Move-wise FitE

[larryfulkerson]

I've been doing a study about the production of aircraft by both sides and here's the story.

During the time period covered by these early turns the Axis is producing about 25 fighters per turn and about 32 bombers per turn [ a rate of 0 means none are produced each turn... once they are gone, they're gone ].

But the Soviet Union is producing about 436 fighters and about 50 bombers every turn. So the more time passes the more the Axis will be outnumbered.

This means that the Soviet union can afford to lose 436/25 or 17 fighters for everyone the Axis losses and still win the air war.
Likewise the Soviet union can afford to lose 50/32 or 1.5 bombers for everyone the Axis losses and still have enough.

That's another reason the Axis has to grab the objectives and decrease the replacement/reinforcement percentage....to lower these numbers to more like parity if possible.

[SMK-at-work]

Il 2's aren't fighters - so your figures need to be adjusted a bit - 333 fighters and 153 bombers.

And the I-16's are cannon fodder, so you can count those as experience for your 109's. 

so in terms of EFFECTIVE fighters the numbers are only 196:25, or a mere 8:1..............

Mig-3's aren't that flash either but are better than I-16's.

soviet fighters will certainly shoot down unescorted bombers of course, so you have to ensure that the soviet fighters either don't fly (by pounding the shirt out of them) or your bombers are always under a good air superiority umbrella.  Seems you're doing #1 fairly effectlively

Also many soviet a/c are tied up in mixed groups that have both bombers and fighters in them - the bombers are useless at AS, and the fighters aren't much good at interdiction or combat suport - further lowering the effective strength of hte Soviet AF. These units will get destroyed over time as their obsolete fighters and bombers get weeded out and the Sov's get replacement units of a single a/c type, but you have a window for making hte most of it for quite a long time!


I should add that in my PBEM as the Soviets my opponent didn't do a very good job of crushing the VVs on T1, although I certainly lost hundreds of a/c per turn for many turns afterwards.

But I have concentrated my fighters into a couple of groups covering specific areas of importance and most of my front is left "open". This has evened up losses a lot and gives my bombers a decent chance of attacking. I still lose more of course, but it's only 1.5 or 2:1 on many turns.

[larryfulkerson]

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work
Il 2's aren't fighters - so your figures need to be adjusted a bit....

With a range of only 31 I just assumed it was a fighter, sorry. And I like the rest of your comments...right on the money. I've always wondered why the designers lumped the fighters and bombers together in the same squadron when they have such dissimular jobs to do. And it gets a bit tedious for the Soviet player to have to look at each squadron before he uses it to see if it's one of those lumped squadrons before he tasks it to do AS or bridge busting way far away, or one of a hundred different things a bomber can do that a fighter is not much good at.

keep those good comments coming.

[larryfulkerson]

This is the turn where the Axis player gets a boatload of reinforcements. I picked the wrong turn to embark/ship the bautrupp dudes to Wilno. I was able to ship only a fraction of the reinforcements I got. And they were too far away to just hot-foot it there as well. They will have to enter the theater in installments I guess. war by the installment plan.

[SMK-at-work]

I've gained a fair bit of insight by reading and re-reading this document - http://www.ac-smolf.dk/fite/Background.doc

[larryfulkerson]

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work
I've gained a fair bit of insight by reading and re-reading this document - http://www.ac-smolf.dk/fite/Background.doc

Hey, thanks a load for that document. I read it with great interest. And I'm keeping it on hand for a re-read from time to time.

[larryfulkerson]

Here's the minimap view of the first four turns from the Axis point of view:

[larryfulkerson]

Here's a movie showing the start of turn 4 and the end of turn 4 showing the differences in the positions of most of the participants, in the north end of the front lines:

[larryfulkerson]

Here's all the Axis moving in the Daugavpils area ( just south of the movie above ) showing the changes in the positions of the Axis units from the start of turn 4 to the end of turn 4:

[larryfulkerson]

Here's all the movement that took place during Axis turn 4 in the Pripet Marshes area:

[larryfulkerson]

Here's all the movement that took place at the northern end of the southern front lines during Axis turn 4:

[larryfulkerson]

Here's the total Axis losses so far:

[MarcA]

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work
Il 2's aren't fighters - so your figures need to be adjusted a bit....

With a range of only 31 I just assumed it was a fighter, sorry.

Larry

The IL-2 Shturmoviks are heavily arnoured fighter bombers optimised for ground attack. If there stats in the game follow real life they should be very effective for combat support but too cumbersome for air superiority.

[larryfulkerson]

Thanks for the update. You got me so interested that I had to find a picture of one.

[larryfulkerson]

Here's the total Soviet losses so far ( as of the start of the Soviet turn 4 ):

[larryfulkerson]

The first turn was devastating in terms of men and equipment lost but less was lost the second turn and even less the third turn and by the fourth turn the Soviets were losing less rifle squads than they were producing ( since there are 180 rifle squads in a Soviet division ).

[larryfulkerson]

While I'm awaiting some turns to come back from PBEM opponents I thought I'd run some more tests. This test is to see what difference arty makes on an attack.

The first group of numbers represents the NO SUPPORT column and the numbers are biased by the fact that there were three different instances of 100% losses by the Soviet dude. It happened, so I copyied the numbers down. But a test needs to be run with many many more trials to get "accurate" numbers obviously.

The trial with the battery in 'T' mode is biased by the fact that we had one early turn ending but I believe the % losses to be somewhat accurate. By the way the battery always did support the attack, for what that's worth.

The trial with the battery in dedicated mode represents accurate numbers I believe, and as expected gave the highest numbers of Soviet losses and the lowest numbers of Axis losses.

All attacks were the same three regiments against the same Soviet division and were all at minimum losses setting.

It would be interesting to see the results for a limited loss setting. I guess I'll do that one sometime and publish the result here.

[larryfulkerson]

Here's the LIMITED LOSSES artillery test results. All the number scream out for many many more trials than just 25. The only accurate number, in my humble opinion, is that for the Axis losses....they are less for a dedicated battery than in any other mode.

[larryfulkerson]

Menschenfresser sends his comments via email:

COMMENTS:
Forward commanders are realizing that Stalin isn't sending any more reinforcements their way. It is stand and (most likely) die for them. But their sacrifice will buy precious time for the Red Army to mobilize. In Barbarossa scenarios, the second question you ask yourself is, where will I make my first stand? The third question is, In what order do I build my line? I am at this stage of the game. Perhaps I'm already committed to a specific course of action. Usually, I start with Leningrad and Moscow. Leningrad is precarious since the Germans reach it so quickly. It sticks out, sandwiched between the Germans & Finns. Unless well-stocked, the Germans can cut it off rather effortlessly. The defense of Moscow needs to start early too, since most German players send almost all of AGC heading right for it.

Three counterattacks this turn. The retreating 192nd Mtn Div retreating NE out of Chernovitsy ran into a Rumanian Mtn division. The Soviet 7th Motorized division, trapped against the Dnestr River, turned and counterattacked, resulting in the two Soviet divisions hitting opposite sides of the Rumanians. The battle ended in a draw with few casualties on either side.

To the north, the other counterattacks were made in an attempt to slow down the Germans crossing the Dvina River. The 181st RD just arriving at the front, attacked the 8th Pz Div's Kradschutz Bn, destroying it in the process (quite a lucky break for the Soviets to actually destroy a German unit this early) and closing down the hole through which the 8th was attempting to cross the river. Further to the north, the 22nd NKVD Div tried to secure Riga's eastern flank. It was unable to budge 1st Panzer's recon battalion.

[larryfulkerson]

I got the rail road engineers busy and they repaired the rails almost all the way up to the front lines in the Minsk area.