TRP - Total Realism Project for War in Europe (1.10b Download)

[OldCrowBalthazor]

Ah yes, 2 Diplochits only. That's what I meant thanks. In vanilla you could get a 25% advantage with Axis once France is out.

I was super sure I saw my mobile Infantry Corps crossing woods with no terrain penalty when playing 1.20 singleplayer.
Got no save at hand to doublecheck tho.

Still do not like the reasoning behind passive fighterspotting.
You say Lothos, that you want to make air superiority be important because its necessary for scouting.
But the opposite is the case! It just isn't.
Level 0 SU fighters can comfortably fly to the frontline, spot 5 hexes deep and fly back to safety.

If you want air superiority to matter you should shrink fighter passive scouting to 2 and increase mission range for active recon flights. With that you would force players to invest in fighters because especially SU would be either totally blind or suffer huge losses when scouting with their low level fighters.

I think the reasoning for the Ftr 5 hexes range passive spotting is that this is an abstraction of a CAP (Combat Air Patrol) air envelope with daily patrols.
I'm not disagreeing with your points though, but this mods air mechanic works counter intuitively.

Case in point the East Front. In my match with Unfortunate Son (Axis), he actively hunted down my fighters by bombing them because of superior range.
It did blind me along large sections of the front at times.
I found that getting the Soviets into fighter tech early is super important and a top priority. The exact opposite that most folks do with Soviet research in vanilla WiE and especially WaW.

One thing though. The surprise mechanic is not existent here in this mod, so I would and could probe the Germans blindly but actively with mass Infantry probes. Find holes, and exploit them. Exactly mirrors Soviet doctrine then. I would try to use air recon with fighters if I could, but had to be limited where I could do those.

Also, protecting my Ftrs and other air elements with AA was essential on most fronts, and especially in the USSR.

My 3 cents anyways.
BTW, there's a series on my channel of the MP match with Unfortunate Son on my channel.
You'll see what I mean when you view the truly titanic struggle on the Eastern Front.
Way more realistic than vanilla WiE or WaW.

Edit> There is a surprise mechanic in the mod.
What I observed from a previous MP match here with the mod was when my Soviet infantry blundered or pushed into unspotted enemy infantry, surprise damage was slight. Infantry walking blind into enemy tanks though was bad.

[Lothos]

Ah yes, 2 Diplochits only. That's what I meant thanks. In vanilla you could get a 25% advantage with Axis once France is out.

I was super sure I saw my mobile Infantry Corps crossing woods with no terrain penalty when playing 1.20 singleplayer.
Got no save at hand to doublecheck tho.

Still do not like the reasoning behind passive fighterspotting.
You say Lothos, that you want to make air superiority be important because its necessary for scouting.
But the opposite is the case! It just isn't.
Level 0 SU fighters can comfortably fly to the frontline, spot 5 hexes deep and fly back to safety.

If you want air superiority to matter you should shrink fighter passive scouting to 2 and increase mission range for active recon flights. With that you would force players to invest in fighters because especially SU would be either totally blind or suffer huge losses when scouting with their low level fighters.

Let's say we agree to disagree. Scouting does not take an entire air wing and was almost always done with a single plane.

Yes, they can fly to the frontline and retreat right away, that is a tactic you can use. Their are limitations to the game engine. The compromise I came up with was IMO the best that can be done with the design of the game engine.

And yes, the Soviets have to change their tactics!

[Duedman]

Let's say we agree to disagree. Scouting does not take an entire air wing and was almost always done with a single plane.

Yes, they can fly to the frontline and retreat right away, that is a tactic you can use. Their are limitations to the game engine. The compromise I came up with was IMO the best that can be done with the design of the game engine.

And yes, the Soviets have to change their tactics!

Yeah, they scouted with single planes. But did they get the entire enemy composition in a 100km range?

I'm fine with it anyway. But you said you wanted air superiority to matter. Which I totally agree with.
But with the game's mechanics beeing as they are it seems to me, that the only way to achieve this is to force the player to do reconnaissance flights. Because those are costly, if you are behind in fighter tech.

@OCB: There is no surprise contact?? Only on land?

[Lothos]

Let's say we agree to disagree. Scouting does not take an entire air wing and was almost always done with a single plane.

Yes, they can fly to the frontline and retreat right away, that is a tactic you can use. Their are limitations to the game engine. The compromise I came up with was IMO the best that can be done with the design of the game engine.

And yes, the Soviets have to change their tactics!

Yeah, they scouted with single planes. But did they get the entire enemy composition in a 100km range?

I'm fine with it anyway. But you said you wanted air superiority to matter. Which I totally agree with.
But with the game's mechanics beeing as they are it seems to me, that the only way to achieve this is to force the player to do reconnaissance flights. Because those are costly, if you are behind in fighter tech.

@OCB: There is no surprise contact?? Only on land?

Their is Suprise contact, not sure why he said there is not.

Some units do not get a surprise damage bonus, units like Garrison do not but Infantry Corps and Armod Corps do.

As for the air items, it was the compromise I made. I personally like it and found it provided a new dynamic to the game.

[OldCrowBalthazor]

Was wrong about no surprise contact. There is but not a big thing when I pushed Infantry on Infantry.
Infantry blundering into Armor though was bad.
Mia Culpa

[Taxman66]

OCB is right (and I think I may have helped clue him in on it) that the Russians can not neglect the fighter wing of their air force.

However, in a pinch Soviet INF is cheap and additionally they have a ton of even cheaper light INF than can be used to scout. The biggest downside is doing it this way potentially clogs up hexes you might want to launch attacks from.

DIV units can be used by other nations for the same purpose as well if needed.

[Taxman66]

Suggestion:

Reduce CV, CVL and land bombers Sub attack to 1 (currently 2).
Increase CV, CVL and land bombers Sub attack by .5 (1/2) for each level of Naval Weapons upgrade.
So they are at Sub attack 2 with Naval Weapons 2 and Sub attack 3 with Naval Weapons 4.

----
Personally, I think they should start at 1.5 and get Sub Attack 2 at Naval Weapons 1, Sub 3 at Naval 3 and Sub 4 at Naval 5, but think you're more likely to go with the above proposal.

[AshFall]

Hello Lothos.

I know you removed the ability to place AA upgrades on resources like mines, ports, etc. I understand the reasoning. It's because the AI would make mass purchases and placements of AA all over the place and at great cost.

Question: Would it be possible to make a simple change enabling AA upgrades on resources for a MP Version of WiE-TRP ?
No other changes necessary.

While the MP community maybe smaller, we are more than casual war-gamers. We test all the time because human opponents are, well, humans.
There's a few of us (MP players) that are concerned that in MP play as it stands now, not having the option to buy and place AA on critical resources will skew things. AA upgrades are expensive enough that no one I know will willie-nillie spend on these.
AA upgrades are extremely important in places like key ports or mines. Malta and Ploesti come to mind, particularly against a human opponent.

Anyways I really love the mod as I have told you before. My future opponent is testing. I have been hot seat testing also.
Respects.
Mike

I would love such an option as well, or if you could make a separate version with AA enabled for resources? Perhaps that would be a good idea generally, an SP version and an MP version with minor changes as needed.

Strat bombing absolutely annihilates the German economy by late 42/43 in vanilla (if the Allies go for that strat). Strat bombers in NA without AA upgrades is pretty much an auto-lose for the Germans, in my experience?

Even with AA you need fighters to counter a good strat-bombing focused opponent.

I'll also echo Oldcrow here, this mod looks absolutely awesome. Any suggestions are simply thoughts on how to make it even better for MP specifically.

[AshFall]

The passive spotting range for fighters does not increase with the range. It is done that way for scouting and gives the side with air supremacy the advantage (which is historically accurate) with intelligence and location of the enemy.

I am not a graphics person, if you want to make a unique Sprite for it I would love to add it in

I found myself thinking about this the other day.

I do like the large passive spotting range from a functional and historical perspective. These are my thoughts:

Given that the goal is to represent the continous scouting of significant air wings (primarily represented by the fighter unit) and promote a war of air supremacy in a given area; high base spotting stats works very well. What isnt good is the tendency to move fighters close to the front and then move them away again. It doesnt fit, thematically or into the goal.

How to get this closer to the goal representation?

1. Set aircraft action points -very- low. I made a quick mini-mod and set it to 2.
Effect: Aircraft are largely stationary by normal means, they can not "move" on their own into too difficult terrain, in bad weather or low supply. As a representation of some sort of aircraft base facilities this is probably accurate. You -can- move them, slowly, if you do not use them to do anything active. Also pretty accurate, in this case the wing does not participate in active missions, their scout planes do their thing, that's it.
Effect: If you want to move your aircraft any significant distance, you -have- to operate them. This is a good thing IMO, makes logistics more important, and this is the only way you can set up aircraft in "hard" terrain like mountains and such. Accounts for moving aircraft facilities longer distances.

2. Remove or lower AP effect of "long range aircraft" tech.
Option: Depending on what is the goal to achieve, can have a smaller effect (1/2 AP per level) or none.
Option: Could, if possible, lower operating costs on aircraft further in addition to logistics, if it gives no AP.

3. Adjust passive spotting, "strike ranges" and tech to desired effect.
Option: Not having them mobile by normal means you can now set the passive spotting to wherever the net result is best. An interesting balance act between "active" scouting missions by "strike range" and passive scouting "aura".

Strats can still strike twice despite the low AP, so that does not seem to be an issue.

What do you all think?

[OldCrowBalthazor]

The passive spotting range for fighters does not increase with the range. It is done that way for scouting and gives the side with air supremacy the advantage (which is historically accurate) with intelligence and location of the enemy.

I am not a graphics person, if you want to make a unique Sprite for it I would love to add it in

I found myself thinking about this the other day.

I do like the large passive spotting range from a functional and historical perspective. These are my thoughts:

Given that the goal is to represent the continous scouting of significant air wings (primarily represented by the fighter unit) and promote a war of air supremacy in a given area; high base spotting stats works very well. What isnt good is the tendency to move fighters close to the front and then move them away again. It doesnt fit, thematically or into the goal.

How to get this closer to the goal representation?

1. Set aircraft action points -very- low. I made a quick mini-mod and set it to 2.
Effect: Aircraft are largely stationary by normal means, they can not "move" on their own into too difficult terrain, in bad weather or low supply. As a representation of some sort of aircraft base facilities this is probably accurate. You -can- move them, slowly, if you do not use them to do anything active. Also pretty accurate, in this case the wing does not participate in active missions, their scout planes do their thing, that's it.
Effect: If you want to move your aircraft any significant distance, you -have- to operate them. This is a good thing IMO, makes logistics more important, and this is the only way you can set up aircraft in "hard" terrain like mountains and such. Accounts for moving aircraft facilities longer distances.

2. Remove or lower AP effect of "long range aircraft" tech.
Option: Depending on what is the goal to achieve, can have a smaller effect (1/2 AP per level) or none.
Option: Could, if possible, lower operating costs on aircraft further in addition to logistics, if it gives no AP.

3. Adjust passive spotting, "strike ranges" and tech to desired effect.
Option: Not having them mobile by normal means you can now set the passive spotting to wherever the net result is best. An interesting balance act between "active" scouting missions by "strike range" and passive scouting "aura".

Strats can still strike twice despite the low AP, so that does not seem to be an issue.

What do you all think?

Wow this is a grand idea!

[Taxman66]

Among other concerns I worry this would make planes a lot easier to target and pick on.

[Lothos]

The passive spotting range for fighters does not increase with the range. It is done that way for scouting and gives the side with air supremacy the advantage (which is historically accurate) with intelligence and location of the enemy.

I am not a graphics person, if you want to make a unique Sprite for it I would love to add it in

I found myself thinking about this the other day.

I do like the large passive spotting range from a functional and historical perspective. These are my thoughts:

Given that the goal is to represent the continous scouting of significant air wings (primarily represented by the fighter unit) and promote a war of air supremacy in a given area; high base spotting stats works very well. What isnt good is the tendency to move fighters close to the front and then move them away again. It doesnt fit, thematically or into the goal.

How to get this closer to the goal representation?

1. Set aircraft action points -very- low. I made a quick mini-mod and set it to 2.
Effect: Aircraft are largely stationary by normal means, they can not "move" on their own into too difficult terrain, in bad weather or low supply. As a representation of some sort of aircraft base facilities this is probably accurate. You -can- move them, slowly, if you do not use them to do anything active. Also pretty accurate, in this case the wing does not participate in active missions, their scout planes do their thing, that's it.
Effect: If you want to move your aircraft any significant distance, you -have- to operate them. This is a good thing IMO, makes logistics more important, and this is the only way you can set up aircraft in "hard" terrain like mountains and such. Accounts for moving aircraft facilities longer distances.

2. Remove or lower AP effect of "long range aircraft" tech.
Option: Depending on what is the goal to achieve, can have a smaller effect (1/2 AP per level) or none.
Option: Could, if possible, lower operating costs on aircraft further in addition to logistics, if it gives no AP.

3. Adjust passive spotting, "strike ranges" and tech to desired effect.
Option: Not having them mobile by normal means you can now set the passive spotting to wherever the net result is best. An interesting balance act between "active" scouting missions by "strike range" and passive scouting "aura".

Strats can still strike twice despite the low AP, so that does not seem to be an issue.

What do you all think?

Going to try and tackle each section

1 - I disagree with how you view aircraft during World War 2. They were extremely mobile and all they needed was a few hours to clear out a Debree. A dirt airfield worked just fine as an airfield. Strategic Operation is not really an option as it restricts aircraft to only resources and moving them to other places would not be possible.

2) If we lower Action Points then that in effects lowers rebasing etc... not a fan of lowering this. I believe what is currently their works well with the game engine.

3) Not sure I understand here, I never really set a passive scouting. Honestly the game engine itself is allowing the aircraft to see up to their site range for the first hex it moves to. I believe this is happening because the devs never planned on this feature being worked in for aircraft and was mainly designed for land units. Maybe one day they will address this, I cannot predict what they would do.

My thinking is this, the Allies should be trying to bomb the hell out of the Axis starting in 1943 and forward The Axis on the other hand should be concentrating all of their AA and several fighter wings (with leaders) to try and do damage back to the Allies. It is supposed to be a grind folks! What I keep hearing from people is the ones that play the Axis want to be able to counter every move the Allies make, but its not really the reality of what happened and how it happened. In an MP game playing the Axis it is not supposed to be a cake walk! You really need to do the following.

1) Instead of ignoring the UK, you need to pound it down with the German air force. Bring those bombers up, your goal is not to force the UK into submission but to pound them down, so they have very little MPP to work with while you build up your forces for your plan. You force the UK player to protect the UK which opens up other areas for your attack or to let you prepare for the invasion of Russia and to buy you some time before the Allies can hit you back. Use your fighters along the channel to keep an eye in case the UK brings ships in. It would also help you figure out what targets to hi. Also bring some planes to Brest and set them to Raid mode! Hit the UK every way you can while you build up! If you see not allied shipds in the channel then race your subs (1 move) all the way through to the ports in western France. If the UK has the balls to bring ships in the channel then pick and choose what you are pounding to the bottom of the ocean! After loosing a few ships you will see the UK player keep his ships just out of range and only bring them in if he spots your ships.

2) At some point toward the end of 1942 and early 1943 as the Axis player you need to be prepared for the allies to come at you with their air power. This means bring your fighters back and protect your stuff! Bring a leader back and make sure all your fighters and AA are within range of a leader to give the max change of damaging those Allied bombers so they are down for a few turns. Remember Allies goal is to limit your MP so the Russians can stop you and then counter push you back.

This is WW2 Europe Basics 101!

My goal is to make it so you do not have an auto counter to everything.

[Taxman66]

Lothos, did you see my suggestion above regarding air units vs. subs?

--------

Another possible way to address Ashfall's concerns would be to limit air units APs after they rebase once. If an air unit rebases reduce it's remaining AP to say 2. If that is not possible can you do the same reduction to air AP as naval units take after they encounter a ship?

[Lothos]

Lothos, did you see my suggestion above regarding air units vs. subs?

--------

Another possible way to address Ashfall's concerns would be to limit air units APs after they rebase once. If an air unit rebases reduce it's remaining AP to say 2. If that is not possible can you do the same reduction to air AP as naval units take after they encounter a ship?

I am concerned about the change and giving more power to the CVL. The AI is very good at ASW and my Subs are already getting slaughtered in the Atlantic. I have to constantly shift where I am attacking to avoid ASW and when they do find me OMG!

Why are you suggesting the change? What is the underlining issue you are trying to fix?

[Taxman66]

Subs:
The 'problem' you are having with your Axis subs is based mostly on the free experience/Tech the AI gets. I'm noticing the reverse 'problem' playing the Allies vs. GE AI subs. I can barely dink them for 1 or 2 damage with CVLs, and miss/force dives nearly as often. DDs are often taking as much damage (if not more sometimes) than they do to the subs, and if they end a turn next to the sub they are eating 4/5 damage while the sub takes 2 or 3. As time progresses, the AI (with instant free Tech investure) gets ahead on the Sub/ASW race so not much changes until you get caught up. Meanwhile CVLs stay neutral, but become more vulnerable to subs (I think, haven't had the mispleasure of being next to one with a CVL yet).

My suggestion actually makes CVLs a bit weaker vs. subs in the early years, current to your settings around the end of 1941/early 1942, and a bit stronger come 1943/1944. This feels more historical as the sub war was effectively turned by mid 1942, and by mid 1943+ became mostly a slaughter fest. The majority of which was due to air power.

Planes:
My suggestion here is simply a bit of compromise off Ashfall suggestion. I believe his and OCB/Dudeman's concerns is the ability of the weaker air power to freely scout deep into the enemy line by rebasing a FTR to the front, then sending back away from harm.

On a side note, playing the Allies SP, I find the UK takes more damage defending against GE bombers than she does back. This is again due mostly to the free experience point. At equal tech (FTR 1 or 2), UK FTRs attempting to defend southern England eat more damage than they do to GE FTR escorts and bombers. So I use 2 AA units and upgrade Corps in London/Portsmouth with AA and just suffer the hits there. I could use the 3rd UK AA too, but don't since I wouldn't do that in MP as it leaves Malta vulnerable (something the AI won't take advantage of). I use the UK FTRs only to defend the north out of GE FTR escort range. Even here it's a closer thing with losses usually equal. Although the MPP cost for the GE Hvy bomber is higher than it is for FTR losses, you have to factor in the damage the bomber is doing, and the fact that AI GE has so much money it doesn't really hurt them that much.

[Lothos]

Subs:
The 'problem' you are having with your Axis subs is based mostly on the free experience/Tech the AI gets. I'm noticing the reverse 'problem' playing the Allies vs. GE AI subs. I can barely dink them for 1 or 2 damage with CVLs, and miss/force dives nearly as often. DDs are often taking as much damage (if not more sometimes) than they do to the subs, and if they end a turn next to the sub they are eating 4/5 damage while the sub takes 2 or 3. As time progresses, the AI (with instant free Tech investure) gets ahead on the Sub/ASW race so not much changes until you get caught up. Meanwhile CVLs stay neutral, but become more vulnerable to subs (I think, haven't had the mispleasure of being next to one with a CVL yet).

My suggestion actually makes CVLs a bit weaker vs. subs in the early years, current to your settings around the end of 1941/early 1942, and a bit stronger come 1943/1944. This feels more historical as the sub war was effectively turned by mid 1942, and by mid 1943+ became mostly a slaughter fest. The majority of which was due to air power.

Planes:
My suggestion here is simply a bit of compromise off Ashfall suggestion. I believe his and OCB/Dudeman's concerns is the ability of the weaker air power to freely scout deep into the enemy line by rebasing a FTR to the front, then sending back away from harm.

On a side note, playing the Allies SP, I find the UK takes more damage defending against GE bombers than she does back. This is again due mostly to the free experience point. At equal tech (FTR 1 or 2), UK FTRs attempting to defend southern England eat more damage than they do to GE FTR escorts and bombers. So I use 2 AA units and upgrade Corps in London/Portsmouth with AA and just suffer the hits there. I could use the 3rd UK AA too, but don't since I wouldn't do that in MP as it leaves Malta vulnerable (something the AI won't take advantage of). I use the UK FTRs only to defend the north out of GE FTR escort range. Even here it's a closer thing with losses usually equal. Although the MPP cost for the GE Hvy bomber is higher than it is for FTR losses, you have to factor in the damage the bomber is doing, and the fact that AI GE has so much money it doesn't really hurt them that much.

When it comes to tech I have always been on par with the Allies (I play Germany most of the time) but even in the games I played the Allies I was always on par. Reason being is literally the first 4 to 5 turns of the game I invest all MPP into Research and make sure I am researching almost all of the techs (small exclusions).

Also AI does not get instant tech, in the highest difficulty it just does not pay the MPP for it but has to research it just like a human player.

[Taxman66]

I know it's not 'instant', however it is 'Instant investment' (in addition to being free of course). Meaning that they get to invest in everything immediately, while the player has to ramp up. This gives the AI a multiple turn lead depending on the order you get up to speed. Playing the Axis (at least for GE) it's not too hard to keep close to pace with the Allies (though a free instant investment max USA & USSR is not something I've delt with nor would my sense of fairness allow me to try.
On the Allied side, the UK can keep close (though will be behind by the turns it takes to get everything going, depending on the order they choose to invest in) through the first set and even after some of the first ones pop, and need reinvestment. The problem for them comes in spending to fight in Egypt/Libya and supporting USSR. There is not enough money to do that and reinvest in Tech as well as of course upgrading the stuff (Only about 1/3 of the RN get Naval Weapons/AA lvl 1 upgrades, and only DDs and maybe a CL or two in critical spots get ASW).

I get it, it's a big advantage for the AI. Fair enough I knew that. But don't tell me the AI doesn't get ahead on Tech. It does, plain and simple.

----
Anyway, I just thought you might be open to an idea that feels historical and weakens air units vs. subs early and makes them better (without getting to ridiculous levels) as time goes on.

[AshFall]

Going to try and tackle each section

1 - I disagree with how you view aircraft during World War 2. They were extremely mobile and all they needed was a few hours to clear out a Debree. A dirt airfield worked just fine as an airfield. Strategic Operation is not really an option as it restricts aircraft to only resources and moving them to other places would not be possible.

2) If we lower Action Points then that in effects lowers rebasing etc... not a fan of lowering this. I believe what is currently their works well with the game engine.

3) Not sure I understand here, I never really set a passive scouting. Honestly the game engine itself is allowing the aircraft to see up to their site range for the first hex it moves to. I believe this is happening because the devs never planned on this feature being worked in for aircraft and was mainly designed for land units. Maybe one day they will address this, I cannot predict what they would do.

My thinking is this, the Allies should be trying to bomb the hell out of the Axis starting in 1943 and forward The Axis on the other hand should be concentrating all of their AA and several fighter wings (with leaders) to try and do damage back to the Allies. It is supposed to be a grind folks! What I keep hearing from people is the ones that play the Axis want to be able to counter every move the Allies make, but its not really the reality of what happened and how it happened. In an MP game playing the Axis it is not supposed to be a cake walk! You really need to do the following.

1) Instead of ignoring the UK, you need to pound it down with the German air force. Bring those bombers up, your goal is not to force the UK into submission but to pound them down, so they have very little MPP to work with while you build up your forces for your plan. You force the UK player to protect the UK which opens up other areas for your attack or to let you prepare for the invasion of Russia and to buy you some time before the Allies can hit you back. Use your fighters along the channel to keep an eye in case the UK brings ships in. It would also help you figure out what targets to hi. Also bring some planes to Brest and set them to Raid mode! Hit the UK every way you can while you build up! If you see not allied shipds in the channel then race your subs (1 move) all the way through to the ports in western France. If the UK has the balls to bring ships in the channel then pick and choose what you are pounding to the bottom of the ocean! After loosing a few ships you will see the UK player keep his ships just out of range and only bring them in if he spots your ships.

2) At some point toward the end of 1942 and early 1943 as the Axis player you need to be prepared for the allies to come at you with their air power. This means bring your fighters back and protect your stuff! Bring a leader back and make sure all your fighters and AA are within range of a leader to give the max change of damaging those Allied bombers so they are down for a few turns. Remember Allies goal is to limit your MP so the Russians can stop you and then counter push you back.

This is WW2 Europe Basics 101!

My goal is to make it so you do not have an auto counter to everything.

1. From several sources (I had a quick dig around, not enough time to find the ones I originally thought of: https://www.airandspaceforces.com/artic ... lles-heel/) the logistics of air bases were a significant issue during ww2, especially at the level represented in-game. I'm only including this info for others to see, not out of any assumption of your personal knowledge Lothos.

Each air unit matches the rough description of a "Geschwader"(GS) (to use the german OOB), usually 3 Gruppen, 4 (or even 5)if they were a fighter wing. That's 30-40 aircraft per gruppe(Gr), so anywhere between 90-200 aircraft, with supporting personnel. Each Gr occupying its' own airfield, with airfields set nearby one another within the GS.

The linked article notes severe problems with logistics and air support where specialised engineer companies were lacking, also where the commander of the area of operations was lacking in understanding of air logistics for that matter.

Basically, it boils down to that effective forward movement and aircraft support was predicated on the development (both tactically, strategically and technologically) of highly specialised personnel with tools for rapid airbase construction. Which you did not do (with few exceptions) in horrid terrain (dense forests, mountains, etc). The allies did not have that developed during their early campaigns, and managed it locally later in the NA campaign, at which point the gained air superiority over the luftwaffe.

To represent this in game, i.e. the dependency of significant air forces upon useable airfields and the development of rapid airbase construction as the war went on, you could do it something like the suggestion I put forward. That would create natural "groupings" of air units the way they would roughly be spread out in actual operations.

Among other concerns I worry this would make planes a lot easier to target and pick on.

2. Effect: Lowering non OP-move rebasing would be the point. Airbases were a central point not only for operations but for enemy attacks. Direct strikes and "air warfare" to attempt the elimination of enemy air-forces in their base areas were a big thing. This change would promote that. Active aircraft "battles" trying to take one another out. Set up an AA-unit with your air fleet in hot areas to help.

3. "passive scouting" is the land spotting range, you set it very high at start, which I think is a good idea - especially if their AP is lowered. In fact, I think the passive spotting at 5 is a good starting point, and with low AP it could increase further with LRA tech (maybe 0.5 per step?) along with strike ranges which would then be "active flights" to do aggressive recon.

In regards to the strat bombing campaign, I'm only speaking from vanilla here. If you dont build AA tech on key resources fighters and AA units dont matter much, since strat bombers will take out most of a resource in one hit. It's not hard to decimate all relevant resources west of Lubeck, for negligible cost in that case. You're advocating an absolute air focus, investing in all relevant tech without break and building all of the units. I would propose that choice is a good thing. If one wants to do a strat without that absolute focus and instead invest in AA upgrades and AA units that should be an "ok" alternative, though it wont be as good of course (which is reasonable!). Germany did invest significant resources "hardening" key cities and areas with stationary AA batteries to defend against bombing, so the "damage back" is just the represenation of having built a small "AA group" for 30-50mpp or so there. The main thing isnt really the dmg the strats -take- though, it's lowering the damage they -do- a bit-

Also, AA upgrades on fortifications and cities are key in keeping HQ's alive in vanilla once the enemy has ground attack weapons 3. It becomes very easy to Alpha strike HQ's in one turn from full to dead. The change to allow lvl 3 AA upgrades on HQ's was specifically to handle this, but you usually need to put it on an upgraded hex as well for the additional defence.

Just my fistful of pennies

[Lothos]

I know it's not 'instant', however it is 'Instant investment' (in addition to being free of course). Meaning that they get to invest in everything immediately, while the player has to ramp up. This gives the AI a multiple turn lead depending on the order you get up to speed. Playing the Axis (at least for GE) it's not too hard to keep close to pace with the Allies (though a free instant investment max USA & USSR is not something I've delt with nor would my sense of fairness allow me to try.
On the Allied side, the UK can keep close (though will be behind by the turns it takes to get everything going, depending on the order they choose to invest in) through the first set and even after some of the first ones pop, and need reinvestment. The problem for them comes in spending to fight in Egypt/Libya and supporting USSR. There is not enough money to do that and reinvest in Tech as well as of course upgrading the stuff (Only about 1/3 of the RN get Naval Weapons/AA lvl 1 upgrades, and only DDs and maybe a CL or two in critical spots get ASW).

I get it, it's a big advantage for the AI. Fair enough I knew that. But don't tell me the AI doesn't get ahead on Tech. It does, plain and simple.

----
Anyway, I just thought you might be open to an idea that feels historical and weakens air units vs. subs early and makes them better (without getting to ridiculous levels) as time goes on.

If their is an issue where the sub is diving to much in the later years because I removed ASW from air power then we can add it back in to negate that dive chance. Keep me posted.

[OldCrowBalthazor]

Friendly reminder to folks playing this mod in an MP match...go to the Advanced Settings to turn off the National Morale Bars that are on top of the screen to thwart the 'Vichy' Bug.
In SP this is also a thing but you can easily go back to a saved game if you forgot. Not so in a MP game on the server.
btw Lothos, Duedman and I are in the spring of 1940...and the rampage into the west has begun. We are banking as many turn recordings as we can before the match goes public.
We have a schedule for YT but not announcing quite yet.
Cheers.