Strats Resupply Efficiency: A case study

[Lusche]

I have read a few times now that one reason why attacking the strats would be "pointless" is the 'fact' that they are allegedly resupplied so fast.

But how fast, and more importantly: How efficient is it really? Let's take a closer look at this specific question:

The attacker:
It takes one 90 minute B-29 sortie for a single player to get 3 fully up key factories down by about 25-30% each. That would double the downtime to about 60 minutes of all corresponding items on all bases.

The resuppers:
Factory downtime is 180 minutes. A one way goon trip (ditching at the strats) takes 6-8 minutes depending on map, let's assume 7.* 


How long does it take until one factory has been resupped back to 100%?

0 player 180mins
1 player ~115 mins = ~1.9 manhours of effort
2 player ~85 mins = ~2.8 manhours
5 player ~50 mins = ~4.2 manhours
10 player ~30 mins = ~5 manhours

And thats just to restore one factory. Compare that to the 1.5 MH used to hit three of them.









*= Bomber and resupply run numbers based on my detailed logs of more than 300 strategic attacks and more than 50 resupply runs

[lyric1]

You think that actual statistical facts involving math will change the perception of people in this game.

I do enjoy your fact finding though keep it coming.

[Lusche]

You think that actual statistical facts involving math will change the perception of people in this game.

Not really, I've been around her for too long   

Whatever players want to believe, they will believe, no matter what

[lyric1]

Not really, I've been around her for too long   

Whatever players want to believe, they will believe, no matter what

 

[Arlo]

Well, that seems fine by me. What am I missing, L? The strat buffs are rewarded with a lot of points for objects. The lost strats will either hamper their side due to 3 hours of country-wide logistical problems or as few as 30 minutes of country-wide logistical problems with 30 players pulled from action and dedicating themselves to rebuilding the strats (all three). If more strat runs get through (with little or no effort to intercept) then it's quite possible that a dedicated strategic bombing of one side or another will assist the guys left that are attacking bases and may result in the coveted map-reset win thing. Luckily, all sides have strategic bombing capability as well as the ability to interdict (whether through high alt fighter patrols just as dedicated to flying long hours in AH just to stop the strat bombing ... or ... rocket planes, which don't require such long hours and dedication).

In real life the destruction of a factory by bombers was quicker than the rebuilding of it. If that wasn't so, there wouldn't have been strategic bombing.

[bozon]

In real life the destruction of a factory by bombers was quicker than the rebuilding of it. If that wasn't so, there wouldn't have been strategic bombing.

In real life strategic bombing was incredibly inefficient at creating a real dent in the industry. It took hundred of bombers to severely damage one factory and usually production was only slowed down a little but never halted. I personally think that the whole strategic bombing campaign of WWII was a net loss to the allies, but that is just me.

[Lusche]

Well, that seems fine by me. What am I missing, L? The strat buffs are rewarded with a lot of points for objects.

Actually in terms of score the return is very little. It totally pales in comparison to hitting town centers. Hitting the probably most important strategic target, the City, is particularly horrible for the score.

If more strat runs get through (with little or no effort to intercept) then it's quite possible that a dedicated strategic bombing of one side or another will assist the guys left that are attacking bases and may result in the coveted map-reset win thing. Luckily, all sides have strategic bombing capability as well as the ability to interdict (whether through high alt fighter patrols just as dedicated to flying long hours in AH just to stop the strat bombing ... or ... rocket planes, which don't require such long hours and dedication.

On a global scale, the strategic  gameplay part didn't really develop on the player side. While the attacks on the strats had definitely increased, the strat game is still largely uncoordinated and random. And after 9 months now, I doubt it will change.

While I never expected that the new strats would be a total gamechanger, with everybody suddenly leaving the old "tactical" paths, I initially would have expected that there may appear one or two "strat squads", which would really use the new opportunities to support their side.
And the potential is there: A small squad of 5-10 players could very much cripple one front: 2-4 B-29s Hitting the strats systematically, with the rest quickly porking front line bases two sectors deep. They could help their side while taking a leave from the same old "smash & grab missions".

But I didn't see that really happen on a regular scale. Guess smash&grab is still more attractive, an evening is a wasted one if you didn't get a "base XX was captured by" message.

[Arlo]

In real life strategic bombing was incredibly inefficient at creating a real dent in the industry. It took hundred of bombers to severely damage one factory and usually production was only slowed down a little but never halted. I personally think that the whole strategic bombing campaign of WWII was a net loss to the allies, but that is just me.

Perception of how efficient strategic bombing really was or was not (as well as opinion of how much
it did or did not accomplish) aside;

Here's where it gets tricky: There is no way AHII can practically emulate hundreds of inefficient bombers.
What's done in place are flights of efficient bombers. In AHII there is not enough industry spread across
the map to emulate slowing industry down by small percentages (and not enough player instant gratification
in such). AHII is a microcosm, compared to the real war. Yet it still attempts to offer players the excitement
of the strategic bombing experience (for those who prefer that). Such also offers the challenge of
intercepting them ... for players interested in that.

[Arlo]

Actually in terms of score the return is very little. It totally pales in comparison to hitting town centers. Hitting the probably most important strategic target, the City, is particularly horrible for the score.

On a global scale, the strategic  gameplay part didn't really develop on the player side. While the attacks on the strats had definitely increased, the strat game is still largely uncoordinated and random. And after 9 months now, I doubt it will change.

While I never expected that the new strats would be a total gamechanger, with everybody suddenly leaving the old "tactical" paths, I initially would have expected that there may appear one or two "strat squads", which would really use the new opportunities to support their side.
And the potential is there: A small squad of 5-10 players could very much cripple one front: 2-4 B-29s Hitting the strats systematically, with the rest quickly porking front line bases two sectors deep. They could help their side while taking a leave from the same old "smash & grab missions".

But I didn't see that really happen on a regular scale. Guess smash&grab is still more attractive, an evening is a wasted one if you didn't get a "base XX was captured by" message.

Score is score. That's an easy adjustment by HT. But the system you describe sounds
solid. So ... it's the players.

[Lusche]

Score is score.

Of course it is. I was just correcting the notion that "The strat buffs are rewarded with a lot of points for objects" 

[Arlo]

Of course it is. I was just correcting the notion that "The strat buffs are rewarded with a lot of points for objects"  

Depends on what they hit, specifically, from what I read in your post. The original
discussed three factories.  I'm willing to bet a flight of 3 B-29s rack up quite a lot.

[Lusche]

Depends on what they hit, specifically, from what I read in your post. The original
discussed three factories.  I'm willing to bet a flight of 3 B-29s rack up quite a lot.

It's still pales in comparison to town centers. You gett much less score points, and the bombing hit % will be much smaller, as the strat targets are much more dispersed.

[Arlo]

It's still pales in comparison to town centers. You gett much less score points, and the bombing hit % will be much smaller, as the strat targets are much more dispersed.

I'm not sure I would promote condensing them, myself. I would suggest more strat targets spread out
over the rear lines of every chess-nation.

Then again, that's a map-remaking chore of high degree.

Are you arguing for greater score there to attract more strat runs? I would think the attraction
would involve more than score for the run. Maybe not.

[Lusche]

Are you arguing for greater score there to attract more strat runs?

Not being an AH subscriber, I try not to argue explicitly for or against any changes in the game. 

[Arlo]

Not being an AH subscriber, I try not to argue explicitly for or against any changes in the game.  

You were playing last month, Snailman.

So pie-chart baking and analysis is now your true hobby and it has nothing to do with
opinion, desire or anything?