Matrix Games Forums

I don´t know if this work as designed but i notice extremly high aircraft casualties if i attack ground targets. Playing the 1939 campaign as Germany after two turns i lost nealy 50 % of my Luftwaffe against Poland. And this is not against interceptors but mainly against defensive fire of ground units. Have other player made similar experiences? Or is there a trick to reduce losses?

I see the same thing. I've looked into the consts.csv file to see if I could mod a lower hit rate for aircraft doing ground strikes, but couldn't figure it out. Hopefully doomtrader will tell us how to do that quickly.

Hopefully doomtrader will tell us how to do that quickly.

I'll try to do it Tuesday the latest

There is no need to wait so long - look at lines 91-111 in consts.csv  or just search for:

#Air strike effectivness modifiers (%)
#Defender losses in air strike (strength lost - float)
#Attacker losses in air strike (strength points, int)

If you find any intersting combination pleas let us know as we are to modify those values in a patch.

ORIGINAL: Anraz

There is no need to wait so long - look at lines 91-111 in consts.csv  or just search for:

#Air strike effectivness modifiers (%)
#Defender losses in air strike (strength lost - float)
#Attacker losses in air strike (strength points, int)

If you find any intersting combination pleas let us know as we are to modify those values in a patch.

#Air strike effectivness modifiers (%);;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;

looks like those values are null/unchanged?

#Attacker losses in air strike (strength points, int);;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
#die roll;column 1;column 2;column 3;column 4;column 5;;;;;;;;;;;;
1;0;0;0;0;0;;;;;;;;;;;;
2;0;0;0;0;0;;;;;;;;;;;;
3;1;0;0;0;0;;;;;;;;;;;;
4;1;1;0;0;0;;;;;;;;;;;;
5;1;1;1;0;0;;;;;;;;;;;;
6;1;1;1;1;0;;;;;;;;;;;;

what do the columns stand for?
thx for your help

columns means advantage over enemy

ORIGINAL: doomtrader

columns means advantage over enemy

So is that just a random dice roll or something? Or is there a way for a player to get to columns higher than one or two? Or are the columns determined by the differences in tech or something?

If not I'd advocate that the cost of rebuilding air units be greatly reduced, as I see no way that you can tweak things to be less deadly given this chart, unless you duplicate the effects of some of the columns. Which of course negates the need for different columns in the first place...

As Germany I had all but two of my air units still sitting around Berlin awaiting enough PPs to rebuild their Poland losses when I went into France. And I still have little hope of rebuilding the airforce I started with by the time Barbarossa rolls around.

Jim

#Attacker losses in air strike (strength points, int);;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
#die roll;column 1;column 2;column 3;column 4;column 5;;;;;;;;;;;;
1;0;0;0;0;0;;;;;;;;;;;;
2;0;0;0;0;0;;;;;;;;;;;;
3;1;0;0;0;0;;;;;;;;;;;;
4;1;1;0;0;0;;;;;;;;;;;;
5;1;1;1;0;0;;;;;;;;;;;;
6;1;1;1;1;0;;;;;;;;;;;;

In RtV it was:

#Attacker losses in air strike (strength points, int);;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
#die roll;column 1;column 2;column 3;column 4;column 5;;;;;;;;;;;;
1;0;0;0;0;0;;;;;;;;;;;;
2;1;0;0;0;0;;;;;;;;;;;;
3;1;1;0;0;0;;;;;;;;;;;;
4;1;1;1;0;0;;;;;;;;;;;;
5;2;1;1;1;0;;;;;;;;;;;;
6;2;2;1;1;1;;;;;;;;;;;;

Anyway try to test such set of values:

#Attacker losses in air strike (strength points, int);;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
#die roll;column 1;column 2;column 3;column 4;column 5;;;;;;;;;;;;
1;0;0;0;0;0;;;;;;;;;;;;
2;0;0;0;0;0;;;;;;;;;;;;
3;1;0;0;0;0;;;;;;;;;;;;
4;1;0;0;0;0;;;;;;;;;;;;
5;1;1;0;0;0;;;;;;;;;;;;
6;1;1;0;0;0;;;;;;;;;;;;

Cost of rebuilding air units was halved during beta test, but still there is place for changes. In general there are 3 main factor which should be taken under consideration while talking about airunits effectiveness/performance: cost of replacement, losses taken and losses dealt. So maybe we have to modify " Defender losses" of const.csv:

#Defender losses in air strike (strength lost - float);;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
#die roll;1;2;3;4;5;6;;;;;;;;;;;
Losses (strength);0;0.1;0.2;0.3;0.4;0.5;;;;;;;;;;;

Instead of modifying the chart to practically nothing, I wonder if an additional step could be added to the way air ground strikes are done. So when a result is achieved, instead of simply destroying an air point outright, an additional check could be made with three possible results.

Destroyed outright, lose one air point.

Damaged, lose one air point, but half the cost to rebuild the air point is credited to the nation's PP pool.

Shocked, take no losses, but all remaining actions are set to zero. If no actions remain, set the next turns actions to zero instead.

That way you could keep the variable columns in the combat tables as it currently stands, but reduce total casualties taken by about 50%, while still affecting the air game.

Jim

MMmmm my impression with ToW is that the air casualties from ground striking troops is MUCH better than it was in RtV.  In RtV I usually held back my aircraft and ONLY used them when I just had to bust through somewhere.
 
I also tend to mass my aircraft when I use them.  So I am rarely if ever ground striking with a 6 strength unit (or less).  I also take the 4 STR air units and use them against Denmark, The Low Countries, Yugoslavia, Greece, N. Africa etc until I can afford to upgrade them to Armies.  Using 4 Str against first rate powers means your getting intercepted by an opposing air army way too often to be healthy.
 
I also haven't done much air recon yet, I still haven't gotten used to it, I suppose I am still in the habit of using probing forces (mot divisions usually) to do the scouting.  Perhaps if I was using the air recon more often I would notice more losses.
 
In short, I have been VERY happy with the changes to how air works in RoW.  I use it extensively now, rather than just husbanding it for use.  In RtV I NEVER bought new Air Units, they were too expensive, and  not just to buy (they were expensive to buy) but repair was just too much given the rate of losses.  In ToW I think air units are worth the cost to buy given how usefull they are now.  In RtV using an air unit once every 3 months or so meant I never could justify the cost of buying one.
 

I have to agree strongly with Mike. I find the air units, with their current loss ratios to be very useable. I am getting a lot of use out of them in my games and do not feel they are taking unacceptable losses.

Chuck

The issue has been addressed in the hot fix - please test it and share your opinions.

columns means advantage over enemy

 
Would it be possible to eloborate on this a little more in detail? i.e. what do you exactly mean? How is it calculated under which column you roll for losses on your airstrike?
 
Thanks in advance for any info here!!
 
Romdanzer