URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Airbattle Games
  HTML https://airbattle.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: IGNORE: Wing Leader Playtest Archive
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 5310--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kursk Campaign
       By: Gordon Christie Date: May 7, 2020, 2:33 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Not a problem. I'm beginning to wonder slightly about dropbox
       and caching but lack the technical skills to investigate this in
       any meaningful way. Last night felt very strange as both Andrew
       & I were definitely reading a different document though we both
       went into dropbox & (we thought) looked at the same 03 May pdf
       timestamped 09:40. Bizarre....Andrew hadn't previously opened
       the latest version as I'd done the setup & I was pretty sure he
       had the more up to date version though I couldn't open it
       despite several attempts.
       Anyway I like the current version much better:-)). Pity I didn't
       write the AAR around it.....doh!
       Cheers
       Gordon
       #Post#: 5313--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kursk Campaign
       By: Al Cannamore Date: May 7, 2020, 8:39 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Looks like I should update the playaid in the extension. I'll
       get this done asap.
       #Post#: 5315--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kursk Campaign
       By: pilotofficerprune Date: May 8, 2020, 1:43 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I suspect that opening files in dropbox to view them might bring
       on the caching issues. Perhaps if you downloaded the files and
       opened them locally this might not be an issue?
       Again, sorry to clump around with my size nine boots. I can be
       excessively rude sometimes. The data, particularly on bombing
       results and losses, was vital. I think another play with the
       rulebook and OOBs that I drop tomorrow will help enormously.
       #Post#: 5316--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kursk Campaign
       By: Al Cannamore Date: May 8, 2020, 2:17 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       The extension (draft 03) has the May 3 play aid. If you need the
       previous playaid it’s in draft v02 which is in the inactive
       folders.
       #Post#: 5320--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kursk Campaign
       By: Gordon Christie Date: May 8, 2020, 4:47 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I’m pretty certain you’re right about caching & this may well
       have caught me out before. I’ll switch to downloading & opening
       locally. Every days a school day:-))
       Cheers
       Gordon
       #Post#: 5369--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kursk Campaign
       By: Gordon Christie Date: May 11, 2020, 5:51 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Last night Andrew & I finished our third campaign
       correctly:-))...we hope!
       Final scenario was DOK 07 Last Gasp. LW left with OB3 (not ideal
       against unarmored targets) VVS with OB 4 (probably not ideal
       against anything...). We both liked the idea of being forced to
       go with what was available rather than desirable at the end of
       the game. Adds another layer to the choices of OB earlier
       knowing that you may need all 3 offensive/ defensive OBs
       depending how it plays out.
       Perhaps unsurprisingly the LW fighters had the better of it. 7
       kills to 2 losses & only a couple of bomber stragglers (though
       the Soviets were unlucky as 2 unopposed attacks on Hs129s netted
       no kills). Bomber cohesion held top well against the flak &
       strafing yielded 4 hits on one artillery unit (success) & 2 on
       the other without any bomber disruptions or losses for a solid
       german win (-2 CVP for success -1 CVP for bonus effects on both
       artillery units) Bizarrely 4 Fw 190s fell to freakish flak rolls
       while strafing or engaging VVS fighters in the flak zone.
       Final outcome
       German decisive victory (-7). The way it plays out german
       success didn't feel unreasonable to us.
       Final losses were VVS 40 LW 18 (6 or 7 to flak)
       Observations:
       Works smoothly. I think we've now used very scenario & every OB.
       Everything seems to fit together well.
       Overall fits my sense of the historical narrative. LW high
       quality but outnumbered & has a lot to do. Kill:loss ratios felt
       better this time with no bomber massacres for the Germans though
       they are perhaps slightly overpowered.
       Suggestions to restore a bit of balance:
       Reinstate the 3rd Yak-9 squadron in OB5.
       Consider another Yak -1 Squadron in OB4 (not sure if this causes
       countermine issues) . An La 5 or Yak-9 flight would be better
       but I think  doesn't fit in the available space.
       I think the quality balance, although hard on the Soviets, fits
       the historical narrative (my interpretation of Bergstrom's slim
       Kursk volume is that the Germans held the edge until mid battle
       when fuel supply;ies & the need to transfer units against the
       Soviet Orel operation really weakened the Germans over Kursk).
       I'd be reluctant to shift that but it does mean that German
       successes will probably outnumber Soviet.
       I'd be inclined to shift the draw threshold to perhaps -2 so the
       Germans have to do better to win. i'd be incline dot say that is
       taking us into beta test territory.
       We'll give it another go but we're both pretty happy & it's very
       nearly there at alpha.
       Cheers
       Gordon
       #Post#: 5371--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kursk Campaign
       By: pilotofficerprune Date: May 11, 2020, 6:11 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Some thoughts for the next iteration:
       (1) If we restore the 3rd Yak-9 to Soviet OOB #5, do we restore
       the -1 CVP mod too?
       (2) We need to consider the situation where one side or the
       other achieves three raid missions. As they are forced to take
       all three raid OOBs, one of those should be weak.
       We already have this with the VVS OOB #3 (with the Pe-2s). I
       can’t help feel that one of the German raids needs to be
       weakened. Should Luftwaffe OOB #2 be restored to its previous
       state with three rather than four escort flights? This should
       give us a naturally ‘weak’ Orbat for the late game.
       (3) We can certainly shift the draw threshold asymmetrically
       against the Germans if we feel they are getting the better of
       the campaign.
       Another play of the campaign would be good, but let’s thrash out
       a list of all the changes first and I’ll implement them this
       weekend.
       #Post#: 5373--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kursk Campaign
       By: Gordon Christie Date: May 11, 2020, 7:04 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I'd leave an enhanced OB 5 as 0 CVP- I think the Soviets need
       the break if it comes to that.
       A weaker OB2 isn't unreasonable. The Ju88s aren't necessarily
       easy targets.
       Agree with 3.
       The other thought we had that i should have mentioned is to
       shift the CVP shift for LW losses down significantly back to 4
       fighters for offensive scenarios & maybe 6 aircraft (total, all
       types) offensively. The LW were qualitatively reasonably good at
       this point but outnumbered & at the tipping point. They couldn't
       afford losses & I think force conservation is an interesting
       aspect of all of the campaigns we have had. This introduces an
       element of it here. The Soviets can be significantly more (but
       not completely) tolerant of losses.
       Cheers
       Gordon
       #Post#: 5374--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kursk Campaign
       By: Gordon Christie Date: May 11, 2020, 8:10 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Sorry last post should have been 4 LW fighters when defending &
       6a/c when raiding.
       Cheers
       Gordon
       #Post#: 5375--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kursk Campaign
       By: pilotofficerprune Date: May 11, 2020, 8:36 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Let’s look at the German losses for a moment:
       Raids (bombers) - 1 + 10 + 6 + 9 + 2 + 2 + 0 = mean 4.4
       Raids (fighters) - 0 + 6 + 4 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 2 = mean 2.57
       Defender - 0 + 2 + 3 + 2 + 4 + 1 = 2.0
       So, for German defensive scenarios we can certainly tip the
       losses threshold down to 4. On the offensive the mean German
       losses are 7. I’m debating whether to keep the threshold as one
       or other of these:
       (1) +1 CVP for 5 German bomber losses, OR
       (2) +1 CVP for 8 German losses (all types)
       *****************************************************
   DIR Previous Page
   DIR Next Page