Aces High Bulletin Board
Special Events Forums => Scenario General => Topic started by: jordi on November 08, 2003, 12:18:10 PM
-
This will be a mix of 8th AF and RAF Missions vs. the LW. The RAF missions will be flown at DUSK ( NOT DARK ).
We have a new Euro Terrain that we are working on for the Scenario.
Proposed dates will be in the Month of FEB 04.
We are finalizing the Rules and info as we speak.
We are REALLY Looking to get some dedicated Bomber Squadrons to sign up for this. The out come of the scenario is dependent on the Escorts getting the Bombers to the Target, the Bombers getting their Bomb loads ON the Target and the Escorts getting as many of those bombers home ! All the while the LW is trying to STOP the bombers from reaching the target, making hard enough that those that do make it to the target MISS and trying to shoot down and stragglers that get separated on the way home back to England. Every Bomber / Crew shoot down is 1 less that will return on the next mission ( Figuratively not literally ).
One aspect that will come into play is the actual ACCURACY on the bomb drops the bomber groups achieve. It does no good for the war effort if you get to the target but you can not put the pickle in the barrel !
It is also important for the Escort Groups to be aware that getting the bombers to and from the target is more important than individual kill totals.
The same is true for the LW. Racking up Fighter kills does nothing to keep the bombers away from the factories they are trying to bomb. Also living for another flight is more important than a suicide run against outnumbered odds.
We will post some more info in this thread as we get more stuff nailed down.
----
We will also be looking for Potential Squadron Leaders and Command staff postions and opposing CO's
Thanks,
-
In the vote choices the scenario changes from a 4 frame/Saturday only event to a 5 or 7 frame event. I think there must be a mistake there.
-
No,
The vote is to see if enough people even WANT any weekday Evening Frames.
So if you want it to remain the same - pick Choice A.
-
Please POST your Scenario comments here.
Please POST your RURH POLL Thoughts her also
RUHR Scenario poll thread can be found here.
http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=100882&referrerid=4535
Thanks,
-
Well.... 3+2=5 and 4+3=7.
I don't think I could give 5 frames let alone 7 frames to one scenario.
Edit: Put me down for 4 frames in any time slot you settle on :D
Voted A. -- Because it's 4 frames and my friends in Europe can play. They're more likely to fly LW then the US guys and without LW pilots it won't be fun so I guess I'm looking for them to come try to shoot me down. ;)
-
That's it. We can not play at 10 PM EST (4 AM here). Maybe if you change times, i'll vote for more than 4 frames. I'll wait for possible changes and vote.
-
Hi All,
Definately A,
If you want weekday frames can I suggest Friday, More people have Saturday off than mid week and any weekday frame at US friendly time rules out most of Europe. (Unless they fancy getting up at..... or staying up until....... 4am.
TTFN
snafu
-
Originally posted by snafu
If you want weekday frames can I suggest Friday, More people have Saturday off than mid week and any weekday frame at US friendly time rules out most of Europe. (Unless they fancy getting up at..... or staying up until....... 4am.
TTFN
snafu
Would LOVE to use Fridays - but that is the same time as Friday Night Squad OPS and we do not want to displace BOTH Squad Ops and CAP just for the Scenario.
-
But you are willing to displace european timed scenario players by running the weekday frames?
RGJ
-
Gents,
I'm a euro player (gmt+1) and a co-designer of the Ruhr event.
What we are trying to do is a more complex scenario, but we will not go that way if you don't like this :)
The reason we are proposing the weekday US friendlt frames is simple - we can propose it :)
There are more US pilots that could fly a weekday frames then Euro pilots that could do the same in a Euro friendly time.
Starting from this point, we decided to propose the idea of doing a "minor" frames just for the pilots that can attend them.
We are sure that we will not have a full roster there, however if we can run a minro frame (small mission) for 100 pilots, it's still worth trying (in our opinion).
I will not attend that ones as well, but from my point of view i'd like to give a US pilots a chance to have fun.
Now, if the Euro crowd (like me :) ) would like to register for a Euro friendly weekday frame(s) or the Ruhr scenario - i'd love to give it a go as well :)
So basically it's about the numbers here.
Once looking at this i can't see a US pilots voting for the weekday frame (yet) but i see Euros voting against it. If it will stay that way we just won't run it and will stick to Saturdays only. If some more Euros will express the desire of attending a euro friendly weekday frmae we will most likely discuss and propose a Euro fromedly minor frames :)
It's all in your hands folks!
-
Hi all !
vote: - A -
I'm euro player but I suggest Friday :aok
Wake up at 4.00 am ??? - why not :lol
dasko
-
Dasko,
to be sure your vote got counted (i may forget about that one here!) please vote in this thread :)
|
|
V
http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=100882
-
Since there aren't a lot of details in this thread I will make a couple of suggestions.
Dusk is worse then nighttime imho. The red glow makes it harder to see then regular night.
My suggestion would be to go ahead with full night. I am not sure how you have the radar set but imho the Germans should utilize gci's just like in BoB. With radar bases set and assigned to a 3rd country. They would then be manned by an axis player who relays radar information to the axis command.
Here's an interesting link:
http://www.stable.demon.co.uk/general/bomb.htm
The LW had decent radar and even "window" wasn't all that effective in masking the bombers. The LW used many different tactics to over come this. Night bombing of the Ruhr is historic and I think that night in combination of good gci it should be pretty fun. Planes with onboard radar are a problem but this can be made up with the neon icons and good gci.
I hate nighttime. I didn’t want night in Okinawa. It turned out to be fun. I also hate dusk more then night. Nighttime might not be popular with some folks but the LW put far fewer planes up at night compared to daytime. The same can be said for allied night fighters.
Now the night fighter mossies had radar as well so this would need to be addressed as well. Maybe allow a few allied gci’s to man the some of the 3rd country radar bases. They can then relay info to the mossies.
BTW as long as you keep the Saturday frames so I don’t think it matters what happens during the week. The only problem would be scoring. If the during the week one side is seriously outnumbered then its unfair to all the participants to allow what happens during the weekday frames to have a large impact on the event overall.
I vote for staying with the tried and true.
One of my ex-squaddies wants to bribe some one into allowing a few Ta 152s. Name your price and I will have him contact you. :p
-
hi Batz :)
We are going to go with something like this:
(http://www.raf303.org/filip/dusk1.jpg)
(http://www.raf303.org/filip/dusk2.jpg)
also, Germans will have a 3rd country radar controllers and radar sites (the Kammehuber line and himmelbettach" radar sites :)
Unfortunatelly Ta's won't be included as it's goaan be mid '43 ;)
Thanks for the inpot and for the link... i will read the info there for sure! :)
-
Yeah I know what "dusk" in ah looks like and the red glow on the western horizon is worse (atleast imo) then "night time".
Ofcourse at night anyone who can will just adjust their gamma/brightness to make it "not so much like night". Neither setting is perfect but theres not much else.
-
I have voted A, but I also like the sound of having 'mini frames' during the week. Would it be possible to have some of the mini frames at Euro friendly times?
cheers
Ravs
-
Can you give more ditales - at least high level design:
[list=1]
- Historical introduction
- The plane set
- Life rules - multiple or single or something other
- Some outstanding new ideas as I understand night fights will be.
- Other possible feathers - not detalised yet.
I think this scenario can bring a lot of players. Personaly the best scenario I had participated in was Nieman (of course Kadesh is better becuse it is my design :D ). It get great numbers - 160(!) for VVS and 100 for LW. At least that I could see in logs. I think this campaign - not pacific theatre (like Okinava, Guadalcanal, Midway) with later war planeset can bring good numbers. It is scenario more siutable for Euro players than Pcaific that is well known for US players.
-
if the event is '43 we can guess
Allies:
B-17G ... 6-43
P-47D-11 ... 3-43 (sub for earler ds; d11 service 1-44)
P-51B ... 12-43 ? (kinda late I would think)
Lancaster III ... 3-42 (the ah lanc has 2 x 50 in the tail which means its a '44 variant)
Mosquito Mk VI ... 7-43 (nightfighter)
Bf 109G-6 ... 2-43
Fw 190A-5 ... 3-43 (we have no a6)
Bf 110G-2 ... 5-42 (day/night fighter)
Maybe the b26. The typhie and the spit 9 don't have a roll that I can tell. I dont see a need for the boston or the a20g.
If the rules are to bomb the ruhr industry all the allies need is the large bombers (lanc & 17). Escorts (p47d11 maybe last frame with p51bs). A nightfighter (mossie).
The axis need a nightfighter (110g) an intercepter (g6) and bomber killers (a5).
That would be my guess anyway.
-
hmmm... really good young Jedi! really good ;)
we will fill you with details soon :)
-
I think you should try maybe back to back runs on weekends at different times so our euro friends can play to. maybe a saturday after dinner time in US witch would be late night for euro and a Sunday early for US and it would be after dinner for euro? Or the other way around .If we run on weekdays it will cut the numbers with our euro friends because they have to goto work, and I think that will hurt our numbers. But i like the 2 day thing . I hate waiting a week for the next frame . If you run 2 days a week maybe squads will make it a squad thing and use it as a squad night.:D
-
What about the 2 frames /day that we tryied earlier.
So the scenario has first frame 1 for 2h and then a 30min break or so before frame 2 starts.
-
We did that with the BoB scenario. I was axis Co and I wouldn’t want the Ruhr command staffs to have to go through it. It ends up "sand lot" because there's no time for planning in between frames.
It is not so bad on the "defenders" (raf in BoB; lw in Ruhr) but attackers need to be able to co-ordinate their plans. 30 min or an hour between frames is not enough time to evaluate the previous frame and come up with a decent plan.
We also tried Sat and Sun frames but Sun is NFL time in the US. Sat is a "work at home day" for quite a few.
Weekday frames exclude many non-US players.
Scenario numbers haven’t been as high as expected over the past few events. I don’t think that adding a weekday event will help anything. If anything you may split the numbers that we currently get in the Saturday frames. The question is how many more folks will fly if you add weekday frames? Will weekday frames ensure a high player count per frame? Or will we end up with more players overall but less players in each frame?
Then you have to decide the overall impact of the "extra" frames will have on "scoring". It’s hardly fair to have 1 frame where only 30 guys show up impact the overall outcome.
It’s my opinion that The Saturday frames reach more folks per frame. We may get more folks in the event if stretched over 7 frames and weekdays. But if you end up with less players per frame then nothing much was accomplished.
From my experience most events are designed around a given number of players. At times when the numbers are low in a frame it has a real impact not only on the planning but fun level. (Some guys show up and out of their flight of 10 3 show up etc …)
Anyway my 2 cents
-
Is there a chance the USAAF bombers could have more "general" targets rather than individual buildings?
I mention this as, IMHO, most pilots aren't completely up to high accuracy bombing... and as we all know even those brave chaps during the war would drop when the formation leader dropped.
perhaps we could try either counting the number of craters at an enemy target or even just say a percentage of bombers have to drop on the airfield/city etc.
Just tryin to keep it "playable/doable for the bomber pilots, if the bomber pilot attendance drops it will effect the "feel" of the scenario.
CM team no serious criticism intended at all/
-
Originally posted by Batz
if the event is '43 we can guess
Allies:
P-51B ... 12-43 ? (kinda late I would think)
That would be my guess anyway.
That's right fella, NO P51's were gonna be around for another 6 months at least, and then not in substantial numbers for a while after that, as for the Spit 9, with a DT it's range wasn't that short of a P47D at that time.
In mid '43 the T'bolts of the 56Th FG were able to stay aloft for 2 hours and 12 mins, I must dig out a picture I have of the ranges of the fighters overlaid on a map of europe.
IMHO I reckon it should be T'Bolts mostly in the scenario
-
Hiya Witch :),
I 100% agree with you. When designing an event that has "bombers" as a crucial part the focus should be on area bombing. Maybe if and when HT gets the ai done for AH2:ToD he will allow the cms to use the ai script to supplement bomber numbers in the events. Bombers aren't a big draw especially with the difficulty some folks have with the calibration.
If targets are laid out with "area" bombing (like in big week) in mind we may see bomber numbers increase. This also could mean tighter formations.
For instance each bomber group may have 1 or 2 guys who are really proficient with the calibration. If the rest of his flight flies tight they can drop "on lead". Of course they would need to practice to avoid "creep back" where the follow up bombers sequentially drop short. But it adds an element of immersion.
There are other aircraft in the AH plane set better utilized for pinpoint bombing. Bombers should fly high (not to high :p), in formation and area bomb their targets. This allows better escort techniques and the bombers are better able to defend themselves. With individual buildings formations get spread out as individual pilots attempt to get a line and calibrate for their specific building. It’s during these times that the bombers are easily shot down.
With better targets, better survivability and more immersion we may be able to get more bomber guys involved in scenarios.
The types of targets and their lay out are important.
ps are you gonna Co this one? We need a tie breaker :p
Just kidding! I have been retired any way
About the spits and typh I have np with them being included but could they fly all the way to the Ruhr Valley?
-
blackwitch, Batz,
Come on guys, that's not the way to go. It reminds me a an event recently when the CM said so long as the bombs hit anywhere on the tile they would be counted. We proved targets can be hit in Guadalcanal and the biggest problem I see is making a map with really big City or Factory targets so there is something left to bomb after the lead formations pass over. A City size tile can be wiped clean twice over with only 4 B-17 formations.
-
No what I mean is targets like in Big Week and like Guadalcanal.
By area bombing I mean like drop your load on a grouping of various buildings as opposed to like in BoB where you had to bomb the red shed 2 trees down from the green truck. :)
If you have the Big Week map take a look at the targets. A factory complex is a collection of various building and structures. What I mean is they need to be large enough and dense enough to make "strategic bombing" more realistic then "kill that hanger".
The scoring would be like if XX% of the buildings are destroyed = XX% reduction in that factory complex's production etc.
I know you guys can hit anything but unfortunately folks like you are hard to find. :)
You arent just dropping bombs on an area of land but an area of structures that represent a single target.
-
Think CEP for the Bombers.
Think Bomber groups competing to see who gets the better resutls.
Think of Escort groups whos goal is to get as many bombers HOME with 10 guys ALIVE in each bomber as possible.
Think of the LW trying to live and stay alive for the next mission.
-
Think CEP for the Bombers.
What is CEP?
-
Originally posted by Batz
What is CEP?
Circular Error Probable
-Sik
-
Low levels of precision led to massive amounts of damage in Germany and Japan in World War II. The military measures precision in a complex term called "circular error probable," or CEP. That means the distance from the intended point of impact that at least 50 percent of munitions can be expected to land within.
The CEP of bombs dropped from the WWII-era B-17 was 3,300 feet. Only half of the bombs dropped were expected to land within 3,300 feet of their intended target. "If you wanted to have a high probability of destruction of a target of 60 (feet) by 100 feet, you'd need about 1,500 airplanes and about 9,000 bombs," Crowder said. ( Not sure how ACCURATE those numbers are ? )
----
Taken from some notes made by a B29 Bombadier.
Part One: What is CEP?
In order to qualify as a bombardier, a bombardier in training dropped a
total of 100 single releases from varying altitudes to establish his
"Probable Circular Error" (CEP). His CEP had to be less than 200 feet to
qualify him as a visual bombardier.
Before he began to drop bombs for official scoring, he was given ground
training on a simulator and in the classroom, then was allowed to drop 10
practice releases (during a series of three practice missions), to "familiarize"
him with the task. His CEP for the practice missions had to be within 500
feet before he was allowed to drop bombs for qualification.
If it was not, he was given a check ride and intensive training for 10 more
releases during a series of practice missions, then was given another check
ride. He faced elimination (was "Washed Out" of the course) if his CEP had
not been reduced to below 500 feet for the total of 20 practice releases.
After qualifying as a bombardier, every release he made was figured into his
CEP for his entire career.
This CEP enabled the mission planners to predict his performance as a
bombardier making his own aimed drops, and additionally gave them planning
factors to predict the damage that could be expected on a given target from
any altitude of release, thus helping to select the drop altitude for that mission.
It also helped them to plan formation size for the "Toggleers" who dropped
on that lead bombardier's release; and how many formations of planes to send
over a given target; as well as what bomb load to put on them.
So you see, CEP was a very important planning factor, for based on it,
planners were able to select the lead bombardiers; size of the formations;
number of formations; altitude of release; bomb load; aiming point(s) and
intervalometer setting, in order to destroy a given target.
---
-
Yeah I got it. I looked it after I made my reply.
The question now is; will the scoring be based on the amount of "tonnage on target" (amount of ordnance dropped in 3,300ft circle around a target) or will you have to actually "blow stuff up"?
The types of factory "complexes" used in the Big Week event were perfect for area bombing. There was plenty of stuff to blow up at complexes and there were quite a few of them.
If you are going for CEP/tonnage on target what are the targets (factories, cities etc)?
How many bombers?
How many bombs inside the target area?
See what you started!!! :p
Actually, these questions can be left to the cm's and side co's. Anything is better then the third buiding on the right behind the green truck. :)
-
:mad: So, if we want to make sure we score high in this setup we salvo 30 at delay .05 and put all the bombs in the middle - bomb load determined wheather scoring hits or tonage. Not particularly satisfying for guys who like to blow things up. One of these days I'd like to see huge cities with factories where we get points for hitting the factories and loose points for hitting the houses and hospitals. Maybe in the CT.
-
Originally posted by Easyscor
:mad: So, if we want to make sure we score high in this setup we salvo 30 at
<> SNIP <>
where we get points for hitting the factories and loose points for hitting the houses and hospitals. Maybe in the CT.
Hiya Batz :aok
To all...
As my squadron are seriously considering signing up for bombers can I just add that we shouldn't get too fixated on this aspect, its importance is only going to be if it's related to a Victory condition, to me we should forget bombing accuracy and concentrate on how many planes are shot down, remember the scenario is to simulate the 8th's struggle against the LW.
In reality this meant USAAF bombers flying in "Groups", flying as a whole unit - like a shoal of fish - the USAAF fighters had to protect the bombers as much as possible during thier flight, range permitting, and the LW of course had to try to stop the bombers.
A more important question is going to be how far are the Thunderbolts going to be allowed to escort the bombers? in mid '43 rhey couldn't go all the way to the Ruhr but the bombers still went that far and suffered heavy losses.
IMHO if you stop the escorts too far back into France the LW will (smartly) just wait till the escorts reverse and then they'll "have at" the bombers. We need scenario playability and enjoyability.
I foresee the biggest whine will be the lethality of the B-17's guns.
But you don't need to be Einstien to predict that
-
WE are working on the RIGHT BALANCE between all aspects of the Scenario.
It will not be perfect of course.
But you have the right FEEL for the Scenario.
The GOAL is to get the Bombers OVER THE TARGET - DROP ON TARGET - and then get them home !
We are going to work real hard to get as many DEDICATED BOMBER Squads involved to make this work.
The Escort groups main concern is protecting the bombers - not racking up individual Kill totals and streaks - if they can drive off a Wave of LW Interceptors and NOT get into a chase LOW and on the deck therfore leaving the bombers unprotected they have done thier job !
The LW will have some 3rd country radar setup to help vector them into the possible bomber formations. They will need very good communications to coordiante the right attacks at the right place to inflict the maximum damage while keep thier loses to a minimum so they can live and fight another day.
-
Originally posted by jordi
WE are working on the RIGHT BALANCE between all aspects of the Scenario.
It will not be perfect of course.
But you have the right FEEL for the Scenario.
The LW will have some 3rd country radar setup to help vector them into the possible bomber formations. They will need very good communications to coordiante the right attacks at the right place to inflict the maximum damage while keep thier loses to a minimum so they can live and fight another day.
Hi Jordi :D
However the detail works out I'm sure it'll be FUN :)
whomever is going to be the LW RADAR controller, if he wants some tips I can pass on what I learnt from when we did this in the BofB scenario (though I understand (s)he'll want to do it their own way).
To those considering being a RADAR Controller (I take it there'll be more than 1) DEFINATELY give it a go, all those that did it the BofB scenario REALLY enjoyed it, it makes it more "REAL" for the pilots as well being vectored.
ps, you got a commander for the 2nd TAF yet ?
-
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by jordi
OK - now I understand.
We are looking at Summer / Fall of 43 for the time frame.
Does this answer your question ?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes.. and no
I suppose what I'm asking is will the USAAF and the RAF have one strategy and work together OR will the RAF and the USAAF have different strategies and work seperately (more historically accurate)?
__________________
Witch
56 (Firebirds) Squadron RAF
2nd T.A.F.
----
Ok - If we end up going with just 4 Frames we are looking at probably just 1 FRAME of RAF Bombing. Since the CO will be the SAME for The Allied Side for all frames then it is really a moot point in all reality.
-
Originally posted by blackwitch
...can I just add that we shouldn't get too fixated on this aspect, (bombing accuracy)...
Yeah, I know you guys are right but it's pretty gamey and not particularly fair sounding to the LW side either. I'm sure it will be fun and Jordi will make something workable so just keep up the good work.:aok
How about a small bonus for accuracy? ;)
-
Originally posted by Easyscor
I'm sure it will be fun and Jordi will make something workable so just keep up the good work.:aok
How about a small bonus for accuracy? ;)
Where do I send the $5's ??
Thanks,
-
:rofl
-
Originally posted by jordi
quote:
Ok - If we end up going with just 4 Frames we are looking at probably just 1 FRAME of RAF Bombing. Since the CO will be the SAME for The Allied Side for all frames then it is really a moot point in all reality.
Ahhh right :)
My mistake I thought that the allied side would have the RAF AND USAAF flying for all 4 frames.
-
Why not do it like in Okinawa with a night and day periods in a single frame?
Ofcourse this would double the length of a single frame. 3 hours frames 1 1/2 hours each?
What's the map scale? Are the bombers/allies air starting?
You may loose numbers at night but even so as long as you have the correct ratio of night fighters vrs bombers.
BTW who is making the map? Or are you using an existing map?
If you a making a map keep in mind "Flakfestung Ruhr". Or as some allies called it "Happy Valley" and "Land of no return".
On the TE forum I posted these links:
http://www.butler98.freeserve.co.uk/gradnetzb.htm
http://wejones.ftdata.com/wejones/plaumap2.jpg
-
Originally posted by Batz
Why not do it like in Okinawa with a night and day periods in a single frame?
Ofcourse this would double the length of a single frame. 3 hours frames 1 1/2 hours each?
You may loose numbers at night but even so as long as you have the correct ratio of night fighters vrs bombers.
Jordi - Personally - too long for me - just my opinion
What's the map scale? Are the bombers/allies air starting?
BTW who is making the map? Or are you using an existing map?
If you a making a map keep in mind "Flakfestung Ruhr". Or as some allies called it "Happy Valley" and "Land of no return".
Jordi - A new custom map is being designed by the AH Terrain team. It will have England and the RUHR "Happy Valley " in it with the right mix of FLAK to make it live up to its namesake. It will also be designed to be used by the CT Arena and other Scenario uses.
On the TE forum I posted these links:
http://www.butler98.freeserve.co.uk/gradnetzb.htm
http://wejones.ftdata.com/wejones/plaumap2.jpg
The terrain guys may have used that first link already !
Thanks !
-
PLEASE! YOU GOT TO HAVE some B-26's for a Diversionary Raid to throw the Krauts off! The 8th AF never launched the B-17's on a raid with out sending out all kinds of diversions.
Besides, our squad wants the B-26 slot. :D
-
Will there be base capture - or it would be based on Bombruns and Night interseptions only?
Will the icons be long for nightfights? You still do not have radar on Mossie and 110.
Will there be depends of some capabilities on destroyed targets - like in Kadesh - if Fuel Factory destroyed - it reduces fuel on all the fields to 100% or 75% like that?
-
Originally posted by Jester
PLEASE! YOU GOT TO HAVE some B-26's for a Diversionary Raid to throw the Krauts off! The 8th AF never launched the B-17's on a raid with out sending out all kinds of diversions.
Besides, our squad wants the B-26 slot. :D
Sorry - we are doing a different Time Frame - 1943'ish not 1944'ish.
Most of the B-26's were operating in the MED not with the B17's of the 8th AF at that time.
My bad - by Late July '43 B-26's were in action along with the 8th Af ( VIII Air Support Command ). BUT the raids were about 5% the size of the B17 raids. To simulate this we would have to send 1 B26' for 20 B17's we send. Not enough to really work into the scenario.
Now if it were a 1944 "Ruhr Raiders" Scenario -d ifferent story.
You are more than welcome to hop in a B17 or a LANC and help out !
-
Originally posted by artik
Will there be base capture - or it would be based on Bombruns and Night interseptions only?
Jordi - No Capture - Just a determination on how well the Bombers did at the target factoring in lossed inflicted upon them by the LW.
Will the icons be long for nightfights? You still do not have radar on Mossie and 110.
Jordi - We will have 3rd country radar on I think for the LW Night Interceptors so they can be directed toward possible inbound flights of Bombers.
Will there be depends of some capabilities on destroyed targets - like in Kadesh - if Fuel Factory destroyed - it reduces fuel on all the fields to 100% or 75% like that?
Jordi - No real attrition like that at all.
-
What, no P38 escorts? They were the only ones keeping the bombers alive until the P51 could be delivered en masse.
;)
-
Yes - There will be P38 escorts.
:)
-
The p38l is a later variant then the p51d and g10 and entered service the same time as the 262.
P-38L ... 7-44
Bf 109G-10 ... 3-44
Me 262 ... 7-44
Even the p47d11 is late for this event. Since we have no C or early d (d5) there’s really no choice.
However, if such a late variant as the p38l were to be included then pushing the whole event into 44 would be better that way, as the LW would have the correct planes. The AH g6 is the early version and we have no a6. The event already starts with earlier LW planes vs. later USAAF stuff.
If it were 44 you could include the p 38, p51, g10, d9, 262 etc....
The 1st battle of the Ruhr started on the 5th March 1943 and was to go on for five months until 25th July. I assumed this was the time frame that this event was planned around. If so the p38l certainly is a stretch.
The p47d11 vs. g6 and a5 vs. b17 is a good one and there is no need to add stretch into 44 for a few 38s.
At least in my opinion.
-
All opinions are appreicated.
-
Originally posted by Batz
The p38l is a later variant then the p51d and g10 and entered service the same time as the 262.
P-38L ... 7-44
Bf 109G-10 ... 3-44
Me 262 ... 7-44
Even the p47d11 is late for this event. Since we have no C or early d (d5) there’s really no choice.
However, if such a late variant as the p38l were to be included then pushing the whole event into 44 would be better that way, as the LW would have the correct planes. The AH g6 is the early version and we have no a6. The event already starts with earlier LW planes vs. later USAAF stuff.
If it were 44 you could include the p 38, p51, g10, d9, 262 etc....
The 1st battle of the Ruhr started on the 5th March 1943 and was to go on for five months until 25th July. I assumed this was the time frame that this event was planned around. If so the p38l certainly is a stretch.
The p47d11 vs. g6 and a5 vs. b17 is a good one and there is no need to add stretch into 44 for a few 38s.
At least in my opinion.
P38L is SLOWER than p38 F or G. The big difference (other than reliability and dive flaps) was the ability to carry lots and lots of ordnance. That would have no effect on the scenario.
The L is a viable substitute.
-
You need check your numbers. The p38l in ah does 420 @ 25k. The numbers I have for late models Js are 414 @ 25k (practically the same as the L).
For the H I have 395.
In 1943 the H model or early J would be the model of choice for this event.
When I get home later I will post more accurate numbers. But anyway you look at it the F and G were not faster then the L.
-
Not sure where you get 3-44 for a 109G-10. 3-44 was the 190A-8 give or take a month.
109G-10 was delivered to combat units in October 1944 (sometimes listed as early fall) along with the 109K. The earliest 109G-14 (predates the G-10) squad was July of 1944. Prior to that its 109G-6s. Unless you are talking about some substitute type (dunno which), but then say so.
Late and early 109G-6. Different radio mast, wooden tail and "galland" canopy. Not sure what difference that makes. Not too mention the AH 109G-6 has the Drop Tank, 30mm, 20mm gondola and bomb option already included.
The P-38J-25 (June 44) and the P-38L were "better" mainly because of the boosted ailerons and dive flaps Shubie. They were also faster than the P-38H was. L would be too late for a 1943 setup. Too bad, we need Lightnings to fill out the early USAAF.
Night Ops. Its going to be a long frame with 2 seperate bomber missions going to the Rhur.
Mosquito VI from 5-43 with 418 RCAF. Night fighter and fighter-bomber.
-
A couple of points, the L was faster (by~14MPH) than the G/H models and ~20 MPH faster than the F.
However for this scenario the 2 P38 FG's, the 20th and 55th, didn't start operations until October/November 1943, a bit too late for this scenario.
-
Good eye !
Looks like they flew mostly in the Western MED or PAC till Oct.
Thanks for the Heads up.
-
And I've read the lot thus far. Hmmnn...
In no particular order...
Bomb-dropping: carpet-bombing is IMO the way to go, for reasons eloquently and accurately put above. Ensure you have a couple of good bombardiers per formation (at least one backup in case the master bombardier dies, discos or otherwise becomes unable to do the job), and have everyone else drop when the lead bombardier does. That means that to ensure maximal bombs on target area, the planes in the formation really do need to fly in formation. Only drawback here is lack of Otto gunnery meaning that ideally each buff trio should have a player gunner aboard as well.
Fighter types - kill anyone tying to insist on planes that didnt enter until later than this scenario is actually supposed to be. Besides, REAL fighter pilots can get kills armed with a revolver in a Tiger Moth, only wimps need the Allied/Axis uberplanes to get kills, right? ;-)
Night flying. Night combat was a fact of WW2. Any attempt to portray the bulk of the RAF bombing effort that doesnt involve night flying is ridiculous. Any attempt to simply ignore the RAF effort is ridiculous. If you don't like flying at night, then just don't do it! If you're Allied you could man the guns for a bomber pilot; if you're Axis you could man the radar.
From game (only) experience, the night in AH is pathetically bright, and once it's into full night is much the same as full daylight but with the sky painted black, so far as I can tell. But that's flying with a full moon all the time for you, I suppose. Which both the RAF and LW often AVOIDED doing because it made life more dangerous for the bomber crews. No, I don;t mess with the gamma. And I've flown WB2 "2D" at night (that's the untextured version) and in that the night was really pitch black, you could barely see the ground at all from altitude. It took a little more effort and patience to land safely, and you might have to orbit around a bit trying to find the target if it wasnt already on fire - juts like in real life. It was not particularly difficult, and flying at the darkest AH can currently do is easy by comparison. And I'm just a girly! ;-)
Kill all fighter dweebs arguing over a few mph difference in speed when machines in service with worn engines and airframes seldom met those specs anyway, while we're at it... ;-)
Frames part 1 - I'd happily have it that PTO games are held mostly at US-friendly times and ETO games mostly at Euro-friendly times. Some argue that because most players currently are American that we should cater mostly for them. But if you do that too much, you just alienate folks from other parts of the world, reducing their percentage in the player base, etc. etc. Hold games of particular interest to Europeans at Euro-friendly times, you might just help attract (or at leat keep) more Europeans. Which isnt to say that no Europeans are interested in PTO or Americans in ETO, of course, but I hope you get my point...
Frames, part 2 - in order to plan buff raids properly, Batz is perfectly correct that a sufficient amount of between-frame time is necessary. In RL where the planners could all be around one planning table, this might possibly have been a fairly rapid peration. Oddly, trying to do the same thing across the internet is slower, because only one person is working on an initial plan, for review by another, and the plans need to do a certain amount of going back and forth until they can be finalised. Much more effort that putting pencil marks on paper and shoving em back and forth across a table.
Frames part 3 - allowance has to be made for everyone - especially those involved in planning - having a life outside AH (no, honestly! :-} ). Having been in a situation where, by oversight, I was kind of expected to put my life on hold for an entire weekend for several weekends running, I can say that this is NOT a good thing to expect of anyone. Hence avoiding clashes with other games, and frame timing and length issues.
Personally, I dont mind early Saturday morning starts, but then I dont have any family to consider. I HAVE done early morning Mondays, but only for a long-running series of unit-based games (in Another Place, as they say in Parliament) which were so much to my liking that I felt it was worth going to bed early, getting up at 1am flying for three hours, gopin to bed again then getting up at 7am to go to work. I am not prepared to do the like for a one-off game unless the details look vey, very much to my liking.
Finally... kill everyone wanting to fly B17s at 30,0000ft whilst attempting individual precision bombing all the damned time, whilst we're at it! Or at least, chuck a decent amount of cloud over the target area now and then, just to see how they cope...
Esme (who recalls reading about one P38 pilot saying he didnt fly over 15,000ft the entire time he was in Europe.)
(chuckle... ) :-)
-
Since it appears this will be all weekend frames, I'm screwed on flying it, but it looks like it could be great fun.
Couple of things I'm wondering about.
If I'm flying Luftwaffe, the job first is to get the TBolts to dump tanks and cut down thier range. Are LW flying out of France as well as Germany?
The reason I ask is I dug out the Spit pilot's logbook I have and in July-August of 43 the missions they were flying were escorting B26s and other mediums of the RAF to the airfields in France to keep them busy while the 4 engined guys were going over the top to Germany. Just from this one guys logbook from one RAF Spit squadron, he covered B26s 14 times from July through August 43 and these were formations of 36 or 72 Marauders. This doesn't include the the escorts he flew of Mossies, Venturas, RAF Mitchells and Bostons either, which were also flying the same missions. (This be the 2 TAF stuff I saw someone ask about) These were all raids on airfields at St.Omar, Poix, Abbeville etc too.
If the LW guys were kept busy in France it kept those P47 Escorts from having to engage early and losing thier fuel.
The Spits were also taking the 17s part of the way in and bringing them out too, essentially handing off to the P47s going further.
Somehow the Allied guys have to have a chance to escort the buffs to a realistic range without the LW guys being able to hit them so early that the fighter escort becomes a non factor.
If I'm LW CO and I see a chance to get the fighter escort out of the game fast, I'd do it in a heartbeat. And it doesn't take many LW fighters to force the issue on dropping tanks or burning off thier fuel
Wish I could fly it :)
Dan/Slack
-
We are not doing any secondary / diversionary raids.
Depending on how many people register will let us know how spread out to place the LW Operational fields.
Not sure if we will do any SPIT Escorts or not at this point. MIGHT be a job for dead pilots to assume if we can come up with an acceptable rule and or parameteres.
Somehow the Allied guys have to have a chance to escort the buffs to a realistic range without the LW guys being able to hit them so early that the fighter escort becomes a non factor.
That will be the job of the ALLIED CO - how best to get as amny fighters as dep as possible.
Sorry you can not make it.
Thanks,
-
Originally posted by jordi
We are not doing any secondary / diversionary raids.
Depending on how many people register will let us know how spread out to place the LW Operational fields.
Not sure if we will do any SPIT Escorts or not at this point. MIGHT be a job for dead pilots to assume if we can come up with an acceptable rule and or parameteres.
Somehow the Allied guys have to have a chance to escort the buffs to a realistic range without the LW guys being able to hit them so early that the fighter escort becomes a non factor.
That will be the job of the ALLIED CO - how best to get as amny fighters as dep as possible.
Sorry you can not make it.
Thanks,
So LW fighters can up from French bases to hit the incoming raids? That's how you get the Allied Fighters to lose thier fuel. Seems like we've been down that road before in another sim in another day and time :)
Regardless of the route, if there is no way to distract, divert or otherwise engage the early fighters as was done for real, the Allied escorts are gonna be long gone early for lack of fuel.
If the LW only goes from German bases, that might compensate some, but I'll bet you'll have some ticked off escort pilots, even with drop tanks :)
Dan/Slack
-
We will be keeping an eye on the overall balance so it does not end up being too loopsided between 1 side or another.
-
Um, I'll try to put this as gently as possible, but part of the problem here is the very fact that a game has been announced with the title "Battle of the Ruhr".
In real life, the LW would not have known precisely what forces we were sending where on any given day. And spoof raids, secondary raids, deception, etc was a major part of what kept our bombers alive, both by day and by night.
If the Allies are allowed none of the above, then what is to stop the LW from camping just west of the target area leaving teh rest of Europe undefended?
It might have been a better notion to have simply given the game a title that indicated the ETO in 1943, without giving specifics away. Then the LW would have to try to defend potentail targets all over the place, much as they did in RL.
Another thing that is of great concern to me is that given the general imbalance between numbers of fighters and bombers in AH, and assuming that imbalance will exist in this game, starting the game with the odds tilted against the Allies looks horribly like a case of just regarding bombers as being there to be manned target drones for the opposing fighters.
IF - and I repeat IF that is the case (and not being privy to the planning, I do not know) then that is Not Good At All.
I would like to take the opportunity to plead with the CMs that in future before announcing games like this that should be heavily bomber-centric that they take the time to ask the more experienced buffers amongst us what things are relevant to us buffers in the kind of game that you would like to put together. Otherwise, you can get a situation where you cause unecessary problems and end up needing to fix stuff broken at the outset that neednt have been broken with a little more effort bomber-side BEFORE making anything public.
Seriously - if what interest you most is the fighter-side stuff, I respect that, but bomber-side is a whole different kettle of fish, and the kind of planning that might work great for pure fighter vs fighter (with maybe a few JABOs thrown in) just does not work well with serious bomber involvement. And of course, the more "broken" games are, so far as buffers are concerned, the less happy we'll be to fly in them, and the harder it is to attract more buff pilots to play in the games. It simply is not as straightforward planning for buffs as it is for fighters, not at any stage of the process.
I'm sure that I speak for the other dedicated bomber pilots here when I say that we're all willing and eager to help, but you need to start things off without too many preconceptions, and also to ensure that those aspects vital to making it a good game for buffers are addressed. We want the fighter-types to have a good game, too. In no way do we want to make things good for us at the expense of fun for the fighter pilots. We're just a bit tired of being left the dregs and then being expected to jump for joy when we get as much as that little - and that's across games in most similar software, not just AH. AH could be sooo much better for us buffers. Let's see if we can make it so, eh?
Over to you...
Esme
-
The allied Staff is doing everything in our POWER to get as many Bomber pilots and squadrons registered for theevent.
The Numbers originally posted represent the MINIMUM number of bomber pilots we felt we need to run the scenario.
We hope and expect MORE than the minimum to register ( That is our plan ) so that the final numbers will be closer to a final REGISTERED NUMBERS have a BALANCE between the LW and Escorts and Bombers and even regsitered GUNNERS.
The Allied Command staff looked the rules, the numbers and gave the CM a list of changes we felt we needed to make the scenario more balanced. Almost all of the changes we asked for we got.
The ALlied command staff has a VERY GOOD MIX of experienced Scenario bomber pilots who gave me plenty of things to think about and to ask certain modifications.
With Formations turned on we hope to have MORE BOMBERS in the air than there are LW or Escorts !
-
Aye, I know, Jordi. I'm not naysaying or belittling any of the effort going into the game, m'dear. What I am saying is that to make it easier to recruit buffers, the games need to be thought out around buffers in the first place.
You yourself have said that there will NOT be certain important aspects to the game that were present in RL and that one could have in such a game. And I've pointed out that handing the foe the name of the target in advance wasnt exactly standard procedure for those planning bomber operations, and that doing so in scenario games like this creates problems (because you then have to invent some way of preventing the defenders from camping on the target in an unrealistic manner) unecessarily.
Aye, no-one's perfect, we all make mistakes, oversights, etc. I know I do; I'm just trying to do my bit by making suggestions to help improve things for future is all. You may recall that I HAVE been involved in helping get one of these together in AH before (as well as other times elsewhere, too), and the biggest problems then were that there were too many preconceived notions in place before any buffers were even asked about it. What resulted went surprisingly well, considering, but could have been so much better had the buffing side been looked into earlier and in more detail.
Guppy pointed out a potential problem, I'm just speaking to that and pointing out other possible, and avoidable, problems. Maybe they'll affect the game greatly maybe they won't - let us hope not. What can we do based on what info we see here, though? And surely it is better to discuss these kinds of issues for the benefit of all, rather than just keep quiet and cross our fingers? Pool our knowledge and experience, kind of thing?
One of the things that may be being overlooked here is that when trying to refight (in a way) a historical event, it isn't only the hardware but the organisation and skills of those using the hardware that plays a part in making it go in the kind of way wanted. No disrespect to our friends that prefer MA-style gaming to realistic style gaming, but the two are very different, and I've come across a few folk quite enthusiastic about bombers who nevertheless think that all there is to using bombers is to learn the way AH works and press the relevant buttons. They see folk who like to try to do things in as realistic a manner as possible, and wonder why we dont fly at full throttle, why we dont just grab a plane from the nearest airfield, why we bother with formation flying (when appropriate), why we dont like taking off at airfields at extreme elevations, and why we carpet-bomb when we each have perfetly good bombsights, and so on.
I've seen entire units think like that, over the years. And I've seen them take part in big organised games and wonder why the heck they got the stuffing knocked out of them when the other units that didnt go in "hard and fast" did not. The reason is often that no matter their affection for their planes, that they did not understand bomber operations very well.
I've been surprised, too, over the years, at how tenuous a grasp on WW2 history some folk are who play these WW2 simulation games. Again, it's no skin off my nose and nothing shameful that they don't know their history well, but if they don't understand the subject, it's not surprising that they have funny ideas about the best ways to do things, and end up learning the painful way what works and what does not., when history is there to show them what is liable ot work (bearing in mind that the software reality will have differences to teh real reality that impact things).
I don't claim to be an expert on all aspects of WW2 air warfare, far from it. I specialise in what the LW and RAF got up to in the West, and know least about what happened in the PTO. I've also had experience of planning raids realistically (insofar as the software allows) many a time over the years. And bomber planning is all about military intelligence, deception, and downright sneakiness. Even the apparently in-yer-face daylight raids that 8th AF and near the end, the RAF ran used deception whenever possible to keep casualties down. Bomber operations were suspended now and then in the face of unacceptable casualty rates, whilst they thought of new ways to get things done, or waited for new equipment to come into service.
And its not just me or my unit. I know of at least two other units that play in online WW2 games that think the same way, and that are outstandingly succesful because of it. Less casualtuies, more times through to target, more RTB's - all because we strive hard to do what we do as best we possibly can. It might not seem as glamorous learning proper bomber skills as it does learning the finer points of ACMs and deflection shooting, but it rewards learning just as much.
Games that allow those skills to be put to use tend to go better than those that do not, in my experience. And they are a lot more fun for the bomber pilots, and just as much fun for the fighter pilots.
So I'm just trying to help to nudge folks to "think bomber" more in future, is all. It's just that points relating to the current game have, naturally, cropped up. I'm not decrying the effort that's gone into the current game, OK? No need to be so defensive, Jordi, none at all.
Esme
-
So I'm just trying to help to nudge folks to "think bomber" more in future, is all. It's just that points relating to the current game have, naturally, cropped up. I'm not decrying the effort that's gone into the current game, OK? No need to be so defensive, Jordi, none at all.
Esme
---
Hope I did not come across as defensive in my reply.
:)
This is just to help carlify things.
I think you and other DEDICATED Bomber pilots and squads will be suitably impressed with the work the Bomber and Fighter XO's and Bomber and Fighter GL's in laying out missions, WP's and timings to get the bombers in formation - to get to the right point on the map at the right time - to get the Escorts to RV at the right place and time - to hand off Escort duties to other Fighter Groups as time and distance dictates.
Regardless of any of the rules - the work and prep and the actually flying that will actually be used in the Scenario frames will be very different than the "Usual MA" Style of flying that most are used to.
Thanks for your comments.
-
Good reply, Jordi,
!
I think maybe transatlantic differences in use of the language may have appeared there... I find this occasionaly when I'm emailing Americans that sometimes the way one party in the conversation expresses things impacts the other party differently than intended, and so one can get impressions of agression or defensiveness where none is intended.
Such slight differences in the way our two countries use the language, such potentially big problems as a result (and thats ignoring the usual person-person possibilities of misunderstanding) - always amazes me! One tends to be more on guard for difficulties with language when one of the parties isn't a native English speaker, but I must admit, I tend to forget about that potential when chatting with Americans. It doesn't usually cause big problems, but when it does, ... (winces at memory of a few such incidents I've had).
Humans... pah! Can't live with 'em, can't live without 'em, eh?
(chuckle...)
Esme
(This way, Mr Alien! Here! Come take me back home! ;-) )
-
I just felt the need to share this memory of misunderstanding the same language from other sides of the atlantic...
it was the first run of Tilts Neimen Scenario...
The rule stated something like to capture an airfeild more than 3 GVs must be parked at the feild at end frame.
Everyone in the USA read that rule, we all played and parked 3 GVs at each feild, figuring we had a bunch of captures.
Tilt rightly did not count the captures and we were all up in arms, after all we had the 3 required GVs on the field right?. Tilt refered us back to the rules.
Yup... It wasnt 3 that was needed, it was MORE THAN 3. Right there in plain english. Iv also respected Tilt alot for sticking to the rules.
Funny we all misread it, and Ill always atribute it too a difference in how we tend to state things. Pretty Funny when you think about it.