Would Sir like extra bombs with that?

[loki100]

T88

If the game weather engine will give me frozen ground and clear skies to the end of the game, I think I'll reach Berlin.

That combination is lethal for the Germans as your airpower has its full effect and you have high mobility.

8 AAF went for the region to the west of Berlin, not too good as I would have liked to have done more damage to the AFV production. Secondary mission still hunting v-weapon production.



15AAF moved deeper into Germany and bombed around Nuremberg. Starting to include smaller towns on the target list.



BC is getting worried that it will be banned from the Ruhr. Its now focussed to the north of the city but will have to move eastwards in the next turn.



Mainly as the combination of 1 Ca and 1 US Armies are making real progress. 1 Ca moves up to assault the Ruhr (it is well configured for this), the more mobile 1A over-ran the Rhineland. Note I airlanded a para division to improve my rather exposed position at Koblenz.



Further south is less dramatic. All of 2 Br Army's armour is now pulled back to refit as 15A occupies the front line. 9A makes some progress in clearing a rail corridor to Strasbourg but there is a lot of German resistance here. Re-organised the corps commands so 5A now has control of the units near Freiburg.

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: cfulbright

Loki,

Interesting. As the Allies I play an aggressive air attrition game, but I didn't have the inside knowledge to know it was the pilots rather than the planes that I was winning by killing.

Cary

I think thats where it does help to play both sides. In my early games I certainly diverted a lot of bombs to those factories as it seemed to matter - and was a focus for the Allies. I'm now a bit more reductive, ie VP targets+AFV+Trucks and some attention to rail yards. Still more than enough to hit.

[loki100]

T89

More clear skies and frozen ground, but a check on the weather table suggests this is due to end:



With that in mind I lowered % morale to fly and basically forced everything to fly that I could. They can clear up fatigue/low morale next turn.

The bulk of the tactical airforces went to support 1 US and 1 Ca operations.

Strategic air saw 8 AAF carry on hitting targets on the Elbe.



15 AAF went for AFV plants in S Germany, since the AI must be trying to refit all the units I have destroyed then any damage here mades a difficult task even worse.

As an aside its chucked the SS Pzr divisions back into the line with very low CV, I suspect they will have few if any tanks.



BC pushed eastwards to bomb around Kassel. No point hitting the Ruhr now.



Picking up on the discussion above, this is end of turn air losses (ie after the ground phase).

My logic is that the Axis player has no shortage of day fighters, not least you can swap between Bf-109 and Fw 190 models at will (not sure if the AI does this). But regardless of type, by this stage of the war they are easy enough to shoot down.

The key to reaching this stage is to kill off the 1943 cadre of experienced German pilots. So my feeling (from both sides) is its a waste of bombs to hit the aircraft factories as there is nothing the Germans can build that compensates for low experience pilots.



Along the lower Rhine.

1 Canadian made steady progress taking 2 smaller cities as well as allowing some armoured units to pull of the line to refit.

1 US Army filled out its gains from last turn, I basically wanted to clear my potential supply lines and to deploy to outflank the Rhine as a potential defensive barrier.



To the south, 2 British is mostly resting its armour, 15 A has arrived on the front lines and some gains around Nancy. 5A took Freiburg and 9A expanded its hold on Strasbourg.

[loki100]

T90-T92

More turn conflation as T90 and T91 were a depressing mix of heavy rain and heavy mud. So no airpower and very limited mobility.

At least T92 brought light rain so I could bomb – with immediate gains in terms of combat effectiveness.

So on the lower Rhine, T90 saw limited action as I completed some redeployments. Two particularly important outcomes was to capture Kleve (lots of population 'bombing' pts) and encircle Cologne.

I'll now use just 3A to hold the long northern flank and can move all of 1 Ca across the Rhine.

Those with a keen eye will note that 5A is now up here and controls the forces dealing with the salient in the Ardennes. This gets every Army HQ across the front under its Command Capacity.



T91, new small pocket in the Ardennes, deepened my encirclement of Cologne and generally deployed for a renewal of the offensive eastwards.



T92 saw the fall of Cologne and some useful – if limited – gains to the east. Starting to see more and more routs in open combat as the German army falls apart.



On the Upper Rhine, T90 saw 15A make some useful gains, formations now attached to 1 FF making steady progress around Freiburg.



T91 and 2 Br Army joined in – in combination this will ease supply at Strasbourg.



As in the north, the application of airpower on T92 meant much more gains. Only a small corner of France still under German occupation.



Strategic bombing restarted on T92. 8 AAF hit Berlin



15 AAF had a very wide bombing area but the only targets were AFV production and v-weapons. I really want to ensure that the Germans cannot replace their losses.



BC shifted to the region around Erfurt – basically its bombing about 4 hexes east of the front line. Mostly all that is left is a lot of small targets.

Maybe its time for someone to write an Erfurt Programme?



Better example of the air war dynamics. I've not shown their Bf-109 losses (they are destroyed in large numbers) but even the better German fighters are shot down . I 'won' the Air-air combat by something like 10-1.



Bit of detail. First thing that really matters is that none of those German units have high experience (the 90+ pilots of 1943 are long gone) and the ones under 50 are going to suffer high operational losses even if they survive combat.



By contrast all the US pilots are over 70 on experience and most in the high 80s.

Since this is an AS mission, I chose the combat altitude and, despite some improvements from their late 1944 models, this really suits my planes not the Germans.



An extreme example but the Air to Air loss ratio was around 13-1.



VP at the start of T92, at least two turns of no bombing didn't cost me too much in this respect.

[loki100]

T93

My new fixation is the weather. This turn heavy mud (so slow movement) but light rain – so at least I can bomb things.

Strategic bombing is as much a case of finding targets as anything else:

8 AAF says hi to Berlin again .. and knocks out more German tank production. My goal is to achieve the state where 'what is destroyed on the battlefield, stays on the battlefield'.



15 AAF carries on sweeping southern Germany for any surviving AFV production.



BC gradually creeps east. Bombing on the Elbe now.



Overall VP is good but I'll have the problem of the 'late to Berlin' penalty to deal with.



Heres an eg of why bombing German tank production is a good idea. I think this was one of the SS divisions I destroyed in Belgium, back in the line but only equipped with Jagdpanzers.



Bigger situation in the north. 1 Canadian chewing its way along the fringe of the Ruhr. At some stage I need to deal with that region but for the moment, I'll see if I can manage an encirclement.

5A collapsing one pocket in the Ardennes and 1A mostly resting to recover mobility.



And in the south, the rail lines to Strasbourg now freed up (still need to repair of course).

2 British and 15A making inroads along the Moselle, if I can link up with 5A that will be another useful pocket.

[loki100]

T94

Weather watch – light rain and the ground improves to light mud. So airpower and high mobility. Only problem is 9AAF is not available due to low morale. This tends to happen when the fighting is around these major cities. They are full of flak and this hits GA missions.

One thing I'm going to experiment with is lower altitude so at least the tactical bombers are below the flak ceiling. This is risky as you get more operational losses but my hope is most of the formations are using very experienced pilots.

Fairly predictable pattern to the strategic bombing. 8 AAF left Berlin alone and hit Hannover.



15AAF went for the Pzr IV plants at Steyr but seemed more interested in the industry in the surrounding region.



BC went for Hamburg. Seemed to have an obsession with u-boats.



On the ground 1 Ca Army carried on pushing the Germans steadily back. I've pretty much cleared the wooded region behind the Rhine and that undermines the German defensive effort.

1A is still a bit more blocked in.



To the south 2 Br A and 15A took Trier and exploited a gap in the German line. Mainz is now the prize here but also the ability to create pockets that 5A can then finish off.

To the south, 7A pushed the Germans back at Strasbourg – this is now a depot. So if I can manage a break through well place to make substantial gains in southern Germany.

[John B.]

I've never played the game so forgive me if this is an obvious question but can the German players refuse to fly in 1943 saving their good pilots until 1944?

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: John B.

I've never played the game so forgive me if this is an obvious question but can the German players refuse to fly in 1943 saving their good pilots until 1944?

In a PBEM there is an interesting game of cat and mouse between the two airforces. As the axis player you can get air superiority in 1943 in two situations.

One is in Italy where the Allies mostly have short range fighters and struggle for airbases (till they capture the region around Bari). The other is by concentrating your airforces over Germany and moving around - sooner or later you will catch out an under-protected raid.

If you can get numbers on your side you can do a lot of damage and get a favourable loss ratio. Against the bombers the idea really is to lower the morale of the allied airforces so they are less useful - you'll never shoot down enough to win the production war, but by stopping formations from operating you slow the rate at which bombing takes place.

On the other end of the timescale come 1945 the Luftwaffe is finished. The Allies are only bombing because they have strategic bombers - much as I am doing here - it has little impact on either key production or victory point system. You really don't want to put your fighters up against the allied tactical airforces as that is going to be a massacre and by 1945 your own bombers are pretty much useless.

So the ideal for the axis player is to win big a few times in 1943, keep a viable airforce that inflicts substantial attrition on the allies all through 1944 and accept that in 1945 its all over in the air. For the Allies the goal is to undermine the experience levels of the axis airforce as early as you can in 1944 - while you have air supremacy from the summer you need your planes to be active and that means as few losses as you can.

So the airwar comes down to a scale between say May 44 (the allied players preferred version) and Jan 45 (the axis players preferred version) when the air war becomes completely one sided. So for a German player, there is no point hoarding your planes into the end-game but you don't want to down to inexperienced pilots in mid-44.

Which is a long way to answer a simple question. Yes you could, but the real solution is more nuanced. The axis can gain localised air superiority in 1943 so its good to use this, the VP/bombing ratio is at its highest in 1943 (so you want to slow that) and you have the ability to really contest a naval landing in Italy (unlike in France in 1944) so your airforce forces the allied player to be cautious.

[loki100]

T95-T96

Several turns of heavy mud and heavy rain so limited mobility and no airpower. I miss the airpower more than I miss the mobility.

Still the German army is finally falling apart.

I'll split the front up into three sectors as that makes sense.

Nothern sector on T95. Not shown but did final naval invasion in NW Netherlands – see if this shakes up the German line there, if not I may well pull back.

Main event was 1 Ca Army still grinding its way forward, at some stage I need to think about dealing with the Ruhr – not least due to the layout of the train lines.



Which is what I did on T96. Cleared out a small German position to the south of the Ruhr and managed to push some armour over disrupting the German rail net. Note this armoured formation notionally belongs to 5A but I am more worried about managing command capacity than about neat army level front lines.



In the Rhineland, 2 Br and 15 Armies made some gains on T95. The rail network is better laid out (from my point of view) here which helps.



T96 brought the reward for all that attritional fighting – and holding the British armour back. The German front collapsed, I routed out the only force that was blocking my movement and managed to place British tanks over the Rhine.

Diverted 1A south to ensure this was an encirclement as I am trying to seriously weaken the Germans.



On the Upper Rhine, T96 brought the usual one hex advance but also a small bit of exploitation.



T97 saw that develop into a full breakout and I have control of the east bank of the Rhine in this sector and two rail crossing points.

[loki100]

T97

Back to light rain but still heavy mud.

Given the return of the v-weapons, useful I can bomb again.



8 AAF on the Elbe.

Had started wondering why the raids later in the week were using so few planes. Checked and at some stage I'd converted the B-17 payload to bombs rather than secondary fuel. This doesn't just affect notional range – which is easy to spot – but also the total weekly mileage (less so).

So all set to extra fuel and less bombs from next turn.



15 AAF went for the v-weapon sites in S Germany.



BC sticks to Hamburg – seemingly successfully.



For the tactical airforces, basically one is supporting each of the main offensives. So 9AAF supports the fighting in the Ruhr, 2 Tac Air the British-American offensive towards Mainz/Frankfurt and Tac Air the fighting on the lower Rhine.

In turn each is split into 3 missions. About 30% of the FB are on a GS mission, usually tied to the relevant Army Group but sometimes I am linking this to a particular army. Rest of the FB are on interdiction. The 2-engined bombers are on GA-unit and moving around bombing whichever hex I may need to attack that seems particularly strong – sometimes this is out of their immediate sector depending on the key targets.

In the north, 1 Ca Army deploying for a battle to take the Ruhr – hopefully this will also force a retreat from the Netherlands freeing up 3A.

1A managed a small breakthrough



In the centre, pockets along the Moselle over-run and British tanks in Frankfurt



In the south, almost reached Stuttgart, German lines here falling apart.

[loki100]

T98

At last we emerge from the murk of winter – clear skies and light mud. If I am lucky it will dry out next week.

Probably the last week of the traditional strategic bombing war. I'll probably convert BC to do ground attack – unit style missions as that helps destroy the last few strong German units.

For this turn 8AAF went hunting targets on the Elbe. Note the far better numbers on the later days when I corrected my mistake with load outs.



15AAF also looking for targets.



BC hit the smaller towns in Holstein. Lack of targets is why I am going to put this onto a more tactical role.



Northern flank. A few probing attacks in the Netherlands. 1 Ca well set up to attack the Ruhr even as its tanks head east.



British tanks break out from Frankfurt. I'm now routing out surrounded stacks if they will slow my mobility. As you can see from the image I am getting a lot of routs – even from conventional attacks – so more focussed on mobility rather than the slow destruction of the German army.



South. Cities starting to fall every turn, here Stuttgart, Ulm and Mannheim.

My supply net is holding up well on this sector – unlike in previous games so glad to have worked out how to improve that.



Even managed a small offensive in Italy.

[John B.]

Thanks for the explanation! That was very helpful.[&o][&o]

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: John B.

Thanks for the explanation! That was very helpful.[&o][&o]

good. its one of the big issues for a German player to sort out. You can do a lot of damage with the Luftwaffe in 1943 and its pretty much useless in 1945. So that tends you to committing it early to maximise those possible gains. But if you do, you'll lose badly in 1944.

Yes the Allies have a lot of planes but they don't have enough for everything they want to do. So you need a functional core airforce that can set your own limits on that capacity.

As the Allies if I find my opponent wants to go head to head in 1943, I'll take it. I may well lose every round but I'd win out overall.

But I do keep on changing my mind as to just how to balance 1943 commitment of the Luftwaffe against needing a working airforce through 1944 [;)]

[loki100]

T99-T100

Main focus now is to see if I can reach Berlin without being hit by a catastrophic VP penalty. FWIW I'd rather the game ended in mid-May and the outcome was decided on the score at that stage.

Anyway, I'll start conflating turns as not that much is happening - well a lot is but its fairly repetitive. Main issue each turn is to identify my prefered axis of advance and make sure any obstacles are bombed out of existence ...

T99 saw 15 AAF hitting some final targets in the south and 8 AAF hunting v-weapons in the Baltic region. T100 and the only strategic bombing is 8 AAF basically trying to dismantle the rail system around Berlin – the German army is falling apart but this helps speed the process.



Weather on T99 was clear, T100 light rain.

Tactical airpower as on T98. The heavier bombers are all on GA-unit missions hitting the last few strong German formations, all the FB are on GS and AS is supplied by FC and elements of 8 AAF.

T99 in the north. Main issue is occupying most of the Ruhr, handy to have one mobile corps to hand for exploitation.



T100, AI escaped but this time I was glad it did as that means I can construct a working rail net.

Starting to take chances with being cut off and pushing some units as far as I can. Hence the Canadian tanks in Hannover.



T99 centre. British infantry able to reach the front so that was broken and again the armour heads off east.



T100 broke through again and almost at the Elbe. Basically 1 US and 2 Br is (hopefully) going straight for Berlin.



T99 south. 9 A destroyed the German front line and allowed the tanks to reach Nuremberg. 15 A and 1FF basically providing flank protection.



T100, few gains as I pulled the British XXX Corps that had been the spearhead north for the drive on Berlin.

Main interest here now is to take out the southern v-weapon production and any other VP rich locations.

[loki100]

T101-T103

I'll spare the details on these turns. My only real interest was taking Berlin before the late game penalty (-100 VP per turn) becomes catastrophic.

But to offset this I wanted to capture as many seconday cities as I could.

Here's the end situations on the main sectors.

3A broke out on T101 and has liberated most of the western Netherlands. As you can see in the corner all this is cut off as I captured Bremen and am using the TF to interdict supplies.



In southern Germany, ended up close to Innsbruck



Even in Italy made some final gains, taking Venice on T102.



T102, 2 British Army and 1 US Army pressing towards Berlin.



And T103, the final bit of action. Due to a massive air supply effort managed to keep up the MP of the British armour so could muster a final attempt to take Berlin.

The last two turns 8AAF has been unit bombing that hex in preparation.



Just in time to salvage a draw- by 3 pts (ahem)



Few charts and tables. The final OOB, have worked fairly hard to keep the Allied formations within their command limits.



Ground losses.



Air losses. My FB losses escalated in the last turns as GS is relatively costly, by T100 I had actually reverted back to mostly using interdiction.



Some idea of what happened as this shows turn losses over the last 10 turns



Sometimes a very useful picture. Press the '8' key and you can see where every command is drawing its supply from (this shows the depot it gets the majority from). In effect while I had some depots up at the front till the rail yards repaired there were too limited. So my cluster of larger depots just east of the Rhine were the primary source of supply.

Good thing the Western Allies have a lot of trucks.



Some comments.

Started this to offer some idea how the strategic airwar interacts with the rest o f the Grand Campaign as I think the feedback loops are not too obvious at first attempts.

Basically:

1) pay attention to the VP targets
2) taking out German AFV and truck production is worthwhile, especially if you match this with hitting rail yards (depots with damaged rail yards are less effective and less rail capacit makes it harder to use the rail lines effectively)
3) ignore fighter production
4) as, make the Luftwaffe fight. Even in 1943, you can use Fighter Command to generate an AS that will catch them. If you are trading losses you are winning.
5) Don't push the strategic bombers too hard early on, keeping the bombing going is better than sudden surges as you have to stand down formations due to low morale and fatigue

These tables are a bit misleading as I tend to swap planes around (and a lot of FC shifts over to bombers by the end of 1943) but my Polish pilots clearly went looking for revenge



But the stand out fighter is P51B/D. Once they appear, its really hard for the Luftwaffe as there is almost nowhere in Western Germany that is safe.



One thing I'd forgotten is that fuel tanks don't just increase the range (ie the obvious visual feedback) but also mileage, in other words the ability to return to the same targets many times. So a plane with no fuel tanks may have a heavier bomb load but may drop less bombs in the week due to making less missions.

For the tactical aircraft, unless you have really good reasons not to, I'd say put about 70% of your FB on GA-interdiction and 30% on GS. 2-engined bombers are very good for hitting railyards and airfields and useful in the GA-unit role.

I like to do manual upgrades as its a bit of micro-management I like. I also don't want to see my best formations flying second rate planes.

One thing I worked out in this game is it very easy to overlook the Mosquito in a FB role. I've tended to use the Hurricanes to supplement the Typhoons but now think this is a mistake. The Mosquitos have long range (so can stay in the UK in 1944 for example), the loadout is as good as the Hurricane and they are more robust.

With hindsight, I'm not sure it was worthwhile putting so much effort into Italy. I think the VP efficient model is to take Rome and find a defensive line and strip out almost all your offensive formations.

Final comment – I do think this is a great game for vs the AI with the allies. Yes the AI makes mistakes but on challenging it provides a decent opponent.

[John B.]

Thanks for this AAR. It was very interesting and good to see the the AI can put up a bit of a fight.

[MrBlizzard]

Very nice AAR, thanks for sharing all these useful comments. I'll re-read it from the start.

[bomccarthy]

ORIGINAL: loki100

One thing I'd forgotten is that fuel tanks don't just increase the range (ie the obvious visual feedback) but also mileage, in other words the ability to return to the same targets many times. So a plane with no fuel tanks may have a heavier bomb load but may drop less bombs in the week due to making less missions.

I think I am missing something here - the ability to fly more missions in a week is based on availability each day, correct? This would be affected by crew and airplane fatigue/damage and recovery/repair while not flying. Now, there may be increased operational losses when trying to fly long-distance missions without extra fuel tanks, as planes run out of fuel and crash, and escorts may have to turn back early as they run low on fuel, leaving the bombers vulnerable to attack over the target and on their return flight. This would definitely affect the day-to-day availability of planes as the week progressed.

The ability to fly multiple missions in a single day would be based on fatigue/damage of the aircrew and the airplane as the day wore on, as well as distance to the target and speed (i.e., round trip from southeastern England to northwest France is a couple of hours, while the round trip from southeast England to Berlin is 7+ hours). The cruise speed and time traveling to and from a target remains the same with or without extra fuel tanks. I recall that the increased number of sorties possible during longer daylight in the summer is represented by a boost to interdiction results between May and August.

I don't know if the game simulates the US shuttle escort operations (P-47s accompany the bombers on the ingress until Belgium, P-38s and P-51s pick up the bombers and escort them close to the target, additional P-51s pick up the bombers over the target and on the initial return leg, and the original P-47s (now refueled) pick up the bombers for their final return leg). I know the game doesn't simulate the 8th AF fighter tactics - once they handed the bombers over to the next fighter escort groups, they returned to England "on the deck", ambushing German aircraft in takeoff and landing patterns, strafing their airfields, and shooting up trains.

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: John B.

Thanks for this AAR. It was very interesting and good to see the the AI can put up a bit of a fight.

I think the Axis AI is more than good enough. Clearly it can be essentially re-active which helps but I've found this with the Allies vs the AI is a very enjoyable game

ORIGINAL: MrBlizzard

Very nice AAR, thanks for sharing all these useful comments. I'll re-read it from the start.

Thanks, yes the idea was to develop the more direct answers to specific questions and put something that offered some sort of context. There are other vs AI AARs but they are also from very early versions of the game

ORIGINAL: bomccarthy

ORIGINAL: loki100

One thing I'd forgotten is that fuel tanks don't just increase the range (ie the obvious visual feedback) but also mileage, in other words the ability to return to the same targets many times. So a plane with no fuel tanks may have a heavier bomb load but may drop less bombs in the week due to making less missions.

I think I am missing something here - the ability to fly more missions in a week is based on availability each day, correct? This would be affected by crew and airplane fatigue/damage and recovery/repair while not flying. Now, there may be increased operational losses when trying to fly long-distance missions without extra fuel tanks, as planes run out of fuel and crash, and escorts may have to turn back early as they run low on fuel, leaving the bombers vulnerable to attack over the target and on their return flight. This would definitely affect the day-to-day availability of planes as the week progressed.

The ability to fly multiple missions in a single day would be based on fatigue/damage of the aircrew and the airplane as the day wore on, as well as distance to the target and speed (i.e., round trip from southeastern England to northwest France is a couple of hours, while the round trip from southeast England to Berlin is 7+ hours). The cruise speed and time traveling to and from a target remains the same with or without extra fuel tanks. I recall that the increased number of sorties possible during longer daylight in the summer is represented by a boost to interdiction results between May and August.

I don't know if the game simulates the US shuttle escort operations (P-47s accompany the bombers on the ingress until Belgium, P-38s and P-51s pick up the bombers and escort them close to the target, additional P-51s pick up the bombers over the target and on the initial return leg, and the original P-47s (now refueled) pick up the bombers for their final return leg). I know the game doesn't simulate the 8th AF fighter tactics - once they handed the bombers over to the next fighter escort groups, they returned to England "on the deck", ambushing German aircraft in takeoff and landing patterns, strafing their airfields, and shooting up trains.

Just sticking to the issue of how fuel tanks interact. The truth is I am not sure, but it seems to generate a greater total mileage for your planes and thus the ability to fly more.

Now being a statistician (ahem), I just had to go and test this.

So here are the results from a Summer 1944 turn (so no bad weather effects). I turned off the other air ADs and just ran a recon, linked AS and strategic bombing mission by the bulk of 8 AAF. Clearly this is just one run on each model, but here are the saves if anyone wants to run multiple tests:

https://we.tl/M3weCbQDcC

(this is a wetransfer link, just click and it will give you access to the files).

So test 1, I sent the cluster of strategic bombers with the heaviest bomb payload and no extra fuel tanks. This gave 6 * 1000lb for the B-17s and 8 for the B-24s (both types).

So in this case all 1,000 bombers can reach the target without extra fuel



I set up the AD on this pattern, so fairly normal for a strategic bombing mission (my approach anyway) with breaks and keep D1 clear so that the recon can take effect.



Here's the results, note the very low commitment compared to notional numbers and that I got around 870 bombers over the target in the week



And the losses, didn't lose very many bombers



For test 2 I used the standard fuel+bombs payload so the B-17s carried 3 bombs and the B-24s carried 4.

This time I had 1,600 bombers over target - so each flew about 50% of the missions (in theory if everyone had joined each day I would have had 3,000 bomber/missions).



And the losses - I only lost 9 more bombers despite doubling the intensity of the mission.



Trying to compare results is hard, but roughly on the first set up I knocked out 1 HI, 14 Fuel and <1 manpower points

For the second mission, knocked out 1.5 manpower, 8 HI and 6 fuel points.

Clearly needs multiple runs to eliminate the sometimes extreme random elements but I'd say that suggests two things:

a) fuel tanks don't just extend range but also available mileage, I went from 870/3000 bomber missions to 1600/3000 bomber missions with no noticeable increase in bomber losses.

b) The number of bombs matter. In the first test [1] I dropped more bombs (say roughly 870*7 approx 6,500) than in the second (again roughly lets say 1600*3.5=5,000) and did more damage.

So the trade off is a bit unclear, really needs about 10 runs at each but the two clear results are more bomber/missions with fuel tanks and more dropped bombs without. The first mission was also mildly more efficient in terms of losses for the damage inflicted.


[1 - in the first test the B-17s had 6 bombs and the B-24s 8]

[bomccarthy]

I've downloaded your saves and I'll see if I can set aside some time to look at them more closely.

I noticed that in your test 1 (no extra fuel) 66 more bombers flew on D4 than on D2, while in test 2 (extra fuel) 521 fewer bombers flew on D4 than on D2. I wonder if the results would have been different if you specified the number of aircraft requested, rather than leaving that setting on "auto".

I am puzzled, though, why there would be a sortie difference based on extra fuel, unless the game algorithm is simulating aircraft turning back before reaching the target because of low fuel. There would be no other real-world explanation.

I think this is where my thinking diverges from those of the designers/developers - extra fuel tanks should be added and number of bombs decreased automatically, based on the target distance and altitude set.

Historically, the use of extra fuel tanks, especially in bombers, was determined through standard operating procedure that took into account range to target, altitude, and weight of the aircraft. Considerable fuel cushion was built in to account for the highly variable weather over NW Europe and the lack of precise weather recon - I don't believe that any mission was flown that pushed this margin just to get some more bombs on the target. If more bombs were desired, the mission altitude was decreased considerably, such as the 20th AF in the Pacific (climbing to 10k ft in a fully loaded airplane burned a lot less fuel than climbing to 25k ft). In the game, players should only have a choice on the type of ordnance carried, not on the mix of ordnance and fuel - if you choose to bomb a distant target, then you automatically carry fewer bombs.