri II; 9 sqns Spit Vb, leading unit 610 Sqn with 23 kills; 12 sqn Spit IX leading units 402 RCAF Sqn with 39 kills, 132 Sqn with 31 kills (all on Spit Vb!), 222 Sqn and 485 RNZAF Sqn with 30 kills. 222 and 402 are the 2 squadrons in the Hornchurch wing which now has more than triple the kills of some of the MAC wings with four squadrons of IXs.

FC: 3 sqn Typhoon. 3 Sqn Spit Vb and 1 sqn P-51B (re-equipping), lead unit 501 Sqn with 3 kills

UK NF's: 7 sqn and 3 dets Mossie NF.II, leading units 68 Sqn with 33 kills, 605 and 307 Polish Sqn with 21 kills each; 3 sqn Mossie NF.XII lead unit 141 Sqn with 18 kills; 3 det Mossie FB.VI, lead unit A/25 Sqn with 8 kills.

BC: 2 sqns Stirling III, 16 sqns Halifax II, 7 sqn Halifax III, 27 sqn Lanc I, 9 sqn plus 1 det
Lanc III, 5 sqn Mossie B.IV.

In the MTO -

15th AF: 10 B-24J Groups; 18 P-38L sqns, leading units 95th FS with 57 kills, 307th FS with 43 kills and 97th FS alongside 308th FS on 41 kills.

12th AF: 8 Groups A-20C. Incredibly enough, the 319th BG has 23 kills although I expect it cost them a lot of Bostons to get that score. 4 Groups of P-47D re-equipping and 4 Groups of P-38H. Leading units 33rd FG with 35 kills and 81st FG on 20 kills (both P-38H) with 57th FG on 18 kills (all on P-47C).

Med Air Cmd: 4 sqns B-25D, 4 sqns Baltimore, 19 sqns Spit IX with the Borgo wing leading the way again - leading units 145 Sqn on 19 kills, 601 Sqn with 16 kills and 92 Sqn on 14 kills. 8 sqns of P-40's, with 225 Sqn the only scorers on 2 kills, and 3 sqns of P-39 with no kills.

205 Group: 3 sqn (inc. 1 re-equipping) and one det Halifax II, 4 sqns B-24D.

No NI activity to speak of here.





fochinell -> RE: AAR swift vs fochinell (9/24/2007 6:13:37 PM)

And now, the analysis -

Here's December 1943's monthly total - A: 2,238/50,308 (539 aa), X: 1,503/20,790 (47 gd).

Compared to October 1943 this means an increase in Allied effort (50,300 vs 42,700 or about 18% more sorties) compared to a static level of LW sorties (20,800 in both months). My losses rose to over 2,200 or 4.4% while Werner's rose to 1,500 or 7.2%. AA losses have slightly declined to 24% from 26%, IMO mostly down to a reduction in AF strikes until the LW returned to northern Italy at the end of the month. LW pilot attrition is 970 KIA plus 13 MIA which is almost at my magic 1,000 pilots per month taget, up from 747 and 25 respectively in November. I guess the MIA reduction this month despite the higher losses is down to fewer over-sea combats, possibly from the regular 15th AF missions over the Adriatic no longer encountering regular resistance.

The bad news for me is that the extra 300 aircraft I destroyed this month cost me an extra 200 losses of my own. This becomes particularly significant when you look at the losses by type - the B-17F losses rise from 252 to 416, and B-17G losses from 212 to 383. In total (including B-24J's) my day HB loss is up to almost exactly 900 (excluding 8 B-24D's which are being used as night bombers with 205 Group), which is the limit which I can afford against new production. Even so, I'm losing too many B-17's [:(], although I can balance this by re-equipping one of the 8th AF bomb divisions with the B-24J once the flood of new 15th AF BG's have been filled out.

Overall Allied fighter losses are fairly static, amounting to about 925 against 936 in November; within that Spitfire losses are down slightly (Vb down to 115 from 162, IX up to 99 from 85),Thunderbolt losses are also fairly static (96 vs 105 P-47C, 208 vs 192 P-47D), while the reduction of tactical combat in Italy means the P-38H loss rate has halved (88 vs 166) while the L's have increased slightly (186 vs 150). Mustang losses are creeping up now that the first tranche of units have been re-equipped (35 vs 18 P-51B, 19 vs 9 Mustang III) but aren't significant yet. Of the obsolete types, P-39 losses are up to 14 from zero now it's back in action, while P-40 losses reflect the P-38H dynamic (38 vs 76), almost halving for the second month running (down from 147 in October).

On the medium bomber front, A-20 losses rise (78 vs 42) mostly due to Flak, Marauder losses are static (101 vs 91) and Mitchell losses are halved (43 vs 102). Night bomber losses are also static (77 vs 80, including Lib D's in December). NF losses rise slightly (19 vs 13)

On the Axis side, Bf 109G-6 and Fw 190A losses actually reduce slightly (612 vs 636 and 205 vs 222 respectively)[:@], while Zerstorer losses increase substantially(318 vs 181) [:)], Wild Sau losses increase (32 vs 7) and NJG slightly (86 vs 70). Most of the NJ losses were in the day battles.

SB score is relatively static at 5,550 (vs 5,359) and terror up to 147,264 (vs 130,979); nothing significant to report here - the USAAF is hitting the aviation industry so I expected the SB score only improve marginally, while the medium-sized BC attacks aren't causing substantial urban devastation to increase the TB score dramatically.






Hard Sarge -> RE: AAR swift vs fochinell (9/24/2007 9:24:08 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: fochinell

is amazing to see huge losses by the 8th AF, while BC, which was regularly getting hammered by night fighters during this period of the war, take almost no losses on each raid.

BC was taking around 5% losses on deep-penetration raids to Germany at this point; bear in mind Werner is ignoring my BC raids half the time and when he does oppose them it's usually with no more than a couple of NJG Gruppen. He could always use more, but he's running scared of high NJG losses for some reason. I'm also using small raids of between 200-350 bombers in relatively compact streams of 120-170 bombers per raid mission plan, and these are much harder for WS and TS to generate intercepts out of in the game. My plan was to minimise BC losses and maximise NJG attrition with regular small-scale RR raids; I need all my replacement pilots for the 8th AF bomber units....

Just in case, if I am not reading that end statement wrong, remember, each Nation has its own replacement rates, so the English get so many Pilots per day, as do the Yanks, and the guys from OZ and so on

the biggest thing that can hurt here, is getting a couple of new Squadrons or Groups close togeather, that do not have a lot of "Real" pilots in the data base (some units have many, many pilots, and can have a full listing and then have replacement pilots coming in down the road, where other units, I am lucky to find info on who was in it, beside the CO, the more real pilots I can find and add, the less strain, on the replacement system)


The 8th AF losses are very heavy, but it's worth remembering that Werner is flying over 1,500 sorties on the big battle days, and almost all of these are dedicated to the strategic raids. That's around three times the defensive sortie rate the LW put up against the 1st Schweinfurt raid, and it's not too far out of whack to expect something like three times the losses as a result.






Rebel Yell -> RE: AAR swift vs fochinell (9/24/2007 10:51:00 PM)

Ok, Now I understand that the BC losses are player's choice not to expend much effort on interception.  The 5% losses jibe with what I've read, but I would definitely call a 5% average getting hammered.  BC wouldn't have been able to hang on if they had a complete turnover every 4 and half months.

I can see triple the defense sorties causing more casualties, but coordination of so many interceptors would be greatly influenced by Mr Murphy, and there would be strongly diminishing returns, imho.

It will be great finding out how things will go in the new version.



von Shagmeister -> RE: AAR swift vs fochinell (9/25/2007 11:54:50 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rebel Yell

Ok, Now I understand that the BC losses are player's choice not to expend much effort on interception.  The 5% losses jibe with what I've read, but I would definitely call a 5% average getting hammered.  BC wouldn't have been able to hang on if they had a complete turnover every 4 and half months.

I can see triple the defense sorties causing more casualties, but coordination of so many interceptors would be greatly influenced by Mr Murphy, and there would be strongly diminishing returns, imho.

It will be great finding out how things will go in the new version.


10% was considered to be the point at which ops were unsustainable by the Western Allies Air Forces.

The Luftwaffe fighter control system was extremely sophisicated and was capable of successfully co-ordinating very large forces. It wasn't until Allied (USAAF) fighters started making deep penetrations in numbers that the Luftwaffe fighter defenses became less effective.

Losses of a/c in the new version are still heavy, but I'm very pleased to say that pilot deaths (as a proportion of a/c losses) are at a much more realistic level now, though this isn't much help to the offensive player as a pilot who bales out over enemy territory is still a loss (POW), but it is a great help to the defensive player.



fochinell -> RE: AAR swift vs fochinell (9/25/2007 11:55:50 AM)

The 5% losses jibe with what I've read,

Middlebrook in "The Berlin Raids" quotes a 5.2% loss rate for BC on raids to Germany during the Battle of Berlin period, 20 August - 9 September 1943 and 16 November 1943 to the end of March 1943. In "Bomber Command War Diaries" the loss rate between 3 August and 18 November 1943 is given as 3.5%, all from night operations

but I would definitely call a 5% average getting hammered. BC wouldn't have been able to hang on if they had a complete turnover every 4 and half months.

BC had about 469 night bombers on strength at the beginning of March 1942 and lost 774 aircraft at night between the last week in February and mid- August 1942; that's about 165% of their March front line strength in a little less than six months. Throughout the whole of 1942 BC operated at about a 5% casualty rate.

The scale of the attrition faced by BC even before 1943 is often unappreciated, as is the size of the British Commonwealth effort to sustain and expand BC as a consequence.

I can see triple the defense sorties causing more casualties, but coordination of so many interceptors would be greatly influenced by Mr Murphy, and there would be strongly diminishing returns, imho.

I don't think congestion is modelled in the game, at least judging by what happens in enormously massive air battles or large-scale night raids (1,000+ bombers) which I have tried before.

It will be great finding out how things will go in the new version.

Agreed.



Rebel Yell -> RE: AAR swift vs fochinell (9/25/2007 6:56:49 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: von Shagmeister



10% was considered to be the point at which ops were unsustainable by the Western Allies Air Forces.



What is your source for that?



Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.421875