Air power
Moderators: JAMiAM, ralphtricky
Air power
I just read an interesting article in TAOW zone regarding many aspects, one of which is air power where the author highly recomends attacking the enemy airfields. Does anyone playing as Sov in Fite use something like this? seems a good way to loose all your planes at least before the first snow begins to fall and the Germans have a big shock bonus.. ?
"Tanks forward"
- murphstein
- Posts: 26
- Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 2:39 am
RE: Air power
Speaking of airpower...
When playing "classic" Barbarossa 41 as Axis against PO, I'm setting my JGs for Air Superiority and then using my KGs to attack the Soviet airfields pre-emptively in Turn 1. The theory, I read, is that the Soviet fighters scramble to defend their airfields, and my AS fighters take them on.
So, do the target airfields need to be in range of my fighters for my fighters to engage? In other words, if I send bombers against fields too far away, do they arrive w/o fighter cover?
When playing "classic" Barbarossa 41 as Axis against PO, I'm setting my JGs for Air Superiority and then using my KGs to attack the Soviet airfields pre-emptively in Turn 1. The theory, I read, is that the Soviet fighters scramble to defend their airfields, and my AS fighters take them on.
So, do the target airfields need to be in range of my fighters for my fighters to engage? In other words, if I send bombers against fields too far away, do they arrive w/o fighter cover?
Dan Murphy
RE: Air power
ORIGINAL: murphstein
In other words, if I send bombers against fields too far away, do they arrive w/o fighter cover?
Correct. They will arrive without air cover and be slaughtered. Although that is against the Reds, so they may not do too badly. [:D]
To repeat history in a game is to be predictable.
If you wish to learn more about EA, feel free to pop over to the EA forums Europe Aflame Forums.
If you wish to learn more about EA, feel free to pop over to the EA forums Europe Aflame Forums.

RE: Air power
ORIGINAL: Veers
ORIGINAL: murphstein
In other words, if I send bombers against fields too far away, do they arrive w/o fighter cover?
Correct. They will arrive without air cover and be slaughtered. Although that is against the Reds, so they may not do too badly. [:D]
You'll be alright for the first turn and flying in the green and maybe turn 2 if you haven't exhausted them on turn 1. But after that the air shock values have started to converge and you will take a hiding if you strike too deep

-
SMK-at-work
- Posts: 3396
- Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2000 8:00 am
- Location: New Zealand
RE: Air power
In FitE the LW can literally wipe out the VVS (Sov airforce) close to the front on T1 - it is a classic opening move.
there's a couple of AAR's going in that forum ast het moment that mention it at the start and show screnshots of combat results where Sov air units have taken 100% casualties from airstrikes.
there's a couple of AAR's going in that forum ast het moment that mention it at the start and show screnshots of combat results where Sov air units have taken 100% casualties from airstrikes.
Meum est propisitum in taberna mori
RE: Air power
I have a bunch of Air now built up in Siberia.. will not move it forward till first winter offensive unless HUGE crises.. we are somewhere around t16?.. Smolensk and Kiev are not yet fallen, But he advances on Lenn and that scares me.
"Tanks forward"
- larryfulkerson
- Posts: 42785
- Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 9:06 pm
- Location: Tucson, AZ,usa,sol, milkyway
- Contact:
RE: Air power
ORIGINAL: freeboy
I have a bunch of Air now built up in Siberia.. will not move it forward till first winter offensive unless HUGE crises..
I've put my ( Soviet ) planes on ignore losses ( since they are in reorg status and can't move anyway ) and have stacked an AA unit with them and I'm using them as bait to get the Axis to attack them so the AA units can shoot them down. I figure I can afford the losses much more than the Axis can. I could be wrong though.
Russia’s 41st Army COLLAPSED in Pokrovsk — 25,000 Soldiers KILLED After a RIDICULOUS Russian Assault
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_CtW3GqPQg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_CtW3GqPQg
-
SMK-at-work
- Posts: 3396
- Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2000 8:00 am
- Location: New Zealand
RE: Air power
IMO that's about the best yuo can do with them at that stage Larry - but a canny Axis player will realise they're stacked with AA and ignore them...or perhaps bombard them with artillery!![&o][&o]
Meum est propisitum in taberna mori
- larryfulkerson
- Posts: 42785
- Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 9:06 pm
- Location: Tucson, AZ,usa,sol, milkyway
- Contact:
RE: Air power
ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work
IMO that's about the best yuo can do with them at that stage Larry - but a canny Axis player will realise they're stacked with AA and ignore them...or perhaps bombard them with artillery!!
So um....no, I meant to say that even those that aren't on reorg status....the good to go ones....I have them stacked with AA units as well. And my opponent sometimes goes for the bait and attacks them. Which causes them to go into reorg, but the point is that I'm using my aircraft as bait to have the Axis dude attack them. I'm losing maybe twice as many as he is but still I think I can afford to lose aircraft at that rate and still win in the long run. Maybe I should check my on-hand figures to see if I'm about out of fighters or something.
Most of my losses have been his fighters shooting down my interceptors. I think. Anyway, I've lost a lot of bombers and most of the missions they've been on was interception.
Russia’s 41st Army COLLAPSED in Pokrovsk — 25,000 Soldiers KILLED After a RIDICULOUS Russian Assault
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_CtW3GqPQg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_CtW3GqPQg
- golden delicious
- Posts: 4121
- Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2000 8:00 am
- Location: London, Surrey, United Kingdom
RE: Air power
To get away from the specific case of turn one of a Barbarossa scenario;
Airfield attacks can be dicey. You can lose a lot more aircraft than the defender. Some occasions when they are useful;
a) if your opponent is suffering from considerable air shock
b) if you have considerable air superiority but this is set to change. You might want to keep knocking the enemy down so it takes longer for his air force to build up.
c) if you can get bombers under your fighter cover but away from his. Bombers won't fight back.
d) if your air replacement rate is considerably better than that of your opponent. You might suffer twice the losses he does, but if you are getting four times as many aircraft through replacements, you are still winning the air war.
e) if you are struggling for air superiority and want to sacrifice bombers in exchange for some of his fighters
f) if the target is out of supply. Then all his losses are effectively doubled.
At all times remember that there are two drawbacks to airfield attacks
1) The losses you take
2) The fact your bombers aren't doing something else, potentially more useful. Launching those 80 He-111s on yet another raid to disable the three remaining operational SB-2s is a real waste of their time. Set them on combat support instead.
Airfield attacks can be dicey. You can lose a lot more aircraft than the defender. Some occasions when they are useful;
a) if your opponent is suffering from considerable air shock
b) if you have considerable air superiority but this is set to change. You might want to keep knocking the enemy down so it takes longer for his air force to build up.
c) if you can get bombers under your fighter cover but away from his. Bombers won't fight back.
d) if your air replacement rate is considerably better than that of your opponent. You might suffer twice the losses he does, but if you are getting four times as many aircraft through replacements, you are still winning the air war.
e) if you are struggling for air superiority and want to sacrifice bombers in exchange for some of his fighters
f) if the target is out of supply. Then all his losses are effectively doubled.
At all times remember that there are two drawbacks to airfield attacks
1) The losses you take
2) The fact your bombers aren't doing something else, potentially more useful. Launching those 80 He-111s on yet another raid to disable the three remaining operational SB-2s is a real waste of their time. Set them on combat support instead.
"What did you read at university?"
"War Studies"
"War? Huh. What is it good for?"
"Absolutely nothing."
"War Studies"
"War? Huh. What is it good for?"
"Absolutely nothing."
-
Foggy
- Posts: 110
- Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2006 7:51 pm
- Location: matthewcox2001@gmail.com
RE: Air power
Be really careful in FiTE - I've done well so far w/my air force - have
not attacked enemy airfields
Remember how bad your equipment is -
this is not 1943+, that being said - I have AS - most units are in CS - but you still have to hold the ground!
My goal is to maintain AS+ till the beginning of 1943 - then all those new units can exterminate the Luftwaffe
)
Heinz 57 (Axis) vs. Foggy (Comrades)
not attacked enemy airfields
this is not 1943+, that being said - I have AS - most units are in CS - but you still have to hold the ground!
My goal is to maintain AS+ till the beginning of 1943 - then all those new units can exterminate the Luftwaffe
Heinz 57 (Axis) vs. Foggy (Comrades)
dazed and confused again!
- a white rabbit
- Posts: 1180
- Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2002 3:11 pm
- Location: ..under deconstruction..6N124E..
RE: Air power
..the use of air as potential costly targets can be improved if they're at the limit of the enemy's bombing range, which should also give yr own Air Sup a fighting chance too of being useful and surviving..
..some where behind Moscow's nice in early war Russia, any passing troops can also park there , add their AA to the defence before moving on, and can help fortify..
..i'm not sure but i get the impression that air left to its own devices, on general combat support, if it's very fit will attack airfields, but i virtually never leave air on general CS prefering to assign targets, so don't take this as more than an impression
..some where behind Moscow's nice in early war Russia, any passing troops can also park there , add their AA to the defence before moving on, and can help fortify..
..i'm not sure but i get the impression that air left to its own devices, on general combat support, if it's very fit will attack airfields, but i virtually never leave air on general CS prefering to assign targets, so don't take this as more than an impression
..toodA, irmAb moAs'lyB 'exper'mentin'..,..beàn'tus all..?,
- golden delicious
- Posts: 4121
- Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2000 8:00 am
- Location: London, Surrey, United Kingdom
RE: Air power
ORIGINAL: a white rabbit
..i'm not sure but i get the impression that air left to its own devices, on general combat support, if it's very fit will attack airfields, but i virtually never leave air on general CS prefering to assign targets, so don't take this as more than an impression
Seems unlikely. You probably had the ASA on by accident.
"What did you read at university?"
"War Studies"
"War? Huh. What is it good for?"
"Absolutely nothing."
"War Studies"
"War? Huh. What is it good for?"
"Absolutely nothing."
- a white rabbit
- Posts: 1180
- Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2002 3:11 pm
- Location: ..under deconstruction..6N124E..
RE: Air power
ORIGINAL: golden delicious
ORIGINAL: a white rabbit
..i'm not sure but i get the impression that air left to its own devices, on general combat support, if it's very fit will attack airfields, but i virtually never leave air on general CS prefering to assign targets, so don't take this as more than an impression
Seems unlikely. You probably had the ASA on by accidented.
..yahh, as if..
..it was a scen where for once i actually had serious AS, one of the D-day scens i think, so i left stuff on general CS..
..toodA, irmAb moAs'lyB 'exper'mentin'..,..beàn'tus all..?,
- golden delicious
- Posts: 4121
- Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2000 8:00 am
- Location: London, Surrey, United Kingdom
RE: Air power
ORIGINAL: a white rabbit
..it was a scen where for once i actually had serious AS, one of the D-day scens i think, so i left stuff on general CS..
What about interdiction? You may have seen an end-of-round interdiction strike on a unit situated at an airfield.
"What did you read at university?"
"War Studies"
"War? Huh. What is it good for?"
"Absolutely nothing."
"War Studies"
"War? Huh. What is it good for?"
"Absolutely nothing."
- a white rabbit
- Posts: 1180
- Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2002 3:11 pm
- Location: ..under deconstruction..6N124E..
RE: Air power
ORIGINAL: golden delicious
ORIGINAL: a white rabbit
..it was a scen where for once i actually had serious AS, one of the D-day scens i think, so i left stuff on general CS..
What about interdiction? You may have seen an end-of-round interdiction strike on a unit situated at an airfield.
..you may have a point there, i did say it was only an impression that etc
..toodA, irmAb moAs'lyB 'exper'mentin'..,..beàn'tus all..?,
- murphstein
- Posts: 26
- Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 2:39 am
RE: Air power (newbie follow-up questions)
Newbie here...playing FiTE, Operation Barbarossa and Classic Barbarossa vs. "Elmer"...
How, exactly, does the Axis player "wipe out" the VVS on Turn 1 of these scenarios?
1) I have my fighters set on AS, close to the front, in range of the target Sov airfields. Do I set them to Minimize, Limit or Ignore Losses? My ground units are getting 7-8 combat rounds in, so I'm guessing Min is the right choice.
2) For my bombers attacking the VVS airfields (targeting fighters, fields with no ground units, fields with bigger stacks, fields under my own fighter cover), I assume I use the same loss settings as my covering fighters, i.e., Min Losses to get maximum rounds in?
3) As I understand it, I need to launch at least 2 rounds of airfield attacks in Turn 1, one to disorganize the VVS, and the second to wallop them on the ground. Do I continue launching round after round of airfield attacks, or does the law of diminishing returns suggest I stop after 2 or 3 attacks? I'm playing with FOW on, so I have only a rough idea (initial VVS deployments - % damaged per raid) of what targets remain at what fields in the later rounds of attack.
4) If I overrun an airfield with my ground units, the Sov air units retreat to another field, and are presumably disorganized? Is it "better" to not overrun the airfields and let the LW attack VVS units spotted by my ground units, or to overrun the fields and hunt down the survivors further to the rear in later rounds?
5) And maybe for another thread, can someone explain when and why the Axis would want to destroy bridges in Classic Barbarossa? I get the general operational doctrine of sealing off the killing zone to prevent reinforcement by the enemy, but in this particular scenario, movement penalties for crossing non-super-rivers seem to be insignificant.
Thanks,
dpm
How, exactly, does the Axis player "wipe out" the VVS on Turn 1 of these scenarios?
1) I have my fighters set on AS, close to the front, in range of the target Sov airfields. Do I set them to Minimize, Limit or Ignore Losses? My ground units are getting 7-8 combat rounds in, so I'm guessing Min is the right choice.
2) For my bombers attacking the VVS airfields (targeting fighters, fields with no ground units, fields with bigger stacks, fields under my own fighter cover), I assume I use the same loss settings as my covering fighters, i.e., Min Losses to get maximum rounds in?
3) As I understand it, I need to launch at least 2 rounds of airfield attacks in Turn 1, one to disorganize the VVS, and the second to wallop them on the ground. Do I continue launching round after round of airfield attacks, or does the law of diminishing returns suggest I stop after 2 or 3 attacks? I'm playing with FOW on, so I have only a rough idea (initial VVS deployments - % damaged per raid) of what targets remain at what fields in the later rounds of attack.
4) If I overrun an airfield with my ground units, the Sov air units retreat to another field, and are presumably disorganized? Is it "better" to not overrun the airfields and let the LW attack VVS units spotted by my ground units, or to overrun the fields and hunt down the survivors further to the rear in later rounds?
5) And maybe for another thread, can someone explain when and why the Axis would want to destroy bridges in Classic Barbarossa? I get the general operational doctrine of sealing off the killing zone to prevent reinforcement by the enemy, but in this particular scenario, movement penalties for crossing non-super-rivers seem to be insignificant.
Thanks,
dpm
Dan Murphy
RE: Air power
ORIGINAL: golden delicious
ORIGINAL: a white rabbit
..it was a scen where for once i actually had serious AS, one of the D-day scens i think, so i left stuff on general CS..
What about interdiction? You may have seen an end-of-round interdiction strike on a unit situated at an airfield.
To GD, Interdiction strike? I thought all the targting attacks behing the lines, like when I move my sov trains and theu are attacked by enemy air in "Combat support" role? HELP What settings actually cause the air units to attack enemy units moving around during the enemies turn
"Tanks forward"
- golden delicious
- Posts: 4121
- Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2000 8:00 am
- Location: London, Surrey, United Kingdom
RE: Air power
ORIGINAL: freeboy
To GD, Interdiction strike? I thought all the targting attacks behing the lines, like when I move my sov trains and theu are attacked by enemy air in "Combat support" role? HELP What settings actually cause the air units to attack enemy units moving around during the enemies turn
Interdiction.
There's supposed to be a fixed number of interdiction strikes calculated at the start of the turn, and if these don't get used up during movement, the game makes up for it at the end of each round.
"What did you read at university?"
"War Studies"
"War? Huh. What is it good for?"
"Absolutely nothing."
"War Studies"
"War? Huh. What is it good for?"
"Absolutely nothing."



