Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Question for the players

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> WarPlan >> AAR >> RE: Question for the players Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Question for the players - 11/3/2019 6:05:16 AM   
Essro

 

Posts: 117
Joined: 11/19/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

As promised some pics. First this one. The western front 21 June 1940. I just wiped out a Pz Corp. Not only do I have all these guys in France I have a boatload in the UK and Egypt. Maybe another 20 odd Commonwealth divisions. I honestly have doubts he will get France in 1940. This PBEM.





this looks painful. Keep us posted.

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 31
RE: Question for the players - 11/3/2019 6:08:36 AM   
Essro

 

Posts: 117
Joined: 11/19/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cohen_slith

I see a Strategical Unit here as four engine bombers - which I do not believe UK had in adequate numbers in '39. They had a mix of Blenheims, Whitleys, Hampden, and the like, that I'd class as medium bomber at least.
To add them to the production queue or bind them to the fall of France, is something that would do good to the game.


I think you are correct. I made my comment thinking the Stirlings were operational but as soon as I posted it, I started to second guess.

(in reply to Cohen_slith)
Post #: 32
RE: Question for the players - 11/3/2019 6:34:52 AM   
Jim D Burns


Posts: 3953
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Salida, CA.
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Cohen_slith
I see a Strategical Unit here as four engine bombers - which I do not believe UK had in adequate numbers in '39.


Not true, look at bomber 3, they had quite a few Wellingtons in Sep 39. Probably enough to justify 2 units in game.

http://www.niehorster.org/017_britain/39_raf/_raf.html

I count 19 squadrons in bomber 3 of Wellingtons. That's 6-18 planes per squadron and production would be adding more all the time as it was a modern new aircraft currently in the production cycle.

Edit: Oops, one of the squadrons was in New Zealand, so only 18 not 19 were in England sorry. That's still quite a powerful force of 4 engine planes at the very start of war.

Jim



< Message edited by Jim D Burns -- 11/3/2019 6:55:38 AM >

(in reply to Essro)
Post #: 33
RE: Question for the players - 11/3/2019 2:49:19 PM   
Essro

 

Posts: 117
Joined: 11/19/2007
Status: offline
Jim's right.

And I forgot about the Wellingtons as well (I need to stop posting late at night--I forget things I know lol). Although a 2 engine bomber it certainly counts as a strat bomber.

But in any case, we have deviated significantly from the original question of rail capacity.

For the record, I think the at start German rail is fine--but would be curious to the methodology used to attain its current value. But I would not be opposed to reducing it by X amount until some event or specific date--Polish collapse or a date to be determined.


side note: isn't the Stirling a great aircraft? It looks an airplane a 5 year old might draw. It's always made me smile.




< Message edited by Essro -- 11/3/2019 2:54:24 PM >

(in reply to Jim D Burns)
Post #: 34
RE: Question for the players - 11/3/2019 4:42:21 PM   
Cohen_slith

 

Posts: 2117
Joined: 10/5/2010
From: Italy
Status: offline
Point is that right now the game seems quite Pro-Allies (Unless you play the '40 Scenario - different tale there for France, but the Allies did not had X turns to produce stuff in the while).

So if the Sitzkrieg is forcefully enacted as it seems the way it will go - less rail moves, harder combat in bad weather, etc, these screenies will be the May'40 truth for everyone.
Who will want to play Axis at that stage, and play WW1 slog?

(in reply to Essro)
Post #: 35
RE: Question for the players - 11/3/2019 8:45:20 PM   
Michael T


Posts: 4023
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: online
Who needs Lancaster's when our Wellingtons and Stirling's can do this?

I guess we should nerf the Germans, that will help.






Attachment (1)

_____________________________

'Deus le Volt!'
------------------

(in reply to Cohen_slith)
Post #: 36
RE: Question for the players - 11/3/2019 8:46:31 PM   
Michael T


Posts: 4023
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: online
More.






Attachment (1)

_____________________________

'Deus le Volt!'
------------------

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 37
RE: Question for the players - 11/3/2019 8:47:33 PM   
Michael T


Posts: 4023
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: online
Not quite there yet.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

'Deus le Volt!'
------------------

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 38
RE: Question for the players - 11/3/2019 8:51:10 PM   
Cohen_slith

 

Posts: 2117
Joined: 10/5/2010
From: Italy
Status: offline
I think there the main problems are the fact that fighters seems impotent vs bombers. Losses are pratically minimal on the bomber's end.
And that there is no way to control what fighters intercepts.

One can easily launch a few decoy missions (I can use a fighter to bomb some closeby unit, that prolly will also be escorted by another fighter! And get intercepted! Spending reactions from the defender before to do meaningful bombings).
Right now it is all relative since ... as said air losses seem minimal, escorted or not.

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 39
RE: Question for the players - 11/3/2019 9:00:19 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 7002
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
I don't know what to say, because I have found fighters to be very effective against bombers, especially early on. I also am wondering how the Axis is managing their air war in this game, tbh.

For all of that, I am open to putting Bomber Command in the deployment queue as mentioned above.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Cohen_slith)
Post #: 40
RE: Question for the players - 11/3/2019 9:01:31 PM   
Michael T


Posts: 4023
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: online
If one strat bomber and a couple of tac's can manage this imagine what it will be like in 43/44.

_____________________________

'Deus le Volt!'
------------------

(in reply to Cohen_slith)
Post #: 41
RE: Question for the players - 11/3/2019 9:04:30 PM   
ncc1701e


Posts: 1401
Joined: 10/29/2013
From: Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

If one strat bomber and a couple of tac's can manage this imagine what it will be like in 43/44.


LOL - where are the Flak 88?

_____________________________

Chancellor Gorkon to Captain James T. Kirk:
You don't trust me, do you? I don't blame you. If there is to be a brave new world, our generation is going to have the hardest time living in it.

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 42
RE: Question for the players - 11/3/2019 9:05:05 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 7002
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
Playing solo I have found that strategic bombing is not that cost effective compared to what you can do with the production elsewhere. But this is against the AI. So I don't know.

400+ production per bomber is super expensive. (Especially as they tech up.) And you need a massive investment in escort fighters to safely bomb the Ruhr after France falls.

For this same amount of production you can put together an early invasion force. From the economic standpoint, imo, a big investment into strategic bombing may well delay getting back into Europe by a year.

So I wouldn't necessarily judge strategic bombing based on this game's results.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 43
RE: Question for the players - 11/3/2019 9:06:24 PM   
Michael T


Posts: 4023
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: online
Well it does seem that one should cover the Reich with flak in 1940 rather than build panzers.

_____________________________

'Deus le Volt!'
------------------

(in reply to ncc1701e)
Post #: 44
RE: Question for the players - 11/3/2019 9:13:55 PM   
Jim D Burns


Posts: 3953
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Salida, CA.
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx
So I wouldn't necessarily judge strategic bombing based on this game's results.


I agree, you can see no AA has been built and I wonder if any intercepts occurred. The cost of repairs on one good intercept can equal all or quite a bit more usually of the damage done in repair costs. Looking at it from one side is not the way to go about re-writing the rules.

I find it far more cost effective to keep my strat bombers on sub attacks and only try a strat attack when enemy fighters are not around. I'm simply not willing to pay the costs of repairs this early in game and by late 40 or early 41 if Germany hasn't built another fighter or two along with at least 2 AA per site for defense of the industries then its Germany's play that is the problem.

Jim

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 45
RE: Question for the players - 11/3/2019 9:15:31 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 7002
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
Not at all, once you get France, Allied bombing the Ruhr is suicidal. You can't get there with escorts. So any bombers will get chewed up by your fighters. And it's not like those fighters have all that much to do once France falls and before the Soviets are in the game.

It is possible to reach targets in France and the low countries with escorts, sure. But this is going to be the UK all by itself at that point with no French airforce. I could easily park 3 luftwaffe fighters in the area and for that matter go after the British fighters myself if they insist on staying in range.

It would be foolish to divert production to building flak in 1940.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 46
RE: Question for the players - 11/3/2019 9:22:42 PM   
Michael T


Posts: 4023
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: online
Of course he has fighters and yes they sometimes intercept, sometimes not. Just like mine. And 1 Flak doesn't do much. I have also bombed cities with Flak. It's misses too. If I were playing myself I would be suffering the same result. If I had build another Strat bomber early on I would have half the Reich in flames.

_____________________________

'Deus le Volt!'
------------------

(in reply to Jim D Burns)
Post #: 47
RE: Question for the players - 11/3/2019 9:25:53 PM   
Jim D Burns


Posts: 3953
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Salida, CA.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx
It would be foolish to divert production to building flak in 1940.


I think it all depends on tech die rolls. If Britain can get a quick fighter advance in early 1940, and build one or two more fighters, then the AA will be needed as Britain can far better sustain the cost of an air war than Germany in 1940 since Germany needs to build up for barbarossa. AA deals damage but takes no damage and can cost the British quite the repair bill in bombers, so it all depends on how Germany wants to spend its cash in 1940, and a little luck in the tech rolls for Britain.

Jim

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 48
RE: Question for the players - 11/3/2019 9:26:31 PM   
Michael T


Posts: 4023
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: online
well, once this poor German goes under the door will be open for another to step in...

_____________________________

'Deus le Volt!'
------------------

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 49
RE: Question for the players - 11/3/2019 9:29:26 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 7002
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
I'd rather build a couple of extra fighters in 1940 than flak, more flexible.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 50
RE: Question for the players - 11/3/2019 9:35:29 PM   
ncc1701e


Posts: 1401
Joined: 10/29/2013
From: Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards
Status: offline
Well seriously, if I am extracting the manual:

Air Superiority Group – 20 strength, only air unit that can intercept enemy air units

Ground Attack Group – 20 strength short-range attack aircraft, with escorts, that are most effective supporting land attacks or attacking naval groups

Tactical Air Group – 20 strength medium-range versatile aircraft, with escorts, that can perform all bombing missions with fair effectiveness

Strategic Air Group – 20 strength long-range aircraft, with long range escorts, that are primarily used to attack an enemy’s production

The "with escorts" for me is perhaps important to clarify. I am not sure the Allies did have fighters, in 1940, with enough range to escort a raid to Cologne, Dusseldorf or Essen...

Later in the manual, we have the "Default Values for Air Units" table at page 49 and Range value:

Air Superiority Group = 6 hexes
Ground Attack Group = 6 hexes
Tactical Air Group = 10 hexes
Strategic Air Group = 20 hexes

And, the small note that England and USA ground attack air group: +2 range

So, that is already 12 hexes range for a Tactical Air Group with escorts(?) and 22 hexes range for a Strategic Air Group with long range escorts(?).
Perhaps tuning down the ranges can be considered.

From Wikipedia, few ranges I have captured:

Bombers:
Stirling range = 3750 km
Wellington range = 3540 km
Lancaster range = 4073 km

Fighters:
P51 Mustang range = 1609 km
P47 Thunderbolt range = 1290 km
Supermarine Spitfire range = 720 km

Cheers

_____________________________

Chancellor Gorkon to Captain James T. Kirk:
You don't trust me, do you? I don't blame you. If there is to be a brave new world, our generation is going to have the hardest time living in it.

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 51
RE: Question for the players - 11/3/2019 9:39:27 PM   
Michael T


Posts: 4023
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: online
quote:

I'd rather build a couple of extra fighters in 1940 than flak, more flexible.


The way it stands, I think both are needed.

_____________________________

'Deus le Volt!'
------------------

(in reply to ncc1701e)
Post #: 52
RE: Question for the players - 11/3/2019 10:11:30 PM   
Jim D Burns


Posts: 3953
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Salida, CA.
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ncc1701e
The "with escorts" for me is perhaps important to clarify. I am not sure the Allies did have fighters, in 1940, with enough range to escort a raid to Cologne, Dusseldorf or Essen...


You have to look at the stats of the planes not simply the word "escorts". The tech chart clearly shows no air to air points added to any bomber type until 1942 tech is reached, so the default air to air stats of 2 for most bombers and 3 for strategic bombers is simply the value for the plane type simulated, and escort stats aren't added to the value until 1942.






Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Jim D Burns -- 11/3/2019 10:13:40 PM >

(in reply to ncc1701e)
Post #: 53
RE: Question for the players - 11/3/2019 10:17:34 PM   
Cohen_slith

 

Posts: 2117
Joined: 10/5/2010
From: Italy
Status: offline
But then an Interceptor '39, that has 8 air to air combat, versus a 'non escorted' bomber (as per without an escorting interceptor unit) - how much damage it does?
0 most of the cases, 1 now and then, 2 seldomly.
Never seen higher than that.

I think that is the main problem that sets the Axis to get their own cities nuked into oblivion since '39. (And anyhow then the fact Allies have far too many starting fighters)

(in reply to Jim D Burns)
Post #: 54
RE: Question for the players - 11/3/2019 10:33:23 PM   
Jim D Burns


Posts: 3953
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Salida, CA.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cohen_slith
0 most of the cases, 1 now and then, 2 seldomly.
Never seen higher than that.


Assuming repairs are a 1 for 1 ratio to production costs, each point of strat lost costs 20 to repair. At best a single strat attack does 2 damage to industry, that means if you damage 2 strat they need to do 20 attack hits to break even on their losses (even if repairs are only 50% production cost, you still need 10 hits per 2 losses). The cost to loss ratio is far more devastating to the allies than to Germany, but you aren't considering the costs of repairs so you don't see it.

Jim

(in reply to Cohen_slith)
Post #: 55
RE: Question for the players - 11/3/2019 10:36:58 PM   
ncc1701e


Posts: 1401
Joined: 10/29/2013
From: Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns

quote:

ORIGINAL: ncc1701e
The "with escorts" for me is perhaps important to clarify. I am not sure the Allies did have fighters, in 1940, with enough range to escort a raid to Cologne, Dusseldorf or Essen...


You have to look at the stats of the planes not simply the word "escorts". The tech chart clearly shows no air to air points added to any bomber type until 1942 tech is reached, so the default air to air stats of 2 for most bombers and 3 for strategic bombers is simply the value for the plane type simulated, and escort stats aren't added to the value until 1942.


Thanks a lot for clarifying this.


_____________________________

Chancellor Gorkon to Captain James T. Kirk:
You don't trust me, do you? I don't blame you. If there is to be a brave new world, our generation is going to have the hardest time living in it.

(in reply to Jim D Burns)
Post #: 56
RE: Question for the players - 11/3/2019 10:41:05 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 7002
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
2 is the most I've seen, but that is per attack, and I've seen bombers take 2 hits twice in a row.

That's a full 20% off the bomber in one run and what can happen if you fly unescorted into fighter range. It's not a sustainable proposition, economically, or for the bomber itself.

Strategic bombing is expensive and it takes a lot to make it work right. And there is the question of opportunity costs; the production thrown this way is production not spent on other things.

Take Bomber command off the map until mid 40 and this isn't going to look nearly so good. And if the French fighters are escorting, then maybe that should be looked at as well, since this really didn't happen. I'm not even sure the British and the Americans covered each other's bombers down the line, let alone the French.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Jim D Burns)
Post #: 57
RE: Question for the players - 11/3/2019 11:05:25 PM   
Michael T


Posts: 4023
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: online
You forget that the Germans are also losing air factors. That the German production multiplier is higher. And that early losses of German production weakens them for 1941 v Russia. That they are also building Fighters and maybe even flak to counter the bombing. So even though in pure production cost the allies are losing more initially, in the long run it means a weaker Germany down the track v Russia. And Russia is where the war is won or lost.

_____________________________

'Deus le Volt!'
------------------

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 58
RE: Question for the players - 11/3/2019 11:10:53 PM   
Michael T


Posts: 4023
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: online
IMO this starting UK bomber should not exist. The French should have one less fighter to at start as well. French and Brits should not escort or support each others units.

My point about all this is that the Allies have many more unrealistic advantages that should be nerfed before we even consider shackling the German in 39. Whether it be rail reduction or some other method of restraint.

What about Italy? Not being able to DOW until Paris is captured means the UK and France just flood France with units. There is no threat at all to consider from Italy. Let Italy do as it pleases from the get go. Then see how many UK units roll in to France.

_____________________________

'Deus le Volt!'
------------------

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 59
RE: Question for the players - 11/3/2019 11:43:05 PM   
Cohen_slith

 

Posts: 2117
Joined: 10/5/2010
From: Italy
Status: offline
That is a thing that is there in WiF.

Italy starts with a trade with USA (Well latest rules, so not Matrix WiF, the cardboard / vassal of WiF); but Italy loses such trade as soon as it goes to war.
But Italy can declare war at any given time (Given - do it before France falls and you have the French navy around!), but at least keeps the Allies honest. (And yes in WiF Italy starts with full production already)

So if the Allies strip this or that place of troops to send them to France, Italy could exploit the business.

It does not help that Axis has no starting invading power earlier. In '39 Malta was not garrisoned pratically either.

Right now I feel the Axis is quite impeded in pratically everything as it is - and there is talk of ulterior Axis nerfs.

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> WarPlan >> AAR >> RE: Question for the players Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.238