AAR swift vs fochinell

Eagle Day to Bombing of the Reich is a improved and enhanced edition of Talonsoft's older Battle of Britain and Bombing the Reich. This updated version represents the best simulation of the air war over Britain and the strategic bombing campaign over Europe that has ever been made.

Moderators: Joel Billings, simovitch, harley, warshipbuilder

fochinell
Posts: 293
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 5:15 pm

RE: AAR swift vs fochinell

Post by fochinell »

25th November 1943: A77/1490 (39 aa), X: 29/917 (13 gd).

MTO: On their third or fourth attempt, the 15th AF B-24J's finally hit Venice RR. No action there (0/207 f, 1/96 b, 0e/a), with what little there is taking place against the supporting sweeps and strikes.

ETO: Yet more low cloud means Allied Supreme HQ resort to a major series of sweeps with the 8th AF fighters. Normally I avoid using them, as I reckon the lower serviceability, increased fatigue and abysmal morale hits caused by strafing anything with an AA defence more formidable than a Volksturm pensioner with a Luger mean ineffective escorts when Werner's pampered, rested JG units finally are allowed out to play. But I've had enough of the weather enforcing inactivity and reducing the attrition. Cut to the chase - 38/432 f lost, for only 17 e/a claims in air combat. Gnnngh... [:@]

Overall I lose 13 P-38H, 20 P-38L, 7 P-47C and 17 P-47D with no bombing damage to make it worthwhile.

BC: Grounded. That's how the weather is.
User avatar
wernerpruckner
Posts: 4138
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 1:00 pm

RE: AAR swift vs fochinell

Post by wernerpruckner »

Gavin seems to be grumpy - he will be grumpier after he sees the next turn [:D]
fochinell
Posts: 293
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 5:15 pm

RE: AAR swift vs fochinell

Post by fochinell »

26th November 1943. A: 91/1549 (20 aa), X: 38/1055 (4 gd)

Grumpy? Moi?

MTO: Some small-scale strafes of coastal AF's with the P-40's getting massacred as per usual.

ETO: Risking the inevitable "cancellation-leaving-the-sweeps-to-get-butchered", LGO, and "delayed-escort" delights, the 8th AF take a chance on a double B-17F raid to transport targets around Cologne. To my suprise, the bombers get there along with the first wave of escorts, but then Werner's secret weather ray designed by von Braun strikes again, and the Forts miss their primaries and secondaries, and then scatter their bombs on targets of opportunity all the way back from Cologne to Eindhoven. The remaining escorts then have hard time as the LW appear as usual on the return leg to feast on the stragglers and flak cripples. 10/444 f 48/320 b 39 e/a. Pants. [:@] They also do a "return over enemy coast", but fair play to Wener for ignoring this (they still lose 2 to Flak over Munchen Gladbach and get several crashes as a consequence - I need less incompetant minions).

One of the 9th AF sweeping groups is down to 16 operational Thunderbolts even before their mission. Hmmm. Maybe time for a rest day. [8|]

BC: 5 Group Lancasters to Merseberg. Concentrated raid until the last stage, when 64 bombloads go astray. 6/352 b. A few NJG appear on the return leg, but lose 3 of their own. OKL seem to think this represents some kind of tactical victory, which only goes to show how far the NJG have declined. [:D] Another Oboe-mossie raid on Handels Hafen PORT seems to go well. Are these doing any damage, Werner?
User avatar
wernerpruckner
Posts: 4138
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 1:00 pm

RE: AAR swift vs fochinell

Post by wernerpruckner »

26th November
 
weather turn
 
only two recce missons done by Gavin.
 
3 losses due to SAS raids ( one Fw190A and two Bf109G-6 )
fochinell
Posts: 293
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 5:15 pm

RE: AAR swift vs fochinell

Post by fochinell »

28th November 1943. A: 33/1273 (6 aa), X: 11/171 (0 gd).

MTO: Weather. [>:]

ETO: With weather closing out Holland and western Germany, the 8th AF hit the Paris FACS for 0/242f 1/191b 0e, supported by 9th AF Marauders to Versailles RR and 2TAF Mitchells to Creil AF as well as a Typhoon and Mossie strike on FACs in the Seine valley. The 2TAF raid sees the only resistance, with the Spitfires proving to be almost as passive as usual - 9/169f 19/72b 11e. Other than that, the 8th AF bombing is good, and all three targets suffer substantive damage.

BC: 6 Group to Duisburg, 3/264 Halifax II's. A reasonable raid, with almost all bombs reported in the city area. No LW resistance as the NJG pilots cower in their bunkers, running their hands fondly over the decorations Reichmarshal Werner gave them back in the good old days before they had to stay on base to avoid public ridicule. [;)]
fochinell
Posts: 293
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 5:15 pm

RE: AAR swift vs fochinell

Post by fochinell »

29th November 1943. A: 208/2219 (24 aa), X: 156/2132 (0 gd). Yee-hah! This is the kind big battle I need to get the attrition I want, even if it costs me 100 B-17's. Again, I'm too close to 10% attrition and Werner too far from it to claim a clear success though. I wish he'd go back to taking on my fighters...

MTO: The usual tactical stuff, nothing exciting, and several raids and sweeps cancelled due to bad weather.

ETO: The weather breaks, and a major series of 8th AF attacks begin - 4 raids of 68 B-17G grouped together, hitting CHEM sites around Frankfurt and Ludwigshafen with full escort and support from the tactical forces. For once the LW rises to fight on the inbound leg, and interceptions begin over Holland. The two P-51 escort Groups are overwhelmed, but intermediate leg P-47 and target leg P-38 escorts even the odds a lttle as they enter the fight over stragglers on the route corridor. Overall B-17 losses are high - 53/594f 108/272b 175e - but the attrition is sustainable given that the Luftwaffe opted to fight a major battle and took major losses in return. The infernal Zerstorer take useful casualties - 62 Me410 alone go down, while the escorts lose 7 Mustang III, 13 P-51B, 21 P-47D, 15 P-38L, 6 Spit Vb and 10 Spit IX. The tactical raids come in to cover the German border/Belgian leg of the exit route, and miss most of the main fighting. The 9th AF get 5/130f 0/64b 6e and the 2TAF Mitchells get 7/253f 1/72b 6e.

BC: 1 Group take their Lancaster I's to Leipzig for 3/291b. Most of the bombloads hit the city, so it looks like an adequate raid. The NJG cower in their bunkers as usual. [:)]

205 Group make a very-long range attack on Gleiwitz-Hitler PORT, meeting no resistance 0/168b and managing to get 48 Lib D's and 24 Halifax II bombloads on target, which is good enough for non-H2S bombers at long range.
fochinell
Posts: 293
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 5:15 pm

RE: AAR swift vs fochinell

Post by fochinell »

30th November 1943. A: 64/1490 (26 aa), X: 21/711 (4 gd). Another weather-limited turn, with a good attrition ratio for Werner to close off a busier month. AS 2 IND 10 TERROR 13; so my SB score has slipped while terror has gone up by a predictable 1 point.

MTO: 15th AF to the BBFAC near Turin, doing little damage and not much fighting - 0/208f 5/96b 2e. Most of the activity centers around the supporting AF raids by fighters, with the 12th AF losing 23/144f 8e.

ETO: Another LGO raid by 3 Group to Dortmund. [:@]

Overall, a better month for me than October, with a similar effort to October (42,700 Allied sorties vs 41,900 in October) leading to an increase in allied losses from 1,400 to 2,000. However, this is repaid by an increase in Axis losses from a paltry 569 in October to a much more satisfying 1,225 in November. Even better is the increase in allied efficiency involved, as Werner's sortie total in October was 12,800, rising to 20,800 in November. Werner's loss rate in October was 4.4%, rising to 5.9% in November, while mine rose from a pathetic 3.4% to 4.7%. So Werner made a greater effort, costing me more aircraft, but costing himself more in the process. Notable features were the sudden increase in ground kills (from zero to 178) reflecting more sweeps now re-equipment has largely been achieved and a stack of expendable P-38H and Thunderbolts has built up to replace the dwindling stock of Spit Vb's, and the drop in AA casualties from a shocking 54% in October to a better 26% in November. More good news is Werner's pilot attriton rate, with October seeing a drop from 508 KIA plus 1 MIA in September to a miserable 389 KIA plus 2 MIA. November saw this rise to 747 KIA plus 25 MIA which is much better, although I really want to jack this up to 1,000 pilots lost per month to hammer him.

Werner's losses of single-engined day fighters doubled over the October figure (967 vs 485); more significantly, his Zerstorer losses more than tripled (to 181 vs 52), although this was from a minimal initial level and they cost me twice the loss in heavy day bombers to achieve this (555 vs 251).

Night bomber losses were fairly static (80 compared to 70 in October) while NJG losses rose from 24 twin-engined and 8 single-engined to 70 and 7 in November; although some of these were lost defending against daylight attacks, it indicates the level to which the intruders have claimed ascendency over the NJG with their losses against night bombers at a 1:1 ratio, at a cost of 10 NF's in October and 13 in November.

Medium bomber losses are up to 270 from 208 in October, but this is sustainable unlike September's loss rate of 370.

My fighter losses are up to 936 from 778, but this is easily sustainable now that re-equipment of the strategic forces with the P-47D, P-38L and P-51B is complete and much of the strain is still being borne by the expendible P-40's, P-47C's and P-38H's. P-47C losses rose from 32 to 105 this month, but I'm still sitting on a good reserve despite losing slightly more than new production over the month, while the P-47D can be seen to be carrying much of the load with losses rising from 77 to 192, but this is still out-stripped by new production.

The arrival of three P-39 sqns in MAC should help spread the attritional load further against my overall production. Meanwhile, Spit Vb attrition dropped from an unsustainable 212 in October to a high but bearable 162 in November; while the Spit IX losses dropped slightly from 94 to 85 which allowed a couple of new Spit Vb sqns in MAC to convert to the IX.

So much for the air losses; the bad news is the SB score, which declined from 5956 at the end of October to 5359 at the end of November. I'd like to blame this on the weather, but the score was sufficiently low to start with that I should have been able to keep it static without too much trouble. On the other hand, terror is up two points, from 116,661 to 130,979 which is pretty much what I expected given the bonus of constant 15th AF raids on Italian RR targets.

Here's the overall losses:



Image
Attachments
btr losses nov 43.jpg
btr losses nov 43.jpg (134.72 KiB) Viewed 200 times
fochinell
Posts: 293
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 5:15 pm

RE: AAR swift vs fochinell

Post by fochinell »

And here's the aces list:



Image
Attachments
btracesnov43.jpg
btracesnov43.jpg (161.39 KiB) Viewed 200 times
fochinell
Posts: 293
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 5:15 pm

RE: AAR swift vs fochinell

Post by fochinell »

And here's the units:

8th AF (15 grps B-17F, 10 grps B-17G plus 9 PFF dets; 7 grps P-47D, 4 grps P-38L, 2 grps P-51B, 2 sqn Mustang III); leading units are 78th FG (P-47D) 105 kills, 56th FG (P-47D) 95 kills, 355th FG (P-38L) 87 kills and 19 sqn (M.III) 42 kills.

9th AF (4 grps B-26B, 1 PFF det B-26G; 3 grps P-47D, 2 sqn Spit IX, 1 sqn M.III); 354th FG 25 kills, 358th FG 20 kills, 66 sqn (Spit IX) 22 kills.

2TAF (1 Hurri sqn, 9 Typhoon sqns, 5 Mossie F.B.VI sqn, 6 B-25D sqn; 10 Spit Vb sqn, 11 Spit IX sqn); 402 RCAF sqn 35 kills, 485 RNZAF sqn 25 kills, 416 RCAF sqn 24 kills (all Spit IX), 132 sqn with 23 kills is the leading Spit Vb unit (those guys should get a few DFC's for that).

FC (2 Typhoon, 2 Mossie dets; 4 Spit Vb sqns); 501 sqn with 3 kills, everybody else on 1.

15th AF (6 grps B-25J; 18 sqns P-38L); 95th FS 37 kills, 307th FS 35 kills and 48th FS 31 kills.

12th AF (8 grps A-20C - 4 grps of B-26B just finishing conversion; 4 grps P-47C and 4 grps P-38H); 33rd FG 30 kills, and 350th FG 15 kills (both P-38H), with 57th FG (P-47C) on 16 kills.

MAC (4 sqn Balt, 4 sqn B-25D, 1 sqn Mossie FB, 2 sqn Hurri; 2 sqn P-39 working up, 8 sqn P-40, 4 sqn Spit Vb, 14 sqn Spit IX). 145 sqn on 14 kills, 92 sqn on 12 and 1 SAAF, 93 and 111 all on 10 kills (all Spit IX), while 3 out of the 4 Spit Vb sqns (1435, 242, 4 SAAF) are all on 3. None of the P-39 or P-40 sqns have any kills yet, which is a bit weird in the case of the P-40's as they've usually picked off the odd straggler RTBing during their endless AF strikes by ths point.

On the night offensive, BC now have 4 sqn Mossie B.IV, 8 sqn plus 1 det of Lanc III, 27 sqn Lanc I, 4 sqn Halifax III, 17 sqn Halifax II and 3 sqn Stirling III. Of the 7 sqns plus 3 det Mossie NF.II active, 68 sqn still lead the way with 26 kills, 605 sqn with 16 and B/25 sqn with 13 kills. The two NF.XII sqns aren't even in double figures yet.

205 Group have 2 Halifax II sqns plus 1 det, and another five B-24D sqns. The four 12th AF Mossie NF.II sqns and MAC 1 sqn plus 1 det have achieved nothing, but have actually flown their first missions this month.

moose1999
Posts: 781
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 12:41 pm

RE: AAR swift vs fochinell

Post by moose1999 »

Great read this AAR - keep going!
I've never played any of these games, but the losses during one day - hundreds of aircraft from each side - seem a little extreme to me.
Do the kill numbers in game reflect the historical numbers?
regards,

Briny
User avatar
Hard Sarge
Posts: 22145
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2000 8:00 am
Location: garfield hts ohio usa
Contact:

RE: AAR swift vs fochinell

Post by Hard Sarge »

Well, depends on your point of view, one thing with the game, a mistake can be hammered on more then the same would of been in real life, plus as it is a game, most combats are to the death, while in Real Life, alot of them, would of been "time to get out of here"

plus a lot of losses are really crashes (mostly due to combat) and most Airforces wouldn't count them as enemy losses, so something like the BB raid, 60 some bombers were lost, but a whole more returned to base, or close to base and crashed or landed but were then wrote off, as being too damaged to repair, but those are not counted as combat losses

but over all, game losses will look like they are higher then in real life, but most times, we can not get units to do as well as they did in real life, so it is a toss up


Image
fochinell
Posts: 293
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 5:15 pm

RE: AAR swift vs fochinell

Post by fochinell »

Great read this AAR - keep going!

Why thank you. The cheque is in the post.... [;)]

I've never played any of these games, but the losses during one day - hundreds of aircraft from each side - seem a little extreme to me.
Do the kill numbers in game reflect the historical numbers?


No, BTR is much bloodier - for example, Galland complained that the Americans were breaking the Jagdwaffe by inflicting 1,000 pilot casualties over a three-month period in the spring of 1944. In BTR I can inflict that kind of loss in a month and the LW can still come back for more, although eventually pilot quality declines.

But the real secret is that although both the allies and the Axis can sustain more than double, or even three times the historical loss rate they experienced, the dynamics are right; the LW are fighting from a losing position. Combat in BTR is bloodier than historical - Flak and combat should be less lethal to reflect that IMO - but the game modelling does not distort the real dynamic. The numbers may be higher than they were historically; but the trends are accurate - kill enough bombers, and the 8th and 15th AF can't disrupt Axis industry. Everything else is just the icing on the cake.

moose1999
Posts: 781
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 12:41 pm

RE: AAR swift vs fochinell

Post by moose1999 »

Well, as long as the realistic dynamics are intact (the balance between losses and production values for example) I'm happy. [:)]

I suppose lowering the kill rates (and reworking all the dynamics of the game, for example factory and pilot output, as I'm sure would be the consequence of such a move) is not an option? [;)]

The only problem I see is this:
I love the ability to follow the progress of individual squadrons and pilots - and that the game provides individual names and stats for each of the thousands of pilots in the conflict is just great.
But doesn't the very high kill rates sort of compromise this (in my view very important) feature by constantly having your pilots killed and exchanged with new ones? Won't it hurt the immersion factor?
It sort of defeats the purpose of having all this wonderfull detail at pilot-level (stats that changes dynamically through the campaign).
But I've never played any of the games, of course, so I don't know if it's an issue at all...?
regards,

Briny
User avatar
Hard Sarge
Posts: 22145
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2000 8:00 am
Location: garfield hts ohio usa
Contact:

RE: AAR swift vs fochinell

Post by Hard Sarge »

well for pilots, we also have pilots on delay, so where we can, pilots who flew in 1945 won't be coming in, until late 44 or 45 (now some of them will come in earlier, just due to lack of better info on pilots)

now, I do know in a couple of my old games, Beckham was the leading Allied Ace at wars end (so I kind of have a soft spot for him)

and depending, the loss rate is not always so bad

plus one thing about losses in the game vs RL, we do not have the bombers and transport planes flying around or on the fields, which is where more then a few of the RL pilots cleaned up on

which we are trying to work on the numbers of pilots who end up getting killed, we would like to have a higher WIA/KIA result, then the game currently has now, along with a chance for the Allied pilots to also evade, but...

Image
Attachments
acesendofwar.jpg
acesendofwar.jpg (139.62 KiB) Viewed 200 times
Image
User avatar
Hard Sarge
Posts: 22145
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2000 8:00 am
Location: garfield hts ohio usa
Contact:

RE: AAR swift vs fochinell

Post by Hard Sarge »

grrrrr

one hassle with the old game, was HARD to get snap shots taken, it wants to show the screen under it, so not all of the right screen is shown in that shot

which, now it should show Beckham as the top Ace

Image
Attachments
acesendofwar.jpg
acesendofwar.jpg (107.5 KiB) Viewed 200 times
Image
User avatar
Hard Sarge
Posts: 22145
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2000 8:00 am
Location: garfield hts ohio usa
Contact:

RE: AAR swift vs fochinell

Post by Hard Sarge »

of course, it does not always look as good from the other side

Image
Attachments
acesendofwarge.jpg
acesendofwarge.jpg (99.79 KiB) Viewed 200 times
Image
User avatar
Rebel Yell
Posts: 530
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2003 7:00 pm
Location: The Woodlands, TX USA

RE: AAR swift vs fochinell

Post by Rebel Yell »

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

Well, depends on your point of view, one thing with the game, a mistake can be hammered on more then the same would of been in real life, plus as it is a game, most combats are to the death, while in Real Life, alot of them, would of been "time to get out of here"

plus a lot of losses are really crashes (mostly due to combat) and most Airforces wouldn't count them as enemy losses, so something like the BB raid, 60 some bombers were lost, but a whole more returned to base, or close to base and crashed or landed but were then wrote off, as being too damaged to repair, but those are not counted as combat losses

but over all, game losses will look like they are higher then in real life, but most times, we can not get units to do as well as they did in real life, so it is a toss up



I've been thinking about this since it was posted.

Is it not possible to globally lower the lethality of combat? The vast majority of air combat in WWII was inconclusive.

I understand what you're having to account for, with damaged aircraft, write-offs etc, but I think its important for the system to generate plausible losses in aircraft and pilots. It will kill the immersiveness for me if bloodbaths are the norm. My .02 anyway. I'll gladly buy it whether this can be done or not, but I'll enjoy it a lot more if can.
User avatar
Hard Sarge
Posts: 22145
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2000 8:00 am
Location: garfield hts ohio usa
Contact:

RE: AAR swift vs fochinell

Post by Hard Sarge »

the trouble is, to be honest, the combat model overall is too tame, there are alot of things that happened during the war, that we can't do or copy

now, that said, should the Allies lose 110 B-17s during the day, no, but will the player plot his raids the same way the real guys did ? again no

cardboard solders are easier to order to there death, then real ones

one trouble we have, is fighters if they get into trouble are not going to dive to the deck and get of out dodge, they are going to stick with the game plan

(same trouble most Flight Sim have, even outnumbered, or beaten, the enemy planes are going to stay in the fight)


Image
fochinell
Posts: 293
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 5:15 pm

RE: AAR swift vs fochinell

Post by fochinell »

1st December 1943. A: 39/2894 (34 aa), X: 2/0 (1 gd)

Nil resistance from the LW today against some substantial strategic attacks.

MTO: The usual tactical raids in Italy to support a 15th AF attack on Pulverfabrik Skoda CHEM, which goes well - 99% damage for 0/240f 1/96b 0e. I really need those incoming B-24 groups to step up the bombing damage, though. [:'(]

ETO: The 8th AF go for industrial sites around Hannover with three forces of 128 B-17's each. Continental RUBBER avoids damage, while Hannover Mitteland PORT gets 99% and Vereingte Deutsche ALUM gets 91%. Good bombing results for negligable losses - 0/558f 5/383b 0e. The usual tactical raids see no combat either. [:)]

BC: 4 Group to Magdeburge Elbe PORT and 0/23 Mossies to Dortumnd Herne PORT. The 4 Group Halifaxes experience another LGO raid; except this time a partial one. Two forces of Halifaxes are plotted; a Halifax II raid, led by 35 Squadron in 5 Group with H2S (120b total), and a second Halifax III raid led by the highest morale Halifax III squadron (96b total), and timed to hit the target at the same time as the slower Halifax II force. This plus the usual RCM and NI sorties in support. The Halifax III force all take off and hit the target (good bombing!) while only the lead group of the Halifax II force attacks for a classic LGO raid. I dunno what this means, but it's interesting that the only Halifax II unit to participate was from 8 Group. Ah well. [8|]
User avatar
wernerpruckner
Posts: 4138
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 1:00 pm

RE: AAR swift vs fochinell

Post by wernerpruckner »

now my situation:

top pilots:

Image
Attachments
toppilots.jpg
toppilots.jpg (139.93 KiB) Viewed 200 times
Post Reply

Return to “Gary Grigsby's Eagle Day to Bombing the Reich”