Matrix Games Forums

Posted: **Wed May 30, 2018 8:42 pm**

ORIGINAL: KorutZelva

As for air balance, I think with the future change of shifting one tac for one medium will get it just perfect. With a bit of AA and defensive terrain air force are not the death star some (including me!) portrays them to be. The fact that massing air in NA is a relatively standard play can gives the wrong impression of its effectiveness overall. In NA there a lack of defensive terrain means airforce can blow up units left and right (when the weather cooperates!) because there's nowhere to hide. Different battlefield, different outcome. On my last turn I had tons of max tech bombers getting 2:0 odds to tanks tucked in german forests. [X(]

I suspect your poor combat odds probably have more to do with relative experience and effectiveness levels than they do with the fact that the tanks were in forest. I have had fully entrenched Armies in Cities with good AA destroyed by air attack alone. Not saying the forest doesn't help, I just doubt it was the most important factor.

Posted: **Wed May 30, 2018 8:47 pm**

ORIGINAL: Harrybanana

ORIGINAL: KorutZelva

As for air balance, I think with the future change of shifting one tac for one medium will get it just perfect. With a bit of AA and defensive terrain air force are not the death star some (including me!) portrays them to be. The fact that massing air in NA is a relatively standard play can gives the wrong impression of its effectiveness overall. In NA there a lack of defensive terrain means airforce can blow up units left and right (when the weather cooperates!) because there's nowhere to hide. Different battlefield, different outcome. On my last turn I had tons of max tech bombers getting 2:0 odds to tanks tucked in german forests. [X(]

I suspect your poor combat odds probably have more to do with relative experience and effectiveness levels than they do with the fact that the tanks were in forest. I have had fully entrenched Armies in Cities with good AA destroyed by air attack alone. Not saying the forest doesn't help, I just doubt it was the most important factor.

The air units were managed by 3 pip Eisenhower, 2 pip Bradley and 2 pips Montgomery. [X(]

But yeah, next time I'll also wait for supply to raise back to 10 before sending my planes on the mainland... [:'(]

Posted: **Wed May 30, 2018 8:50 pm**

ORIGINAL: KorutZelva

Long range is king. More so than I previously though. The obvious benefit is of course being to hit other when they can hit you but there's more. Having long range means you can space out your Air HQs more and still support each other. And by being spaced out more you can make better use of defensive terrain because planes can be further from the HQ without starting to get supply from an other HQ.

Hate to say I told you so (well actually I love it), but repeated below is my post mortem post from our game. See point 1.

"This Axis Strategy is essentially as follows:

1. Prioritize Advanced Aircraft tech and also research Long range aircraft (more important than many people think)
2. Build the Manstein HQ ASAP,
3. Build all your Fighters, Tanks, TAC and, if possible, HQs prior to DAK arrival (I believe this is pretty standard anyway),
4. Get Spain on the Axis side, preferably by diplomacy,
5. Send Manstein to Libya to join Rommel (well actually even before Rommel arrives)
6. Use the Luftwaffe on mass, first to take Malta, then Egypt, then Russia. If necessary also use the Luftwaffe on mass to take Algeria and the Middle East.
7. Don't be afraid to "operate" the Luftwaffe to wherever it is needed.
8. Don't rush Barbarossa. Generally speaking, the only time Axis MPP production is greater than Allied MPP production is from the fall of France until Barbarossa.
9. When using the Axis Air Force, generally concentrate on destroying the enemy's fighters and HQs first, not the front line units. I often neglect this one myself.
10.Once Leningrad, Moscow and Stalingrad have been captured, destroy whatever unit is in London with the massed Luftwaffe and then drop a paratrooper. Game Over."

I believe this is the strategy that Sugar used in this game as well. The only difference is that he was perhaps a bit laggard in getting Spain on his side. Of course, it is not just that Sugar has a great strategy, but that he executes it perfectly (or close to perfect anyway).

Posted: **Wed May 30, 2018 8:56 pm**

ORIGINAL: Harrybanana

ORIGINAL: KorutZelva

Long range is king. More so than I previously though. The obvious benefit is of course being to hit other when they can hit you but there's more. Having long range means you can space out your Air HQs more and still support each other. And by being spaced out more you can make better use of defensive terrain because planes can be further from the HQ without starting to get supply from an other HQ.

Hate to say I told you so (well actually I love it), but repeated below is my post mortem post from our game. See point 1.

"This Axis Strategy is essentially as follows:

1. Prioritize Advanced Aircraft tech and also research Long range aircraft (more important than many people think)
2. Build the Manstein HQ ASAP,
3. Build all your Fighters, Tanks, TAC and, if possible, HQs prior to DAK arrival (I believe this is pretty standard anyway),
4. Get Spain on the Axis side, preferably by diplomacy,
5. Send Manstein to Libya to join Rommel (well actually even before Rommel arrives)
6. Use the Luftwaffe on mass, first to take Malta, then Egypt, then Russia. If necessary also use the Luftwaffe on mass to take Algeria and the Middle East.
7. Don't be afraid to "operate" the Luftwaffe to wherever it is needed.
8. Don't rush Barbarossa. Generally speaking, the only time Axis MPP production is greater than Allied MPP production is from the fall of France until Barbarossa.
9. When using the Axis Air Force, generally concentrate on destroying the enemy's fighters and HQs first, not the front line units. I often neglect this one myself.
10.Once Leningrad, Moscow and Stalingrad have been captured, destroy whatever unit is in London with the massed Luftwaffe and then drop a paratrooper. Game Over."

I believe this is the strategy that Sugar used in this game as well. The only difference is that he was perhaps a bit laggard in getting Spain on his side. Of course, it is not just that Sugar has a great strategy, but he that he executes it perfectly (or close to perfect anyway).

Actually Spain is still neutral!!! [:D]

If you want to do a rematch I'm game. After going through the Sugar bootcamp, I might have reached skill parity with you now. [:)]

Posted: **Wed May 30, 2018 9:01 pm**

ORIGINAL: KorutZelva

The air units were managed by 3 pip Eisenhower, 2 pip Bradley and 2 pips Montgomery. [X(]

But yeah, next time I'll also wait for supply to raise back to 10 before sending my planes on the mainland... [:'(]

My understanding of Leaders/HQs and combat is that all they do is influence a units effectiveness. This is very important, but I don't think they have any effect beyond this. So if, for example, your Fighter attached to Ike has an 83 effectiveness, it is still going to get beaten by a German Fighter that has a 100 effectiveness attached to an inferior German HQ (assuming equal techs). So other than influencing a units effectiveness an HQ has no further effect on combat.

Posted: **Wed May 30, 2018 9:14 pm**

ORIGINAL: KorutZelva

If you want to do a rematch I'm game. After going through the Sugar bootcamp, I might have reached skill parity with you now. [:)]

I always thought your skill (and certainly knowledge of the Rules) was at least equal to and probably superior to my own. You are certainly giving Sugar more of a run for his money in this game than I did in mine with him. It is not your skill that was ever in question, but your strategy. You rely on uber-diplomacy which, in my opinion, is too dependent on luck. I don't blame you for using it any more than I blame Sugar for using mass air attacks. Both are within the Rules and totally acceptable. It is just not a game I care to play anymore. Perhaps I will come back around, but at the moment I haven't started a game in several months.

So thanks for the offer, but I think I will pass for now. But I did very much enjoy the game we did play. You are an excellent opponent and gentleman. I am also very much enjoying this AAR.

Posted: **Wed May 30, 2018 9:19 pm**

It also doesn't help that the UK national morale never fully recovers from the damage inflicted on it.

Posted: **Wed May 30, 2018 9:31 pm**

ORIGINAL: Harrybanana

ORIGINAL: KorutZelva

If you want to do a rematch I'm game. After going through the Sugar bootcamp, I might have reached skill parity with you now. [:)]

I always thought your skill (and certainly knowledge of the Rules) was at least equal to and probably superior to my own. You are certainly giving Sugar more of a run for his money in this game than I did in mine with him. It is not your skill that was ever in question, but your strategy. You rely on uber-diplomacy which, in my opinion, is too dependent on luck. I don't blame you for using it any more than I blame Sugar for using mass air attacks. Both are within the Rules and totally acceptable. It is just not a game I care to play anymore. Perhaps I will come back around, but at the moment I haven't started a game in several months.

So thanks for the offer, but I think I will pass for now. But I did very much enjoy the game we did play. You are an excellent opponent and gentleman. I am also very much enjoying this AAR.

No prob! [;)]

Posted: **Wed May 30, 2018 10:58 pm**

ORIGINAL: Harrybanana

Hate to say I told you so (well actually I love it), but repeated below is my post mortem post from our game. See point 1.

"This Axis Strategy is essentially as follows:

1. Prioritize Advanced Aircraft tech and also research Long range aircraft (more important than many people think)
2. Build the Manstein HQ ASAP,
3. Build all your Fighters, Tanks, TAC and, if possible, HQs prior to DAK arrival (I believe this is pretty standard anyway),
4. Get Spain on the Axis side, preferably by diplomacy,
5. Send Manstein to Libya to join Rommel (well actually even before Rommel arrives)
6. Use the Luftwaffe on mass, first to take Malta, then Egypt, then Russia. If necessary also use the Luftwaffe on mass to take Algeria and the Middle East.
7. Don't be afraid to "operate" the Luftwaffe to wherever it is needed.
8. Don't rush Barbarossa. Generally speaking, the only time Axis MPP production is greater than Allied MPP production is from the fall of France until Barbarossa.
9. When using the Axis Air Force, generally concentrate on destroying the enemy's fighters and HQs first, not the front line units. I often neglect this one myself.
10.Once Leningrad, Moscow and Stalingrad have been captured, destroy whatever unit is in London with the massed Luftwaffe and then drop a paratrooper. Game Over."

I believe this is the strategy that Sugar used in this game as well. The only difference is that he was perhaps a bit laggard in getting Spain on his side. Of course, it is not just that Sugar has a great strategy, but that he executes it perfectly (or close to perfect anyway).

The funny thing is that almost all of that is wildly ahistorical. If real-life supply issues wouldn't limit or prevent it (even just getting supplies into Sicily so as to bomb Malta to oblivion would have been problematic), then real-life brute force constraints would (there are only so many bombs you can drop). I too can (post-the fall of France) easily and quickly nuke every British air unit in range with my massed bombers and Stukas; if it were that easy, then the Battle of Britain would have been a total cakewalk (vs. the Stuka being quickly pulled from front line units).

Someone really needs to work on a more historical scenario with realistic constraints, where possible/moddable/scriptable.

Posted: **Thu May 31, 2018 2:42 am**

According to Churchill's "The second World War" he prepared the new governour of Malta to probably hand it over to the Axis after the attack of the X. Fliegerkorps in autumn/winter 41/42 and again in 42 of the entire Luftflotte 2 (one of the 3 german Luftflotten). How could the Axis be able to occupy Crete, an island of 8261 square KMs, but not Malta of 316 divided to 2 islands, defended by a fraction of forces?

One of the 2 am. airfleets (15. Air Force) participating in the european theatre was placed in - tada - Tunesia (Catch 22 anyone?)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/15th_Expeditionary_Mobility_Task_Force

Posted: **Thu May 31, 2018 9:43 am**

ORIGINAL: Elessar2

The funny thing is that almost all of that is wildly ahistorical. If real-life supply issues wouldn't limit or prevent it (even just getting supplies into Sicily so as to bomb Malta to oblivion would have been problematic), then real-life brute force constraints would (there are only so many bombs you can drop). I too can (post-the fall of France) easily and quickly nuke every British air unit in range with my massed bombers and Stukas; if it were that easy, then the Battle of Britain would have been a total cakewalk (vs. the Stuka being quickly pulled from front line units).

Someone really needs to work on a more historical scenario with realistic constraints, where possible/moddable/scriptable.

I think you think that if something didn't happen then it couldn't have happened, thus it's ahistorical. This was war and war is the most unpredictable thing of all things. And this was the greatest war of all.

Let's say that German high command rejected the Manstein plan and subsequently lost to France in 1940. Someone today claims that Germany could have won by doing a prod attack through Belgium to draw the allied formations and an armored assault via the Ardennes to encircle it, then another someone would answer "this was impossible. There are supply issues, there is the Ardennes forest and road network. No! Something like that was infeasible. And even if supply and narrow roads could be dealt with, do you think that the Allied high command was stupid to fell for this???"

Posted: **Thu May 31, 2018 3:59 pm**

ORIGINAL: Sugar

According to Churchill's "The second World War" he prepared the new governour of Malta to probably hand it over to the Axis after the attack of the X. Fliegerkorps in autumn/winter 41/42 and again in 42 of the entire Luftflotte 2 (one of the 3 german Luftflotten). How could the Axis be able to occupy Crete, an island of 8261 square KMs, but not Malta of 316 divided to 2 islands, defended by a fraction of forces?

One of the 2 am. airfleets (15. Air Force) participating in the european theatre was placed in - tada - Tunesia (Catch 22 anyone?)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/15th_Expeditionary_Mobility_Task_Force

I agree with you with respect to Malta Sugar. The Axis could have captured Malta had they had the determination to do so.

But if you are saying that because the 15th air force was stationed for a period of time in Tunisia this shows that massing aircraft in North Africa was possible, I disagree. The entire 15th AF would, at most, only be 2 units at the scale of this game. But I don't believe the entire 15th AF was ever stationed in Tunisia. It's HQ was there, but I think some air groups had to be stationed in Algeria for lack of airfields. And the reason why the 15th was even stationed in North Africa in late 43 and early 44 was because there was a lack of airfields and supply in Sicily and Southern Italy (which by then had been captured by the Allies). It wasn't until the Allies captured the major airfields around Foggia and had the ports of Naples and Taranto operating that the 15th AF was really able to deploy at full strength close to its targets in Germany and Rumania. But in this game the Foggia airfields are largely irrelevant.

Posted: **Thu May 31, 2018 4:02 pm**

ORIGINAL: Taxman66

Yes.
More than once ive been unable to fully reinforce an air unit in a supply 6+ hex because it was attached to the wrong hq

So what supply level do air units that are not attached to HQs get and how is this determined?
I know they will be under supplied, and have noticed that they can get some supply when located in cities/towns...

C

Posted: **Thu May 31, 2018 5:34 pm**

I know they will be under supplied, and have noticed that they can get some supply when located in cities/towns...

Any unit gets the best possible supply, either from HQs or (supply producing) ressources. Placing any unit in cities like Milano p.e. provides them with 12 supply, since the city produces 12 supply. There is no penalty for attaching the unit to the "wrong" HQ. If you want to replace a unit nearer to the front and aren't able to attach it to the next HQ it's therefore best to place it in a city, town or near a port to keep it operational when you're rearranging detachements in your next turn.

But if you are saying that because the 15th air force was stationed for a period of time in Tunisia this shows that massing aircraft in North Africa was possible, I disagree.

Obviously there was enough capacity for an entire german Luftflotte and additional italian aircraft. Anyway this game is not a historical simulation, and the size of single air units isn't clearly defined for some reason. This game is offering to do better than historically; even namely in terms of logistics.

At least it's a question of balancing, any further restriction has to apply to both sides. According to KZ the balancing has improved to a satisfying lvl, and this match is proving it somehow, because it anticipated the major change of the coming patch; I was able to reach my goals even without Spain.

Posted: **Thu May 31, 2018 8:01 pm**

I am reading this AAR now but sorry it will take me a long time cause I am a slow reader and reading a good AAR like this makes me very antsy to play the game.

I am wondering why you need to spend chits on wooing the USSR when their war entry is guaranteed (or is it not?). If you chit on them, does it give them more MPP for readiness or something?
I think it is good for Germany to chit on Spain and for the UK to chit on Sweden and maybe Finland going by my own game experiences.

Sorry for many annoying noobie questions and noob comments, but what is a 'DE 603'?

Posted: **Thu May 31, 2018 8:59 pm**

Sugar, the Germans had 5 Luftflottes in 1942, not just 3. But the size of these Luftflottes varied considerably. For example, in September 1942 Luftflotte 4 in Southern Russia had 886 aircraft, but Luftflotte 2 spread around in North Africa, Italy and Greece had only 171. If you and others believe that the Axis could have operated 1000s of aircraft in Africa then we will have to agree to disagree. As you have been said it is only a game. I personally just wish it was a more accurate simulation.

Posted: **Thu May 31, 2018 10:28 pm**

ORIGINAL: Sugar

At least it's a question of balancing, any further restriction has to apply to both sides. According to KZ the balancing has improved to a satisfying lvl, and this match is proving it somehow, because it anticipated the major change of the coming patch; I was able to reach my goals even without Spain.

I think the comment you are referring for was about the balancing of the air war (tac for medium bomber) rather than the overall balancing of the two sides. Tourney result tells the story of a allied leaning. Bill mentioned comments on Steam forum also echoes that. Based on this, I don't feel as strongly as others the need to tweak the Franco DE. I do think it's a good idea but that since it's something that's going to give the Allies a boost, they should toss a bone the Axis way too. It could be something like giving a Franco relation boost for doing 'all of France' to give a clear path to Spain that the Axis can consider. Because the change is going to make 'All of France' even less desirable because they keep France diplo chits in play longer, potentially stalling wooing Spain.

Posted: **Thu May 31, 2018 10:30 pm**

ORIGINAL: GiveWarAchance

I am reading this AAR now but sorry it will take me a long time cause I am a slow reader and reading a good AAR like this makes me very antsy to play the game.

I am wondering why you need to spend chits on wooing the USSR when their war entry is guaranteed (or is it not?). If you chit on them, does it give them more MPP for readiness or something?
I think it is good for Germany to chit on Spain and for the UK to chit on Sweden and maybe Finland going by my own game experiences.

Sorry for many annoying noobie questions and noob comments, but what is a 'DE 603'?

Yepp, a diplo hit incurs a raise in readiness which translates in bigger mpp collection.

DE 603, refers to 'Decision 603' this is the one that if the Axis controls Morocco-Algeria, they can bribe Franco to join the Axis.

Posted: **Fri Jun 01, 2018 12:18 am**

Thank you Korut.
That's a neat feature that diplo affects USSR mpp.

For Axis to control Morocco and Algeria, they have to declare war on them and invade? Aren't they part of Vichy France?

Also, do Axis players ever choose a full takeover of France instead of taking the Vichy option? For me it seems much better to go for Vichy.

Posted: **Fri Jun 01, 2018 12:40 am**

Game treats them as Vichy "associates". That is if Axis DoWs anyone in the group (Vichy, Syria etc) the rest get a diplo hit against the Axis.

I have seen only one AAR with Axis going "whole France" and never in my games.

Matrix Games Forums

Tourney game AAR: KZ (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis)

RE: Tourney game AAR: KZ (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis)

RE: Tourney game AAR: KZ (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis)

RE: Tourney game AAR: KZ (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis)

RE: Tourney game AAR: KZ (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis)

RE: Tourney game AAR: KZ (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis)

RE: Tourney game AAR: KZ (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis)

RE: Tourney game AAR: KZ (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis)

RE: Tourney game AAR: KZ (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis)

RE: Tourney game AAR: KZ (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis)

RE: Tourney game AAR: KZ (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis)

RE: Tourney game AAR: KZ (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis)

RE: Tourney game AAR: KZ (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis)

RE: Tourney game AAR: KZ (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis)

RE: Tourney game AAR: KZ (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis)

RE: Tourney game AAR: KZ (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis)

RE: Tourney game AAR: KZ (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis)

RE: Tourney game AAR: KZ (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis)

RE: Tourney game AAR: KZ (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis)

RE: Tourney game AAR: KZ (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis)

RE: Tourney game AAR: KZ (Allies) vs Sugar (Axis)