Ideas for 1.8(d)

[Kraut]

1.8c is finished so letst start collecting ideas for 1.8d

100 turns after the Axis DoW Russia the Axis gets a TO to build the Ostwall. This assumes that things are going badly in the east and the axis starts preparations to defend their fatherland. As a penalty the axis replacent rate is reduced by 5% simulating the manpower and resources going into the construction of the Ostwall.

As the Ostwall itself already exist (the one that get triggered if the russians declare war on the Axis) not too many events should be needed, I hope.

How about an allied TO to invade Turkey ? Lets say -10 US ?

How about an event that the germans and japanese work together more cloesely and instead of bombing Pearl Harbor the japanese invade east russia. Effect: some russian reserves wont apear (fighting the japanese) but the US sends more troops to the european theather. Hmm, lets see, 30% probability ??? If the Japs do bomb Pearl Harbor the usual +15 US are added to the EEV.

 

[Mark Stevens]

Britain was very sensitive to a possible Russian threat to (neutral) Turkey, as it would have threatened her whole strategic position in the Mediterranean. If Russian had done it while still allied to Germany I reckon that the UK and France would have moved heaven and earth to support the Turks. There were plans being drawn up to intervene in Finland before the Winter War armistice, even at the cost of violating Norwegian and/or Swedish neutrality: Gamelin even suggested bombing the Soviet oilfields at Baku from French Syria, which would lead to an alternative history game with a vengeance. Finland wasn't a particularly crucial area from the Allied point of view: the Mediterranean definitely was.

Once the USSR joined the Allies, Britain and the USA had a lot of diplomatic leverage because of Lend Lease and the timing and location of the Second Front: they'd definitely have been extremely reluctant to see Russia invade (another) neutral country.

I think that a Russian attack on Turkey would only have been possible once Germany was near defeat, the Cold War was drawing close, and the USSR could afford to ignore the Western Allies, which really belongs to a post WWII environment.

And the Western Allies never contemplated attacking - Churchill put a lot of diplomatic effort, including a meeting between the two countries' foreign Ministers in November 1943, to persuade Turkey that it should join the Allies.

Of course, if Turkey joins the Axis, anything goes.

 

[Ben Turner]

Originally posted by Mark Stevens
There were plans being drawn up to intervene in Finland before the Winter War armistice, even at the cost of violating Norwegian and/or Swedish neutrality:

This was part of the grande plan- we could blow up Swedish iron mines on the way.

 

[Kraut]

could you move the Narvik-east port one hex so that it lies next to the Narvik port hex ?
This would allow shipments to go through Narvik to disembark at Petsamo or Murmansk without having to disembark at Narvik and walk the last few hundred kilometers.

 

[Mark Stevens]

No, in conjunction with the permanent and temporary exclusion zones, that's a deliberate design feature as the Arctic Convoys from the UK to Murmansk and Archangel took (much) longer than one week, and were subject to weather delays.

Letting them do it in one turn wouldn't be right.

 

[Mark Stevens]

Battle of Britain

At present this is pretty abstract: Axis Option appears after the Fall of France, 50% chance of victory irrespective of the aircraft committed (none will do fine), extra sealift and a couple of units (marines and heavy airlanding) if the Axis win, lose one bomber unit if they fail.

There's nothing to stop the Luftwaffe bombing the UK's airfields, communications and navies if it wants to, of course.

Pelle's suggested a possible alternative which would force an Axis Player to commit the Luftwaffe to raids on the UK and I'd be interested in Players' opinions.

Scrap the 50/50 chance.

Designate a few key RAF fighter bases (Hendon, Biggin Hill?) as targets, attacks on which trigger the bonus sealift and assault troops Event. Set the %age chance of an attack triggering the Event very low - this would need some careful thought. In order to get the bonuses, the Axis Player is forced to commit some air units to bombing and escort.

This does mean that a single Italian fighter on Minimise Losses could still 'win' the BoB with a lucky strike, but that's one more unit than at present, and the thing would stand a good chance of getting badly chewed up.

Whether or not the bonuses are triggered, the Axis Player could still launch an invasion at any time (otherwise the Brits would ship their entire army elsewhere). And, as at present, the bonuses could be used anywhere else, e.g. the Mediterranean.

We've tried a very simple design test, and I believe that the mechanics could be made to work ('Force One Attacks' specific hex gives low %age chance of triggering Event).

Does this seem worth pursuing, or can anyone think of a reason why it wouldn't work, or would be any worst historically than the current position?

Pelle and I would welcome comments on this.

 

[Dan Neely]

sounds good to me. I'd suggest a housereule specifying a minimum size for the attack force though.. precisely to prevent the italians on ML thing you mentioned earlier.

 

[Kraut]

one problem might be: I've discovered that airfield attacks punish the attacke really big times ! Once I've attacked a single isolated RAF fighter with the entire german Luftwaffe and got handled really roughly. If the RAF goes into air combat with the Luftwaffe due to CS or AS setting on the other hand the RAF gets a beating.

here is a little airfield attack test result: attackers: 862 Me-109, 444 Ju-87, 432 He-111, 168 Ju-88, 185 Me-110, 144 Do-217
defenders: 30 Battle, 87 Hurricane, 58 Spitfire (early).
Seems to be a sure bet that the RAF gets a really tough beating, eh ? The results are: Luftwaffe losses: 171 Me-109 and 246 other planes, RAF losses: 10 battle, 31 Hurricane and 23 Spitfire. OK, these are the losses told by the combat result dialog so most of these losses are moved into the replacement pool but nevertheless they are still likely to really break apart the Luftwaffe without hurting the RAF too much.

I reran the test with most RAF Fighters on AS, results: Axis losses: 907 Planes (including 384 Me-109), RAF losses: 73 Planes. Many Axis planes in ReOrg.

 

[Ben Turner]

Couldn't you tie victory in the Battle of Britain into destruction of RAF fighter units? For one thing, this would mean that if the Allied player throws them away in France he's defenceless against an invasion of Britain... this was a real concern historically and why Spitfires weren't used until Dunkirk.

Regarding Airfield attacks... I think in your example you're going about it the wrong way. A 1000 bomber raid on one airfield is going to lead to a pretty target rich environment for the RAF, try making the raid with just one bomber unit keeping your fighters on Air superiority. Yes, airfield attacks can still be very bloody for the attacker... but in the case of the Battle of Britain the way to get a historical result would be to keep on making small attacks on the same airfield until you've sucked up their readiness and supply... this was the problem historically, the Germans were always going to take heavier losses in the air but sooner or later the RAF simply would not be in a fit state to respond, and Fighter Command would be caught on the ground and destroyed.

Btw, whilst we're on a similar subject... I don't know how this is handled in EA already, but I think a German decision to launch Operation Seelowe would have to be made at the latest in Winter 1940 if it's going to be carried out any time that year. Everything I've read about the possibilities for the operation indicate that the Germans simply could not have done it without taking quite some months to prepare. Obviously taking the TO would have a detrimental effect on the Axis in some other way, so that if it turns out they aren't in a position to launch Seelowe then the effort is wasted.

 

[Kraut]

I redid the test with just one bomber attacking on min. losses with all Axis fighters on AS. Same result, with lesser Axis losses (fewer planes committed) but also fewer allied losses (some times just 10 RAF fighters got shot down)
And: If I'm not mistaken, the event doesn't count how many attacks are made agains a hex during a turn, it just checks whether at least one attack was made and than decides (depending on the percentage) whether the attack is counted as successful. So an event loop has to be created to allow the axis to attack the target airfields week after week after week until the BoB is trigered successfully.

If one wants many hexes to be target hexes the loop gets even more complicated, if on will prevent the axis from starting the BoB before the fall of France or 75 turns after the US entered the war even more events are needed.

I don't think these events would be spend wisely on such a side-show of the war because honestly most players dont even think about really invading England, they just start BoB to get the extra sea lift and the bonus units.

 

[Panzerpelle]

The Evil ed events for this setup is

1 event 2 cancelled enable event 2
2 force one attacks (X,Y) chance to activate X%
3 event 2 activated TO option activate 4
4 turn 500 news only trigger for reinforcement

It will repeat until the event 2 is activated and then it will be a X chance for the TO to appear. Note the order in wich the event 1 and 2 is structured, it will not work in any other order...

It will take 2 events per target hex to create this effect.

 

[Panzerpelle]

Originally posted by Kraut
one problem might be: I've discovered that airfield attacks punish the attacke really big times ! Once I've attacked a single isolated RAF fighter with the entire german Luftwaffe and got handled really roughly. If the RAF goes into air combat with the Luftwaffe due to CS or AS setting on the other hand the RAF gets a beating.

here is a little airfield attack test result: attackers: 862 Me-109, 444 Ju-87, 432 He-111, 168 Ju-88, 185 Me-110, 144 Do-217
defenders: 30 Battle, 87 Hurricane, 58 Spitfire (early).
Seems to be a sure bet that the RAF gets a really tough beating, eh ? The results are: Luftwaffe losses: 171 Me-109 and 246 other planes, RAF losses: 10 battle, 31 Hurricane and 23 Spitfire. OK, these are the losses told by the combat result dialog so most of these losses are moved into the replacement pool but nevertheless they are still likely to really break apart the Luftwaffe without hurting the RAF too much.

I reran the test with most RAF Fighters on AS, results: Axis losses: 907 Planes (including 384 Me-109), RAF losses: 73 Planes. Many Axis planes in ReOrg.

The Axis force elctronic levels may be to low and then you get this result..?

 

[Kraut]

Ah, indeed, both forces are set to electronic support level 33 !! I've just modified a EA 1.8b to 100% for both forces and will run some tests.
What influence does the ESL has on ground combat ??
What is the best value for WW2 scenarios ?

 

[Panzerpelle]

It mostly affect the aircombat IIRC...the settings is described in the update doc in the TOAW forlder...but I think it should be higher then 33%. Maybe the germans a bit higher then the allies...

 

[Kraut]

I've just tried the 100% setting and one effect was quite obvious, theater recon abilities for airfields were reduced. With the original 33% setting I was almost always able to see the enemy planes on airfields no matter how far behind the front they were, at 100% I have far less battlefield information.

The air combats were also less bloody, the attacker still lost more planes than the defender but an all out attack by the entire Luftwaffe against the entire RAF on AS only resulted in 100+ german planes shot down.

If I assigned my fighter directly to airfield attacks (not letting them react to an air combat started by a bomber squad bombing an airfield) I still get results of 50% axis losses (~600 fighter planes shot down)

 

[Panzerpelle]

Intresting..I didnt know that recon ablilitys of air units was affected. Its logical that higher levels give this effect...better radio discipline and communications...

 

[Kraut]

what about an axis TO to attack Sweden ? If Finland collaps during WinterWar the remaining passage to north russia is very narrow and could be defended fairly well. In such case, wouldn't the axis consider an attack through Sweden?

 

[Mark Stevens]

Not just trying to shoot eveything down, but as far as I know Sweden was considered a useful neutral by the Germans, in the same way as Switzerland. Not exactly pro-Axis, but certainly willing - or under enough pressure - to continue trading with it, allow troops to pass through its territory on their way to and from Norway and, crucially, strongly anti-Communist.

It would have taken some pretty strong provocation to cause Germany to attack Sweden.

 

[Mantis]

As to the BoB...

Suggestions:

What about the BoB event removing a % (2/3 - 3/4?) of the Axis fighters? They're 'tied up' fighting the BoB. This choice should probably remove most of the Brit fighters, or put them in reorg? Anyways, after a suitable time, the % chance of success is determined.

If it works, an increase in sealift occurs. Regardless of outcome, a % chance could be calculated, and some or all of the fighters could 'return' as reinforcements. Some (depending on %s defined) might not return at all... ???

:hmmm:

 

[Mark Stevens]

Rather than do that, why not actually fight the Battle of Britain? Send the Luftwaffe's bombers over to hit the RAF bases and the Royal Navy turn after turn - that should cause a pretty hot air battle over southern England and, if successful, would greatly assist the chances of an invasion. It would also tie up both sides' air forces for as long as the Axis Player wanted to sustain it.

Trouble is, as far as I can see, there's no way to tie this into the extra sealift and bonus troops: any other ideas, anybody?