I don't know what's causing this, and I don't know if it is significant enough to affect the game for other players, fair enough. But it seems apparent in the gameplay I've experienced over 100+ game turns so far.


To have a rough stab at quantifying this, I ran through the replay of a recent ...

I totally understand what you are saying about aircraft performance. I have been absolutely loathe to going into the a/c DB and start messing around with the different aircraft settings. I think that would be an ugly can of worms to open. The problem being it is a one size fits all fix.

I ...

Curious how you guys are structuring your raids.

In my case I avoid close-escort unless I'm willing to accept higher escort attrition as a payoff for inhibiting interceptor attacks on the bombers. I usually stack multiple units of high escorts at 2-6,000 ft above the bombers, with more at 8 and ...

Also just trying the game again after a break, thanks to the recent updates (and well done for everybody working on keeping BTR going like this after so long).

Some things I've noticed with V.1.06.83 on an Allied vs AI 1943 campaign:

On a different note I am stunned by the inability too ever ...

So the escort range raid is slightly penalized for calling escorts from distant airfields. I'm not sure if this is WAD, but it is what it is.

Well, I'd argue that it's more than a slight penalisation. It also seems to have changed since prior iterations of the game updates for whatever reason ...

I've seen this repeatedly, with P-47D-6's and Spitfires on escort missions. The claimed escort range in the planning phase has no relation to the actual escort coverage, which is usually significantly less. That may be a distinct problem from another aspect I've seen which is units repeatedly going ...

<t> Waiting for updates can be frustrating. I should know, I've been playing this game for a decade, during which time updates and development have been done by individuals effectively in their spare time. <br/>
<br/>
As gamers we are dependent on the limited support the development team can ...

<t> Sure, the UPEN mandatory stuff can give a nice break for the Axis player in the game. However, this doesn't necessarily mean the UPENS in Germany will always be the ones bombed. In my experience, the harder the pens are to damage overall, the more the ones in France get bombed. They will always ...

Well, I'm R&Ding the Go229 in small numbers. Shame Swift won't leave me any engines to install in them... I don't expect to see it apper before I lose my PBEM campaign, but the idea of it keeps my morale up in the ruins of the RLM bunker in Berlin.

<t> re: the problems of damaging the U-boat pens in reality - yes, but surely the point is for the game to force you to attack the mandatory targets to meet political criteria, rather than actually destroy them for real. So far as I know they have no influence on the game dynamics (unlike the damage ...

<t> Oboe Mk 1, tested on operations from December 1942 and then in frequent use from March 1943, could reach Emden, Essen and Dortmund, which clocks in at just over 260 miles in BTR ranges. The range was contingent upon the altitude of the aircraft involved; the higher they flew, the further the ...

see post #16.

<t> Re: P-39 wing guns. Bell were pressuring the USAAF to remove the wing guns in May 1942, undoubtedly in response to criticism of Airacobra performance in the South-West Pacific, on the grounds of the weight saving involved and the improvement to climb performance. Although Larry Bell himself ...

Rob,

Just to add I have the same problem in my PBEM with Swift in February 1944 - A8/R7's building up in the pool but so sign of the A5/U2 Wilde Sau units upgrading yet. No G-14's in production yet, so I can't confirm that so far.

<t> Nikademus, I stand by my contention that there was no equivalent substitute for accurate combat marksmanship which involved factors such as speed, range and deflection estimation which were far more significant to combat results than the location of the armament. The removal of P-39 wing ...

<t> HMSWarspite, good points, however: My point would be that a 36 vs 36 bounce should indeed be determined by up to four pilots in the bouncing unit actually in a position to complete a decisive attack; but that should be little different from 4 bouncing 4. As it is a 'complete unit' bounce (and I ...

<t> Erkki, just to reiterate, I think centrally-mounted armament was desirable, but the difference between it and wing-mounted armament was marginal - particularly when wing-mounted armament was heavy enough to compensate for dispersal of convergence over combat ranges.<br/>
<br/>
I completely ...

<t> Erkki, this probably risks overstates our disagreement, but what the hell, it beats working.<br/>
<br/>
I do understand what convergence is; I dispute the significance of the impact of it on the basis of actual combat results.<br/>
<br/>
Two points by way of example. First, a minor one. No ...

<t> Re: wing vs fuselage mounted guns.<br/>
<br/>
I'm aware of the convergence of wing-mounted guns, but two factors arise in relation to that - i) the effective range of weapons extended beyond that convergence (e.g the 20mm Hispano cannon in Spitfire VB's and later could and did hit and ...

<r> Hi Reddon,<br/>
<br/>
My take on your points as a fellow BTR addict; what follows is just my opinion, and is made in ignorance of most of the game mechanics:<br/>
<br/>
1. Night combat results. Yes, night combat does seem to produce more damaged than immediately destroyed, and I suspect this ...