Pelton (GHC) vs KWG (WA) GHC Victory

[KWG]

WHOA!!!

"In Caen on June 21st the sun will rise before 5:56am and set after 10:10pm
In the same city on Dec 21st the sun will rise at 8:53am and set at 5:05pm"


Russia is going to even more so I wonder?

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: Red Lancer

I am all in favour of a hard fought contest and a little trash talk. I am 100% against inaccurate allegations and name calling.
This applies to all members of the forum.

I completely agree and am sorry if I said any inaccurate allegations or name calling towards anyone or 2by3.

@ Pelton - I do not believe this is an exploit.

I respectfully disagree, based on in game and historical data. I or anyone else can play "historically" as Germany. This tactic can be used to bomb units on French coast before an invasion for months
.

You can argue that some of your tactics are equally ahistoric -

almost never attacking and three deep defensive lines are just as ahistoric.
There is always a danger of over optimisation but where do you draw the line between those who can use the game
to their advantage and where it is pushed too far.
If neither of you are playing Normandy by history then quoting historical data is not a sufficient argument.

Generally speaking its the player base that in the end desides if its an exploit or "over optimization".
If the issue it is an I win button, it becomes clear as day to everyone. Its fixed/patched or everyone starts using the
"over optimization" of the gaming system making game play not fun, but boring as the outcome is clear before the first turn is done.


The air rules are pretty clear. 17.3.3.1 shows the interdiction bonus which is based on increased daylight hours.
I do not believe that has any effect beyond air interdiction as the modifier is applied after the interdiction value
is applied to a hex. Winter does have an effect through weather (17.1.5 refers) and a negative interdiction modifier.

I did not know that thanks for clearing that up.

Its not the messenger that's important or not, but the message.

[Seminole]

Russia is going to even more so I wonder?

It's really a question of latitude, but I don't know that they'll get more discrete than seasonal.

[Seminole]

If the issue it is an I win button, it becomes clear as day to everyone.

I don't think everyone sees an 'I win' button yet.
I recall someone making that comment with regard to the strategic bombing VP (just avoid beachhead penalties and bomb to victory), but with the divisor and a tuned German response I'm willing to bet that tactic would fail.

I'm totally open to examining that air losses are not exaggerated, I want the game fun and playable from both sides.
That's why I want to understand the particulars of his successful raids versus his unsuccessful.

You've highlighted an issue, what remains is to apportion responsibility between your play style (static defensive arrangement, etc), KWG's play style (forgoing strategic VP to open the front), as well as other important variables like detection value, aircraft/loadouts used, frequency, etc.

Intuitively I feel that there should be diminishing returns on repeated bombings. After the low hanging fruit and targets of opportunity, air power has some serious limitations to it.

[Peltonx]

I have been busy so have yet to flip the turn-almost done other then a possible counter attack.

Now that everyone knows what we are looking at for a possible exploit - its very nice to have other players telling me what to look for as I don't have much exp on the air system other then what I have learnt from liquadsky an a few others. I know nothing about WA side of things.

[KWG]

ORIGINAL: Seminole

If the issue it is an I win button, it becomes clear as day to everyone.

I don't think everyone sees an 'I win' button yet.
I recall someone making that comment with regard to the strategic bombing VP (just avoid beachhead penalties and bomb to victory), but with the divisor and a tuned German response I'm willing to bet that tactic would fail.

I'm totally open to examining that air losses are not exaggerated, I want the game fun and playable from both sides.
That's why I want to understand the particulars of his successful raids versus his unsuccessful.

You've highlighted an issue, what remains is to apportion responsibility between your play style (static defensive arrangement, etc), KWG's play style (forgoing strategic VP to open the front), as well as other important variables like detection value, aircraft/loadouts used, frequency, etc.

Intuitively I feel that there should be diminishing returns on repeated bombings. After the low hanging fruit and targets of opportunity, air power has some serious limitations to it.

Read my own post on the "I win" easy button. And credit losses with the actual numbers and who caused them.


Lets not forget Interdiction.

And my ground forces and their tactics would like a little credit.

[KWG]

ORIGINAL: Pelton

I have been busy so have yet to flip the turn-almost done other then a possible counter attack.

Now that everyone knows what we are looking at for a possible exploit - its very nice to have other players telling me what to look for as I don't have much exp on the air system other then what I have learnt from liquadsky an a few others. I know nothing about WA side of things.

Iam the Germans over 90% of the time. The Allied Air is a game unto itself. The first serious books I started reading as a kid were on WW2 airplanes. What the crews went and the courage it took amazed me. Hours of boredom and seconds of sheer terror.


I believe War in Russia 1941, most of the German's power will be a still strong Luftwaffe.

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: KWG

ORIGINAL: Pelton

I have been busy so have yet to flip the turn-almost done other then a possible counter attack.

Now that everyone knows what we are looking at for a possible exploit - its very nice to have other players telling me what to look for as I don't have much exp on the air system other then what I have learnt from liquadsky an a few others. I know nothing about WA side of things.

I believe War in Russia 1941, most of the German's power will be a still strong Luftwaffe.

Yes I have stated as much in DEV forums.

I believe that the current air system will be "over optimization" or over powered when it comes to WitE 2.0

If these tactics are used on the Eastern Front, Germans can punch a 30 mile wide hole in the front before ground combat even starts even vs stacks 3 high with 30+ CV in forts and terrain.

Flip the coin and same thing will go late war.

This can be done turn after turn after turn.

[KWG]

ORIGINAL: Pelton

ORIGINAL: KWG

ORIGINAL: Pelton

I have been busy so have yet to flip the turn-almost done other then a possible counter attack.

Now that everyone knows what we are looking at for a possible exploit - its very nice to have other players telling me what to look for as I don't have much exp on the air system other then what I have learnt from liquadsky an a few others. I know nothing about WA side of things.

I believe War in Russia 1941, most of the German's power will be a still strong Luftwaffe.

Yes I have stated as much in DEV forums.

I believe that the current air system will be "over optimization" or over powered when it comes to WitE 2.0

If these tactics are used on the Eastern Front, Germans can punch a 30 mile wide hole in the front before ground combat even starts even vs stacks 3 high with 30+ CV in forts and terrain.

Flip the coin and same thing will go late war.

This can be done turn after turn after turn.

I think the numbers of aircraft and the payloads at the early or late of Barbarossa, for either The Germans or Russians will be nowhere near the same as the Allied Air force in England 1944. If that makes a difference in game.

[LiquidSky]

Okay..I finished my first test.

I used the May 1944 campaign start. I didn't bother invading.

I started to track bomber losses, but they proved to be negligible. I used only the 8th airforce, and Bomber Command. I started with AUTO loadouts, then changed them to the many small bombs loadouts...for unnoticeable effect. The AI probably bombs with the small bombs on units anyways. I hit a 10/10 box centered near Fecamp. With max sorties. I always rest any squadrons with 60 or less morale. I bomb every day.

May 11, 1944: RAIN. Men 9375, Guns 566, AFV 5 First turn the whole airforce is ready.
May 18, 1944: Rain. Men 3628, Guns 230, AFV 5
May 25, 1944: Rain. Men 4524, Guns 101, AFV 1
June 1, 1944: CLEAR Men 7028, Guns 289, AFV 8
June 8, 1944: Clear Men 7145, Guns 321, AFV 7
Jun 15, 1944: Clear Men 6864, Guns 210, AFV 3 After this bombing I moved a bunch of FLAK to German units and towns in the area being bombed.
Jun 22, 1944: Clear Men 964, Guns 24, AFV 0 And instead of around 2500 planes with low morale its around 4500
Jun 29, 1944: RAIN Men 2281, Guns 43, AFV 0 A lot less planes available...usually a squadron bombs once every 3 turns.
July 6, 1944: CLEAR Men 6516, Guns 330, AFV 3
Jul 13, 1944: Clear Men 5483, Guns 320, AFV 10

Another thing I noticed is that from the Italian theatre (which I did nothing in) the Germans were losing around 1500 men (on top of the above) to attrition (per turn).

Looking at the German army that is being bombed...the TOE's are all over 100% for the regiments in forts. The divisions that are more exposed range from 90-99 TOE. They were lower before I gave them FLAK support units. (All Germans are on REFIT)

Other notables: 9000 vehicles have been lost. 920 Rifle Squads. Most of the guns lost are Flak guns.

[Peltonx]

Your up.

Turn 49 VP: 62
WA Loses: 256,000
GHC Loses: 268,000

Turn 50 -24 VP 38
WA Loses: 263,000 7,000
GHC Loses: 289,000 21,000 Loss ratio: 1 to 3

Turn 51 -7 VP 31
WA Loses: 273,000 10,000
GHC Loses: 326,000 37,000 Loss ratio: 1 to 3.7

Turn 52 -10 VP 21
WA Loses: 280,000 7,000
GHC Loses: 362,000 36,000 Loss ratio: 1 to 5

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: LiquidSky



Okay..I finished my first test.

I used the May 1944 campaign start. I didn't bother invading.

I started to track bomber losses, but they proved to be negligible. I used only the 8th airforce, and Bomber Command. I started with AUTO loadouts, then changed them to the many small bombs loadouts...for unnoticeable effect. The AI probably bombs with the small bombs on units anyways. I hit a 10/10 box centered near Fecamp. With max sorties. I always rest any squadrons with 60 or less morale. I bomb every day.

May 11, 1944: RAIN. Men 9375, Guns 566, AFV 5 First turn the whole airforce is ready.
May 18, 1944: Rain. Men 3628, Guns 230, AFV 5
May 25, 1944: Rain. Men 4524, Guns 101, AFV 1
June 1, 1944: CLEAR Men 7028, Guns 289, AFV 8
June 8, 1944: Clear Men 7145, Guns 321, AFV 7
Jun 15, 1944: Clear Men 6864, Guns 210, AFV 3 After this bombing I moved a bunch of FLAK to German units and towns in the area being bombed.
Jun 22, 1944: Clear Men 964, Guns 24, AFV 0 And instead of around 2500 planes with low morale its around 4500
Jun 29, 1944: RAIN Men 2281, Guns 43, AFV 0 A lot less planes available...usually a squadron bombs once every 3 turns.
July 6, 1944: CLEAR Men 6516, Guns 330, AFV 3
Jul 13, 1944: Clear Men 5483, Guns 320, AFV 10

Another thing I noticed is that from the Italian theatre (which I did nothing in) the Germans were losing around 1500 men (on top of the above) to attrition (per turn).

Looking at the German army that is being bombed...the TOE's are all over 100% for the regiments in forts. The divisions that are more exposed range from 90-99 TOE. They were lower before I gave them FLAK support units. (All Germans are on REFIT)

Other notables: 9000 vehicles have been lost. 920 Rifle Squads. Most of the guns lost are Flak guns.

Hmm ok try KWG system

5 recons on the hex

bomb 10 times

recon 5

bomb 10

recon 5.

Interesting that flak has little effect, how about terrain or forts?

Also what are the results per run?

You seeing 500+ loses for single attacks?

Also he hitting a few hexes and not an area.

Pick a single hex or 2 or 3 and pound them 20 to 30 times. with 5 recons before each 10. Check morale of units and how much you can lower CV.

There should be nothing left of units, result of bombing an area will be less then targeting a single hex 20-30 times

[LiquidSky]

Here is a breakdown on where the damage occurs.

The randomness seems to come mostly from the number of planes and type that are bombing. BC is by far the best at bombing units. They also get disrupted easily so cant bomb every turn.

I will show a breakdown on the bombing that killed 1842 men. It happened in Paris, in a Heavy Urban hex. Fort level only 1. (it was the Sec Div)

Flak does have an effect...seems to cut out around 1/3rd of the losses. However, Flak also gets bombed which reduces it's long term effectiveness.

[LiquidSky]

Oops...the hex was the middle of Paris. It is still a Heavy Urban hex, but there is no fort, and it holds Luftwaffe 3 HQ and OB West HQ.

Here is the breakdown of the Ground losses:

Looking at the flak in the city, a lot of the guns are destroyed.




The Americans hit the same hex the next day, but only killed about 300 men and some guns....but only a third of the guns could fire at them since the british hurt the rest.

[LiquidSky]

Well..I booted up an old test scenario where I was up against a German line in the Netherlands.

Hitting 9 hexes a total of 267 times with the entire allied bomber force (including fighter bombers) I inflicted 20,624 Men, 303 guns, and 59 AFV's

But I lost 514 aircraft. It is interesting to not that the dug in Germans in the Polder couldn't be dislodged.

EDIT: Rain (and less planes able to bomb) causes about half as many as last turn to hit the same targets.
Losses inflicted drops dramatically to 3900 men, 45 Guns, and 12 AFV's...I suspect because there is a lot less men to kill.

EDIT: Third turn saw around 8000 men killed by bombing. This time the hex was able to be taken in attack. TOE's for the Germans in the area are around 50%.
I am thinking that both terrain and fortifications do little to prevent casualties. The biggest way to slow the bleed is to use flak, but that flak will take damage as well.

[Seminole]

I think the numbers of aircraft and the payloads at the early or late of Barbarossa, for either The Germans or Russians will be nowhere near the same as the Allied Air force in England 1944. If that makes a difference in game.

I'm with you on this.
With the Germans I can do stuff in a small area, for a small amount of time.
There's no comparison with the '44 WA air forces...

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: Seminole

I think the numbers of aircraft and the payloads at the early or late of Barbarossa, for either The Germans or Russians will be nowhere near the same as the Allied Air force in England 1944. If that makes a difference in game.

I'm with you on this.
With the Germans I can do stuff in a small area, for a small amount of time.
There's no comparison with the '44 WA air forces...

and also neither side is going to be able to concentrate to this extent. Normandy was historically very unusual in terms of proximity to base and the very narrow target area. Even when either the Germans or Soviets concentrated air on a given sector it was much larger than this constricted battle zone and there were plenty of other demands on them.

Add on less good airbases within the Soviet Union and you are not going to see extreme concentrations - don't forget at the moment WiTE has the equivalent of land based aircraft carriers rather than fixed bases.

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: LiquidSky

Well..I booted up an old test scenario where I was up against a German line in the Netherlands.

Hitting 9 hexes a total of 267 times with the entire allied bomber force (including fighter bombers) I inflicted 20,624 Men, 303 guns, and 59 AFV's

But I lost 514 aircraft. It is interesting to not that the dug in Germans in the Polder couldn't be dislodged.

EDIT: Rain (and less planes able to bomb) causes about half as many as last turn to hit the same targets.
Losses inflicted drops dramatically to 3900 men, 45 Guns, and 12 AFV's...I suspect because there is a lot less men to kill.

EDIT: Third turn saw around 8000 men killed by bombing. This time the hex was able to be taken in attack. TOE's for the Germans in the area are around 50%.
I am thinking that both terrain and fortifications do little to prevent casualties. The biggest way to slow the bleed is to use flak, but that flak will take damage as well.

Good stuff 20k to bombing, which is still lower then KGW's 25-30K per turn not counting interdiction just bombing. I am guessing hes better at it then u and me as my results are a little lower then yours.

So the air force can inflict turn after turn 20 to 30K loses and the ground forces only need to attack the few hexes
that have been bombing to rout the units there which inflicts more loses as they retreat.

Again I can see this being historical for a turn or 2, but this is clearly unhistorical as it can be done for months on end.

Its plain an simple, it does not match up to what happened historically - most loses were caused by ground combat not 1 to ground combat and 5 to bombing. This is data over a month not a single turn.

The lose ratio is unhistorical and the loses caused by bombing is unhistorical that's the data from me and others

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: loki100

ORIGINAL: Seminole

I think the numbers of aircraft and the payloads at the early or late of Barbarossa, for either The Germans or Russians will be nowhere near the same as the Allied Air force in England 1944. If that makes a difference in game.

I'm with you on this.
With the Germans I can do stuff in a small area, for a small amount of time.
There's no comparison with the '44 WA air forces...

and also neither side is going to be able to concentrate to this extent. Normandy was historically very unusual in terms of proximity to base and the very narrow target area. Even when either the Germans or Soviets concentrated air on a given sector it was much larger than this constricted battle zone and there were plenty of other demands on them.

Add on less good airbases within the Soviet Union and you are not going to see extreme concentrations - don't forget at the moment WiTE has the equivalent of land based aircraft carriers rather than fixed bases.

Historically speaking a field was an airbase in Russia something 2.0 simply cant model nor any game for that matter.

Fighters (Russian and German)during summer were very close to the fighting based in some farmers corn field not an airbase. Stukas and bombers ect ect did have to use "air bases" most of the year.
Not sure how 2.0 could model that, guess squads would have to have counters on the map?

[KWG]

"Historically speaking a field was an airbase in Russia something 2.0 simply cant model nor any game for that matter.

Fighters (Russian and German)during summer were very close to the fighting based in some farmers corn field not an airbase. Stukas and bombers ect ect did have to use "air bases" most of the year.
Not sure how 2.0 could model that, guess squads would have to have counters on the map?"


The ability to build a airfield any where. Expand airbase from scratch