new things about 1.04.10 patch beta

new things about 1.04.10 patch beta (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series

Message

kevini1000 -> new things about 1.04.10 patch beta (4/21/2011 3:07:53 PM)
The first thing I notice was that the 1 Russian airfield just west of Leningrad and the 2 airfields just to the South east of Smolensk were now out of range. When hitting airfields it seemed as though I could only strike airfields with about 50 bombers per hit even when I assigned everyone. Sath

Joel Billings -> RE: new things about 1.04.10 patch beta (4/21/2011 6:29:41 PM)
Probably has to do with the change that makes mixing of aircraft from different organizations no longer allowed (item 3 on the readme). This has major consequences regarding the use of staging bases as well as reducing the ability to concentrate massive amounts of airpower in any particular raid.

carnifex -> RE: new things about 1.04.10 patch beta (4/21/2011 7:19:56 PM)
Hopefully this change will still allow the German player to achieve at least the 4000 historical kills the first turn.

wac29 -> RE: new things about 1.04.10 patch beta (4/21/2011 7:40:50 PM)
I got a little over 5100 on a newly started game

Helpless -> RE: new things about 1.04.10 patch beta (4/21/2011 7:48:11 PM)
quote: at least the 4000 historical kills the first turn This is not historical, but still possible.

kevini1000 -> RE: new things about 1.04.10 patch beta (4/21/2011 8:17:16 PM)
How many planes did the Germans gett historically and how many did they really loose doing it. I could see where numbers could greatly varry depending on how you did the game or what time frame your looking at. Sath

marty_01 -> RE: new things about 1.04.10 patch beta (4/21/2011 8:48:57 PM)
From Glantz "Clash of Titans" page 49: quote: "...to hit 66 Soviet airfields in the forward areas. The Red Air Force lost over 1,200 aircraft in the first morning of the war. Throught the next few days, the Luftwaffe had undisputed air supremacy, and all Soviet Troop and rail movements received relentless attention" Glantz footnotes the above as: Van Hardesty, "Red Pheonix: The Rise of Soviet Airpower, 1941-1945" Apparently there is some controversy over some of the research conducted by Van Hardesty...so take the above with a grain...

marty_01 -> RE: new things about 1.04.10 patch beta (4/21/2011 9:25:44 PM)
Within "Stumbling Colossus" (see pages 194 to 203) Glantz described air losses suffered within the Western Military District. These are apparently the losses described by the Western Front Air Force Commander Lt. General of Aviation N.F. Naumenko in a report dated 31 December 1941: quote: "On 22.6.41 at our airfields and in the air, the enemy destroyed 538 of our aircraft at a cost of 143 aircraft lost by the enemy. On the following day, the losses of the two sides were 125 and 124, respectively, and by the end of June, that is after eight days of war, our losses totaled 1,163 aircraft and enemy losses were 422." glantz follows the section on the Western Front Airforce with snippets from a report by Lt General of Aviation F.A. Astakhov who disscussed losses suffered by the Southwestern Front during the opening phase of the war -- report dated 21 August 1941. quote: "As a result, from 22 through 24 June, the Germans destroyed 237 Soviet aircraft on the overly vulnerable airfields. Faulty equipment and poor training led to the loss of another 242 aircraft due to accidents during the period from 22 June through 10 August which constituted 13 percent of the total aircraft losses (1861 planes) during this period" So according to the F.A. Astakhov Report the total Soviet air losses from 22 Jun to 10 August were 1861 Aircraft. Or at least that's how I am reading this section from Glantz.

kevini1000 -> RE: new things about 1.04.10 patch beta (4/21/2011 9:45:31 PM)
I would almost bet that the Russian's are underplaying there losses. They actually seem light. The main thing is in WITE do we see a disruption of Soviet troop and rail movement and I almost have to say no. You see some interdiction of troop movement but almost no rail disruption unless that is built into the game. Can a unit moving by rail be interdicted. I played 5 or 6 turns as the Russian and I don't remember it ever happening. I was railing stuff everywhere and upto the front. Sath

randallw -> RE: new things about 1.04.10 patch beta (4/21/2011 11:35:39 PM)
As said before, the chance of interdiction partially depends on detection level; ground units being railed to the front may not even be detected by the enemy, if they begin way in the rear, and may not be detected until they are adjacent to the enemy ( after detraining and moving of course ).

marty_01 -> RE: new things about 1.04.10 patch beta (4/22/2011 12:09:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sath I would almost bet that the Russian's are underplaying there losses. They actually seem light. Maybe. But you asked so one assumes from your question that you had nothing to go on. So on what basis do you think the loses are under-reported?

kevini1000 -> RE: new things about 1.04.10 patch beta (4/22/2011 12:39:04 AM)
My reasoning is that as a commander if I reported higher losses even if acurrate then I might end up being arrested and executed or worse. For this reason I might fudge the numbers to be a little lower. Sath

runyan99 -> RE: new things about 1.04.10 patch beta (4/22/2011 1:04:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: randallw As said before, the chance of interdiction partially depends on detection level; ground units being railed to the front may not even be detected by the enemy, if they begin way in the rear, and may not be detected until they are adjacent to the enemy ( after detraining and moving of course ). Of course, in real life the above is exactly what does NOT happen when moving by rail against an enemy with air superiority. The trains get spotted by Jabos and shot up in route. It needs addressed.

Mynok -> RE: new things about 1.04.10 patch beta (4/22/2011 1:59:29 AM)
Played through the first turn of GC41 a couple times last night. Has something changed about port bombing? I cannot seem to get Kuressare down? 19% and still blocking sea transport to Riga?

Joel Billings -> RE: new things about 1.04.10 patch beta (4/22/2011 2:41:12 AM)
There were some changes to the city bombing routines, but the readme lists an increase, not decrease in damage. Are you bombing it with the same number of bombers (other changes tend to make it harder to concentrate air). There are turn 1 (or turn 1 and 2) movement and rail capacity restrictions on the Soviets.

JAMiAM -> RE: new things about 1.04.10 patch beta (4/22/2011 3:07:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mynok Played through the first turn of GC41 a couple times last night. Has something changed about port bombing? I cannot seem to get Kuressare down? 19% and still blocking sea transport to Riga? Are you clicking directly on Riga to make the move? I was able to move into Riga with Kuressare having only 1% damage in my game. Have you taken both Ventspils and Liepaja? There was a change in 1.04 regarding the FOW at sea, so are you sure that you're not just misinterpreting the tile coloration?

kevini1000 -> RE: new things about 1.04.10 patch beta (4/22/2011 3:14:58 AM)
Do units gain no moral when they win a battle now? I'm still waiting to see a unit gain a moral point with a victory.

Sabre21 -> RE: new things about 1.04.10 patch beta (4/22/2011 3:29:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JAMiAM quote: ORIGINAL: Mynok Played through the first turn of GC41 a couple times last night. Has something changed about port bombing? I cannot seem to get Kuressare down? 19% and still blocking sea transport to Riga? Are you clicking directly on Riga to make the move? I was able to move into Riga with Kuressare having only 1% damage in my game. Have you taken both Ventspils and Liepaja? There was a change in 1.04 regarding the FOW at sea, so are you sure that you're not just misinterpreting the tile coloration? I just checked too. I can still move into Riga after bombing that port.

Mynok -> RE: new things about 1.04.10 patch beta (4/22/2011 3:32:15 AM)
Yikes. Yes, I took the small ports on the coast of Latvia. I'm not even looking at tile coloration, just hitting F3 and selecting my unit in Konigsberg. When I right click on Riga...nothing happens. I'm trying again.

Mynok -> RE: new things about 1.04.10 patch beta (4/22/2011 4:43:31 AM)
Ah...it's about land MPs left. My SEC divs can get to Riga fine. L corps cannot. That's who I was trying to get there.

PeeDeeAitch -> RE: new things about 1.04.10 patch beta (4/22/2011 4:59:36 AM)
I always use the divisions at (and next to) Memel.

randallw -> RE: new things about 1.04.10 patch beta (4/22/2011 8:08:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: runyan99 quote: ORIGINAL: randallw As said before, the chance of interdiction partially depends on detection level; ground units being railed to the front may not even be detected by the enemy, if they begin way in the rear, and may not be detected until they are adjacent to the enemy ( after detraining and moving of course ). Of course, in real life the above is exactly what does NOT happen when moving by rail against an enemy with air superiority. The trains get spotted by Jabos and shot up in route. It needs addressed. The game is turn based, which creates side effects. As one side takes it's turn the other side's recon aircraft are not flying, so real life spotting rules don't quite apply here.

Rafo35 -> RE: new things about 1.04.10 patch beta (4/22/2011 12:59:53 PM)
As far as air interdiction goes, one should not confuse 1944 around Normandy and the east front in 41. To begin with, the Luftwaffe only had a few dozens of fighters bombers and the other kinds of planes had something else to do. Interdicting train traffic on a large scale was something of the future (and quite localised).

carnifex -> RE: new things about 1.04.10 patch beta (4/22/2011 4:36:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Helpless quote: at least the 4000 historical kills the first turn This is not historical, but still possible. I'm relying on Christer Bergstrom and "Barbarossa - The Air Battle: July-December 1941" where the Russian historian Viktor Kulikov claims close to 4000 machines destroyed in the first three days. What number of airframes do you think the Lufwaffe destroyed in the first week?

Helpless -> RE: new things about 1.04.10 patch beta (4/22/2011 6:45:03 PM)
There are a lot of different numbers available with different level of precision. For example most suffered Western MD/Front losses from airfield airstrikes: 22 June - 528, 23 - 63 24-30 - 97 (ЦАМО РФ, ф.208, оп. 2589, д.91, л.102). ~600 planes in first 3 days. If all other fronts would suffer the same amount of losses from airfield attacks you still won't have 4K. Of cause total losses were still horrific, but most of them were due to the airfield attacks only on June 22. I found such numbers from various sources of total air Soviet aircraft losses in June 1941: NW - 921 4 days WF - 538+623=1100 22-30 9 days SW - 918 22-30 9 days S - 354 22-30 9 days ~3300 for all active fronts in 4-9 days. Again, most of the losses happened on June 22 ~1160 machines out of which 800 were destroyed on the airfields. Now it is possible to make 6K on turn 1 (4 days) just with bombing airfields.

Mehring -> RE: new things about 1.04.10 patch beta (4/22/2011 7:13:33 PM)
Interesting statistics. I've found that in 1.03, 5500+ aircraft are easily destroyable playing axis. Playing the other side, however, and losing only 3-4000 planes I find that by spending a bit of time and effort (an improved UI could greatly reduce the necessary time), within a few months the Russian airforce can be molded into a very effective force capable of achieving air superiority in any sector of its choice, probably far more effective than it was historically. The basic tactic I've used is to concentrate force and repeatedly bomb Axis fighter fields until nothing more is fit to fly. The escorts get mangled, sure, but the bombers get through and you only need 40-60 bombers to get through 2 or 3 times and the field's a mess and subsequent waves of bombers may not even need escorts. Counter tactics may include dispersing the fighters among many bases, but I've not been stopped yet. With so many Russian aircraft, more it seems with the new patch, surely the effectiveness of those aircraft needs reducing? I'm curious to see how the new airstrike fragmentation will impact on this.

heliodorus04 -> RE: new things about 1.04.10 patch beta (4/22/2011 7:19:02 PM)
From my Soviet GC perspective regarding Aircraft - you don't need to fly so many missions and get the 5K figure, I don't think. Kill the SB2s, and all the Mig-3s, Yakks, and Laggs that you can get your cannons on. Then prioritize any I-16s. Last, go for IL-2s, IL-4s and other bombers. Every biplane you kill is actually doing me a favor, at least in a GC (different for scenarios where you get points for any AC kills).

Mehring -> RE: new things about 1.04.10 patch beta (4/22/2011 7:27:23 PM)
I do a lot of damage with biplanes, don't mock them, and the IL4 is an awesome bomber. Destroy the 'crap' units and you also damage experience and morale, making them ineffective combat units for longer. The Germans need to destroy the whole lot in my view.

heliodorus04 -> RE: new things about 1.04.10 patch beta (4/22/2011 7:38:13 PM)
The IL-4 is, in my view, mostly useful for partisan resupply, where its range can be used from safe airbases far from the line. Problem is you'll get very little escort, and your IL-4s get torn up. I rotate a lot of the DB-3Bs and a couple other medium level-bombers on VVS bases too, but mostly it's what IL-4s do. And I fly divisional resupply with them from time to time. They just get shot to hell so easily by any interceptor. Thus, the low priority for the German. The German mainly needs to focus on the aircraft that can harm HIM early, so any of the good Soviet Fighter-Bombers (I-16, Mig-3, Yakk, Lagg) and the bombers that can defend themselves well (SB-2s first, IL-2s second, etc.). Bi-planes are actually quite good in and around Leningrad, and I think that's a good spot for them. But they're never going to do 'well' against Bf-109Fs and I'd rather hold on to the well-trained pilots (the bi-planes do have good experience and morale) than risk them getting shot down to far superior aircraft. One of the odd things in my GC'41 is how long it's taking units in NR to repair aircraft. The larger air units by size (40+ aircraft) are taking forever to repair/replace. And that's a fair number of IL-4s among that set. Having played the German side, I just don't see the bi-planes as particularly useful against anything but Romanian and Finnish air forces, and while that's useful, you have far more bi-planes than you need to fight those groups.

marty_01 -> RE: new things about 1.04.10 patch beta (4/22/2011 7:55:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Helpless There are a lot of different numbers available with different level of precision. For example most suffered Western MD/Front losses from airfield airstrikes: 22 June - 528, 23 - 63 24-30 - 97 (�� , �.208, ��. 2589, �.91, �.102). ~600 planes in first 3 days. If all other fronts would suffer the same amount of losses from airfield attacks you still won't have 4K. Of cause total losses were still horrific, but most of them were due to the airfield attacks only on June 22. I found such numbers from various sources of total air Soviet aircraft losses in June 1941: NW - 921 4 days WF - 538+623=1100 22-30 9 days SW - 918 22-30 9 days S - 354 22-30 9 days ~3300 for all active fronts in 4-9 days. Again, most of the losses happened on June 22 ~1160 machines out of which 800 were destroyed on the airfields. Now it is possible to make 6K on turn 1 (4 days) just with bombing airfields. There are indeed numerous numbers from a variety of sources. More from Glantz. These are losses he cites for the Western Military District\Western Front for the first 18-day of Barbarossa. From �Barbarossa Derailed�, Pages 32 & 33: quote: In eighteen days of combat, Bock�s Army Group Center advanced 600 kilometers to the approaches to the western Dvina and Dnepr Rivers, occupied all Belorussia, and inflicted 417,790 casulties on the Western Front, including 341,073 soldiers killed, captured, or missing. In addition, the Western Front lost 4,799 tanks, many of which simply ran of of fuel, 9,427 guns and mortars, and 1,777 combat aircraft, most of these destroyed at their airfields on the ground. In essence, at least along the Western Strategic axis, Army Group Centers�s powerful juggernaut fulfilled the mission assigned to it by the Barbarossa Plan by utterly shattering and destroying much of the Red Army�s first strategic echelon west of the Divina and Dnepr Rivers. In accordance with Plan Barbarossa�s preeminent assumption, Hitler and most of the German High Command considered the war was won. Glantz Footnotes this with: quote: 41: Zolotarev, VOV 147. During this period, 24 Divisions of Pavlov�s initial force of 44 Divisions perished entirely, and the other 20 lost from 30 to 90 percent of their personnel. I assume by �perished entirely�, Zolotarev is mistranslated, and that �entirely perished� refers to everyone in these formations were either captured, missing, wounded, or KIA. I can�t tell from the footnote if Zolotarev is the source for the aircraft destroyed figure for the Western Front during it�s first 18-days of combat.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.859375