RE: The early air war (Full Version)

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



Message

HardLuckYetAgain -> RE: The early air war (11/25/2017 10:03:25 PM)

All of these planes manned by Germans? I see IAR-80A and CR.42s in the mix with 109's



Dinglir -> RE: The early air war (11/26/2017 10:19:31 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: morvael

Thinking about using axis elite bonsu for German (until training program collapse in late 1944, could this be tied to Rumanian surrender?) and Finnish air groups, as well as Soviet elite for Guards groups. Plus use formula from land units to slow down excessive growth and decline.


I really LOVE the changes you people are working on. I think they will go a long way towards making the air war more realistic. I hope you will also let Air Group losses cost more experience - is this part of the plan? I also think it is great that you are crashing the Luftwaffe quality late war.

Another idea, you might want to consider is this: On the airfield, make it possible for Air Groups to fly "less than 10", "less than five" and "less than 2" as well as keeping the current options. It would allow to set up an airfield tasked solely with protecting the other bases in the area.

Also, if you could set the U2-VS to be able to fly ONLY at night, I think that would be great. Historically they flew low and slow, and using them during daytime would mean that even the German MG-34 would be quite lethal against them.

As HardLuck and others, I am concerned with the losses that can be inflicted upon airbases through using level bombers to attack them. Reducing that ability seeems to be the right thing to do. However, that leaves the Soviet level bombers with no real purpose during the early war. I have no answer to this, as there is no "logistical bombing" mission hitting trucks, fuel and supplies.

Finally, I would like to hear your opinion on options for reducing the numbers advantage in a dog fight. Currently, I continuously see things like 100 HE-111H bombers winning a dogfight against 10 Yak-1's and similar situations. Is it possible to limit the number of times a fighter or fighterbomber aircraft can be fired upon to two or three, recalling it afterwards (for instance)?

To sum up: I think what you are doing is GREAT, but being the ungrateful B...... that I am, I would like to have more.




tyronec -> RE: The early air war (11/26/2017 11:39:33 AM)

quote:

Plus I'm sure those aren't destroyed by the Russian bombers either. If we can get confirmation of this that would be great.

I cannot tell how they were destroyed, however would concur that it was very probably a night bombing raid (this is my other opponent, the previous set of combats were vs. Grognard who is not using night bombing) and most likely the majority were shot down by bombers or operational losses. There were a few Romanians there as well as the Luftwaffe.

quote:

However, that leaves the Soviet level bombers with no real purpose during the early war. I have no answer to this, as there is no "logistical bombing" mission hitting trucks, fuel and supplies.

I think they are quite useful for ground bombing armor if used in sufficient numbers - they take a lot less losses from AA than the IL2's.



Dinglir -> RE: The early air war (11/26/2017 11:51:40 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tyronec
I think they are quite useful for ground bombing armor if used in sufficient numbers - they take a lot less losses from AA than the IL2's.


I guess it has to do with the way I am using my U-2VS against enemy infantry. Doing that tends to free up a lot of IL-2's to hit German armored units. With the massive production numbers, I am not overly concerned with losses to enemy AA.



tyronec -> RE: The early air war (11/26/2017 8:46:05 PM)

quote:

IMHO stop flying 109's in night missions(set them to day mode) since all the screen shots here are for night bombing(your loses are more than likely caused by night flying in general). Fly the 110's for night missions only (if you fly any night missions at all. May be worth it not to fly night missions or a very few squadrons of 110's to fly nights) & crank the intercept up to 200% minimum or more on the 110's and set percentage to fly ~35-55% at the end of your turn. 42%-45% has been the sweet spot when the planes aren't fatigued (higher the number the less sorties they will fly if the Soviets keep coming) and when they are higher fatigued I drop them down to 35% or lower. I'm sure you already know all of this but give it a try.

You should be able to set up a scenerio to try it out before actually trying it in a live game. Good luck.



This is indeed good advice. I did some testing and as you say the 109s are worse than useless at night, dropping out of the sky faster than they do any damage.
The 110s seem to have a kill ratio of around 6:1 or a little better, against good bombers at night. This is just for shooting each other down, if the bombers get through then they may get a few for each bombing run. See combat results below.

So at night fatigue is not the issue. If Axis use their 110s then the Soviets can probably attrition them down to nothing (only 4 production week), then get free bombing runs and likely do a bit more damage than they should but not a game changer.

IMO the more serious issue is a mass assault on the Luftwaffe at daytime which works because of fatigue build up on the Axis fighters. The screen shots posted on 11/21 are for day bombing.

[image]local://upfiles/52296/A5B78C2DB36C419FB13DB0F47C7405E3.jpg[/image]



Stelteck -> RE: The early air war (11/26/2017 9:13:25 PM)

Is this daylight results as you said ? I'am a little confuse.



Denniss -> RE: The early air war (11/26/2017 9:47:10 PM)

for a heavily mauled raid the first attack seems to successful plus I can't spot the airfield AAA listed as defenders.

This reminds me a bit of a bad tactic used by a russian player in Second Front/War in Russia to get rid of the Bf 110s by setting up raids outside of Bf 109 range but near known Bf 110 bases. Those would intercept the raids but get mauled by single engine soviet a/c.



Stelteck -> RE: The early air war (11/27/2017 6:50:55 AM)

In WITP, which air model may have similarities, a raid can be attacked on the way in to target but also on the way back. So you can get destroyed on the way back while still having bombed the target. It depends of how much the raid was detected early. (With radar helping).



tyronec -> RE: The early air war (11/27/2017 8:49:11 AM)

quote:

quote:

IMHO stop flying 109's in night missions(set them to day mode) since all the screen shots here are for night bombing(your loses are more than likely caused by night flying in general). Fly the 110's for night missions only (if you fly any night missions at all. May be worth it not to fly night missions or a very few squadrons of 110's to fly nights) & crank the intercept up to 200% minimum or more on the 110's and set percentage to fly ~35-55% at the end of your turn. 42%-45% has been the sweet spot when the planes aren't fatigued (higher the number the less sorties they will fly if the Soviets keep coming) and when they are higher fatigued I drop them down to 35% or lower. I'm sure you already know all of this but give it a try.

You should be able to set up a scenerio to try it out before actually trying it in a live game. Good luck.



This is indeed good advice. I did some testing and as you say the 109s are worse than useless at night, dropping out of the sky faster than they do any damage.
The 110s seem to have a kill ratio of around 6:1 or a little better, against good bombers at night. This is just for shooting each other down, if the bombers get through then they may get a few for each bombing run. See combat results below.

So at night fatigue is not the issue. If Axis use their 110s then the Soviets can probably attrition them down to nothing (only 4 production week), then get free bombing runs and likely do a bit more damage than they should but not a game changer.

IMO the more serious issue is a mass assault on the Luftwaffe at daytime which works because of fatigue build up on the Axis fighters. The screen shots posted on 11/21 are for day bombing.




Attachment (1)

These combat results are from night bombing. It is a test scenario, not a real game - hence the lack of AA.
The previous set of results, posted three pages back in this thread, were for day bombing.

quote:

for a heavily mauled raid the first attack seems to successful plus I can't spot the airfield AAA listed as defenders.

I ran quite a few other attacks and the results were similar, air combat between 110s and good Soviet bombers at night had a kill ratio of around 1:6. Given the pool of DB3Bs there should be enough for the Soviets to wipe out the 110s.

[image]local://upfiles/52296/825D0A8880D145539F94ACBEC705A15B.jpg[/image]



HardLuckYetAgain -> RE: The early air war (11/27/2017 12:54:39 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tyronec


quote:

for a heavily mauled raid the first attack seems to successful plus I can't spot the airfield AAA listed as defenders.

I ran quite a few other attacks and the results were similar, air combat between 110s and good Soviet bombers at night had a kill ratio of around 1:6. Given the pool of DB3Bs there should be enough for the Soviets to wipe out the 110s.






Yes, I think ~70-80% of the old bombers should be considered scrap metal/wood and removed from the game. Did the Russians really keep all of these bombers flying in 41? How about the old fighters? I know they would keep some but to the qty that we see in the game?



Crackaces -> RE: The early air war (11/27/2017 2:02:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain


quote:

ORIGINAL: tyronec


quote:

for a heavily mauled raid the first attack seems to successful plus I can't spot the airfield AAA listed as defenders.

I ran quite a few other attacks and the results were similar, air combat between 110s and good Soviet bombers at night had a kill ratio of around 1:6. Given the pool of DB3Bs there should be enough for the Soviets to wipe out the 110s.






Yes, I think ~70-80% of the old bombers should be considered scrap metal/wood and removed from the game. Did the Russians really keep all of these bombers flying in 41? How about the old fighters? I know they would keep some but to the qty that we see in the game?


I just shot down over 200 biplanes Turn #6 .. ;) But I can say if I attacked targets unescorted these same cannon-fodder platforms would shoot down their numbers in bombers ...



Crackaces -> RE: The early air war (11/27/2017 2:07:57 PM)

quote:

In WITP, which air model may have similarities, a raid can be attacked on the way in to target but also on the way back. So you can get destroyed on the way back while still having bombed the target. It depends of how much the raid was detected early. (With radar helping).


WITP is interesting .. you can set very specific ranges and thus set up and avoid "CAP traps"
The interception point is always the target so you can fly over a base chock full of fighters and have the battle many hexes away .. this algorithm works for islands but produces interesting situations over japan as an example .
But there seems to be timing when platforms arrive over the target and intercept happens ...



HardLuckYetAgain -> RE: The early air war (11/27/2017 2:15:22 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces


quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain


quote:

ORIGINAL: tyronec


quote:

for a heavily mauled raid the first attack seems to successful plus I can't spot the airfield AAA listed as defenders.

I ran quite a few other attacks and the results were similar, air combat between 110s and good Soviet bombers at night had a kill ratio of around 1:6. Given the pool of DB3Bs there should be enough for the Soviets to wipe out the 110s.






Yes, I think ~70-80% of the old bombers should be considered scrap metal/wood and removed from the game. Did the Russians really keep all of these bombers flying in 41? How about the old fighters? I know they would keep some but to the qty that we see in the game?


I just shot down over 200 biplanes Turn #6 .. ;) But I can say if I attacked targets unescorted these same cannon-fodder platforms would shoot down their numbers in bombers ...



I'm not advocating unescorted German bomber missions if that is what you are reading into what I wrote ;-). Plus 9 times out of 10 the Germans really doesn't need much ground support in early 41 if you are conducting your ground campaign correctly. The whole point is to use the German Airforce wisely and keep the Soviet Fighter arm with very little experience.



HardLuckYetAgain -> RE: The early air war (11/27/2017 2:19:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

quote:

In WITP, which air model may have similarities, a raid can be attacked on the way in to target but also on the way back. So you can get destroyed on the way back while still having bombed the target. It depends of how much the raid was detected early. (With radar helping).


WITP is interesting .. you can set very specific ranges and thus set up and avoid "CAP traps"
The interception point is always the target so you can fly over a base chock full of fighters and have the battle many hexes away .. this algorithm works for islands but produces interesting situations over japan as an example .
But there seems to be timing when platforms arrive over the target and intercept happens ...



Dinglir is correct in his earlier post that more ranges need to be added to the airbase for smaller ranges. This would help a great deal imho further refining the air war.



Crackaces -> RE: The early air war (11/27/2017 4:14:39 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain


quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces


quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain


quote:

ORIGINAL: tyronec


quote:

for a heavily mauled raid the first attack seems to successful plus I can't spot the airfield AAA listed as defenders.

I ran quite a few other attacks and the results were similar, air combat between 110s and good Soviet bombers at night had a kill ratio of around 1:6. Given the pool of DB3Bs there should be enough for the Soviets to wipe out the 110s.






Yes, I think ~70-80% of the old bombers should be considered scrap metal/wood and removed from the game. Did the Russians really keep all of these bombers flying in 41? How about the old fighters? I know they would keep some but to the qty that we see in the game?


I just shot down over 200 biplanes Turn #6 .. ;) But I can say if I attacked targets unescorted these same cannon-fodder platforms would shoot down their numbers in bombers ...



I'm not advocating unescorted German bomber missions if that is what you are reading into what I wrote ;-). Plus 9 times out of 10 the Germans really doesn't need much ground support in early 41 if you are conducting your ground campaign correctly. The whole point is to use the German Airforce wisely and keep the Soviet Fighter arm with very little experience.


I am not sure with the new patch if the Pelton airpower theory is still true .. airpower is a difference in attacking terrain + forts ..and Russia fort levels will be higher as a whole when engaged ...
also airpower produces disruption that produces fatigue that eventually produces dead Russians ..




HardLuckYetAgain -> RE: The early air war (11/27/2017 4:39:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces


quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain


quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces


quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain


quote:

ORIGINAL: tyronec


quote:

for a heavily mauled raid the first attack seems to successful plus I can't spot the airfield AAA listed as defenders.

I ran quite a few other attacks and the results were similar, air combat between 110s and good Soviet bombers at night had a kill ratio of around 1:6. Given the pool of DB3Bs there should be enough for the Soviets to wipe out the 110s.






Yes, I think ~70-80% of the old bombers should be considered scrap metal/wood and removed from the game. Did the Russians really keep all of these bombers flying in 41? How about the old fighters? I know they would keep some but to the qty that we see in the game?


I just shot down over 200 biplanes Turn #6 .. ;) But I can say if I attacked targets unescorted these same cannon-fodder platforms would shoot down their numbers in bombers ...



I'm not advocating unescorted German bomber missions if that is what you are reading into what I wrote ;-). Plus 9 times out of 10 the Germans really doesn't need much ground support in early 41 if you are conducting your ground campaign correctly. The whole point is to use the German Airforce wisely and keep the Soviet Fighter arm with very little experience.


I am not sure with the new patch if the Pelton airpower theory is still true .. airpower is a difference in attacking terrain + forts ..and Russia fort levels will be higher as a whole when engaged ...
also airpower produces disruption that produces fatigue that eventually produces dead Russians ..




Sorry but I have no idea what point you are making here. I think that you are saying that you need airpower to project German Air might with fighter escort???.....???? Which I am saying but in those two current games the Germans are behind the power curve in the Air in my opinion and needs to re-establish that first before stretching an already overworked fighter arm further.

BTW who is advocating the Pelton airpower theory? (I never read a detailed Strat he ever posted) But I don't believe in the way he handled the airforce because it allowed Soviet Fighters to get experience by shooting down unescorted bombers. Which is extremely bad imho. So I assume you are referencing the flying of unescorted bombers to target.



Telemecus -> RE: The early air war (11/27/2017 4:43:10 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain
BTW who is advocating the Pelton airpower theory? (I never read a detailed Strat he ever posted) But I don't believe in the way he handled the airforce because it allowed Soviet Fighters to get experience by shooting down unescorted bombers. Which is extremely bad imho. So I assume you are referencing the flying of unescorted bombers to target.


Always a bit difficult to be sure what someone meant from what they wrote a long time ago. I always took their point to be to prioritise any saving of lorry use above any air power use. So never move an airbase off rails - which with single stage missions for much of the Axis in 1941 means never (almost) use the air force at all?



HardLuckYetAgain -> RE: The early air war (11/27/2017 4:53:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Telemecus

quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain
BTW who is advocating the Pelton airpower theory? (I never read a detailed Strat he ever posted) But I don't believe in the way he handled the airforce because it allowed Soviet Fighters to get experience by shooting down unescorted bombers. Which is extremely bad imho. So I assume you are referencing the flying of unescorted bombers to target.


Always a bit difficult to be sure what someone meant from what they wrote a long time ago. I always took their point to be to prioritise any saving of lorry use above any air power use. So never more an airbase off rails - which with single stage missions for much of the Axis in 1941 means never (almost) use the air force at all?



Trucks aren't an issue imho. You could be within a good radius and get excellent supply. Which you want to make sure to keep filled with supply. But to write it up made for a very nice quick starting point. Like I said there are a ton of mitigating circumstances that is not the easiest thing to write up in a hurry.



Crackaces -> RE: The early air war (11/27/2017 5:55:08 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Telemecus

quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain
BTW who is advocating the Pelton airpower theory? (I never read a detailed Strat he ever posted) But I don't believe in the way he handled the airforce because it allowed Soviet Fighters to get experience by shooting down unescorted bombers. Which is extremely bad imho. So I assume you are referencing the flying of unescorted bombers to target.


Always a bit difficult to be sure what someone meant from what they wrote a long time ago. I always took their point to be to prioritise any saving of lorry use above any air power use. So never more an airbase off rails - which with single stage missions for much of the Axis in 1941 means never (almost) use the air force at all?



and .. "Air power is not needed anyway to push the Russian back so no need to use it" from his "training manual"
.. His strategy might have produced some results in the past but I might contend that the German airpower is needed more than ever to bust Soviet walls ..but I will wait for more recently patched games to progress



Crackaces -> RE: The early air war (11/27/2017 6:00:46 PM)

quote:

Sorry but I have no idea what point you are making here. I think that you are saying that you need airpower to project German Air might with fighter escort???.....???? Which I am saying but in those two current games the Germans are behind the power curve in the Air in my opinion and needs to re-establish that first before stretching an already overworked fighter arm further.


yes .. and before the most recent patch I think the German could burry the mistake ..just ignore the air (Pelton suggests that air is overrated and not needed to win) however, with the most recent patch the need to project airpower into the battlespace is even greater, and the inability to do so compounds quickly.. becoming apparent as a fortified level 2 and/or 3 wall that can't be busted
I am running into that problem with my game with SparkleyTits ...
so ..

1. You have to smash the Soviet air force turn 1 .. that means being ready to move staging bases deep into the battle space
2. With bases near the rails you project air power into the battle space
3. Then there is the recon and find out where the soviets will intercept and sweep them with fighters that will go away anyway ..
4. Then exhausted with the required to fly exceeded bomb their airbases unescorted ..

Although a picture in my AAR .. the Germans projected fighter cover well into the Leningrad airspace .. the consequences to be shown as soon as we get the turn back ;)



tyronec -> RE: The early air war (11/27/2017 11:10:12 PM)

quote:

@HardLuck: I'm not advocating unescorted German bomber missions if that is what you are reading into what I wrote ;-). Plus 9 times out of 10 the Germans really doesn't need much ground support in early 41 if you are conducting your ground campaign correctly. The whole point is to use the German Airforce wisely and keep the Soviet Fighter arm with very little experience.

A very interesting statement.
I think the Luftwaffe should be available for ground support throughout '41, and to a lesser extent '42. Not everywhere and not all the time, but certainly to start with the Luftwaffe should be dominant. If they are not needed then it is the ground war that needs rebalancing, hopefully over time we will see how that balance is working out with the latest patch in place.

If you are advocating not taking on the Soviet fighter force to keep them with low experience then to what purpose; are you expecting to start ground support bombing later in the game (late '41 or perhaps '42) or do you want to be able to fly more effective CAP later into the game ?
I don't understand why this would work because surely the Soviets can gain experience by flying aggressive tactics throughout '41 and build up experience that way, but perhaps there is something I don't understand about how it works.
And surely if the Axis can't provide good ground support for the first half of '41 what chance have they got later in the game when the Soviets can deploy greatly increasing numbers of air craft ?
Am assuming in all the above that the Soviets will use best aggressive tactics to fatigue Axis fighters and bomb airbases in an effective manner.

In any case, I think it is wrong that air groups can gain experience from being shot down in large numbers. Of course if Axis heavily fatigue their fighters and the Soviets get some easy air-to-air kills then fair enough, experience gain is appropriate.



HardLuckYetAgain -> RE: The early air war (11/28/2017 12:53:43 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tyronec

quote:

@HardLuck: I'm not advocating unescorted German bomber missions if that is what you are reading into what I wrote ;-). Plus 9 times out of 10 the Germans really doesn't need much ground support in early 41 if you are conducting your ground campaign correctly. The whole point is to use the German Airforce wisely and keep the Soviet Fighter arm with very little experience.

A very interesting statement.
I think the Luftwaffe should be available for ground support throughout '41, and to a lesser extent '42. Not everywhere and not all the time, but certainly to start with the Luftwaffe should be dominant. If they are not needed then it is the ground war that needs rebalancing, hopefully over time we will see how that balance is working out with the latest patch in place.

If you are advocating not taking on the Soviet fighter force to keep them with low experience then to what purpose; are you expecting to start ground support bombing later in the game (late '41 or perhaps '42) or do you want to be able to fly more effective CAP later into the game ?
I don't understand why this would work because surely the Soviets can gain experience by flying aggressive tactics throughout '41 and build up experience that way, but perhaps there is something I don't understand about how it works.
And surely if the Axis can't provide good ground support for the first half of '41 what chance have they got later in the game when the Soviets can deploy greatly increasing numbers of air craft ?
Am assuming in all the above that the Soviets will use best aggressive tactics to fatigue Axis fighters and bomb airbases in an effective manner.

In any case, I think it is wrong that air groups can gain experience from being shot down in large numbers. Of course if Axis heavily fatigue their fighters and the Soviets get some easy air-to-air kills then fair enough, experience gain is appropriate.




I'm horrible at explaining myself & not always easy to get my point across so I'm sorry for that. The writeup I did in your AAR was what I would do to gain a "German" advantage in my own mind if I were to take over at that spot. Thus too many people are making an interpretation that my strategy is X and hard coded when it really isn't. I'm a fluid player adapting on the go, you have to or you will get your azz handed to you. That writeup was just to get you where I would want to be with what resources where if I had to take over. Since I normally have those resources put into place during the first few turns it is an even workflow with little interruption to meet the Soviets head on for me in a game you are facing.

Yes, the Germans is the dominant Air Force in 41, yes they can bomb with escort, yes they will go after the Soviet fighter airforce. How you do it really depends on the player you are playing but the tune to the music is almost the same but what instrument you use to achieve the song is what is key. Can I explain every eventuality you will meet? No, nor do I have time to do so. But I can tell you that I'm not the "super" aggressive German Air player in the opening 10 turns. I want to keep the integrity of my fighter force intact and will limit any mission that inhibits that. If done correctly with the right instrument the German Airforce can inflict heavy casualties while limiting Soviet Experience. That is why people won't be seeing me fly a multitude of CAP sorties or a multitude of Airfield sorties since those fighters are for the Soviet bombers that "will" come to take out the German fighters. When I as a German have the Advantage (and the experience from shooting down all those bombers) you turn the table around and go after the Soviets. You are bidding your time for the pounce.

Again, maybe I'm just wrong and the Soviet Airforce is just too strong for the Germans Airforce. Makes me want to play the Germans again to find out......






Crackaces -> RE: The early air war (11/28/2017 1:35:57 PM)

quote:

Again, maybe I'm just wrong and the Soviet Airforce is just too strong for the Germans Airforce. Makes me want to play the Germans again to find out......


It depends ...
Me vs. SparkleyTits I try and bomb Il-4's deep into the battlespace turn #1 .. The Germans run quickly into the 33% rule (The first 33% of air miles are measured against potential airbase bombing .. I use the 33% up and no more airbase bombing) I got about 1900 selected platforms.. the 'right ones' but not enough .. Now ST has total domination on Turn 4 and as we go later
The 8MP team has demonstrated in their AAR how under even the latest rules it is quite possible to destroy the Soviet air force and dominate the skies

Somewhere between I suspect are many players. I might contend that a newbie like myself who experienced #1 and not understand how it happened would be of the ilk "The game is so borked .. the German air force is nerfed!" (Well how the Germans are restricted from completely wiping out the Soviet air force turn #1 is kind of borked IMHO I would design things differently .. to achieve the same result but not as many unintended consequences .. that is me) vs. the player experiencing situation #2 might exclaim quite the opposite.
Thus before I start going doing historical simulation vs. fair war game debate I believe a more open discussion of game mechanics focusing on WAD intended consequences, WAD with acceptable unintended consequences, and WAD unacceptable unintended consequences TO&E, OOB, or rules changes needed to modify game behavior. (Does not work as designed is self explanatory)

Just my .02



M60A3TTS -> RE: The early air war (11/30/2017 12:01:45 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain


quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

quote:

In WITP, which air model may have similarities, a raid can be attacked on the way in to target but also on the way back. So you can get destroyed on the way back while still having bombed the target. It depends of how much the raid was detected early. (With radar helping).


WITP is interesting .. you can set very specific ranges and thus set up and avoid "CAP traps"
The interception point is always the target so you can fly over a base chock full of fighters and have the battle many hexes away .. this algorithm works for islands but produces interesting situations over japan as an example .
But there seems to be timing when platforms arrive over the target and intercept happens ...



Dinglir is correct in his earlier post that more ranges need to be added to the airbase for smaller ranges. This would help a great deal imho further refining the air war.


I second or third this.



M60A3TTS -> RE: The early air war (11/30/2017 12:07:04 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain


quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces


quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain


quote:

ORIGINAL: tyronec


quote:

for a heavily mauled raid the first attack seems to successful plus I can't spot the airfield AAA listed as defenders.

I ran quite a few other attacks and the results were similar, air combat between 110s and good Soviet bombers at night had a kill ratio of around 1:6. Given the pool of DB3Bs there should be enough for the Soviets to wipe out the 110s.






Yes, I think ~70-80% of the old bombers should be considered scrap metal/wood and removed from the game. Did the Russians really keep all of these bombers flying in 41? How about the old fighters? I know they would keep some but to the qty that we see in the game?


I just shot down over 200 biplanes Turn #6 .. ;) But I can say if I attacked targets unescorted these same cannon-fodder platforms would shoot down their numbers in bombers ...



I'm not advocating unescorted German bomber missions if that is what you are reading into what I wrote ;-). Plus 9 times out of 10 the Germans really doesn't need much ground support in early 41 if you are conducting your ground campaign correctly. The whole point is to use the German Airforce wisely and keep the Soviet Fighter arm with very little experience.


Here's one way to use the German air force wisely. Spam so much recon that the Soviet fighter pilots, exhausted from chasing recon planes, can't get out of their bunks when the Heinkels show up to blast their airfield.

[image]https://i.imgur.com/haB669H.jpg[/image]



Crackaces -> RE: The early air war (11/30/2017 12:39:49 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS


quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain


quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces


quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain


quote:

ORIGINAL: tyronec


quote:

for a heavily mauled raid the first attack seems to successful plus I can't spot the airfield AAA listed as defenders.

I ran quite a few other attacks and the results were similar, air combat between 110s and good Soviet bombers at night had a kill ratio of around 1:6. Given the pool of DB3Bs there should be enough for the Soviets to wipe out the 110s.






Yes, I think ~70-80% of the old bombers should be considered scrap metal/wood and removed from the game. Did the Russians really keep all of these bombers flying in 41? How about the old fighters? I know they would keep some but to the qty that we see in the game?


I just shot down over 200 biplanes Turn #6 .. ;) But I can say if I attacked targets unescorted these same cannon-fodder platforms would shoot down their numbers in bombers ...



I'm not advocating unescorted German bomber missions if that is what you are reading into what I wrote ;-). Plus 9 times out of 10 the Germans really doesn't need much ground support in early 41 if you are conducting your ground campaign correctly. The whole point is to use the German Airforce wisely and keep the Soviet Fighter arm with very little experience.


Here's one way to use the German air force wisely. Spam so much recon that the Soviet fighter pilots, exhausted from chasing recon planes, can't get out of their bunks when the Heinkels show up to blast their airfield.

[image]https://i.imgur.com/haB669H.jpg[/image]


I am for changing the algorithm that given an area recon + some threshold means each mission after that has a logarithmic increase in interception
The Christmas bombings in Vietnam Phase I .. by the third day same routes same altitudes and B-52's were being shot down in droves .. made them think twice about phase II of Linebacker II

I would suppose that if Germans were intercepted at the same rate they would reconsider the strategy of RECON spamming ..and I am guilty as charged in the 2x3 game ...;)



Telemecus -> RE: The early air war (11/30/2017 12:57:52 PM)

Perhaps more specifically it is the interception kill rate rather than interception per se that you want to alter.

Would not an easier thing be to just have a recon interception off in air doctrine? It is simply the converse of recon escort off.

Incursions by a few fast light recon aircraft were never treated the same way by airforces as large agglomerations of bombers with or without escorts.



Crackaces -> RE: The early air war (11/30/2017 1:05:52 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Telemecus

Perhaps more specifically it is the interception kill rate rather than interception per se that you want to alter.

Would not an easier thing be to just have a recon interception off in air doctrine? It is simply the converse of recon escort off.

Incursions by a few fast light recon aircraft were never treated the same way by airforces as large agglomerations of bombers with or without escorts.


The other possibility is the 2 hex rule .. so recon the same hex twice like you can only bomb a hex twice .. no historical reference or simulation argument there .. just an extension of an already established rule



tyronec -> RE: The early air war (11/30/2017 1:13:22 PM)

quote:

Perhaps more specifically it is the interception kill rate rather than interception per se that you want to alter.

Would not an easier thing be to just have a recon interception off in air doctrine? It is simply the converse of recon escort off.

Incursions by a few fast light recon aircraft were never treated the same way by airforces as large agglomerations of bombers with or without escorts.


I think the system already does this to some extent - less fighters are sent to intercept recon. It is an annoying issue, not good for the game if someone can gain an advantage by conduct lots and lots and lots of recon, which no one really wants to do.

The root cause of this problem is fighter interception fatigue. Fix that and the problem disappears.



HardLuckYetAgain -> RE: The early air war (11/30/2017 1:38:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS


quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain


quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces


quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain


quote:

ORIGINAL: tyronec


quote:

for a heavily mauled raid the first attack seems to successful plus I can't spot the airfield AAA listed as defenders.

I ran quite a few other attacks and the results were similar, air combat between 110s and good Soviet bombers at night had a kill ratio of around 1:6. Given the pool of DB3Bs there should be enough for the Soviets to wipe out the 110s.






Yes, I think ~70-80% of the old bombers should be considered scrap metal/wood and removed from the game. Did the Russians really keep all of these bombers flying in 41? How about the old fighters? I know they would keep some but to the qty that we see in the game?


I just shot down over 200 biplanes Turn #6 .. ;) But I can say if I attacked targets unescorted these same cannon-fodder platforms would shoot down their numbers in bombers ...



I'm not advocating unescorted German bomber missions if that is what you are reading into what I wrote ;-). Plus 9 times out of 10 the Germans really doesn't need much ground support in early 41 if you are conducting your ground campaign correctly. The whole point is to use the German Airforce wisely and keep the Soviet Fighter arm with very little experience.


Here's one way to use the German air force wisely. Spam so much recon that the Soviet fighter pilots, exhausted from chasing recon planes, can't get out of their bunks when the Heinkels show up to blast their airfield.

[image]https://i.imgur.com/haB669H.jpg[/image]


Recon interception doesn't provide a tremendous about of fatigue compared to other forms of interception since only a few fighters are intercepting instead of a multitude. This can be delimited by setting your offset in Air settings for interception during the opposing players turn. So yes it is a contributor but not on the level that is being made out to be imho.



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

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.0625