Air supply in attack?

Josans · Post by **Josans** » Tue Oct 16, 2001 5:55 pm

The question is simply, is allowed or better, is realistic supply by air the german panzer corps to use them in attack?

I just played with Loki and seems that him and Svar, Muzrub, Heincici and Rundstedt thinks that is unrealistic.

Your opinions are very valuable for me.

In the game against Loki I airsupplied my panzers to attack and the corps begin the turn in supply 3 and 4. Is this wrong? Only can I airlift for defending?

Please. I need your opinions. Im have accused again of unrealistic gamer. And maybe he is right <img src="frown.gif" border="0">

Josan.

Svar · Post by **Svar** » Tue Oct 16, 2001 7:49 pm

Originally posted by Josan:
The question is simply, is allowed or better, is realistic supply by air the german panzer corps to use them in attack?

I just played with Loki and seems that him and Svar, Muzrub, Heincici and Rundstedt thinks that is unrealistic.

Your opinions are very valuable for me.

In the game against Loki I airsupplied my panzers to attack and the corps begin the turn in supply 3 and 4. Is this wrong? Only can I airlift for defending?

Please. I need your opinions. Im have accused again of unrealistic gamer. And maybe he is right <img src="frown.gif" border="0">

Josan.

Josan,

You need to be more specific about the use of air supply. It is perfectly legitimate to use in attack if the unit is in a supplied hex but unrealistic if the unit is in a zero supply state and still attacking. It would be impossible for a mobile corps to get enough supply through the air to be able to continue advancing without a ground supply line. To augment the ground supply of an advancing unit seems perfectly reasonable as the rear areas would be secure but an out of supply advancing unit has no secure rear areas in which to receive massive quantites of air supply.

Svar

Josans · Post by **Josans** » Tue Oct 16, 2001 8:49 pm

Originally posted by Svar:

Josan,

You need to be more specific about the use of air supply. It is perfectly legitimate to use in attack if the unit is in a supplied hex but unrealistic if the unit is in a zero supply state and still attacking. It would be impossible for a mobile corps to get enough supply through the air to be able to continue advancing without a ground supply line. To augment the ground supply of an advancing unit seems perfectly reasonable as the rear areas would be secure but an out of supply advancing unit has no secure rear areas in which to receive massive quantites of air supply.

Svar

Svar,

I airlifted the units with a supply level of 3 in the North ( to take Pskov), a supply of 4 ( yes FOUR) to take Mogilev and supply 3 in the south. Is this not correct? Also I have the files if you want to check it( or anyone ) to see I dont lie. So if with this supply level is unrealistic...

You say is correct air supply in attack but Loki said me Im the only one doing that (so you never have make that if you are playing with him).

I believe Loki just surprised with my movements. I did not make any air attack to conquest Mogilev and Kiev and in the battle report saw a few squads defending.Maybe lack of Ops and readiness make the fall of the cities. Maybe 22000 squads losses, 5500 tanks, 8000 guns and 7600 planes in 3 turns gives the rest to conceed the game.

And I think the cities also can fall with no air supply. My panzers corps are about50-70 readiness. I can test it now.

Josan.

Yogi Yohan · Post by **Yogi Yohan** » Tue Oct 16, 2001 9:02 pm

Originally posted by Josan:
The question is simply, is allowed or better, is realistic supply by air the german panzer corps to use them in attack?

In attack or defence, it doesen't matter. Air Supply in this verison simply boosts readiness, its not a substitute for normal supply as in earlier versions. A PzKps out of supply but mantained by Airlift will not be able to make more than two plots a turn. I don't think it should be considered wrong in any way to use airlift to boost the readiness of attacking units.

Josans · Post by **Josans** » Tue Oct 16, 2001 11:15 pm

Originally posted by Yogi Yohan:

In attack or defence, it doesen't matter. Air Supply in this verison simply boosts readiness, its not a substitute for normal supply as in earlier versions. A PzKps out of supply but mantained by Airlift will not be able to make more than two plots a turn. I don't think it should be considered wrong in any way to use airlift to boost the readiness of attacking units.

Oh ! Im not the only one Im a normal guy <img src="eek.gif" border="0">

Svar · Post by **Svar** » Tue Oct 16, 2001 11:49 pm

Originally posted by Josan:

Svar,

I airlifted the units with a supply level of 3 in the North ( to take Pskov), a supply of 4 ( yes FOUR) to take Mogilev and supply 3 in the south. Is this not correct? Also I have the files if you want to check it( or anyone ) to see I dont lie. So if with this supply level is unrealistic...

You say is correct air supply in attack but Loki said me Im the only one doing that (so you never have make that if you are playing with him).

I believe Loki just surprised with my movements. I did not make any air attack to conquest Mogilev and Kiev and in the battle report saw a few squads defending.Maybe lack of Ops and readiness make the fall of the cities. Maybe 22000 squads losses, 5500 tanks, 8000 guns and 7600 planes in 3 turns gives the rest to conceed the game.

And I think the cities also can fall with no air supply. My panzers corps are about50-70 readiness. I can test it now.

Josan.

Josan,

It sounds like you used air supply correctly. I normally do not move my Pz Korps from a supplied hex to a hex that will be at zero supply level the next turn though. It has happened accidently though and I hold it until supply catches up to it. There are two problems with moving Pz Korps long distances unsupported. First, the Soviet can move in behind you and cut you off from supply even if you would have been in supply had he not moved. Second, you can easily move out from under German fighter protection and the Soviet can bomb your Pz Korps with every Soviet bomber unescorted within range. The range of Soviet bombers is long so that could be every Soviet bomber group in the Soviet air force.

Svar

Yogi Yohan · Post by **Yogi Yohan** » Wed Oct 17, 2001 1:26 am

Originally posted by Josan:
The question is simply, is allowed or better, is realistic supply by air the german panzer corps to use them in attack?

I missed the second part of the question, regarding realism earlier. The answer to my mind would be - perhaps.

A Panzerkorps on the advance could not possibly be fully supplied by airlift - but that is not the case, obviously the airlift cannot provide enough fuel since the PzKps crawls along at 2 plots per week if supplied solely by air. There is no realism problem in the effect of the airlift.

BUT - and this is a biggie - as far as I know, all major supply airlift operations during the war involved LANDING the supplies on an airfield. Only rarely were they paradropped, and when so, the amount of supplies recieved would drop dramaticly - some was lost, and some was never delivered (you need the chutes, the cases etc - more logistics). So, does a PzKps on the march have access to airfields in recently occupied territory? Perhaps, perhaps not. So, on second thought, it might be a good idea to have some house rules on this after all.

You could say that a unit could only recive airlift if it either begins its turn in or next to a city (likely to be airfields there) or if it stays put for the turn (then it finds and prepares a suitable field, a stretch of road, whatever).

Lokioftheaesir · Post by **Lokioftheaesir** » Wed Oct 17, 2001 2:26 am

Originally posted by Josan:

.....Maybe 22000 squads losses, 5500 tanks, 8000 guns and 7600 planes in 3 turns gives the rest to conceed the game........

Josan.

Josan

At no did i mention losses or that the fall of cities was any problem to me. I could recreat them is our situation was reversed as you well know.
Do you think i am frightened or am trying to weasle out of the game?
(see 'loki defeated post' if you think so)

Well the concensus is that air supply is now handled realistically. I will abide by that and not worry about it anymore.

Nick

Ed Cogburn · Post by **Ed Cogburn** » Wed Oct 17, 2001 10:45 am

Originally posted by Yogi Yohan:

In attack or defence, it doesen't matter. Air Supply in this verison simply boosts readiness, its not a substitute for normal supply as in earlier versions. A PzKps out of supply but mantained by Airlift will not be able to make more than two plots a turn. I don't think it should be considered wrong in any way to use airlift to boost the readiness of attacking units.

Oh dear... not again....

Well, there is one thing I'd add here. The issue of plotting is an important one, the game has certainly reduced the abuse possible with air supply. However there is the issue of duration and action. If an unsupplied Pz Korps, kept alive only by air supply, can continue to operate, including attacking, behind enemy lines for a number of turns, even though its reduced to 2 squares of movement per turn, then that's a problem, IMHO, because I don't believe that to be realistic. Air supplied korps moving and fighting indefinitely behind enemy lines was, I believe, not possible then. *All* the examples of air supply we have from WWII were operations just to keep cutoff units alive, not to allow them to move and attack, *especially* motorized units. Crete is an exception in that the air supplied German paratroopers were attacking, but these were "light" units that didn't need a substantial logistical train, they weren't moving (they basically landed right on top of their enemy), and had no vehicles needing petrol.

Now if Jason is using air supply to boost units that are currently in low supply (1 to 4), such as panzer units ahead of the infantry in a deep penetration, then that's fine, and historical. That's what I understand he is doing, so I see no problem here. If he's using air supply to keep a large unsupplied corps moving and fighting for four or five turns at a stretch in the Soviet rear area however, then I have a problem with that, but that's not what he is doing.

PMCN · Post by **PMCN** » Wed Oct 17, 2001 12:33 pm

Just a few comments.

The paratroopers in Crete were starting to get into fairly desprate straits until they captured the airport, as far as my memory goes the capture of one or both of those airfields was of extreme importance to the mission planners. Until then they could not bring in troops, replacements or significant quantities of supplies.

The amount of supplies required by a german Pz Division conducting normal operations was around 150 tons per day (from V4V and W@W games). My standard Pz Korps has 2 Pz Divisions, 1 Motorised, 1 INF (sorry Ed old habits die hard), plus 7 Rgt of Korps units (Artillary, Flak, JPz). So that is 400-600 tons of supplies per day for combat ops. I have only ever airlifted something like 139 tons of supplies with 2 Ju-52 units. Even with all 4 and with only a short hop you would have trouble suppling the Korps with enough combat supplies for 1 days offensive operations. In game terms I have used the Ju-52 gruppen to enhance an advanced Pz Korps readiness level if it drops to low values but I have never seen enough enhancement to think that you could keep the unit supplied indefinately. Certainly not once it exceeds escort range. Normally I see a modest (3-7%) enhancement. I do not think Josan is doing anything ahistoric in resuppling those advancing units from the air.

In WW2 the only time air supply worked (and it did for the german garrisions of several isolated smaller cities such as Veliki Luki) was when it was intended to support defensive garrisions. Sole airsupply was not possible in WW2 or even shortly afterwards as the French proved in Den Bein Phu.

Yogi Yohan · Post by **Yogi Yohan** » Wed Oct 17, 2001 2:30 pm

Originally posted by Ed Cogburn:

Oh dear... not again....

Well, there is one thing I'd add here. The issue of plotting is an important one, the game has certainly reduced the abuse possible with air supply. However there is the issue of duration and action. If an unsupplied Pz Korps, kept alive only by air supply, can continue to operate, including attacking, behind enemy lines for a number of turns, even though its reduced to 2 squares of movement per turn, then that's a problem, IMHO, because I don't believe that to be realistic. Air supplied korps moving and fighting indefinitely behind enemy lines was, I believe, not possible then. *All* the examples of air supply we have from WWII were operations just to keep cutoff units alive, not to allow them to move and attack, *especially* motorized units. Crete is an exception in that the air supplied German paratroopers were attacking, but these were "light" units that didn't need a substantial logistical train, they weren't moving (they basically landed right on top of their enemy), and had no vehicles needing petrol.

Now if Jason is using air supply to boost units that are currently in low supply (1 to 4), such as panzer units ahead of the infantry in a deep penetration, then that's fine, and historical. That's what I understand he is doing, so I see no problem here. If he's using air supply to keep a large unsupplied corps moving and fighting for four or five turns at a stretch in the Soviet rear area however, then I have a problem with that, but that's not what he is doing.

Ed, did you read my second post before answering my first? The house rule I proposed there would greatly decrease the illegit usage of airlift, IMHO.

In any case, I got the impression that a unit moving around a 0 supply level will usually start to loose equipment (becasue it drops below 20% readiness) after the 2nd turn at least.

Muzrub · Post by **Muzrub** » Wed Oct 17, 2001 2:57 pm

I use Airsupply.

But only to static units who are not attacking.
I use it only to assist in defence while the other player has his turn.

I dont see the point in moving forward or attacking out of supply. Unless you are surrounded and need to break out.

Otherwise its an abuse.

To me the game takes time, you try to build a defence and absorb punishment. But when someone uses the game mechanics to abuse a friendly game and make your work and time worthless, it pisses me off.
It's not about wining, its about a struggle between two players, a test of nerve and the ability to take risks and accept the results. To win is secondary, to have a great game and a positive result is all!. I like to win when I play other people in any game, but its not the victory you remember, its the tussle and the uncertain outcome of a move. Its fighting back from the brink of defeat with good measure that I remember the most, its when you plot 5 moves and on the 5th move while watching the battle you see your plan, your work pay off for that round. I enjoy the small victories of each game, no matter the final outcome.

Thats enough preaching.

bye

Lokioftheaesir · Post by **Lokioftheaesir** » Wed Oct 17, 2001 3:23 pm

Originally posted by Muzrub:
I use Airsupply.

But only to static units who are not attacking.
I use it only to assist in defence while the other player has his turn.

I dont see the point in moving forward or attacking out of supply. Unless you are surrounded and need to break out.

Otherwise its an abuse.

To me the game takes time, you try to build a defence and absorb punishment. But when someone uses the game mechanics to abuse a friendly game and make your work and time worthless, it pisses me off.
It's not about wining, its about a struggle between two players, a test of nerve and the ability to take risks and accept the results. To win is secondary, to have a great game and a positive result is all!. I like to win when I play other people in any game, but its not the victory you remember, its the tussle and the uncertain outcome of a move. Its fighting back from the brink of defeat with good measure that I remember the most, its when you plot 5 moves and on the 5th move while watching the battle you see your plan, your work pay off for that round. I enjoy the small victories of each game, no matter the final outcome.

Thats enough preaching.

bye

Muzrub

I salute you. In those words you have spoken your thoughts as if they were my own. 20 years of gaming and the things i remember are the little victories where true skill came forth and gave me satisfaction for a job well done. Not the grand victories of which i've had my share.
You are not preaching, you are restating the truism that
'It is not whether you win or lose it's how you play the game'

Of course the anal retentives and bean counters will not like this and truth, they rule the world.
But then, to me they are the lost ones.
I pity them.

Nick

frank1970 · Post by **frank1970** » Wed Oct 17, 2001 5:23 pm

In 1941 Guderian´s Pz korps was supplied by air, when he advanced too fast into Russia. He recieved fuel and ammo for his 3 (?) Divisions and continued his attack after THREE days of refueling. ("Guderian")

I do not know whether there was any more airsupply on the Eastern Front, but the Africa Front received a lot of her supplies via air.
(eg Me Gigant, etc)

murx · Post by **murx** » Wed Oct 17, 2001 8:19 pm

Hi,
I think the main object with special supply & airsupply and its discussion on abuse or not is because the player thinks different then those generals in WWII - we all agree that combined arms is king of the battle - in WWII many still thought MG & arty is only for defense, and tanks are only infantry support weapon - no real offensive weapon group of its own.
Often in WWI they still fought over 'terrain' and not the 'modern' way by just cutting all the logistics and thus crippling the enemy. Modern war tries to not fight over cities but outflank and ignore them as forces can't fight after a few days/weeks without logistical chain.
So those generals wont try an 'all-out' airsupplied Army/Corps/Division in an attack - a modern 'would-be general' at his PC might think different.
Even if Special Supply and Airsupply might be a strong option in WIR they aren't super weapons.
Is it abuse to use different HQs supplies for other units ? It didn't happend - due to logistical strains ? Maybe - but mainly because the commanders esp. at the German side didn't cooperate well, they envy other commanders units and protected their own 'units and supply', and Hitler wanted it that way so that no 'co-operation' happened and there would be no opposition within the Whermacht against him (at least no strong opposition).
The player instead has *ALL* cooperation of all commanders - every unit does as it is ordered.
If there was a 'political' scale in the game it might be different and special supply and air supply might be different.
WiR creates a game where there are no political - and more important - personal struggles between commanders and so no insubordination or better very few.

murx

Ed Cogburn · Post by **Ed Cogburn** » Sun Oct 21, 2001 5:20 am

Originally posted by Paul McNeely:
My standard Pz Korps has 2 Pz Divisions, 1 Motorised, 1 INF (sorry Ed old habits die hard)

Infidel! <img src="smile.gif" border="0">

I have only ever airlifted something like 139 tons of supplies with 2 Ju-52 units. Even with all 4 and with only a short hop you would have trouble suppling the Korps with enough combat supplies for 1 days offensive operations.

Use your bombers. Its easy to support a full sized panzer corps behind enemy lines, using a bunch your bombers along with the Ju52s. Yes, its unrealistic creating such a huge air concentration, but hey, that *is* my complaint about this whole thing! <img src="smile.gif" border="0">

Ed Cogburn · Post by **Ed Cogburn** » Sun Oct 21, 2001 5:28 am

Originally posted by Yogi Yohan:

Ed, did you read my second post before answering my first? The house rule I proposed there would greatly decrease the illegit usage of airlift, IMHO.

I wasn't disagreeing with you Yogi, just trying to "revise and extend your remarks" as the politicians do. <img src="smile.gif" border="0"> My main reason for responding is that despite an exploiting panzer corps being reduced to 2 squares of movement, this is still an unrealistic possibility. As you say, the reduction of movement from 5 to 2 is an improvement and helps to nearly cover a huge exploit, but even the 2 square movement is wrong IMHO. Aside from that addendum, I agree with everything you said.

[ October 20, 2001: Message edited by: Ed Cogburn ]</p>

Ed Cogburn · Post by **Ed Cogburn** » Sun Oct 21, 2001 5:35 am

Originally posted by Lokioftheaesir:
You are not preaching, you are restating the truism that 'It is not whether you win or lose it's how you play the game'

[raps knuckles on table] HEAR, HEAR!

Ed Cogburn · Post by **Ed Cogburn** » Sun Oct 21, 2001 6:01 am

Originally posted by Frank:
In 1941 Guderian´s Pz korps was supplied by air, when he advanced too fast into Russia. He recieved fuel and ammo for his 3 (?) Divisions and continued his attack after THREE days of refueling. ("Guderian")

I think this situation is the same as the game situation where you have a mobile corps extended out too far and is in SL1 supply with the infantry 1 or 2 weeks behind. The airsupply is crucial at that moment, because it is substantial compared to the trickle getting to them on the ground. Bad weather immediately followed, so we'll never know whether air supply alone at this stage in this example would have made a big difference. My money says it wouldn't have.

Also, it doesn't hurt when you are talking about a panzer group that is *far* from full strength. Guderian who had 600 tanks in June, had only 6 Pz-II tanks available on 15 September. The rest were either scattered along the roads behind him broken down, or destroyed by the enemy. It was not fuel that Guderian needed so badly, it was tank engines, they were using those things up at an atrocius rate because of dust.

I do not know whether there was any more airsupply on the Eastern Front, but the Africa Front received a lot of her supplies via air.
(eg Me Gigant, etc)

Rommel never had a full strength mobile corps active at any one moment in time. Air supply never succeeded in helping since nearly every time Rommel had to stop operations was due to lack of supply.

Ed Cogburn · Post by **Ed Cogburn** » Sun Oct 21, 2001 6:11 am

Originally posted by murx:
Hi,
I think the main object with special supply & airsupply and its discussion on abuse or not is because the player thinks different then those generals in WWII

I've never agreed to this theory in the past and I'm not stopping now. No amount of futuristic thinking or cooperating commanders could have allowed the Germans to operate a full strength panzer corps indefinitely behind enemy lines. It was a logisticial impossibility, IMHO, proven by the fact it never historically happened, and was never even talked about, never given credibility. Cooperating commanders would have made a big difference in several places, but not here.

Ok, I'm off the soapbox now. <img src="smile.gif" border="0">

[ October 20, 2001: Message edited by: Ed Cogburn ]</p>