WaW Revised version M Now Available

[explorer2]

WaW Revised version M Now Available

1. Structural damage of bombers is way too high
2. More historical USA production creates nearly impossible situation for JA to win
3. Apparently (I haven't checked into it yet) Munich is no longer SS.


Changes to M compared to L

1. Fixed omission from L of new graphics files for Escort Carrier and Fortified Airfield
2. Fixed L Montreal bug: IF AI is West, went into infinite loop.
3. Fixed auto recover all structural damage bug
4. New event: Axis leave North Africa causes Italian units to lose 25% morale
5. New event: If West occupies Rome:
-------First 2 turns, Italians lose 25 % morale
-------Third turn: Italians surrender, all Italian units disbanded
6. Changes to Air Units
-----All Level Bombers, & new Night Bombers have range of 18, regardless of Tech Level
-----All Level Bombers do more structural damage than previously
-----New units: Night Bombers: Similar to level bombers except no attack vs. units, medium structural damage, fighters cannot intercept
-----Strategic Bombers incorporated into Level Bomber IV
-----Fighter III range extended 1 hex
-----Long Range Fighter I range extended 3 hexes
7. Irkutsk changed from resource center to city 2
8. English Channel area & Great Barrier Reef area now Big Sea to simulate slower ship movement in these areas
9. Canton replace by Hong Kong (British owned at game start)


Note on 6. Changes to Air Units
These changes should allow a more accurate modeling of the Battle of Britain, the Blitz, and the Strategic Bombing Campaign.
Lots of new kinds of fun here [:)]

[explorer2]

M just posted, Sunday evening 5/24/2009

[british exil]

Looking forward to downloading and playing. Thanks for all the hard work mate. Also thanks to all those that helped sorting out the other versions and esp. thanks to Tweber for the allowing to modding his mod.

[Bombur]

Since you created night bombers, you could create night fighters too...

[explorer2]

Yes, I thought about creating night fighters as well, but from my research they didn't have a strong impact on the interception of the bombers, and they didn't start using them in significant numbers until late in the war, and didn't last too long due to oil shortages.

GE put most of their effort in defending into flak, which already exists.

Flak is slightly cheaper than the bombers and has a kill ratio in game higher than in real life, so they should do the job nicely.

[Khanti]

ORIGINAL: explorer2
WaW Revised version M Now Available

Changes to M compared to L

1. Fixed omission from L of new graphics files for Escort Carrier and Fortified Airfield
2. Fixed L Montreal bug: IF AI is West, went into infinite loop.
(...)

Thank you for new version. I just waited for this infinite loop bug to be fixed.

PS: You could consider some graphics update: I am sure all colour OR all black-white pictures of units are better than mix of both.
This is WW2, so I suggest recolouring all pictures to black-white.

When Munich become SS city, because it starts in Sept 39 as standard German city in version M.

[pzrjagr]

Explorer2, great work on the new version.  We are holding off trying it PBEM, however, until the missing SS return.  Really sucks for the Germans not having the ubermensch from Munich available.  Please let us know when it will be ready - thanks.

[explorer2]

pzrjagr-
Yes, it is highly recommended to hold off until I get M' new structural damage values and USA production better balanced.
If all goes well, this will be done by June 6.

[Bombur]

ORIGINAL: explorer2

Yes, I thought about creating night fighters as well, but from my research they didn't have a strong impact on the interception of the bombers, and they didn't start using them in significant numbers until late in the war, and didn't last too long due to oil shortages.

GE put most of their effort in defending into flak, which already exists.

Flak is slightly cheaper than the bombers and has a kill ratio in game higher than in real life, so they should do the job nicely.

I´m nor sure, but, if I remember, night fighters, with radars, were very dangerous to British bombers. While the Luftwaffe was neutralized by mid 1944 and losses of daylight bombers fell a lot after the use of escorts, night bombing remained a dangerous activity until late 44. To some extent this happened because night bombers didn´t have escorts. Some of the best German aces were night fighter pilots.

[Bombur]

Here is some data from the old 12 o´clock high, bombing the reich manual.

1-At daylight, the Germans lost one fighter for each bomber shot down. At night, they lost one fighter for each 4 bombers shot down.
2-Attacks against Berlin in late 1943 and early 1944 resulted in 14% bomber losses (for each mission) for the British.
3-A massive attack against Nuremberg in 1944 resulted in 95 bombers lost (of 795) in only one mission. Most of kills were achieved by night fighters.
4-44% of the aircrews of Bomber command were lost in the war.

http://www.lancastermuseum.ca/commandlosses.html

http://madhatterrgames.com/german-night ... 20084.html
As arguably the most consistently effective arm of the wartime Luftwaffe, the Nachtjagd took a steady toll of Allied aircraft - the vast majority of them RAF bombers - throughout most of World War

http://www.google.com.br/books?q=German ... sar+livros

[explorer2]

Very helpful data Bombur.
I had been using total numbers of night fighters in action and killed vs total numbers of night bombers in action and killed as found in WWII Databook.
Looks like this bears some close inspection.
There are so many different ways of looking at the various data.
One of my ways of choosing loss numbers is bombers lost/fighters lost vs. crewmen lost. That figure is indeed very high (the highest percentage in the war in fact), yet enough of the crews returned to allow the bombers to go out again with fresh replacements.

These sources are very helpful so thanks.

[explorer2]

Some additional data on GE night fighters vs UK Bomber Command night bombing.

From the Jerry Scutts book Bombur cites: “The defenders (night fighters) were rarely able to raise the loss ratio to more than 10% of the attacking force."

From WWII Databook, p.260: Total losses as % of sorties on a monthly basis (after 1939) never exceeded 6.2%. It averaged from JAn 1940 to war's end 3.2%, and that includes ALL losses, night fighters, flak, & accidents.

I have not been able to find statistics on how many losses were due to anti-air vs. how many were due to night fighter interception, vs. other causes, but if 3.2% is losses from all causes, I can't imagine on average night fighters accounting for much more than 2% of kills/sortie.

[Bombur]

-Yes, a typical loss rate was about 4%, but it´s fairly high, about half of what is considered a prohibitive loss (10%). A 2-3% loss to night fighters is reasonable. This is higher than losses suffered by escorted daylight bombers and results in the necessity to replace all involved aircraft each three months (assuming each aircraft flying 10 missions/month). This is a significant attrition rate, remember that WaW turns are monthly.

[Bombur]

More data, it´s important to consider that he 3,2% is an average, as ECM developments could shift the balance. A horrendous 5% rate was frequent before the Windows ECM, which decrease losses a lot. The SN2 German radar (impervious to windows) shifted the tide again, in the last months of the war, losses decreased again due to fuel shortages, which crippled the Luftwaffe.

Btw, I made a mistake, the turn is 15 days long, not 30 days.

http://www.isegoria.net/2009/05/between ... isions.htm

[coxville]

With regards to M have just returned from holiday and thought I would give it a go. Munich is SS to start with but reverts to german during the first AI session. Hope this helps if you hadn't managed to find it already.

thanks

Chris

[coxville]

found the SS problem. Event 116 was checking Munich and in line 99 swapping the people to Germany (3) rather than SS.

Sure you would have found that by now anyway.

Happy Modding

Chris

[explorer2]

Thanks for catching this Chris.
I've now corrected it and will include it in version N.