LW useless vs VVS overpowered

[AlbertN]

This is something that needs to be addressed.

Latest beta patch made German fighters pratically sucking bananas as they fly little - and are less efficient.
That renders the Luftwaffe unable to sustain any form of air superiority - talking of '41 and pretty much '42 as well (Where though I am a Soviet player)

As Soviet (which I've posted in the AAR) I have bombed indiscriminately LW fighter bases being non intercepted; occasionally intercepted with some losses - but mostly for a few good turns despite the valiant efforts of the LW - the Soviets were blasting away German guns and disrupting the enemy offensive.
Maybe I've not plastered the AAR with screenshots but it's easily replicable in game.

Ontop of that the VVS has the Li2 Flying Fortresses. Impervious to enemy fire, extremely reliable, their losses are minimal.

From my AAR, for who is not into going to search... here the Soviet tidal waves in the skies shreds an amount of German assets.
Germans must have forgotten to camo their Pz.II as they're overly targetted!



Another sheer example of massed VVS in '42. For games that get in 42!



That's late right? Let's see a T1... after the Soviet airforce is bombed to bits, where the Soviet player has not even tinkered with settings...
The LW intercepts - nice. Still the Soviet VVS gets through, and inflicts damage.

Patch.jpg (219.01 KiB) Viewed 682 times

Now a Soviet player - ontop of the many other superpowers depicted in other AARs / Threads can simply position their Su2 and Il2 (Level bombers are less efficient but they're present in mass...) where the Panzers will advance (or are expected to). Specifically assign Ground Support to the desired armies (so they do not get baited in remote fights) and watch the show.
The LW will pratically be impotent or unable to offer air cover in a mobile front as the '41 may be if the Germans need to embrace and pocket and spearhead fast and hard. If the front slows down, air cover may be there but ... inefficient since the latest beta.

On the other hand I start a new game as Axis and as soon as I use the LW once I am a bit into Russia ...
Russian AA exterminates LW planes. And the supposedly ace / veteran crews of the Luftwaffe hardly achieve anything.

In the AAR where I am the Soviets I spent 3 turns bombing in daylight the LW fighter bases as they're unable to fight or intercept poorly... in '42, so they have decent logistics even... after 3 turns I stopped because I felt it cheesy and gamey.

LWisUseless.jpg (249.34 KiB) Viewed 682 times

One can add that the Soviets have infinite logistics, can fly as much as they want pratically.
Germans already struggle to supply their ground units. To keep some air umbrella up is costy. And now it is inefficient.
Stukas pratically gets blasted away from any Russian AA.

It's like the parts are inverted despite the supposed experience different levels.
In 0.25 the thing that was different is that the Luftwaffe fighters could actually fight in the skies and trashed the VVS but anywhere the LW was not offering air umbrella ... the ground forces were being trashed.

Last but not least the Ju52 instead are mighty frail. Suffering 5% to 20% of OPs losses by flying across friendly hexes for air supply. Even in clear skies and weather without seeing enemy action.
I can quite see any general being told "Plane is faster but you risk your life a flight every 8 roughly. Or we can use train.". Because that's how the thing is. Prolly not even a pilot would get on a plane with that risk % of losing their life.

A flight from Berlin to Munich - or Suwalki to Minsk (I am quite sure the Ju52 were also making Suwalki to Orsha but they cannot anymore so there must have been a range nerf too) as long as it's all friendly ground should have pratically a 0.01% losses in terms of truly destroyed airplane.
'OPs' losses are represented by the shrinking numbers of planes that service each run - representing mechanical repairs, and things like that. Not destroyed planes. (Given I am of the opinion that in general OPs losses are high)

Enemy interception, AA fire, etc - is what should produce losses. And it does.

Edit: For sake of science I tried again - twice, with ground support. Once I just lost a bucket of fighters due to OPs. The other - unopposed by even Russian flak - here I post. It's rain. Yes. But the deadly Stuka are a joke even when they can dive undisrupted. And even if they were lethal just as Stukas, Germany has few of them compared to the Il2. LW needs level bombers too to be effective, in virtue of the pilot quality / skill or so.

LWisUseless2.jpg (197.48 KiB) Viewed 673 times

[ErmanMagon41]

Hmm... I would love to see more effective luftwaffe in game.

[loki100]

This really isn't correct. In my current game I am winning battles due to GS missions from the LW and the VVS (esp its fighters) just dies on contact, pretty much regardless of what they actually try to do

[Stamb]

in my experience tactical bombers are deadly and overpowered for both sides
overall feedback for an air war i provided here
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 6&t=383558

[loki100]

maybe

but if you strip the VVS of its fighter cover - which is far too easy to do, then the Il2s are extremely vulnerable. You can all too easily render the VVS out of action simply by good positioning of the LW fighters. Basically no escorts = no bombers.

the practical discussion is around what to do to make the VVS useable in the mid-game, possibly by pushing up the Soviet air NM values.

I'm into my second HtH in the summer of 42 and the VVS takes such heavy fighter losses that it seems like it can only operate one turn in three with the exception of sectors where I either abandon or can't bring fighter cover due to logistics problems

[Stamb]

yeah
i also noticed that pilots exp plays a crucial role in fighter vs fighter battles

there was only 1 battle in my game when losses were 1:1
and it was when German pilots had the same exp as my pilots

so it is definitely not a problem in difference between planes

its a difference in exp and how this exp is used to calculate final results

also it was mentioned that in .28beta a2a intensity should be lower
i did not see any battles with that patch yet

[AlbertN]

This really isn't correct. In my current game I am winning battles due to GS missions from the LW and the VVS (esp its fighters) just dies on contact, pretty much regardless of what they actually try to do

In latest patch the VVS 'dies less' - which may be okay.
But the LW dies more? Yes.

The point is that it allows the Ground Support by Il2 to be more present.
Simply the LW has no means to vanquish a superior in numbers foe - in .25 Soviets simply had to fly an amount of bait missions to tire the LW Fighters before to get in with their hard hitters (Done that, it's a matter of sacrificing planes) -- but that was costy as hell.
In .27 the Germans simply fight too little, too poorly.

Then they can get bombed into hell - on the ground, planes or troops.

I'd be amazed of a German player that with their fighter allocation in let's say '42 or so (I really started to tinker with the VVS in '42 but with some more will I am sure in '41 results too can be achieved) can achieve to control an air sector vs a superior (in numbers) foes.

But my point is not about the A2A fights. It's what Germans cannot do vs ground targets, and what the VVS can do.
About how Soviets can air supply almost scott-free with Li2 and the Germans play Destruction Derby as a game with their Ju52 as soon as they take off.

The game numbers are clear - then if people profess otherwise; it is just a matter of how said numbers are perceived and felt.

[AlbertN]

Adding - merry Soviet AA making mayhem of the Axis planes.
Only small caliber AA. Besides the 37mm ... the others are machine guns.

SovietAA.jpg (267.59 KiB) Viewed 546 times

[loki100]

...

In latest patch the VVS 'dies less' - which may be okay.
But the LW dies more? Yes.

The point is that it allows the Ground Support by Il2 to be more present.
Simply the LW has no means to vanquish a superior in numbers foe - in .25 Soviets simply had to fly an amount of bait missions to tire the LW Fighters before to get in with their hard hitters (Done that, it's a matter of sacrificing planes) -- but that was costy as hell.
In .27 the Germans simply fight too little, too poorly.

Then they can get bombed into hell - on the ground, planes or troops.

I'd be amazed of a German player that with their fighter allocation in let's say '42 or so (I really started to tinker with the VVS in '42 but with some more will I am sure in '41 results too can be achieved) can achieve to control an air sector vs a superior (in numbers) foes.

But my point is not about the A2A fights. It's what Germans cannot do vs ground targets, and what the VVS can do.
About how Soviets can air supply almost scott-free with Li2 and the Germans play Destruction Derby as a game with their Ju52 as soon as they take off.
...

I've been using air transport all game - I mostly aim at rear depots and so far have lost 437 Ju-52s (so around 8 per turn), I can't see what is wrong with that.

if you know how to place your fighters then you can destroy the VVS' escorts with ease, to the extent they don't just run out of modern planes but even the I-series stuff. So they can't build up, can't train. No escorts = no bombers

Heres a turn where my opponent really tried to contest and commit:



I've been running a lot of GS, can't see the problem with the AA. I've won battles I would have lost without GS, I've escalated narrow wins to devastating wins with GS. And I'll do the same in the next turn because those losses don't dent either my pilot or plane stocks. I doubt the VVS can sustain this into the next turn.

[Stamb]

agree with loki, except of AA losses, they seem to be high in that screenshot from an Albert

a2a battles is heavily favorable for an Axis
as a result they get almost free GS
and as we discussed in other topics
in my game, Axis were flying transport planes just fine
in any weather, including blizzard and heavy rain with the same ops losses as in a clear weather

my view on air war is pretty simple
reduce a2a intensity
maybe buff VVS NM or nerf Axis one
and make tactical bombers less deadly
especially for an arty

and obviously there are smaller issues like no interception for GA/recon

[AlbertN]

...

In latest patch the VVS 'dies less' - which may be okay.
But the LW dies more? Yes.

The point is that it allows the Ground Support by Il2 to be more present.
Simply the LW has no means to vanquish a superior in numbers foe - in .25 Soviets simply had to fly an amount of bait missions to tire the LW Fighters before to get in with their hard hitters (Done that, it's a matter of sacrificing planes) -- but that was costy as hell.
In .27 the Germans simply fight too little, too poorly.

Then they can get bombed into hell - on the ground, planes or troops.

I'd be amazed of a German player that with their fighter allocation in let's say '42 or so (I really started to tinker with the VVS in '42 but with some more will I am sure in '41 results too can be achieved) can achieve to control an air sector vs a superior (in numbers) foes.

But my point is not about the A2A fights. It's what Germans cannot do vs ground targets, and what the VVS can do.
About how Soviets can air supply almost scott-free with Li2 and the Germans play Destruction Derby as a game with their Ju52 as soon as they take off.
...

I've been using air transport all game - I mostly aim at rear depots and so far have lost 437 Ju-52s (so around 8 per turn), I can't see what is wrong with that.

if you know how to place your fighters then you can destroy the VVS' escorts with ease, to the extent they don't just run out of modern planes but even the I-series stuff. So they can't build up, can't train. No escorts = no bombers

Heres a turn where my opponent really tried to contest and commit:



I've been running a lot of GS, can't see the problem with the AA. I've won battles I would have lost without GS, I've escalated narrow wins to devastating wins with GS. And I'll do the same in the next turn because those losses don't dent either my pilot or plane stocks. I doubt the VVS can sustain this into the next turn.

So ... 8 Ju52 per turn out of ... all of them that you got - that's 3-4% losses, and how many flights do you do?
That to me is definitely not acceptable - and my numbers are well higher IF they just fly -once- in the same turn.

I am assuming you have flown all of your default formations starting on map, each turn, I do not know how many times.

Anyhow it seems I am playing a different game and have different experiences in terms of numbers - or as said in another thread - perception and feeling of numbers is simply different from player to player.

[AlbertN]

Here another nice screenshot of Soviet AA butchering 20% of the German planes coming by.
At least this time the hundred+ of planes do something BUT hey, the AA shoots down more planes than what the planes destroy on the ground.

AAImba.jpg (238.78 KiB) Viewed 526 times

[loki100]

according to the production chart I've built 623 since the start of the game and have 8 missing from formations, I'm also short of 5 He-111H-3 T. So looks like i can readily live within the level of usage I do and I can regularly deliver 500 tons + to key locations. But as I say, very rarely near the front line.

so yes, play approach is very important

[DarkHorse2]

Here another nice screenshot of Soviet AA butchering 20% of the German planes coming by.
At least this time the hundred+ of planes do something BUT hey, the AA shoots down more planes than what the planes destroy on the ground.

Yeah, the Soviet AA can be pretty rough. Do you know what altitude you were flying?

What is the effective altitude on those 37mm 61-K AA Gun.

FYI - the Anti-Aircraft listed, IIRC, also includes all the AA that could have gotten a shot at you along the path to the target.

It is like AC units accumulate all the potential AA Fire, along its path, until it is all resolved later.

EDIT:

Found them....

WiTE2_Soviet_37mm_61K_AAGun.JPG (245.52 KiB) Viewed 493 times

Unfortunately, WiTE2 appears inconsistent with its units of measure.

Range: 3000 ?
Ceiling: 21000 ? (miles?, inches?, parsecs?)

grrr... let go verify in the WiTW editor manual... yet again.... see below


Well, if the following is accurate regarding the weapon system it appears:

Soviet_37mm_61K_AAGun.JPG (47.37 KiB) Viewed 493 times

Range: 3000 is "Practical" range in meters? (this also seems to jive with the WiTW manual)
Ceiling: 21000 is "Maximum" range in feet? (ditto)

FYI: 1 meter is approximately 3.28 feet

If these assumptions are true, which I could be entirely wrong,

The "Practical" range of the weapon against air targets would be about 9,842ft.
(this actually makes sense and feels about right)

So, if those guns are hitting anything flying higher than 9,842ft, I think that should prompt some investigation....

WiTW_editor_app_G.JPG (61.13 KiB) Viewed 493 times

[AlbertN]

Altitude was 9k (I believe my opponent left the default setting there!)
Still they've hit bucket of airplanes. A 25% loss out of flak and ops for a single flight is insane.

There was not intervening Soviet hex except one with a Cav Div that wrapped the 2nd combat. So negligible in impact.
With this rate of losses I do not even need fighters as Soviet. I can just pump more and more AA regiments and battallions.

I still rest in my case that Air Transport losses should be 0.01 % in clear weather and going over friendly hexes. An occasional incident that produces an airplane loss.
A 2-4% losses just because something takes off - without enemy action whatsoever - is plainly absurd.
It's not about how players use their assets - it's how the game is for what concerns certains aspects.

Who of you here would take an airplane knowing you have 2-4% chance to get a crash, on a sunny day, in peace time (which is the same as flying over friendly hexes, unless partisans suddenly have widespread AA guns).

The problem is that the numbers are wonky because players most of the time do not fly their own air assets because ... OPs are insane. Because AA... Because supplies... etc.

[DarkHorse2]

I think you misunderstand Albert.

I am not contesting any of your assertions.

I am just trying to offer a suggestion to help with your AA losses and perhaps bumping altitude to something over 10k feet, where you can.

[AlbertN]

That was my opponent altitude - but that's besides the point.

AA in general is a deterrent - not an obliterating force. In this game it is represented as an obliterating force. Even to fly higher - it would equal from my perspective to send planes to the butchery.

The problem spirals up.

Devs check historical losses, they're not there. They bump AA and OPs losses. Players see more AA losses, more OPs losses, bombers for Axis drain supply and there is already no supply. Players use less airplanes. Thus there are less losses.
Devs check current losses. See they're lesser than historical losses. (Only because players use planes less and less, otherwise they'd prolly be 100 times the historical ones).
Devs check historical losses, they're not there. They bump AA and OPs losses. Players see more AA losses, more OPs losses, bombers for Axis drain supply and there is already no supply. Players use less airplanes. Thus there are less losses.
Cycle repeats.

That's how it seems it's working.

It was the same for Panzers - players were not fighting with Panzer divisions because they were exploding on enemy contact.
Now they have been changed - it will take some time to have players with ingrained mindset to avoid panzer-combat to start using panzer-divisions actively in combat as they factually were.