Strategy Thread - BTR

Eagle Day to Bombing of the Reich is a improved and enhanced edition of Talonsoft's older Battle of Britain and Bombing the Reich. This updated version represents the best simulation of the air war over Britain and the strategic bombing campaign over Europe that has ever been made.

Moderators: Joel Billings, harley, warshipbuilder, simovitch

User avatar
madflava13
Posts: 1501
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Alexandria, VA

Strategy Thread - BTR

Post by madflava13 »

I know this may be a little early, but I thought with all the waiting going on, we might start talking about strategies...

I haven't played BtR in some time (years), but I do recall several strategy threads at JC's old site... IIRC, power stations used to be a favorite target because of the system-wide effect. I used to shy away because of the sheer number of targets... Anybody else have ideas or favorite strategies?
"The Paraguayan Air Force's request for spraying subsidies was not as Paraguayan as it were..."
User avatar
Hard Sarge
Posts: 22145
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2000 8:00 am
Location: garfield hts ohio usa
Contact:

RE: Strategy Thread - BTR

Post by Hard Sarge »

ohhhhh

you should know better then to post something like this with me around :)

POWER ! yeap, you can take out almost all production by taking down power, but as you say, there are alot of them, and for me, I dislike sending out heavy bombers to hit small targets, and normally wait until I am closer to them and can use Tac Air to knock them down

OILR, Swift has had some good effects taking down oil, but as most of it is Romy land, and will be taken by the Red Horde, I tend to wait until it falls before going to work on it heavy, but think I may have to rethink my thinking

OILS ? more of a target point raid, then the main idea for a raid

FUEL, well, sort of like Power, some good big targets, but to take it out, a lot of small targets

STEEL, again, lots of small targets

ALUM, I tend to take this out as soon as I can

RUBBER, a good target, a few very big targets that will cripple it

CHEM, another good target, and again a few big targets, but much more work to cripple

BB, lots of good targets in a small area, but dangerous to get to, and HARD to cripple due to lots of smaller sites

ARM, only target to knock out a target, lots and lots and lots of them, there are a few good sized ones to attack for points

AFAC, some good targets, but lots of small targets, and if you hit the bigs, you got a chance to make more small ones, but if you can cripple, you can cripple the LW

EFAC same as above

CFAC, same as above, but alot more of them and most are small

the above 3, better to work on only one type, to try and make a bottleneck, then to split your raids

one trouble is that some of the people who have worked on the game, may of slipped some production into areas or types you may not expect it to be, plus the AI has been programmed to think like this too

Airfields, just to keep the other guy honest :)

Radar, repairs fast, but can make the other guy blind, air attacks and jammers placed into the right areas can work wonders

RAILROADS, maybe one of the more importent targets

AREA, well, with out AREA then BC has nothing to go for :), but burn out a AREA you also tend to nail the RR and other stuff in the area

but, that is a start, your turns



 
Image
soeren01
Posts: 392
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2004 10:04 am
Location: Bayern

RE: Strategy Thread - BTR

Post by soeren01 »

Using BC on AREA and USAAF on RAILS gives synergie effects,
Attaking targets near the coast gives EXP and much better Fighter cover.
Going for german fighters and one of AFAC/EFAC/CFAC tends to give you air superiority if done right.

soeren01, formerly known as Soeren
CoG FoF
PacWar WIR BoB BTR UV WITP WITE WITW
User avatar
Dixie
Posts: 10303
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 3:14 pm
Location: UK

RE: Strategy Thread - BTR

Post by Dixie »

How does the AI approach the campaign targets? IIRC the manual for the old version may have mentioned that the AI would 'decide' on a direction for their bombing (a/c industry, rubber or so on). Will it vary it's targets, or will it focus on the same industries each game?

Also, in BoB how historical is the Luftwaffe campaign? Will it switch to bombing London as historical, or continue against the airfields, or vary it's approach?


Image
Attachments
Untitled.jpg
Untitled.jpg (34.47 KiB) Viewed 664 times
[center]Image

Bigger boys stole my sig
User avatar
Hard Sarge
Posts: 22145
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2000 8:00 am
Location: garfield hts ohio usa
Contact:

RE: Strategy Thread - BTR

Post by Hard Sarge »

over all, I can say that the AI has a number of "plans" that it will pick from at the start of the game, so, each game will/can have a different approch, which, so saying, once it starts, other things start to kick in, losses, damaged targets and what nots

there are things I want to adjust, but we are not there yet to work it over yet

I am not sure how close the AI follows the real war plan for BoB (I not sure the real Germans followed the real war plan too well ?)


Image
User avatar
Terminus
Posts: 39781
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:53 pm
Location: Denmark

RE: Strategy Thread - BTR

Post by Terminus »

Well, they were following it pretty well, right up until the point when they stopped...[:D]
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
User avatar
wernerpruckner
Posts: 4138
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 1:00 pm

RE: Strategy Thread - BTR

Post by wernerpruckner »

OILR, Swift has had some good effects taking down oil, but as most of it is Romy land, and will be taken by the Red Horde, I tend to wait until it falls before going to work on it heavy, but think I may have to rethink my thinking

OILS ? more of a target point raid, then the main idea for a raid

FUEL, well, sort of like Power, some good big targets, but to take it out, a lot of small targets

this is one of my tactics in BtR - it is a combo of OILR/OILS/FUEL/RR/PORT/AF
it is amazing how much fuel the Axis need in the war [:)]

why those kind of targets:

RR/area/PORT => RR and PORT seem to be the transportation points of BTR/BoB, when shut done, there will be less production in the surrounding factories, also the transport of goods is slowed done and/or stopped
Also bombing RRs gives you Terror points - this is the main task for BC
BC usually scores between 25 and 30 terror until the end of 1943 in my PBEMs [:D]

OILR and FUEL - production of fuel, which is needed by the aircraft of the enemy force - fuel also may or may not need by troops and industry ( I am sure that it is needed, but not sure how much is needed )

OILS - storage of oil and fuel - the size says nothing about the amount that there is in storage, but it is often much higher close to big ports and big RRs
bombing it destroys large amounts of fuel !!
but be aware that the game engine moves around lots of oil/fuel all the time

A/Fs - to haunt the enemy and also to destroy - as main task - fuel !! ( A/C are a nice by-product ) also the enemy is forced to move his units around a lot
negative aspect - Flak traps. [X(] but I stil go on bombing them.

Done in a right way you will be able to nearly shut done certain areas for Luftwaffe action - in testing games I was able that the LW A/Fs between Amsterdam, Hamm, Hamburg only got around 10 to 15 fuel points per turn [:D]
if there is not enough fuel on those A/Fs.....than the Luftwaffe cannot fly [:D]
User avatar
Hard Sarge
Posts: 22145
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2000 8:00 am
Location: garfield hts ohio usa
Contact:

RE: Strategy Thread - BTR

Post by Hard Sarge »

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Well, they were following it pretty well, right up until the point when they stopped...[:D]

Well, overall, I kind of got to disagree, while combat is combat and all of that, BoB if you study it, most times just makes you shake your head, what were they thinking, what was the real plan ?

one day you could have a number of well timed and planned raids, with raids hitting right after each other, and putting tons of pressure on the defenders, other days, you may have 12 bombers at low level all by themselfs

most times, it really looks like it was a game, or at best half hearted

which a lot is said about Bebbo and his poor Intel, and how the LW followed his info blindly, but the leaders of the Airfleets, were no fools, the old fighter leaders were not fools, and the newer younger leaders may of been even smarter (as regards to what needed to be done in combat)

the KG Commanders were not fools

but why was so much of the battle fought like a it was a joke ?

the Germans really believed the English were ready to give up ?

the pilots in combat didn't believe or think this, why did the planners ?

a lot of people blame the fat man, but early on, he was back at Karenhall, and didn't come to the front and take over until later on (when the major mistake took place)

of course, we have hindsight, and we know what happened and most times why it happened, but, I would say most Airchair Generals would of fought the battle much different, then the pros did, but we are talking about people who spent most of there lives training and planning for this kind of stuff (now the Yanks, had lots and lots of 90 day wonders and people from all over being moved and placed into command slots, so, alot of more simple mistakes were going to be made)

but almost to the end of the battle, we hear, read, that the LW still didn't know which airfields belonged to whom, and who were stationed where ???

what were they doing ? Recon was flying every day, bombers and fighters were flying almost every day, they didn't know what fields had planes on them and which didn't ?

ahh, oh well, you can say the same for most of the later parts of the war, but at least, then, most of the commanders were handcuffed
Image
soeren01
Posts: 392
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2004 10:04 am
Location: Bayern

RE: Strategy Thread - BTR

Post by soeren01 »

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Well, they were following it pretty well, right up until the point when they stopped...[:D]


Quite right.

They had no plan and they followed it.
soeren01, formerly known as Soeren
CoG FoF
PacWar WIR BoB BTR UV WITP WITE WITW
soeren01
Posts: 392
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2004 10:04 am
Location: Bayern

RE: Strategy Thread - BTR

Post by soeren01 »

Many of the higher German Airforce Officers came from the Army, Artillery and Supply branches. They simply had no real grasp how an airpower worked. The y did a very good job at ground support which was handled similar to Artillery. Also, it was more like trying to bully GB into peace talks than an full out airwar.
soeren01, formerly known as Soeren
CoG FoF
PacWar WIR BoB BTR UV WITP WITE WITW
User avatar
Hard Sarge
Posts: 22145
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2000 8:00 am
Location: garfield hts ohio usa
Contact:

RE: Strategy Thread - BTR

Post by Hard Sarge »

I am talking more of the staff officers then the figure heads, and if anything, the Germens had good staff Officers
Image
Banquet
Posts: 1190
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2002 9:04 pm
Location: England

RE: Strategy Thread - BTR

Post by Banquet »

It does seem surprising that Germany didn't even know where British squadrons flew from. As part of their planning for Sealion they also described the planned invasion area's as something like low mountainous country. I'm not sure anyone living in England would have described the south downs in such a way! The inclusion of Mountain divisions in the planned initial assault seems to confirm what they were expecting.

The fact that they constantly under estimated the remaining aircraft in the RAF also shows complete lack of understanding. They believed their pilots kills claims and seemed unable to take into account replacement aircraft, pilots and of course, pilots that had bailed out. The fact that Britain was building more aircraft than Germany at the time seems to have completely passed them by. If they'd known how many squadrons Britain had about a month in, they'd have probably given up earlier.

I think they were so over confident from their recent campaigns they just didn't plan the campaign well enough because they thought they'd win easily.
User avatar
wernerpruckner
Posts: 4138
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 1:00 pm

RE: Strategy Thread - BTR

Post by wernerpruckner »

A Mountain Division is a "light" division - and so it is easier moved around ( per ship, per A/C )
The German Mountain Divisions were part of the landing forces in Crete ( a part of them landed with gliders and another part per sea )
User avatar
wernerpruckner
Posts: 4138
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 1:00 pm

RE: Strategy Thread - BTR

Post by wernerpruckner »

To underestimate the enemy strength and to overestimate the own strength was one of the biggest problems for the German forces throughout the war.

The Luftwaffe told their pilots that the Bf109G-6 was superior ( faster and more agile ) than all Soviet A/C at that time.
medaloffairness
Posts: 21
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 9:55 am

RE: Strategy Thread - BTR

Post by medaloffairness »

Hmm...
 
I disagree to the opinion that it was the biggest problem of the German to unerestimate the strength od their opponents, because every nation which thinks it can conquer another country or has to defend from the aggression of another country will underestimate the strength of the opponent.
The biggest problem is the war itself.
 
Examples in WWII
 
Germany
Underestimated: Russia
By the way. Due to the contract with Japan, it was the idea that Japan opens a second front against Russia.
The Russians expected this till 1942 (although Japan and Russia had an non-attack agrement) but then Japan got problems with the Americans. So, now the Russian were able to move huge amounts of Siberian forces to Europe, where there were also used in the battle of Stalingrad.
 
Underestimated: Yugoslawia
It was a fast "victory" but the huge number of troops which were sticked in Yugoslawia for the partisans would have been needed on other fronts.
 
and so on...
 
UK
Underestimated: Japan
For whatever reason, the British military responsibilities never thought that it is possible for an Asian army to conquer Singapur on through the jungle. And it has happened.
By the way, this first defeat (with modern weapons) of an European Force against an Asian one showed the Asian that the europeans or any other "western nation" is invinceable. This is the reason why it was impossible for the French to stay in Vietnam any longer after the war...(at least one of the reasons)
 
UK and FRANCE
Underestimated: Germany
I don`t think that France thought that it will be defeated within such a short period.
 
Russia:
Underestimated: Finnland
In the Winter War of 1939/40 Russia thought it will be easy for them to conquer Finnland and at least they have fixed it. But the losses of materials and Human ressources had a relation of 1:10 and in some cases (planes) 1:15
 
America:
Underestimated: Germany (Arnhem and Ardennes)
In both cases the American strategists thought that the soldiers they will have to face are old men or children. The truth was different and unfortunatly blody for all sides.
 
 
You see, underestimation lies in eye of the beholder. Telling a young german pilot that his plane is the best one is just a kind of propaganda, which was used in every country. And I honour those British pilots which were flying into the "Reich" in late 1940 with very old Blenheims for destroying important bridges over the Maas. I don`t think that the British commander told them, that the Blenheim has no chance against some fighters without cover.
 
Last question ;-)
 
Is there a chance to influence the allocation of new piolts out of a replenishment pool? in the new version of BTR?
User avatar
Hard Sarge
Posts: 22145
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2000 8:00 am
Location: garfield hts ohio usa
Contact:

RE: Strategy Thread - BTR

Post by Hard Sarge »

No Chance

one thing I think alot of people who follow BoB miss out, there is a lot of complaint that the LW never had a real 4 engine bomber, they had no Stat Airforce, and in the end had to use it's twins as Stat Bombers

the hassle is, BoB was not a Stat Battle, and at times, I think even the LW tried to make it into one, but, it was a Tac battle, they needed control of the air, of the airspace, it was plain and simple, but overall, they never fought the battle as such, there is a BC AF here, there is a CC field there, it don't matter, a field is a field is a field, if it is in range, it does not work, they would send a Staffel or a Gruppen in to hit a target, and a lot of times, hit it good, but really, just enough so they could say they hit it

I mean, think about it, they went after factories with Staffels (and in fact some of them knocked the places out !)

plus for numbers and stuff, we got to remember, there is what is being told to the folks and what is being told to the troops, and what the troops see and believe, I doubt very much that any of the JG leaders believed any of the statements that the UK only had 50 planes left
Image
User avatar
Hard Sarge
Posts: 22145
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2000 8:00 am
Location: garfield hts ohio usa
Contact:

RE: Strategy Thread - BTR

Post by Hard Sarge »

and just in case, in my own little world, Stat is the same as Strat, and maybe about 100 other words


Image
Banquet
Posts: 1190
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2002 9:04 pm
Location: England

RE: Strategy Thread - BTR

Post by Banquet »

Luftflotte 5 certainly found out the hard way. The German reasoning for the fact that there were still so many fighters in the South was that they must have transferred down from the North. In fact the northern airfields were all in good shape and itching for some action themselves.

In all honesty the best Germany was ever likely to do was force the RAF back to airfields north of London. This would have meant the beachheads during Sealion would still have been contested by the RAF and Germany needed complete air supremecy to have any chance. They had already learned the Stuka's couldn't survive under fighter attack. They didn't just need to get the 9 or so divisions to England, they needed to supply them and get the armour in the 2nd wave over too. If in any of that time the Royal Navy had got access to the channel it would have all been over.

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

I doubt very much that any of the JG leaders believed any of the statements that the UK only had 50 planes left
User avatar
Hard Sarge
Posts: 22145
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2000 8:00 am
Location: garfield hts ohio usa
Contact:

RE: Strategy Thread - BTR

Post by Hard Sarge »

Hmmmm, this topic normally draws them in like flies :)
ORIGINAL: Banquet

Luftflotte 5 certainly found out the hard way. The German reasoning for the fact that there were still so many fighters in the South was that they must have transferred down from the North. In fact the northern airfields were all in good shape and itching for some action themselves.

In all honesty the best Germany was ever likely to do was force the RAF back to airfields north of London.

if they had won the AS over the south, the RAF would of been pushed back more into 12 Group area, then to just say north of London, 12 Group fields would hurt the Fighters if they were trying to reach the Dover area, the GB bombers of this time, would of been slaughtered if they had tried to make a anti-ship strike, worse then what the LW took during there attacks, plus the RAF fighters would of been tied down trying to protect the bombers and would then of been faceing the same troubles the 109 had been

This would have meant the beachheads during Sealion would still have been contested by the RAF and Germany needed complete air supremecy to have any chance.

really don't see it as much of any contest, if they had AS over the south, they would of had it over the beaches too, even more so, and as I said, the RAF would of been trying to protect there bombers, not out on the hunt, much different battle, if you hope to have any of your bombers return


They had already learned the Stuka's couldn't survive under fighter attack. They didn't just need to get the 9 or so divisions to England, they needed to supply them and get the armour in the 2nd wave over too. If in any of that time the Royal Navy had got access to the channel it would have all been over.

and again really ? why does every one think the GE were just plain dumb and stupid people ? by 1940, most of Europe didn't think so anymore ? (and as I am a ex Marine, I have some training in this sort of stuff, and as a lowly NCO I know how to plan and mount an attack with this kind of defence, I am sure the GE Staff Officers had some ideas) you don't need fully loaded boats and ships to make a landing, or to supply a force on the land, just loaded up enough with what you can offload in the time you think you are going to have or need, every modern day writer, thinks they were plain Morons, who would be loading ships that would take 5 days to unload and would be sending all of them to the same spot and would then have to wait in line for the ship ahead of them to unload, before they could begin there unloading

and as the RN had already admitted, the channel was not under RAF control, and "all" ships were order not to enter, of course, if a landing was under way, the RN would of responded, but as already has been seen, the RAF would of had trouble protecting the fleets, as they were father away now, they couldn't do in July, when they were on the coast, they wouldn't be able to do it in Aug or Sept when they were based in 12 Group, and also being weaken, but again, everybody says, when the RN DDs got there at night, the landing would of been in trouble, but who says they had to be there at night, only the modern writers who think the Staff Officers were morons and wouldn't know they only had a short time to be at sea and back

if the LW has AS over the south, the RN DD fleet would of been crippled if it was around during the day

too many plans on what was going to happen to the BB fleet if it looked like England was going to fall, for them to really of been planned on going into the slaughter fields

one hassle is, most people when they talk about what would, could of happened, if, always talk as if the RAF was still in control, but if the LW had AS over the south, then RAF was no longer in control and would be fighting a totally different battle

let the flames begin


ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

I doubt very much that any of the JG leaders believed any of the statements that the UK only had 50 planes left
Image
User avatar
Dixie
Posts: 10303
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 3:14 pm
Location: UK

RE: Strategy Thread - BTR

Post by Dixie »

What were the LW torpedo bombers like at that stage of the war?  Surely Stukas and torpedo bombers would be a major factor in RN losses as regular bombing was rarely effective against a moving ship.  The RN would have gone into action with or without RAF AS in an effort to stop the landings.
[center]Image

Bigger boys stole my sig
Post Reply

Return to “Gary Grigsby's Eagle Day to Bombing the Reich”