TRP - Total Realism Project for War in Europe (1.12 Download)

[Duedman]

You need to intercept the Strategic bombers to have them cause less damage either with AA units or being intercepted.

I am not sure why people keep complaining about this when historical facts are supporting my viewpoint on this. The strategic bomber campaign was devastating to Germany. Germany (historically) had to focus over 70% of its fighters to protect Germany from the bomber campaign.

What I keep hearing from people is they want to build a bunch of AA and then forget about it and let the Allies suffer massive aircraft losses with no damage to the Germans because AA fire receives no damage back. This is not fair and NOT historically accurate! The change was designed to force the German player to move their fighters to protect their industry. This in turn helps the Russians gain Air Supremacy (slowly) on Germany which again is HISTORICALLY ACCURATE!

So to answer your question, assign your fighters to defend your stuff and build all your AA and have them sit around the most vital locations which would then limit where the Allies can bomb if they do not want 1 sided damage (meaning they take damage but the other side does not).

Even with interceptors the bombing power still doubled no?
(I edited my example to 2 attacks per turn)

And I'm actually not "complaining" about the Allied Stratbombers.
It's the 3 Axis ones that run riot long before the Allies start their thing.
I see that AI bonusses make their use more costly in singleplayer.

I guess if played in multiplayer this mod just needs many many houserules.

[Taxman66]

Maybe another part of the solution would be to reduce the effectiveness of ART by:
1) Reduce the demoralization value.
2) Set the de-entrenchment to 1 and not have it increase with ART Tech.
3) Reduce the number of shells that can be saved from 3 to 1, but have it increase to 2 with ART Tech.

----
In regards to the Strat bomber issue, I see Duedman's point economically there is more income with double the turns (though not double income I think).

However, the damage to cities/towns strat bombers can cause and their affect on supply is just as big if not more of an issue.

Lothos, my experience with Single Player (as both Axis and Allied) is that Intercepting the Strat bombers doesn't hurt them that much unless they don't have escorts. Even then I get maybe 1-3 damage on the bomber over both its runs and often take 1-2 damage back to my own FTR. When escorts are included, the escorts and interceptors take similar damage and at best its 1 maybe 2 damage to the bomber and another 1-2 additional back to the interceptors.

In all cases the bomber appears to do the same amount of damage if intercepted or not. Damaging the bomber does mean that eventually it has to take a break to repair.

[Taxman66]

You can remove the GE 2nd Strat Bomber by putting an availability date on it after the turn the freebie shows up.

As for Italy, I don't know is it justifiable that they have a Strat bomber unit? Maybe replace it with another Med Bomber?

[Lothos]

You need to intercept the Strategic bombers to have them cause less damage either with AA units or being intercepted.

I am not sure why people keep complaining about this when historical facts are supporting my viewpoint on this. The strategic bomber campaign was devastating to Germany. Germany (historically) had to focus over 70% of its fighters to protect Germany from the bomber campaign.

What I keep hearing from people is they want to build a bunch of AA and then forget about it and let the Allies suffer massive aircraft losses with no damage to the Germans because AA fire receives no damage back. This is not fair and NOT historically accurate! The change was designed to force the German player to move their fighters to protect their industry. This in turn helps the Russians gain Air Supremacy (slowly) on Germany which again is HISTORICALLY ACCURATE!

So to answer your question, assign your fighters to defend your stuff and build all your AA and have them sit around the most vital locations which would then limit where the Allies can bomb if they do not want 1 sided damage (meaning they take damage but the other side does not).

Even with interceptors the bombing power still doubled no?
(I edited my example to 2 attacks per turn)

And I'm actually not "complaining" about the Allied Stratbombers.
It's the 3 Axis ones that run riot long before the Allies start their thing.
I see that AI bonusses make their use more costly in singleplayer.

I guess if played in multiplayer this mod just needs many many houserules.

What is the strat bomber issue with the Axis? Germany gets one in July 1940.

If their is an exploit their what I can do is make it so Germany can not build strat bombers until after July 1940.

[Lothos]

Maybe another part of the solution would be to reduce the effectiveness of ART by:
1) Reduce the demoralization value.
2) Set the de-entrenchment to 1 and not have it increase with ART Tech.
3) Reduce the number of shells that can be saved from 3 to 1, but have it increase to 2 with ART Tech.

----
In regards to the Strat bomber issue, I see Duedman's point economically there is more income with double the turns (though not double income I think).

However, the damage to cities/towns strat bombers can cause and their affect on supply is just as big if not more of an issue.

Lothos, my experience with Single Player (as both Axis and Allied) is that Intercepting the Strat bombers doesn't hurt them that much unless they don't have escorts. Even then I get maybe 1-3 damage on the bomber over both its runs and often take 1-2 damage back to my own FTR. When escorts are included, the escorts and interceptors take similar damage and at best its 1 maybe 2 damage to the bomber and another 1-2 additional back to the interceptors.

In all cases the bomber appears to do the same amount of damage if intercepted or not. Damaging the bomber does mean that eventually it has to take a break to repair.

Taxxman66 I want to address ome of the items in your post as I like those ideas
---
1) Reduce the demoralization value.
2) Set the de-entrenchment to 1 and not have it increase with ART Tech.
3) Reduce the number of shells that can be saved from 3 to 1, but have it increase to 2 with ART Tech.
---
I like all 3 of these and will look into making these changes

Now on to interceptors, did you have them attached to an HQ. I always have all my interceptors attached to an HQ. My fighters will suffer anywhere from 0 to 4 damage and I usually see a 0-4 to enemy escorts and 0-4 to the strat bombers.

So in most runs I do more damage than I take and the strat bomber damage costs more to repair.

[Lothos]

You can remove the GE 2nd Strat Bomber by putting an availability date on it after the turn the freebie shows up.

As for Italy, I don't know is it justifiable that they have a Strat bomber unit? Maybe replace it with another Med Bomber?

I do believe Italy had something with Strat Bombers, World In Flames (the board game) have them represented with rather impressive long range units.

[Duedman]

However, the damage to cities/towns strat bombers can cause and their affect on supply is just as big if not more of an issue.

This! In my mind that's the true power of Strategic Bombers in this game. So I tend to forget to say that out loud. I don't care about bombing resources for their MPP values.
3 Axis Strategic Bombers can locally crack the supply system of this very game.

If you want an area with little to no supply, no railroad and no boosted HQs (be that North Africa or any part of Russia with a nice chunk of the Red army trapped) just bomb the supply.
3 Bombers with double the turns are crazy in that regard. Interceptors are nearly meaningless.
Even AA on resources would not improve that by a lot. Without AA its even worse of course.

Later on OCB and I houseruled one of the German Stratbombers out even though we already had set them to 1 attack per turn.
Unrestricted, they decide the War in the East long before the Western Allies can do anything.

[Lothos]

However, the damage to cities/towns strat bombers can cause and their affect on supply is just as big if not more of an issue.

This! In my mind that's the true power of Strategic Bombers in this game. So I tend to forget to say that out loud. I don't care about bombing resources for their MPP values.
3 Axis Strategic Bombers can locally crack the supply system of this very game.

If you want an area with little to no supply, no railroad and no boosted HQs (be that North Africa or any part of Russia with a nice chunk of the Red army trapped) just bomb the supply.
3 Bombers with double the turns are crazy in that regard. Interceptors are nearly meaningless.
Even AA on resources would not improve that by a lot. Without AA its even worse of course.

Later on OCB and I houseruled one of the German Stratbombers out even though we already had set them to 1 attack per turn.
Unrestricted, they decide the War in the East long before the Western Allies can do anything.

I agree on a major thing you posted. Resources and Supply in the Cities (etc...) should not be link. Resource should go down from bombing but the supply being sent out from the city should remain the same no matter how much bombing it receives.

I wonder if this is a change the devs would consider making as I do not see anything in the Editor that would allow me to change that.

The only down side I can think of right now to this is North Africa.

[Taxman66]

1. GE can currently get a 2nd Strat bomber by building one before the Freebie shows up. Similar to the base game getting a 3rd para by building one early enough. There are many other examples of this.

2. I'm going to pass on the Italy Strat bomber discussion as that gets too far into 'Realism' vs. 'Game Play/Option/Choice' territory. E.g.: Yes, Italy had them did they have them in enough numbers or the manufacturing capacity to replace losses if used enough to justify a unit.

3. I always, always keep air units under HQ control. It's even easier to do it in TRP with low cost HQs. The only time I don't is regarding the Western GE FTR on the first few turns as Poland is delt with. When playing as attacker or as defender the bomber almost always does the same damage to the target regardless of being intercepted or not.

3a. My observations are similar to yours, with the numercial value of damage done to my interceptors approximating the damage done to enemy escorts+strat bombers. Yes that costs more to the attacker, but when you weigh in the damage the bombers do + in single player all the bonus MPP the AI gets it doesn't 'hurt' them as much.

3b. However, when I'm the attacker my escorts + bombers usually take more damage than they do to the enemy interceptor. With the exception that I can repeatedly bomb in the same area and get to use different escort fighters and go after the same or close by target where the same interceptor is used. This then equals things out. Later on, I can pound the damaged interceptor with additional Strat or Med bombers and try to kill it, the AI isn't good at that sort of thing, but players are.

3c. Note that observations in Single Player are perhaps a bit jaded when playing with the AI having a bonus EXP pip. Note said bonus pip also greatly impacts the sub game.

[Lothos]

1. GE can currently get a 2nd Strat bomber by building one before the Freebie shows up. Similar to the base game getting a 3rd para by building one early enough. There are many other examples of this.

2. I'm going to pass on the Italy Strat bomber discussion as that gets too far into 'Realism' vs. 'Game Play/Option/Choice' territory. E.g.: Yes, Italy had them did they have them in enough numbers or the manufacturing capacity to replace losses if used enough to justify a unit.

3. I always, always keep air units under HQ control. It's even easier to do it in TRP with low cost HQs. The only time I don't is regarding the Western GE FTR on the first few turns as Poland is delt with. When playing as attacker or as defender the bomber almost always does the same damage to the target regardless of being intercepted or not.

3a. My observations are similar to yours, with the numercial value of damage done to my interceptors approximating the damage done to enemy escorts+strat bombers. Yes that costs more to the attacker, but when you weigh in the damage the bombers do + in single player all the bonus MPP the AI gets it doesn't 'hurt' them as much.

3b. However, when I'm the attacker my escorts + bombers usually take more damage than they do to the enemy interceptor. With the exception that I can repeatedly bomb in the same area and get to use different escort fighters and go after the same or close by target where the same interceptor is used. This then equals things out. Later on, I can pound the damaged interceptor with additional Strat or Med bombers and try to kill it, the AI isn't good at that sort of thing, but players are.

3c. Note that observations in Single Player are perhaps a bit jaded when playing with the AI having a bonus EXP pip. Note said bonus pip also greatly impacts the sub game.

Maybe we cut Strategic Bombers down from 2 missions to 1?

EDITED

In addition to my strat bomber question working on a new release here. Have a few more things to add but this is what I have done so far.

- (Bug) Fixed weather zone in hex(s) 150,80 and 154,78
- (Bug) Text issue Change Von Rippentrop to Von Ribbentrop
- (Bug) UK Warsprite renamed to Warspite
- (Bug) Saudi Arabia Partisan in wrong hex 239,134 moved to 238,136
- (Bug) Text issue "USSR Mobilizes Reservers" to "USSR Mobilizes Reserves"
- (Bug) Bandar Stapur, Persia, fixed so you can disembark into city

- (New) Major Powers can no longer attach minors to their HQs
- (New) Poland add some Secondary Supply Sources and Danzig is a Primary Supply Source
- (New) Vichy can no longer be manipulated with Diplomacy
- (New) Most Minors will no longer be able to transport troops
- (New) Max Shells for all artillery changed to 1 (you get +1 when you research Artillery Tech)
- (New) Rocket Artillery will no longer De-Entrench
- (New) Heavy Artillery (and SP) De-Moralization lowered by 15
- (New) Heavy Artillery (and SP) Range increased from 2 to 3
- (New) Heavy Artillery (and SP) De-Entrech is capped at 1
- (New) Germany can't build Strategic Bombers until July, 15 1940
- (New) Romania, Tactical Bomber Cap changed from 0 to 1

- (OOB) Poland increase strength of most units to 10
- (OOB) Poland added General Kutrzeba to the map

[OldCrowBalthazor]

Great discussion above. I was going to contribute but need to absorb what has been written recently.
Keep watch the vids as other things will develop that need attention later. I don't want to give spoilers but look at Malta.

Malta in WiE/WaW observations:
Now in the old days when planes could not do missions because of rain, etc...Malta could get a rest and slowly recover, at least from air attacks. This also included a potential para drop if the AA unit was destroyed and Malta was empty. There were many times when as Allies..I was able to slip in a new unit into Malta if a port was open. Another thing some of us did was house-rule 'No Railgunning of Malta'. RG's have a range of 3. That's fine for something like Sevastopol or Leningrad. But Malta is an island and not like a hard point easily targeted like Fort Maxim Gorky at Sevastopol. One thing is that Malta is composed of a variety of sedimentary rock, easily dug for entrenchments and fortifications.

Malta with TRP (past versions and current version):

Past Version 0.9.7 observation: So last year I tested/played an MP match with Unfortunate Son with v.0.9.7. At that time, air attacks were not possible in rain, etc. Now we had also House-ruled no Rail-gunning of Malta as we both felt that was unrealistic. Also at that time, the AA unit (Crispy131313's Fall Weiss II DEC adapted to TRP) could be a 13 strength AA with 3 experience pips. So bottom line, Ray (Unfortunate Son) repeatedly attacked Malta by air. He did severely reduce Malta and the ports by air and occasional bombardments by sea. The thing was bad weather did intervene at times, that stopped his air attacks. This helped the AA unit recover. Eventually, he had to leave off of trying to take Malta when the bad weather became consistent come Oct 1940. We did have quite a few naval engagements, but again weather was a factor since the Luftwaffe was grounded at times because of weather.

Current Version TRP 1.2.2 observation: (Warning Spoiler for Duedman's and my vids on YT-but I think this is important to bring up now both for SP and MP play of TRP.)
Malta goes down in 4 turns.
First, a rail-gun with all it's shells are used on Malta from Sicily. (I had forgot to ask Duedman if we should house-rule out 'No Rail-Gunning of Malta. No critcism of Duedman btw.
The full force of the Luftwaffe started to bomb. Upon Valleta going down below 5 supply, and the 12 strength ports dropping to 5 strength instantly. (not sure of the cause exactly..there was only 1 Italian sub on each port.)
I could barely reinforce the damaged 11 strength AA unit on Malta. It was de-trenched immediately, (Valleta max entrenchment of 3)
Because regardless of weather, at the time, all weather medium bombers could fully de-trench even in rain. *Not an issue now with the newest patch-a huge improvement tbh.
Regardless of rain or not, an airborne unit could land on a vacant Malta.

Conclusion regarding TRP and Malta. Even with the new patch that eliminates de-trenching by medium bombers, Malta is still very vulnerable to being taken by the Axis. Main reason is double the turns to do so. In vanilla WiE and WaW, the window of opportunity to assault and take Malta is alot shorter. Also, in my opinion, the max entrenchment is too low. In addition, the fact that the AA Unit can only by DEC be brought to elite status of 1 pip to 11 is a detriment. Not sure how to fix the latter as I do like the idea in this later version of TRP to let Hqs get up to 5 Pips of elite and combat units 1. I get the design decision here. But apparently Malta was forgotten.
Now I don't want to see Malta totally invulnerable to an Axis takeover, but as things stand its a pushover for the Axis.

So on Duedmans and my TRP series on YT...the 4 episodes that feature this will air starting on May 31, 2023 (Episode 27). I would strongly urge that these vids be analyzed by all to perhaps figure out some kind of balance. I understand that SP and MP balance is different overall, but believe even for SP, Malta defenses need to be stronger. I have ideas but would like to hear what others have to say.
Sorry about the spoiler but since I saw Dave (Lothos) considering changes...I figured I should put this up now. Its only a little over a week away before the initial Axis attacks on Malta, so folks won't have long to see what I am talking about.
I love this mod btw...but I gotta call a spade a spade when I see one.
Cheers

[Unfortunate Son]

Great discussion above. I was going to contribute but need to absorb what has been written recently.
Keep watch the vids as other things will develop that need attention later. I don't want to give spoilers but look at Malta.

Malta in WiE/WaW observations:
Now in the old days when planes could not do missions because of rain, etc...Malta could get a rest and slowly recover, at least from air attacks. This also included a potential para drop if the AA unit was destroyed and Malta was empty. There were many times when as Allies..I was able to slip in a new unit into Malta if a port was open. Another thing some of us did was house-rule 'No Railgunning of Malta'. RG's have a range of 3. That's fine for something like Sevastopol or Leningrad. But Malta is an island and not like a hard point easily targeted like Fort Maxim Gorky at Sevastopol. One thing is that Malta is composed of a variety of sedimentary rock, easily dug for entrenchments and fortifications.

Malta with TRP (past versions and current version):

Past Version 0.9.7 observation: So last year I tested/played an MP match with Unfortunate Son with v.0.9.7. At that time, air attacks were not possible in rain, etc. Now we had also House-ruled no Rail-gunning of Malta as we both felt that was unrealistic. Also at that time, the AA unit (Crispy131313's Fall Weiss II DEC adapted to TRP) could be a 13 strength AA with 3 experience pips. So bottom line, Ray (Unfortunate Son) repeatedly attacked Malta by air. He did severely reduce Malta and the ports by air and occasional bombardments by sea. The thing was bad weather did intervene at times, that stopped his air attacks. This helped the AA unit recover. Eventually, he had to leave off of trying to take Malta when the bad weather became consistent come Oct 1940. We did have quite a few naval engagements, but again weather was a factor since the Luftwaffe was grounded at times because of weather.

Current Version TRP 1.2.2 observation: (Warning Spoiler for Duedman's and my vids on YT-but I think this is important to bring up now both for SP and MP play of TRP.)
Malta goes down in 4 turns.
First, a rail-gun with all it's shells are used on Malta from Sicily. (I had forgot to ask Duedman if we should house-rule out 'No Rail-Gunning of Malta. No critcism of Duedman btw.
The full force of the Luftwaffe started to bomb. Upon Valleta going down below 5 supply, and the 12 strength ports dropping to 5 strength instantly. (not sure of the cause exactly..there was only 1 Italian sub on each port.)
I could barely reinforce the damaged 11 strength AA unit on Malta. It was de-trenched immediately, (Valleta max entrenchment of 3)
Because regardless of weather, at the time, all weather medium bombers could fully de-trench even in rain. *Not an issue now with the newest patch-a huge improvement tbh.
Regardless of rain or not, an airborne unit could land on a vacant Malta.

Conclusion regarding TRP and Malta. Even with the new patch that eliminates de-trenching by medium bombers, Malta is still very vulnerable to being taken by the Axis. Main reason is double the turns to do so. In vanilla WiE and WaW, the window of opportunity to assault and take Malta is alot shorter. Also, in my opinion, the max entrenchment is too low. In addition, the fact that the AA Unit can only by DEC be brought to elite status of 1 pip to 11 is a detriment. Not sure how to fix the latter as I do like the idea in this later version of TRP to let Hqs get up to 5 Pips of elite and combat units 1. I get the design decision here. But apparently Malta was forgotten.
Now I don't want to see Malta totally invulnerable to an Axis takeover, but as things stand its a pushover for the Axis.

So on Duedmans and my TRP series on YT...the 4 episodes that feature this will air starting on May 31, 2023 (Episode 27). I would strongly urge that these vids be analyzed by all to perhaps figure out some kind of balance. I understand that SP and MP balance is different overall, but believe even for SP, Malta defenses need to be stronger. I have ideas but would like to hear what others have to say.
Sorry about the spoiler but since I saw Dave (Lothos) considering changes...I figured I should put this up now. Its only a little over a week away before the initial Axis attacks on Malta, so folks won't have long to see what I am talking about.
I love this mod btw...but I gotta call a spade a spade when I see one.
Cheers

Just want to concur with Old Crow on the Malta defense has changed dramatically from when he and I play tested the TRP mod. I pursued a naval blockade on the ports along with bombing the ports and town/AA unit and naval gun attacks as well and I finally gave up after a number of turns. This was also the same time I was losing supply in Libya due to the Malta affect. Which I think was too much considering the Axis supply went to zero while I was attacking Malta and it ports were reduced to zero. I personally think that the AA gun should be stronger again but the Malta affect on the Axis should not trigger every turn. If the Axis player is attacking Malta and reducing the ports at Malta then the Malta effect should be affected/reduced. Especially if the Axis control the seas around Malta. Which should force the Allied player to keep a naval presence at Malta or in the Med vs sending the entire RN chasing down the Kriegsmarine.

Watching the game between Old Crow and Duedman I was amazed how easy it was for the Axis to breach the Maginot line compared to when we played. I tried to breach it with two heavy arty, a rail gun, air attacks, ground assaults and paratroopers and it took me 3 turns to breach one hex.

Other observation and I know it has been discussed is strat bombers effectiveness on resources and units and everyone mention AA guns and send the entire Luftwaffe to defend Germany. The Strat bombers in all SC games evade damage constantly which did not happen as often as I feel it does in this game. I think they should always take casualties. Historically they took huge losses.

1-increase the AA unit back to 13 strength.
2- Malta effect should not fire every turn because the fact there are double the turns.
3- Malta effect should be reduced if Malta suffers heavy damage from naval blockade and air attacks.
4- The Allied player should keep a naval presence at Malta to maintain the Malta affect. Not a DD unit but a BB or CA unit. Realistically they should also have an air presence as well. I know its 1 hex.
5- Strat bombers should not evade damage in any SC game or mod.

[Lothos]

Great discussion above. I was going to contribute but need to absorb what has been written recently.
Keep watch the vids as other things will develop that need attention later. I don't want to give spoilers but look at Malta.

Malta in WiE/WaW observations:
Now in the old days when planes could not do missions because of rain, etc...Malta could get a rest and slowly recover, at least from air attacks. This also included a potential para drop if the AA unit was destroyed and Malta was empty. There were many times when as Allies..I was able to slip in a new unit into Malta if a port was open. Another thing some of us did was house-rule 'No Railgunning of Malta'. RG's have a range of 3. That's fine for something like Sevastopol or Leningrad. But Malta is an island and not like a hard point easily targeted like Fort Maxim Gorky at Sevastopol. One thing is that Malta is composed of a variety of sedimentary rock, easily dug for entrenchments and fortifications.

Malta with TRP (past versions and current version):

Past Version 0.9.7 observation: So last year I tested/played an MP match with Unfortunate Son with v.0.9.7. At that time, air attacks were not possible in rain, etc. Now we had also House-ruled no Rail-gunning of Malta as we both felt that was unrealistic. Also at that time, the AA unit (Crispy131313's Fall Weiss II DEC adapted to TRP) could be a 13 strength AA with 3 experience pips. So bottom line, Ray (Unfortunate Son) repeatedly attacked Malta by air. He did severely reduce Malta and the ports by air and occasional bombardments by sea. The thing was bad weather did intervene at times, that stopped his air attacks. This helped the AA unit recover. Eventually, he had to leave off of trying to take Malta when the bad weather became consistent come Oct 1940. We did have quite a few naval engagements, but again weather was a factor since the Luftwaffe was grounded at times because of weather.

Current Version TRP 1.2.2 observation: (Warning Spoiler for Duedman's and my vids on YT-but I think this is important to bring up now both for SP and MP play of TRP.)
Malta goes down in 4 turns.
First, a rail-gun with all it's shells are used on Malta from Sicily. (I had forgot to ask Duedman if we should house-rule out 'No Rail-Gunning of Malta. No critcism of Duedman btw.
The full force of the Luftwaffe started to bomb. Upon Valleta going down below 5 supply, and the 12 strength ports dropping to 5 strength instantly. (not sure of the cause exactly..there was only 1 Italian sub on each port.)
I could barely reinforce the damaged 11 strength AA unit on Malta. It was de-trenched immediately, (Valleta max entrenchment of 3)
Because regardless of weather, at the time, all weather medium bombers could fully de-trench even in rain. *Not an issue now with the newest patch-a huge improvement tbh.
Regardless of rain or not, an airborne unit could land on a vacant Malta.

Conclusion regarding TRP and Malta. Even with the new patch that eliminates de-trenching by medium bombers, Malta is still very vulnerable to being taken by the Axis. Main reason is double the turns to do so. In vanilla WiE and WaW, the window of opportunity to assault and take Malta is alot shorter. Also, in my opinion, the max entrenchment is too low. In addition, the fact that the AA Unit can only by DEC be brought to elite status of 1 pip to 11 is a detriment. Not sure how to fix the latter as I do like the idea in this later version of TRP to let Hqs get up to 5 Pips of elite and combat units 1. I get the design decision here. But apparently Malta was forgotten.
Now I don't want to see Malta totally invulnerable to an Axis takeover, but as things stand its a pushover for the Axis.

So on Duedmans and my TRP series on YT...the 4 episodes that feature this will air starting on May 31, 2023 (Episode 27). I would strongly urge that these vids be analyzed by all to perhaps figure out some kind of balance. I understand that SP and MP balance is different overall, but believe even for SP, Malta defenses need to be stronger. I have ideas but would like to hear what others have to say.
Sorry about the spoiler but since I saw Dave (Lothos) considering changes...I figured I should put this up now. Its only a little over a week away before the initial Axis attacks on Malta, so folks won't have long to see what I am talking about.
I love this mod btw...but I gotta call a spade a spade when I see one.
Cheers

Did you send the British fleet to help? If he sent the entire German Air force where was the royal navy and their carriers to help support?

[Duedman]

I do not think there will be a solution that solves the problems for both SP and MP. If you nerf Axis side until only Pro‘s can beat the mod you ruin it for SP.

Very tricky. But interesting discussion

[OldCrowBalthazor]

Did you send the British fleet to help? If he sent the entire German Air force where was the royal navy and their carriers to help support?

To the east and west away from Malta. Axis fighters and maritime bombers with passive sea spotting range could cover the area around the Malta, insuring a first strike with the Italian Navy and the Luftwaffe on the RN. The fleet if positioned within intercept range of Malta would be vulnerable to a one-two punch. All RN elements including CVs, CVLs and their screening vessels would be in full view.

There will be initial strikes on an Italian ftr in west Sicily. But I pulled back when I got indications of the rest of the air potential plus the numbers of Italian ships nearby. Also, the western TF was waiting to escort some critical units for a dash to Egypt...so we had a dual mission to do.

Regardless of that...it was the alpha strike bombardment of a Rail Gun that sealed Malta's fate.
The 11 strength AA was clipped down quickly. If I had brought the entire RN and massed around the island, and had the one CV and the CVLs on intercept mode...it might of delayed the outcome for awhile longer with massive casualties and a diminished response. There are the Italian ports for the BBs to duck back into and German and Italian Hqs to support the air elements with a significant boost.

Later there is a trap within a trap that was detrimental to the Allies, but that happens after Malta.
My points above in the other post still stand in my view.

Malta is weaker than it was before in both early versions of TRP mainly because previously it had a 13 strength AA if the UK DEC to strengthen it was chosen, air strikes were not allowed in rain, and a house-rule to restricting a Rail-gun from bombardment of Malta. Also now, the UK has only 1 CV. The CVLs are fine for some kind of air coverage, but not as potent as CVs with their two strike ability to retaliate.

One thing that's a plus now, is that medium bombers can not de-trench in bad weather. Unfortunately, that patch came in after the assault on Malta in this on going match. At least that can be factored in if any tweaking to increased Malta's native defenses is considered.

The other thing that helped a bit previously in the past was the ability to put AA upgrades in the town and ports. It was a small help but every little bit helps.

Anyways that's the report. The Axis was waiting for the RN to do exactly that, get in close to try to support Malta. Easy to operate an entire air armada in quicker than it takes to round up a massive task force out at sea that had other duties like sea lane convoy patrols, home waters defense, and escorting troop convoys into a dangerous sea A.O.

[Lothos]

Did you send the British fleet to help? If he sent the entire German Air force where was the royal navy and their carriers to help support?

To the east and west away from Malta. Axis fighters and maritime bombers with passive sea spotting range could cover the area around the Malta, insuring a first strike with the Italian Navy and the Luftwaffe on the RN. The fleet if positioned within intercept range of Malta would be vulnerable to a one-two punch. All RN elements including CVs, CVLs and their screening vessels would be in full view.

There will be initial strikes on an Italian ftr in west Sicily. But I pulled back when I got indications of the rest of the air potential plus the numbers of Italian ships nearby. Also, the western TF was waiting to escort some critical units for a dash to Egypt...so we had a dual mission to do.

Regardless of that...it was the alpha strike bombardment of a Rail Gun that sealed Malta's fate.
The 11 strength AA was clipped down quickly. If I had brought the entire RN and massed around the island, and had the one CV and the CVLs on intercept mode...it might of delayed the outcome for awhile longer with massive casualties and a diminished response. There are the Italian ports for the BBs to duck back into and German and Italian Hqs to support the air elements with a significant boost.

Later there is a trap within a trap that was detrimental to the Allies, but that happens after Malta.
My points above in the other post still stand in my view.

Malta is weaker than it was before in both early versions of TRP mainly because previously it had a 13 strength AA if the UK DEC to strengthen it was chosen, air strikes were not allowed in rain, and a house-rule to restricting a Rail-gun from bombardment of Malta. Also now, the UK has only 1 CV. The CVLs are fine for some kind of air coverage, but not as potent as CVs with their two strike ability to retaliate.

One thing that's a plus now, is that medium bombers can not de-trench in bad weather. Unfortunately, that patch came in after the assault on Malta in this on going match. At least that can be factored in if any tweaking to increased Malta's native defenses is considered.

The other thing that helped a bit previously in the past was the ability to put AA upgrades in the town and ports. It was a small help but every little bit helps.

Anyways that's the report. The Axis was waiting for the RN to do exactly that, get in close to try to support Malta. Easy to operate an entire air armada in quicker than it takes to round up a massive task force out at sea that had other duties like sea lane convoy patrols, home waters defense, and escorting troop convoys into a dangerous sea A.O.

I have an idea, one thing I can do is change Malta to a Major Fortress and then make it so Rail Guns have no effect on Major Fortresses.

I could in theory do this with all fortress types. Make it so Strategic Bombers and Rail Guns will not be able to hit them causing their supply to go down. It would force players to find other ways. Places this would effect I believe are

Malta
Gibraltar
Sevastopol
Singapore
Tobruk
Maginot Line (French Only not when Germans Control it later in the game)

Can't think of any other places

[Taxman66]

1)
I suggest reconsidering the increased range of Heavy & SP ART. With a range of 3:
a) Malta is now within their fire zone, making it easier and safer to take out Malta.
b) It can now be used from 2 hexes across the channel to hit the hex defending the port east of London.
d) Every Axis ART in the game can hit Dover from France.
c) 3 hexes in England are now within range to shell Calais.
d) Cherbourg and the hex SW of Southhampton are now within range of each other.
e) Marsala can be hit from the hex NW of Tunis

2)
Also not a fan of the Major Power HQs can no longer attach minors.
May I ask what the thinking is behind this change?
For the record if you decide to keep this change, I strongly suggest ensuring that all the minors get at least 1 HQ (e.g. Brazil)

[OldCrowBalthazor]

Did you send the British fleet to help? If he sent the entire German Air force where was the royal navy and their carriers to help support?

To the east and west away from Malta. Axis fighters and maritime bombers with passive sea spotting range could cover the area around the Malta, insuring a first strike with the Italian Navy and the Luftwaffe on the RN. The fleet if positioned within intercept range of Malta would be vulnerable to a one-two punch. All RN elements including CVs, CVLs and their screening vessels would be in full view.

There will be initial strikes on an Italian ftr in west Sicily. But I pulled back when I got indications of the rest of the air potential plus the numbers of Italian ships nearby. Also, the western TF was waiting to escort some critical units for a dash to Egypt...so we had a dual mission to do.

Regardless of that...it was the alpha strike bombardment of a Rail Gun that sealed Malta's fate.
The 11 strength AA was clipped down quickly. If I had brought the entire RN and massed around the island, and had the one CV and the CVLs on intercept mode...it might of delayed the outcome for awhile longer with massive casualties and a diminished response. There are the Italian ports for the BBs to duck back into and German and Italian Hqs to support the air elements with a significant boost.

Later there is a trap within a trap that was detrimental to the Allies, but that happens after Malta.
My points above in the other post still stand in my view.

Malta is weaker than it was before in both early versions of TRP mainly because previously it had a 13 strength AA if the UK DEC to strengthen it was chosen, air strikes were not allowed in rain, and a house-rule to restricting a Rail-gun from bombardment of Malta. Also now, the UK has only 1 CV. The CVLs are fine for some kind of air coverage, but not as potent as CVs with their two strike ability to retaliate.

One thing that's a plus now, is that medium bombers can not de-trench in bad weather. Unfortunately, that patch came in after the assault on Malta in this on going match. At least that can be factored in if any tweaking to increased Malta's native defenses is considered.

The other thing that helped a bit previously in the past was the ability to put AA upgrades in the town and ports. It was a small help but every little bit helps.

Anyways that's the report. The Axis was waiting for the RN to do exactly that, get in close to try to support Malta. Easy to operate an entire air armada in quicker than it takes to round up a massive task force out at sea that had other duties like sea lane convoy patrols, home waters defense, and escorting troop convoys into a dangerous sea A.O.

I have an idea, one thing I can do is change Malta to a Major Fortress and then make it so Rail Guns have no effect on Major Fortresses.

I could in theory do this with all fortress types. Make it so Strategic Bombers and Rail Guns will not be able to hit them causing their supply to go down. It would force players to find other ways. Places this would effect I believe are

Malta
Gibraltar
Odessa
Singapore
Tobruk
Maginot Line (French Only not when Germans Control it later in the game)

Can't think of any other places

That's a great idea and the fortress list is perfect imo. Odessa was a hard nut to crack for quite awhile in 1941, and had to be seiged by a large component of the Romanian army.
Tobruq being a Fortress good to...as it was a thorn in Rommel's arse for some time till the Port was wrecked.
Gibraltar and Singapore of course.
Maginot Line Fortresses instead of pillboxes would force the Germans to seriously consider not attempting to breach the line but tear through the Low Countries and flank it as Guderian planned and executed.
Leningrad and Sevastopol have to be left out of course. The latter places realistically and historically were prime targets for super heavy guns.
Btw I like the proposed version changes you listed before my 'Malta post' except giving hvy arty a range of 3.

[Taxman66]

Odessa? Did you mean Sevastopol?

Wasn't the Rail gun actually used there? I guess you could still use it to bop the one port that can't be blocked by land units.

With regards to the Maginot line, it's not supply that is the problem.
Please also increase Metz and Strasbourg to Max Entrenchment level = 6.

[Lothos]

1)
I suggest reconsidering the increased range of Heavy & SP ART. With a range of 3:
a) Malta is now within their fire zone, making it easier and safer to take out Malta.
b) It can now be used from 2 hexes across the channel to hit the hex defending the port east of London.
d) Every Axis ART in the game can hit Dover from France.
c) 3 hexes in England are now within range to shell Calais.
d) Cherbourg and the hex SW of Southhampton are now within range of each other.
e) Marsala can be hit from the hex NW of Tunis

2)
Also not a fan of the Major Power HQs can no longer attach minors.
May I ask what the thinking is behind this change?
For the record if you decide to keep this change, I strongly suggest ensuring that all the minors get at least 1 HQ (e.g. Brazil)

1 - Yea that is going through my head to. My thought was that they no longer do 2 de-entrenchment and only hit as a 5 for morale (10 with tech) when it used to be 30. However I can change this back.

2 - Thought here is that minors are not suppose to be as tough as majors and they do not really coordinate well with anyone else other than their country. Only a handful of minors should have HQs (and they already do). Which minors do not have HQs that you feel should get one? A list with a Generals name would be helpful.