Air losses against no air GS dat Flak

[king171717]

I think this is the highest Air Combat losses I sustain as the Germans on GS. Ouch!!

[HardLuckYetAgain]

Looks GREAT!!! Everyone knows that the Soviets are most powerful

[Rosencrantus]

holy smokes and I thought I had it rough

[Dreamslayer]

Looks like its a bug. Because you can't see on the screenshot Soviet AA elements.
There is 171st PVO AA rgt (up to 96 medium AA guns and 12 light AA guns) locatated in Orel right from 1st turn and Rifle division should have some AA too.
But even with this absolutely nonsense TOE of AA rgt such air losses looks wrong.
I dont understand why is it so difficult to fix TOE of Soviet PVO units. Its not only abnormally rise AA abilities but also drains AA guns from the pool to these units. So it leads to another one fiction and at the end we get "snowball effect".

[DeletedUser44]

It's not difficult for them to fix.

You just have to fuss long enough for them to finally do it.

[Dreamslayer]

ORIGINAL: Sauron_II

It's not difficult for them to fix.

Sure, they have time to made changes like in the last patch (see data and scenario changes), even "New Yugoslavian and Bulgarian leaders added for future expansion scenario" but no attention to this AA chaos in Soviet OOB.

You just have to fuss long enough for them to finally do it.

You probably kidding. Since 2018 is long enough?
Maybe we need to organize the solidarity march?

[Hardradi]

Whats the altitude and can you show us the Soviet AA guns?

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: Dreamslayer

ORIGINAL: Sauron_II

It's not difficult for them to fix.

Sure, they have time to made changes like in the last patch (see data and scenario changes), even "New Yugoslavian and Bulgarian leaders added for future expansion scenario" but no attention to this AA chaos in Soviet OOB.

You just have to fuss long enough for them to finally do it.

You probably kidding. Since 2018 is long enough?
Maybe we need to organize the solidarity march?

or maybe its acknowledged but as ever needs a bit of work to understand why and ensure a proposed fix doesn't cause problems elsewhere?

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

The case shown of VtoB of before and after the patch just shows the randomness of the losses because there was absolutely no change between 1.02.08 and 1.02.11 versions when it comes to air losses.

Now the fact that we can't load current saves with versions before 1.02.06 makes it harder to run side by sides as the last changes to losses were made in 1.02.06. I did take a very old save from 1.01.09 and launched an attack and then tried it with 1.02.11. I ran the battle 3 times each and the total overall losses were quite a bit higher with the later version. It was complicated by the fact that I always got more aircraft in the earlier version flying ground support (for no reason that I can think of), but the loss per a/c flying was much higher. 3 is not a large sample size but it's something, and at least the a/c flying were all level bombers (tac bombers take more flak due to bombing at lower altitudes). We are looking at the losses but there are some things that are difficult to unravel. We'll likely have some changes after the holidays, but I can't say yet what those might be. If someone has a good test save with some battles from 1.01.09 that show a difference in 1.02.11, it could help. Thanks.

[Stamb]

ORIGINAL: Hardradi

Whats the altitude and can you show us the Soviet AA guns?

For dive bombers altitude will not make a difference once they are over 5k or 8k. During an attack they will dive and be close to an enemy.

For the topic starter there is just one thing to say.
F

[Dreamslayer]

Does fort level increase AA effectiveness?

[loki100]

no, possibly CPP may give a small bonus - not sure about that but it does help artillery.

its wrong/too high and acknowledged as such, so the issue is how to solve since there has been nothing directly done to increase AA effectiveness it may well be an unintended side effect of fussing around with the artillery routines - or it maybe something else

[KenchiSulla]

Kamikaze!

[panzer51]

its wrong/too high and acknowledged as such, so the issue is how to solve since there has been nothing directly done to increase AA effectiveness it may well be an unintended side effect of fussing around with the artillery routines - or it maybe something else

Well, you can start by setting AA guns effective ceiling properly and not some imaginary number.

[Yogol]

ORIGINAL: loki100

no, possibly CPP may give a small bonus - not sure about that but it does help artillery.

its wrong/too high and acknowledged as such, so the issue is how to solve since there has been nothing directly done to increase AA effectiveness it may well be an unintended side effect of fussing around with the artillery routines - or it maybe something else

Maybe they now shoot every 100 meters, like artillery does.

Regardless, I'll keep all my bombers in reserve for now!

[DeletedUser44]

ORIGINAL: Hardradi

Whats the altitude and can you show us the Soviet AA guns?

Ditto this.

I tend to push altitudes on my missions, even though manual states the GS drops down to 1000 ft when conducting the close air support. (However, the Combat Display shows the altitude as set according to the AD mission)

I also am a little suspect of the arbitrary 1000 ft. Even the Stukas commonly dropped their bombs at 3000 ft.

Historically, there was a lot of variation in bombing altitudes, depending on the aircraft, level of enemy flak, bombing sight capabilities, and target.

[DeletedUser44]

ORIGINAL: Yogol

ORIGINAL: loki100

no, possibly CPP may give a small bonus - not sure about that but it does help artillery.

its wrong/too high and acknowledged as such, so the issue is how to solve since there has been nothing directly done to increase AA effectiveness it may well be an unintended side effect of fussing around with the artillery routines - or it maybe something else

Maybe they now shoot every 100 meters, like artillery does.

Regardless, I'll keep all my bombers in reserve for now!

This should be in the csv combat log I believe, as far as the actual details of the AA fire.

[PeteJC]

I am playing around with a T2 GC as Axis player verses AI on the current 02.11 patch. On average 10% of bombers are lost per GS attack/mission from flak & Operations. Flak on average is 6% and ground about 4%. It does vary but for the most part I am seeing these averages. This is much higher than what I have seen in my previous games with earlier patches, and I am not altering my play in anyway.

Pretty tough to take. Basically, have to use GS very sparingly if not at all. I am thinking of going back to 2.09 version otherwise no GS which makes the air war portion as Axis pretty pointless.

[DeletedUser44]

I posted my 4-turn air losses using latest version (just prior to the hot-fix).

Cannot say I am seeing anything that out-of-wack yet, except maybe OPS.

My GS is using altitude of 16k ft rather than the default of 9k (not that I know this is the issue or not).

I just grabbed the following from a log file at random:

94,4,Ju 88A damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 88A damaged by FLAK
94,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
94,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
94,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R Destroyed by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 87B-R damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 88A damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 88A damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 88A damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 88A damaged by FLAK
94,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
94,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 88A damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 88A damaged by FLAK
94,4,He 111H-3 damaged by FLAK
94,4,Ju 88A damaged by FLAK

When viewed in this context, it makes me uncomfortable.

I really wish they logged the wpn system doing the dmg (instead of 'FLAK', seriously?)

Also, since these were just 'damaged', not entirely sure if 'damaged' even shows up in the AC losses or not.

[PeteJC]

Your losses are negligible. Did you run just 1 sortie? What fixed this?

[DeletedUser44]

Don't look at the current turn numbers. no telling how many sorties were flown at that point.

But just the total (far right column).

This was for turns 1-4.

195 Total Flak losses. And I flew a bunch during the 1st 4 turns.