War in the East Open Beta Update 1.12.02

[56ajax]

So airbases are completely miscalculating their Need in terms of Fuel and Ammo.

And it is not a question of Supply path, close or on a rail etc as most Airbases are at 100% + in fuel and ammo at the start of the turn.

Possibly a decimal point in the wrong place....

[thedoctorking]

Bizarrely, planes appear to be flying bombing missions even though there is almost no fuel or ammo on their base. I selected a squadron from a base with 1 ammo and 2 fuel for a ground bombing mission. The mission happened, inflicted some casualties, then when I went back and looked, the squadron had more miles flown. The air command HQ has fuel left over, but no ammo. Unclear what's going on.

[Telemecus]

ORIGINAL: 56ajax
So airbases are completely miscalculating their Need in terms of Fuel and Ammo.

In v1.12.x airbases no longer provide supplies to air groups - that is how it worked up to v1.11.x I assume the supplies you are seeing in an airbase are for use by its own ToE - not the airgroups.

Airgroups in v1.12 are supposed to get supplies "on-the-fly" during the turn from towns nearby - I believe infantry has a similar set up to get fuel even in previous versions. I have not played v1.12 myself, but the way it was described by the developers means that you should not be looking to the supplies on the airbase for airgroups but in nearby towns.

[thedoctorking]

Cool, thanks Tele. I've confirmed that this is what is going on with a test, running a ground attack mission from an airbase and looking at before/after figures for supply and fuel stock in the town that is listed as its supply source. Supply must be converted as needed into ammo for this purpose.

[56ajax]

Hi Tele,

FMD, I'm a monkeys uncle.

So what is the point of an airbase other than a place holder for squadrons.

What fuel and ammo does an airbase (2xIL4, 1xTB3) use when it starts at 200% and after 2 missions of one IL4 squadron it is down to 81%/109% fuel and ammo, without having drawn anything from its supply city. It is using up 60% of the airbases fuel per mission. Are they driving into Moscow for R&R. What ammo could the airbase be using? Shooting recalcitrant pilots, kulaks and czarist officers?

The flying missions must be drawing down the airbases fuel and ammo. And after the 4th mission of one IL4 squadron (29%) the airbase is almost running on empty and it starts to draw from its supply city.

The initial supply or squadron usage is up ship creek.

Maybe an error crept in when they converted supply from tons to lbs.

[56ajax]

Have just repeated my test above but increased the range from 8 hexes to 24 as the russian eagle flies. Usage was 83%/107%. You would have thought the further you flew the more fuel you would use.

[elloboloco]

I believe Tele and the doctorking must be right. I am 13 turns into a game as the axis and am able to conduct effective air missions even when my airbases show little or no fuel and ammo.

[Telemecus]

ORIGINAL: 56ajax
I'm a monkeys uncle.

So what is the point of an airbase other than a place holder for squadrons.

... Are they driving into Moscow for R&R. What ammo could the airbase be using? Shooting recalcitrant pilots, kulaks and czarist officers?

The flying missions must be drawing down the airbases fuel and ammo. And after the 4th mission of one IL4 squadron (29%) the airbase is almost running on empty and it starts to draw from its supply city.

In the very very early versions you could play lots of tricks with airbases to surmount logistics problems. I posted this one which you could use for v1.10 to v1.11.03 here fb.asp?m=4610612



The basic point is you load up an airbase with as much fuel and supply as possible in the logistics phase, and then in your action phase empty it of airgroups, drive it up to 49 hexes eastwards and transfer in all your combat groups for a great air war just near your enemies front. A member of the patch team told me they were going to make the patch specifically to stop this. And basically the only way you can ever stop airbases from being vehicles for driving fuel eastwards is by not having airbases as the source of fuel.

I have not played v1.12 so it would be interesting to see how fully they implemented this solution. I personally think you are just transferring the locus of any logistical manipulation elsewhere. For example would it be worth moving the HQ holding all your flamm panzers to the same hex as your airbase will be in next turn, so the towns collect the fuel for one thing only to be used for another? I do not know, but I think the towns system could be used just as well, and if they have any legacy of airbases fuel and supply so could that.

I have noticed many small amounts of ammo being used in many unexpected places. So yes assume some ammo goes for the small arms that everyone in uniform had to carry? This aerial combat for instance was fought with the pilot firing his pistol mid air! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAf0maieLjs

Over each patch you can notice Air HQs and Air bases becoming less and less important - and it seems both now disappearing in WitE2 as on map units. With flak now very strong in recent patches, the paths airgroups take for missions (to avoid flak) has become important. And so with airbases mattering less for supply I assume it will become more important to place them where other units can help with defensive flak? I assume the support squads still matter (repair etc.) too?

[56ajax]

Yeah Tele, I was going to ask you that. Why shouldn't I reduce the TOE of an airbase to 20%? Isn't aircraft repair impacted by one of the leaders ratings? If you no longer need the support on the base for fuel and ammo...and Yes it is very WiTE2.

[Telemecus]

ORIGINAL: 56ajax
Why shouldn't I reduce the TOE of an airbase to 20%? Isn't aircraft repair impacted by one of the leaders ratings?

Admin affects aircraft repair - but for first level there is never any distance penalty on the ratings. So it could only ever possibly matter for Luftflotte HQs, never for Flieger Korps.

The ToE could still reduce support which is needed for repairs. But certainly on recononly bases I reduce the max ToE to 50% - and would go lower if they allowed us to.

[HOTEC]

Help in desperate!
1) When here is clicked, "This page can't be displayed" appears.
2) Is the download page for member deleted?

[Zemke]

I am up to turn 34 in the game as Germans, and these are my thoughts so far. Playing the Germans.

1. Supply seems to be the limiting factor as always for the Germans, but maybe more so.
2. Fortifications seem to be harder to break, took Moscow, but Leningrad is isolated, but have not been able to reduce the fortification levels prior to the onset of the winter blizzard.
3. The Germans have to make more deliberate attacks to be successful, much more than the previous patch, which seems more realistic.
4. Partisans are much heavier and have hurt my snow turn attacks as I am very far extended, so if a rail line is cut, it had the effect of shutting down offensive attacks in that sector.
5. Russian AI seems much better and more organized. I hope the German AI is the same. I have tried to play the Russians against the German AI in the past, but the Germans were so "dumb", that it made the game no challenge at all.
6. As far as air power goes, I cannot tell much if any difference, but I have never been an Air Power matters that much in Eastern Front games, other than I try to keep the bases in range of the main effort fight and in reasonable supply. Anything more than that is more work than I want to mess with, other than the odd rotation of air units.
7. Losses as of 4 Feb 1942: Russians 6.5 million men and 20942 AFVs
Germans 1,070,431 and 3770 AFVs
Thoughts on losses, the current casualties seem to be more in line with history, but I am afraid the Soviets may not last through the 42 offense, I suspect a human would be much tougher.

Against a human opponent, I think the Russians would be a tougher nut to crack unless I am missing something with fortification reduction, which in the current version Leningrad would have already fallen.

Shout out to the Doctor, the great sage of Soviet WitE Doctrine....sorry I have been really busy with work and could not take on new obligations, CoS positions are too much work and cat hearding for me at this time due to work.

[thedoctorking]

I'm playing a 12.02 game against Elloboloco. He's about to take Leningrad on turn 15 or 16. I didn't start the fortifications quickly enough - had a division on Schlisselburg and the hex on the other side of the river right from the start but it wasn't enough to get to level 4 before the Germans showed up. So Model and Manstein combined with a pile of SU were able to get across the Neva even facing Vasilevsky and what I thought of as a strong defense. Zhukov has the other end of the defense and looked like he could hold the Ladoga ports, though.

To the south, the Germans have not been able to get any big pocketing moves going. I have been super-cautious, giving ground even when not closely pressed. As a result, they have picked up a few divisions here and a few there, but no army-sized (or front-sized) pockets as in the basic game. My army is about 700k short right now in terms of manpower. I've still got Dnepropetrovsk and Zaporozhye, but he looks set to take Kharkov, Orel, and Tula and maybe Voronezh. Certainly supply has been more difficult for him.

I'll do a fuller AAR if folks are interested. I'm at work right now so no access to the game or save files.

[Ridgeway]

I am curious what happens w Leningrad. In my couple of tests, the new fort rules make taking it extremely difficult.

It is not like the old days where once isolated, everybody surrendered pretty easily.

[uw06670]

make taking it extremely difficult

Sounds like it might be more realistic then.

[thedoctorking]

ORIGINAL: Ridgeway

I am curious what happens w Leningrad. In my couple of tests, the new fort rules make taking it extremely difficult.

It is not like the old days where once isolated, everybody surrendered pretty easily.

He's about to get it isolated. We'll see how it goes from there. I have plenty of transports ready to fly night missions to keep it supplied.

[Zemke]

Well Doc, I think the Russians must preserve the Army at all costs, give ground save units and manpower, which sounds like you are doing. I think too many Russian players try to make a stand too soon, because the Russians never lost Moscow or Lenigrad IRL, and they try to do the same. The difference is in the game the Germans do not have Hitler messing things up for the Army. You can lose Leningrad and Moscow and recover, I lost both and by 45 was standing on the steps of Berlin with a MASSIVE Army.

[Bitburger]

You lost leningrad and moskow and still won early with a massive soviet army, in multiplayer? Now that is impressive!

[thedoctorking]

I'm playing a game right now where our boys got their butts kicked in the Barbarossa campaign, lost Moscow and Leningrad. They recovered in the winter to some degree but still stand well to the east of Moscow. It's not totally crippling. I have a respectable Soviet army, about 6m men, plenty of corps and good leadership, air superiority over much of the front, and I'm moving forward in 1942. We've absorbed the German 1942 attack (somewhat scattered though it was). So yes, it is possible to recover from losing two of the major objectives in 1941.

[56ajax]

I dream of a 6m Soviet Army....