Anzio 1944 Allied PO

[Cfant]

Sorry, I should have told you - this is just a test. I made it, because in my "normal" game against the PO this was exactly the result I got. The first raid was not opposed by allied aircraft, so the balkan squads had the same devastating effect you can see in screenshot one.
The allied navy was saved there, because I made a few ground assaults which burned my turn, that's why I said: If one would concentrate on the navy, he could collect a lot of VP's I guess.
The issue is, IF the allied air force will join the fight.

I made a few test-runs today. I have to admit, that my "real" game against PO seems not to be typical concerning PO air force intervening.

here a raid with allied opposition.

[Cfant]

My losses in this raid (I have to make several posts, because the forum allows only one picture [&:])

[Cfant]

Another test-run, here at night. As you can see, only a few beaufighters meet my bombers. This is the result of combat round one. If you only start raids on the allied fleet, I always have four combat rounds. In the 3. round only 8 beaufighters were still in the air (on the other hand some counters of mine were in reorg too).

You also have to keep in mind, that for this test-runs I just let the game pass by until I was able to use the Balkan-Squads. Therefore the allied airforce was rested and in top-form [;)]

Resume: Even if my first success (no allied air-opposition) seems to have been luck, I still would say the Balkan-TO is too cheap. Maybe other playtesters can post their results.

One more issue: It's quite disturbing, that in some Luftwaffe Counter we find bombers and fighters united. This results in JU88's flying escort for naval bombers - I don't guess that was what Aunt Ju was designed for [;)]

[ogar]

A few responses --

1) I think Colin's point about the PO decision making needs reviewing -- my experience (and most Anzio1KM-ers is H2H); and no one is as relentess or tunnel visioned as Elmer.

2) Bleepin'- A on that artillery question. You do want the batteries because you do need to rotate them; SUPPLY MATTERS in this swampland. And you never get quite enough for artillery.

3) AAA with artillery ? You bet, because until the German player starts to get enough flak in, the Allied player can and should activate the MATBF, even the strategic air force, to bomb the artillery units.

4) The Allies did use AAA in active ground support (d'Este), but only in critical defense situations. Later the heavy AAA as well as the Shermans were used as field artillery for the May breakout.

But if I'm spouting off so much, I suppose I better actually play the new version. (I really, really have to get out of the Med.)

[Telumar]

Thanks for the tests. With Allied aircraft intercepting the results look much better. Note that not all of the equipment listed as disabled in the combat report is actually destroyed. There's a random check against unit proficiency to determine the amount of equipment going into the pool.

The usual air campaign Elmer conducts against German airfields is not reflected in your tests, too. Still, the losses to the allied navy are a bit too heavy which partially must have also to do with reduced AA in 3.4. Also the question still remains if the PO will actually set sufficient aircraft to AS. Looks like i'll have to go into the testlab again..

Another test-run, here at night. As you can see, only a few beaufighters meet my bombers. This is the result of combat round one. If you only start raids on the allied fleet, I always have four combat rounds. In the 3. round only 8 beaufighters were still in the air (on the other hand some counters of mine were in reorg too).

Now this is interesting observation on the PO's use of aircraft. It just uses its nightfighters on PM turns.

Although the engine reduces effectiveness of aircraft on PM turns to 33% for normal and 66% for night/all weather equipment the result appears unrealistic to me.

What i will do is:
- increase naval AA
- reduce SM79 III anti-shipping from insane 480 (!!) to 120 and as Colin suggested reduce He-177 anti-shipping to 120. Despite Fritz X and Hs-293 glider bombs which were anyway jammed more or less effectively by the Allies.

Then let's see how thinks will work out and if the Balkan Naval TO still needs to be made more expensive. These changes also should be applied to the HvH version i think.

One more issue: It's quite disturbing, that in some Luftwaffe Counter we find bombers and fighters united. This results in JU88's flying escort for naval bombers - I don't guess that was what Aunt Ju was designed for

Do you mean 2.(F)/122? I know, but what to do? Split the unit? It will evap as soon as the splitted parts encounter a Spitfire..

If you mean 6./NJG 6 - this is the night interceptor version Ju-88G

[ogar]

@Cfant & Telumar,

My experience with air-naval in H2H is that the Luftwaffe is deadly. Usually this happens with an early turn end, and the ships still in bombardement range, and the Allied air weak/not set up for defense.

Combine that with Elmer's disregard for losses (as we saw in Anzio 2KM) and I can see a German player devastating a Allied PO navy.

Maybe add event(s) triggered by naval losses for the PO -- withdrawal after a certain point ? or split the Allied fleet up into task groups for the PO and only allow some of the ships at sea after turn 4, 5 ?

[ogar]

Now this is interesting observation on the PO's use of aircraft. It just uses its nightfighters on PM turns.

Although the engine reduces effectiveness of aircraft on PM turns to 33% for normal and 66% for night/all weather equipment the result appears unrealistic to me

.

On the PO using only all-weather a/c at night -- this happens in Anzio 2KM as well. Is there another day/night scenario with Allied/Luftwaffe nightfighters that we can also check to see if this occurs there as well ?

In Anzio 1KM, I've found the P40's to be about as effective as the Beau in nighttime AS; and I've tried using the Beaus as interdiction at night, but did not find a big payoff when I did so.

[ColinWright]

...This results in JU88's flying escort for naval bombers - I don't guess that was what Aunt Ju was designed for...

It's a red herring -- but some of the bomber units I've been looking at in 1942 do contain a sprinkling of a fighter version of the Ju-88 along with the usual bomber variants.

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: ogar

4) The Allies did use AAA in active ground support (d'Este), but only in critical defense situations. Later the heavy AAA as well as the Shermans were used as field artillery for the May breakout...

Yeah. This sounds about right. Conversely, even German flak had to occasionally take time out from bunker-busting and such to shoot at planes.

The difficulty is that in TOAW, if a flak unit is in the OOB and free to move at all, it's always available for ground combat duty.

That's really more of an issue for the 'wishlist' thread -- which will predictably lead to me entertaining everyone with repeated futile attempts to overcome blocking position LeMay.

However, simply allowing all those guns to fight all the time isn't really appropriate. There really isn't a completely satisfactory solution at the moment.

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: ogar

3) AAA with artillery ? You bet, because until the German player starts to get enough flak in, the Allied player can and should activate the MATBF, even the strategic air force, to bomb the artillery units.

I dunno what 'MATBF' might be, but in my experience (which admittedly doesn't include Anzio) aircraft are almost always used more profitably to support actual ground attacks than to conduct bombardment missions.

[Telumar]

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

ORIGINAL: ogar

4) The Allies did use AAA in active ground support (d'Este), but only in critical defense situations. Later the heavy AAA as well as the Shermans were used as field artillery for the May breakout...

Yeah. This sounds about right. Conversely, even German flak had to occasionally take time out from bunker-busting and such to shoot at planes.

The difficulty is that in TOAW, if a flak unit is in the OOB and free to move at all, it's always available for ground combat duty.

That's really more of an issue for the 'wishlist' thread -- which will predictably lead to me entertaining everyone with repeated futile attempts to overcome blocking position LeMay.

However, simply allowing all those guns to fight all the time isn't really appropriate. There really isn't a completely satisfactory solution at the moment.

I can tell you how that "blocking position" looks like: In IV. And this with good reason, believe me.

Still i find it as inappropriate as you, but all that currently can be done will only be an educated guess. Which i find also unsatisfying.


Referring to one of your earlier posts:

- In the attack on the Campoleone Salient the following guns were allocated to the 3 Gruppen:

Pfeiffer (65.ID): 12x 8.8cm, 9x 3.7cm, 49x 2cm
Gräser (3.PzGD): 43x 8.8cm, 18x 3.7cm, 108x 2cm
Konrad (HG Div): 11x 8.8cm, 9x 3.7cm, 31x 2cm

The war diary states that these guns were to be used in ground combat or AA at the division commanders' discretion.
I can list which formations were with which group for the Campoleone attack and for Fischfang if you wish.

I have three "ortsfeste Abteilungen" ("fixed", lacking organic transport) in the scenario in garrison mode. These are not included in the above list.

I wouldn't go with 25% of the Flak available for ground combat in Anzio anyway. It was definitely more. The Germans brought up a special formation, KG Prentl, which was a special ground combat school for Flak (Flak Erdkampfschule Süd). Apart from being send in an emergency situation this should indicate what they were up to.. More: There was the raid of the HG Div's SP Flak against the Mussolini Canal bridges on the first evening/night. Other references on establishing a "Flak-Sperrgürtel" (Flak blocking position or zone) can be found in OKW's war diaries (and/or Staiger, can't remember atm). Then there was the bad weather which should have reduced the need for AA. The initial storm from Jan 24th to 26th. Between Jan 27th and Feb 19th weather was unsuited for air operations on 40% of all days (i came to this number from Molony). In Peter Verney's book there are also enough references on ground combat use of Flak against the Brits.

[Telumar]

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

ORIGINAL: ogar

3) AAA with artillery ? You bet, because until the German player starts to get enough flak in, the Allied player can and should activate the MATBF, even the strategic air force, to bomb the artillery units.

I dunno what 'MATBF' might be, but in my experience (which admittedly doesn't include Anzio) aircraft are almost always used more profitably to support actual ground attacks than to conduct bombardment missions.

Mediterranean Allied Tactical Bomber Force. Second row of airfields from the left at the map bottom. "Un-entrenching" the enemy artillery should not be underestimated. Plus the Germans will have a hard time to replace knocked out tubes.

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: Telumar



I wouldn't go with 25% of the Flak available for ground combat in Anzio anyway.

25% was just a random number. Point is that it must have been some figure other than 100% -- and that therefore a design approach that implicitly assumes 100% is flawed.

If it was me...I don't know what I would do if it was me. That's one of the great things about being a critic. You don't have to solve the problem, just point it out.

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

ORIGINAL: Telumar



I wouldn't go with 25% of the Flak available for ground combat in Anzio anyway.

25% was just a random number. Point is that it must have been some figure other than 100% -- and that therefore a design approach that implicitly assumes 100% is flawed.

If it was me...I don't know what I would do if it was me. That's one of the great things about being a critic. You don't have to solve the problem, just point it out.

I'll persist in saying that pending painful evidence to the contrary and/or poor cooperation levels, I'd assume it to be more profitable to use that air power in direct support of actual attacks.

One might actually want to go with poor cooperation levels. I was reading an otherwise okay if not great book: Hallion's Strike from the Sky.

It's more or less a history of tactical airpower. He comments that while attempts were made to use the B-25 as a tactical support aircraft (particularly by the Russians) it was impressively unsuited for the role, and suffered heavy losses. Too big and easy to hit.

[sPzAbt653]

The Sturm FlaK Regiments were formed for ground support (even trained in using their 88's for indirect fire against ground targets). Their main role was anit-aircraft though, and I have no idea if any Sturm FlaK units were in Italy.

Thinking about the issue of splitting time between AA and Ground Support roles, I think Telu said he has some AA units in static positions, which is a good solution. Some could also be given no transport, which might cause the player to anchor them to normal AA positions (covering airfields, HQ's and artillery). Another thought might be to hit the Bio-Ed and knock down the AA equipments anti-personnel values. Not because a quad 20 or quad 50 wasn't a serious threat to personnel, but just to simulate these weapons not being entirely dedicated to that role.

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

The Sturm FlaK Regiments were formed for ground support (even trained in using their 88's for indirect fire against ground targets). Their main role was anit-aircraft though, and I have no idea if any Sturm FlaK units were in Italy.

Thinking about the issue of splitting time between AA and Ground Support roles, I think Telu said he has some AA units in static positions, which is a good solution. Some could also be given no transport, which might cause the player to anchor them to normal AA positions (covering airfields, HQ's and artillery). Another thought might be to hit the Bio-Ed and knock down the AA equipments anti-personnel values. Not because a quad 20 or quad 50 wasn't a serious threat to personnel, but just to simulate these weapons not being entirely dedicated to that role.

One can also simply omit the weapons.

They are set in 1940-42, and I'm not saying the solution is perfect, but in my scenarios, I usually give Russian and British flak pieces an AP rating of 0 or omit them entirely, while in the case of the Germans, I omit units whose location in the OOB suggests they weren't directly supporting ground troops very often.

The fact of the matter is that these guns often simply didn't engage in ground combat. Why is interesting but somewhat beside the point: if they didn't, they didn't. Arguments others have made notwithstanding, as a designer one has to go with what given personnel and given weapons did most of the time. Otherwise, the cooks and clerks are fighting all the time, and there goes dinner.

[ColinWright]

Another thought (and that's all it is -- I'm not saying it would work) would be to assign extremely low (say 10%) formation supply levels to formations composed of flak units.

It'd be somewhat artificial, but that way, while they could be occasionally committed to combat, the player would perhaps be motivated to usually hold them out of line of fire, rest them, and have them available to serve as a fire brigade and/or to bolster the big push.

Which, to at least some extent, is what they did.

[sPzAbt653]

I was thinking that if the weapons are omitted or their formations given lower supply parameters, that this would then affect their ability to perform AA missions. Of course, I'm not really sure if an enemy air attack on my airfield that contains planes and AA units actually takes those AA into account, but I like to think it does. I suppose a look at one of those logs would prove it out.

I expect the same when I stack an AA unit with an HQ, or some artillery, and when I place an AA unit on a bridge hex.

[Cfant]

Well, my impression is, that only fighters can defend against enemy aircraft. AA seems pretty weak to me in TOAW.
By the way, here a typical day in italy from my "regular" game agains PO. Elmer was lucky, my last bombing-run didn't find the ships [:D]

Maybe it's too soon to say, but I'm now in turn 13 or 14 and for the first time I think, the situation is under control along the whole front. Elmars main problem seems to be, that I have such a lot of artillery, that every attacking unit suffers for every inch they march on, while germany prepares for a first major counteroffensive. Maybe I unterestimate Elmar (again [:D]), but I doubt Elmar can go the whole distance.

If this proves true, may a change of duration and aim of the scenario should be considered. E.g. Elmer only needs to take osterricca to achieve a victory. And if the scenario only takes 30 turns, Elmar would not have so much time to loose his army [;)] Well, we'll see how the war develops.

[Telumar]

ORIGINAL: Cfant2

Well, my impression is, that only fighters can defend against enemy aircraft. AA seems pretty weak to me in TOAW.
By the way, here a typical day in italy from my "regular" game agains PO. Elmer was lucky, my last bombing-run didn't find the ships [:D]

Maybe it's too soon to say, but I'm now in turn 13 or 14 and for the first time I think, the situation is under control along the whole front. Elmars main problem seems to be, that I have such a lot of artillery, that every attacking unit suffers for every inch they march on, while germany prepares for a first major counteroffensive. Maybe I unterestimate Elmar (again [:D]), but I doubt Elmar can go the whole distance.

If this proves true, may a change of duration and aim of the scenario should be considered. E.g. Elmer only needs to take osterricca to achieve a victory. And if the scenario only takes 30 turns, Elmar would not have so much time to loose his army [;)] Well, we'll see how the war develops.

The screenshot is from an earlier turn. The commandos withdraw on turn 11.

Interesting thoughts btw, but Osteriaccia would be not enough. Maybe Osteriacchia and Cisterna? I could add in a TO for the human player to chose between a long run or a short game as you suggested.

In your game Elmer will still receive the entire US 45th ID and US 1st AD's CCA. I hope that he will use it in an appropriate manner. Would you like to keep me up to date how things evolve, that is if you do want to continue? First elements of CCA should be in action on turn 28, maybe 27.