Matrix Games Forums

Howdy
okay follow on the fighters now, was confused as there been a lot of complaints that Fighters were too good when used as bombers

some of this is wierd, we got the 109 G2, G6, G10, G14 and so on, but we got the 190 A

which in the long run, the 190 A, is the A4, the A5, and so on and some units will have better models and early models will change (how much of it really works I am not sure)

same with the P-47, we get the P-47 C and the P-47 D (which a lot of people think if the plane has a bubbletop it is a D and if it is a Razorback it is a B or a C, it could also be a D)

but JC has plans for the 47 to Grow, where the stats for the RE 20 will be much better then the early D model, and then other improvements will also show up, now if we will have different stats showing for each model or not, I am not sure

the 47 M should make it into the game, there are plans for the N also, but not sure if it will be a "the war lasts longer" or a opp campaign deal

Rain
we looking at different ideas for recon, lots of complaints about it as it is now, not sure if abstract would be right, or unseen recon or what and how we going to do it, but we are looking into it

Adnan
that should great, but not sure if it is something we could put into a old engine to start with, that may be something that a new engine could handle (if it was designed from the start to do it)
we can look, but not sure if we can do it

Capt H

interesting, but it is a touchy area, alot of stuff about the SS or Camps are not allowed to be mentioned in "games"

even if we could, I am not sure how we could do it, or when it should be done and what effect it should have if it is done or what it should do if it is not

Clarifacation please. Does the game already cycle through the different versions of the 190A or is this something that needs to be changed. I think if the 109 and Spits get it then the 190A should too. THe A-2 and A-7/8 being very different in alot of areas.


As to the Death Camp idea I have to speak frankly on that. As far as the CBO goes bombing Death Camp or related areas brings an absolute total of zip to the war effort. At the time although Ultra gave insights the exact measure being shown the Jews was not known to the Allies. Also what would bombing a camp do for the allies? Nothing plain and simple. It would be like bombing a POW camp. During the war a significant amount of German rolling stock was used to transport undesirables. These trains could be and were requistioned from the army above operational requirements. Also significant amount of manpower were used to run the whole show. If anything the camp effort detracted from the overall German war effort.

Hi Dude
yes, the game already has different models of the 190 figured in

going from mem from some of what JC has said in the past, the 190 gets speed and weapon changes as it goes along, to be honest, I have never even checked to see if the data base does or does not make the changes (the data screen will only show what the default stats should be, but it should be easy to double check, at least for weapon load outs)

I see where Capt H is going with this, it is a moral thing, not a bread and butter thing, maybe we can free some of them if we bomb the camp, or if nothing else, maybe we can end there suffering

the GB had already done some raids like this, on smaller scale

interesting, but it is a touchy area, alot of stuff about the SS or Camps are not allowed to be mentioned in "games"

even if we could, I am not sure how we could do it, or when it should be done and what effect it should have if it is done or what it should do if it is not

I agree that it is indeed a touchy subject. I have gotten considerable flak from family members for saying that Eisenhower was correct, the camps could only be truly shut down by ground troops, so the air effort needed to support the ground campaign. But I believe that wargames should be more than just entertainment: they should also be a tool for finding out why history unfolded as it did, and what might have happened if different decisions had been made.

Now as for how: it shouldn't be too hard to calculate the cost in lives of each day the war is prolonged. Then, the resources and manpower used for the death camp strikes could be considered as prolonging the war by a certain amount, since the airpower was then unavailable for missions helping the war effort. This could be compared with the number of lives saved by interfering with death camp operations.

To answer the gentleman who stated that the effect on the war effort would be zero: perhaps. But the Nazis were not sane about the death camps: they would have done better not to kill so many potential workers. In all likelihood, they would have devoted valuable resources and manpower to repairing damage done to the camps, which would then have subtracted from their own war effort.

About the Fw190 and such would it be possible to add the ability to see what the loadout status of planes in the units. Like what version they are flying and what weapons they are fitted with. This would be most useful as far as knowing what drop tanks are fitted to VIII FC planes. (Not being able to know this made me want to pull my hair out)

As far as the ability and or scope in this game to reflect the CBOs attention to and diverting of resources to save human lives and prevent suffering, this game is very accurate. By Late 42 the ravages of the war convinced the Allies to go all out. THere was no half way with Hitler and Tojo. The quickest way to prevent human suffering was to brutally pummel Germany and friends into submission. Every action was subject to military requirements and political goals.

Thus things like Bomber Commands terror bombing of Germany civilians is an example of preventing human suffering. Their rationale was 'to beat the germans so bad they give and then we can all go home'

Operations such the Amiens raid in 1944 were done not to save some dudes in jail but to enable their escape as some of the inmates had intimate knowledge of Maquis Operations and the forthcoming invasion. The rescue of POWs by the 6th Ranger Batt in the PI was done with excess forces. While Pattons copycat operation in Germany was nothing but a publicity stunt (which ended in disaster by the by).

This game is about the CBO 43-45. The CBO's mission during this time was to destroy Germany within its capabilities. The game accurately represents this.

for the 190
yes it does change during the game

I found a number of 190's with 2 20mm MG 151, 2 20 mm MG FF and 2 7.9 mm MG's

also found them with 4 20mm MG 151 and 2 13 mm MG's

I can't say if the other stats change

I found a number of 190's with 2 20mm MG 151, 2 20 mm MG FF and 2 7.9 mm MG's

Thanks

It always peeved me to see an FW, scourge of the skies, in 1944 trying to shootdown bombers with useless MG FFs and 7.92 Mgs

When it comes to the guns carried by WWII fighters, let me highly recommend the "WWII Fighter Gun Debate" pages, starting at:

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/ ... un-in.html

I can see where we will go with this! 'Can we have the changes in armament fitted to a/c more visible', as above, will then become 'I don't want to have my nice P190D20/U4z with the highly effective Hispano Suisa MGZZ 23.45mm orange throwers ungraded automatically to the U5 with the useless Pinking Mk3 apple corers, the fire power sucks, and I lose the ability to fit the 150 gal drop tanks on the port wing with the pilot's golf back pod on the other'! If we are not careful we will need a whole sub game on aircraft armament. Ge ircraft especially will be a mess, and even the Allies can get into the 50 cal vs 20mm debate (why can't I have a 20mm P51, I don't want to be forced to make the same mistakes...?)

I think we need to consider where the aircraft gun upgrade goes before starting down here!

ORIGINAL: HMSWarspite

I can see where we will go with this! 'Can we have the changes in armament fitted to a/c more visible', as above, will then become 'I don't want to have my nice P190D20/U4z with the highly effective Hispano Suisa MGZZ 23.45mm orange throwers ungraded automatically to the U5 with the useless Pinking Mk3 apple corers, the fire power sucks, and I lose the ability to fit the 150 gal drop tanks on the port wing with the pilot's golf back pod on the other'! If we are not careful we will need a whole sub game on aircraft armament. Ge ircraft especially will be a mess, and even the Allies can get into the 50 cal vs 20mm debate (why can't I have a 20mm P51, I don't want to be forced to make the same mistakes...?)

I think we need to consider where the aircraft gun upgrade goes before starting down here!

Well the answer is easy.... the planes that are used should use the weapons they had. If for example a P51 with 4 20mm Cannons exist then there should be some of it in the game. If not - bad luck.

The problem is not so large at the allied side - but for the german. With all Rüstsätzen and different versions like FW190A-4/R2-... you have the standard weapons, the Rüstsätze and the field improvement. But we should only use the "better" Rüstsätze... if a Weapon improvement is good for ground attack it is useless in the game. So we can reduce a lot of these things. But there should allways be the option for different planes - like the A4/A8...
but this make only sense if we have a dynamical altitude-effects-planes-model. As long as any plane has one or maximum two performances it is unnecessary. Then you can make "german piston engine plane" vers. "allied piston engine plane". The kind is not really interesting, cause they all react similar. Better would be the FW190A sucks at alt about XY feet, P38 sucks about yz feet, the manouverability of Spits are improved in low speed and so on. So you have your static numbers and at any altitude you get the changed numbers for your own planes. So, combat at 2000 feet between P51 and FW190A will be no fun for the P51, the same in 25000 feet will be a free choice. Same with hit chances for bombers... B17 in 28000 feet hit nothing (they should aim for something else so the chance of hitting the target is better) but in 17000 feet it is much better (and NOT a dice that decide this. If i risk my bombers at low alt, my dice has be better as in highest alts... something allways went strange in BTR - so i set the maximum alt cause it doesn´t matter) We need a much better target system in the game and also the air combat system need to be redone... (yeah i know... but this is a wish list [:)])

Okay lets see

for 51's and 20 mm, from what I know, the 51 didn't carry them, but some of the A-36's did, so you get stories about 51's atacking with 20 mm (and I am not sure of all of the weapon load outs on the GB mustangs, but they were different then the US)

I had talked with JC, I wanted to bring in a 3 Alt proformence stats, IE, Low, Mid and Hi

the 47 C was a good High Alt plane, but poor at low, soild at med, which is where the statements about the 47 D 20 (RE20) which with the Paddleblade, the low alt proformence was much much improved)

this would give a TA 152 with a edge in high alt, and a sitting down on the deck, the 38, the 190 (it was a very poor plane above 20,000 ft, it lost major power from it's engine, reason the the work on the 190 D) and so on and so on

but JC didn't like it, as it countered what he wanted to try and do, so we are waiting to see how his works out

he has plans that should give us a better "feel" for each model

for Alt and bombing, you may be seeing a bug

it was in BTR, UV and WitP, any plane over 32,000 some feet, does very well (the bug does something so the game thinks the plane is very low,in fact, if I remember right, it thinks it is underground)

if that is the case, then yes, High Alt raids will seem to do better then simi high or med level raids

but, the game does take into effect alt, a raid at 20,000 "should" have a better aim point then a raid at 22 or 24,000

(you may notice, if you give B-17's to the GB, they don't seem to hit very well with them ?, well the bomb site is modelled also)

of course, the big hassle is how to prove or disprove any of this

you can send out a 300 plane raid, and the 1st BG will do 50% damage to the target, the next 250 planes will miss, and then the last BG will do 45% damage (as GE you can see this)

you can also have the pathfinders totally nail the target and do 100% and all the rest are just dropping on a dead site

every once in a while, you do get the 5%, 8%, 12%, 22% damage increase

but that is all the joy of die rolling

If you are going to get in to altitude effects on performance (and I agree that would be nice [;)]). You will, of course need the correct Spit varients! (You know, LF, F, and HF of V, IX, XIV etc !). With production rates, squadron roles, etc etc.

I can see a lot of fun here[X(]!!!

I cant wait to see what you've actually done.

BTW Ides of March is 15th (from another thread). And if you are going to run the game from when that is signiicant (44BC) we are in a LOT of trouble[:(])

Clarifacation please. Does the game already cycle through the different versions of the 190A or is this something that needs to be changed. I think if the 109 and Spits get it then the 190A should too. THe A-2 and A-7/8 being very different in alot of areas.

For the new release I have A4 (A3's??? don't remember) through A9's planned, with a few sub-set versions of each, e.g. nightfighters and heavily armed A8's or somesuch. Multiple versions of the D model will be going in as well. A new feature will be auto conversion of certain A models to higher order A models; with some late model A's converting to D's... these conversions will take place out of the pool. Some C and Kangeroo models will be in for one to decide what to do with as well. More details on the C and Kangeroo will come forth when some source material arrives from Germany.

Best to you,

Jean-Claude

For the new release I have A4 (A3's??? don't remember) through A9's planned, with a few sub-set versions of each, e.g. nightfighters and heavily armed A8's or somesuch. Multiple versions of the D model will be going in as well. A new feature will be auto conversion of certain A models to higher order A models; with some late model A's converting to D's... these conversions will take place out of the pool. Some C and Kangeroo models will be in for one to decide what to do with as well. More details on the C and Kangeroo will come forth when some source material arrives from Germany

Sweet[8D]

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge
...

Rain
we looking at different ideas for recon, lots of complaints about it as it is now, not sure if abstract would be right, or unseen recon or what and how we going to do it, but we are looking into it
...

Hi, maybe a misunderstanding, but I don't advocate the abstraction of recon. Those little pests should still fly their missions, just that when they do (may be more than once on the same AF) then te info should be adjusted towards more detail (I bet those photoboys can see the difference between FW-190 and Me-109 on a pic).

howdy
sorry, part of that post was not all pointed towards you, just what some of the others have said and what has been offered as replacements

hmm, kind of like the idea of multi recon being flown, but...

a good GE player would soon be able to predick and start ambushing them

maybe a recon mission should get say 3 die rolls when it takes the snaps, and then the "pic"s are either best info taken, or info or the 3 combined and best detail figured out ??????

need more brain drain time and debate and see what we can do

but, over all, lots of people don't like plotting them, themselfs, lots don't like letting the AI plot them (unless we get more filters, to make them behave how we want), lots don't like how easy they are to Kill, and lots don't like the little bug that helps drag away GE fighters that should be headed elsewhere

we looking, just not sure how we going to go on it

as normal, when I try to explain something, you are more confused now then when you first started

A die roll for recon is nice especially if you totally abstract the recon system by removing all recons and replace them by recon points. One recon point represents one mission per day, plotted like a normal mission but carried out with die rolls. 75% success chance for standard high alt recce, 15% success chance of additional low alt recce with best info, additional 5% chance of new target detection (should be modified by year and weather/cloud level). Recon point should start with something in the 70 range increasing by 5-10 points per month up to late 1944.
This would also remove the problems with raising fatigue due to alert levels on the axis side.

that sound good...

a dice for losses by flak/interception should be also in... and the planes should be in the game... you can move em, so the recon points for each sector rise or fall... and seperate the continent in say these 5 segments... and a recon from the VIII can´t check sicily or italy... if you want to give the med more points you have to move your recon planes...
if your planes are damaged your recon points get reduced and so on.

Great idea... no more tracking and plotting and - more important a better overview...

How about an overhaul of the staff plot feature - I use this some times when bored of plotting (how many air chiefs plotted raids down to the recon level?)

Too many raids are not based on latest recon......
Targets are often deep in the enemy back yard..
obvious targets missed....
Tons of ready fighters not used for sweeps..

Staff should deal with this...
also auto shifting of air units to bases should be an option ( i.e in 3 days we are going to blitz all the airbases and industry in Denmark and the Far North of Germany - I want everything possible shifted to the right bases)

"Get on it staff Sarg, or you rear gunner in that MK1 Halifax. Your Pilot is the mad bugger wearing the Carmen Miranda hat who only talks Eskimo."

thats what the auto plot raids are for

Yes but it don't work very well - it tends to want to straff a deserted airfield deep in enemy badlands 10 times in a row etc