• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

caj

Corporal
63 Badges
Jun 25, 2004
46
0
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Field Marshal
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Tyranny: Gold Edition
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Steel Division: Normandy 44
  • BATTLETECH
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Tyranny - Tales from the Tiers
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings II
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Lead and Gold
  • Leviathan: Warships
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Semper Fi
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Supreme Ruler 2020
Johan,
I love the game but the Air Missions need to have a second choice added besides attack an area province or region. Please add a choice to allow an Air unit or group to attack a specific province. IRL - the pilots were given a mission to bomb a specific factory or target and not fly all around the region lookng for strategic or tactical targets. Air Superiority would work well with the Area Missions but Tactical or Strategic should be able to go area or specific.

Cheers
CJ
 
Upvote 0

unmerged(41044)

Captain
Mar 7, 2005
330
0
markpalm1 said:
The destruction of Panzer Lehr in the breakout from St. Lo

Well apart from Panzer Lehr not actually being destroyed perhaps you would like to tell the class why the use of a strategic scale bombing run was never repeated in support of tactical operations?

Hint: something to do with the bombs falling on friend and foe alike.

Which simply emphasises my point - Short of carpet bombing, locating and targetting dug-in troops is damn difficult for aircraft.
 

markpalm1

Captain
8 Badges
Dec 29, 2003
405
4
www.geocities.com
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Semper Fi
  • 500k Club
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
Shock and Awe

Horza said:
Well apart from Panzer Lehr not actually being destroyed perhaps you would like to tell the class why the use of a strategic scale bombing run was never repeated in support of tactical operations?

Hint: something to do with the bombs falling on friend and foe alike.

Which simply emphasises my point - Short of carpet bombing, locating and targetting dug-in troops is damn difficult for aircraft.

Au Contraire, this was the original "shock and awe"

1st U.S. Army Report of Operations 20 Oct. 1943 - 1 Aug. 1944

In its official “after-action” report on the conduct of the first phase of Operation Overlord (the code name for the Normandy Invasion), the U.S. First Army arrived at certain conclusions regarding the use of aerial bombardment in preparation for an advance of forces on the ground. Particularly in reference to the creation of a new type of “tank-air team” in the breakout near Saint-Lô at the end of July 1944, the report concluded that these two arms represented “an unbeatable combination.”

Although normally it is a wasteful use of air power to bomb targets within range of supporting artillery in some cases a requirement exists for air support against targets within artillery range. The tremendous blast of the 500 lb and heavier bombs is very effective against highly organized defenses and casemated positions. Near hits may tip the casemates off level or pile dirt in front of the port thus neutralizing the gun and the blast effect may kill or stun the crews and damage fire control equipment. The guns will always be neutralized during the air attack, the accuracy of the bombing being the determining factor in the duration of the period of neutralization. The nature of the objective, not the ability of the artillery to reach it should determine whether air support is to be utilized. To secure the best results air bombardment should not take place at too great a distance from the attacking troops in order that the defensive positions can be reached before the defenders have had an opportunity to recover and to man their positions. Excellent results were obtained when air bombardment took place with the assaulting troops not more than 1000 yards from the target, prepared to move in rapidly upon completion of the bombardment. Since even this limited advance requires valuable time the target should be covered with artillery fire after the bombardment, lifted on call from forward observers or at a prearranged time as the infantry closes in.

As a prelude to the penetration west of St. Lo in Operation “COBRA” heavy and medium bombers in conjunction with fighter-bombers and artillery fire were utilized in an elaborate prearranged fire plan . . . to pulverize the area selected for the breakthrough. This prearranged fire plan was highly successful and contributed in large measure to the success of the assault; however, certain features in connection with the use of heavy and medium bombers require further study.

The bombing target consisted of an area three and one-half miles long and 2500 yards deep. The longer axis of the target was east and west and the area was bounded on the north by the straight, broad St. Lo - Perier Road. In addition the northern boundary was marked with red artillery smoke. The plan called for fighter-bombers to attack a 300 yard strip along the northern edge of the strip from H-75 minutes to H-60 minutes. From H-60 minutes to H Hour the entire area was bombed by heavy bombers. Following the heavy bomber attack the fighter bombers again attacked the forward edge of the area from H Hour to H plus 15 minutes followed by medium bombers which attacked the southern half of the target from H plus 30 minutes to H plus 75 minutes. The fighter-bombers approached the target from the east and flew parallel to the front during the attack whereas the heavy and medium bombers came in from the north and flew perpendicular to the front during the attack. Ground troops were withdrawn behind a line twelve hundred yards north of the target. However, some divisions suffered casualties from heavy and medium bombers dropping their bombs short.

The inaccuracy of some of the heavy and medium bombers may be attributed to two factors. The smoke and dust raised by the first bombs dropped drifted to the north of the target and succeeding waves of bombers appeared to use this smoke and dust as a target rather than adhere to the designated bomb release line. Other formations of heavy bombers appeared to confuse the St. Lo - Perier road with another road approximately 2500 yards north of and nearly parallel to it.

For the armored divisions pushing through the gap following the penetration of the enemy"s position west of St. Lo a plan for armored column cover by fighter-bombers was developed and used which produced results far beyond all expectations. In this set-up four fighter-bombers armed with fragmentation and 500 lb bombs fly continuously ahead of each advancing armored column. Liaison is maintained by additional air support personnel riding in the forward tanks of the column. Communication between air and ground, including tank battalion commanders, air personnel riding in tanks and between division and corps air support party officers, is maintained by means of VHF radio. With this arrangement, very close coordination is obtained by the tank-air team. Using the planes as their eyes to give advance warning of impending threats and detailed information on the enemy"s disposition, the armored columns are able to advance more boldly and aggressively. In addition the planes are available as a weapon to attack targets appearing in the operating sector of the tank column. In the event the target is too large to be bombed successfully by the four planes supporting the armored column, request for additional planes is immediately radioed to air operations by the flight leader. In the meantime the flight leader initiates action against the target.

The results obtained by the employment of the tank-air team in mobile, fast moving situations are recognized as being an outstanding achievement in air-ground cooperation and represent the development of an unbeatable combination.

Operation Cobra : the break-out

For nearly a month, the Americans had been bogged down in the hellish war of the hedgerows. Operation Cobra, launched at the end of July, would at long last open a decisive gap in the German lines. General Bradley, commanding the First Army, had worked out his strategy extremely carefully. Aerial saturation bombing over a limited area would briefly destroy all the defences there and create a breach through which his forces could pour. The area he chose lay between the villages of La Chapelle-Enjuger and Hébécrevon, a few kilometres north of the main road between Saint-Lô and Coutances.

An initial attempt, on July 24th, proved disastrous, as the bombers dropped some of their projectiles on the American front lines, killing or wounding 150 men. Despite this, a second attempt was made the very next day. For three hours, 1,500 B-17 and B-24 bombers pummelled the target, supported by medium bombers and fighter bombers attacking with napalm. This time, the Germans did not escape so lightly. General Bayerlein’s Panzer Lehr, which had only recently arrived in the sector, was literally blown to pieces. 45-tonne Panther tanks were lifted off the ground by the force of the explosions and torn apart like children’s toys. Infantrymen were buried alive in their shelters. The few, shell-shocked survivors either surrendered without a fight or fled.
 

unmerged(41044)

Captain
Mar 7, 2005
330
0
'Au contraire' ? That's the sum total of your argument? And 'shock and awe' just makes you look ridiculous.

To repeat:

Panzer Lehr wasn't destroyed by bombing. It did suffer badly from two month's continous combat under constant air attack. At St Lo it was carpet bombed and hit by the entirety of the US VIII corps. After Third Army's breakout it was brought out of the line for rest and refit, but still was able to commit a Kampfgruppe to hold the line.

Carpet bombing was never used again on the front line. The US assault forces were hit hard by the bombing, and the bombing element of Operation Cobra was considered counter-productive.

Googling and cut and paste does not contribute anything to the discussion.
 

markpalm1

Captain
8 Badges
Dec 29, 2003
405
4
www.geocities.com
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Semper Fi
  • 500k Club
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
Horza said:
Panzer Lehr wasn't destroyed by bombing. It did suffer badly from two month's continous combat under constant air attack. At St Lo it was carpet bombed and hit by the entirety of the US VIII corps. After Third Army's breakout it was brought out of the line for rest and refit, but still was able to commit a Kampfgruppe to hold the line.

Carpet bombing was never used again on the front line. The US assault forces were hit hard by the bombing, and the bombing element of Operation Cobra was considered counter-productive.

Googling and cut and paste does not contribute anything to the discussion.

Quoting yourself is not so persuasive either. The commander of Panzer Lehr, Fritz Bayerlein:

We had the main losses by pattern bombing, less by artillery, still less by tanks and smaller arms.

The actual losses of dead and wounded were approximately:
by bombing 50%
by artillery 30%
by other weapons 20%

The digging in of the infantry was useless and did not protect against bombing .... Dugouts and foxholes were smashed, the men buried, and we were unable to save them. The same happened to guns and tanks . . . . it seems to me, that a number of men who survived the pattern bombing . . . surrendered soon to the attacking infantry or escaped to the rear.

The first line has [sic] been annihilated by the bombing.... The three-hour bombardment on 25.7-after the smaller one a day before-had exterminating morale effect on the troops physically and morally weakened by continual hard fighting for 45 days. The long duration of the bombing, without any possibility for opposition, created depressions and a feeling of helplessness, weakness and inferiority. Therefore the morale attitude of a great number of men grew so bad that they, feeling the uselessness of fighting, surrendered, deserted to the enemy or escaped to the rear, as far as they survived the bombing. Only particularly strong nerved and brave men could endure this strain.

The shock effect was nearly as strong as the physical effect (dead and wounded). During the bombardment. . . some of the men got crazy and were unable to carry out anything. I have been personally on 24.7 and 25.7 in the center of the bombardment and could experience the tremendous effect. For me, who during this war was in every theater committed at the points of the main efforts, this was the worst I ever saw.

The well-dug-in infantry was smashed by the heavy bombs in their foxholes and dugouts or killed and buried by blast. The positions of infantry and artillery were blown up. The whole bombed area was transformed into fields covered with craters, in which no human being was alive. Tanks and guns were destroyed and overturned and could not be recovered, because all roads and passages were blocked ....

Very soon after the beginning of the bombardment every kind of telephone communication was eliminated. As nearly all C.P.'s [Command Posts] were situated in the bombed area, radio was almost impossible. The communication was limited to [motorcycle] messengers, but this was also rather difficult because many roads were interrupted and driving during the bombardment was very dangerous and required a lot of time.


Quoting Eisenhower:

In June 1944, John S. D. Eisenhower, Ike's son, graduated from West Point-ironically on the same day that Allied forces stormed ashore at Normandy. June 24 found the new lieutenant riding through Normandy with his father, observing the aftermath of the invasion:

The roads we traversed were dusty and crowded. Vehicles moved slowly, bumper to bumper. Fresh out of West Point, with all its courses in conventional procedures, l was offended at this jamming up of traffic. It wasn't according to the book. Leaning over Dad's shoulder, l remarked, "You'd never get away with this if you didn't have air supremacy." I received an impatient snort:

"If I didn't have air supremacy, l wouldn't be here."


HOI2 doesn't model either of these realities well in their air model.
 

unmerged(41044)

Captain
Mar 7, 2005
330
0
markpalm1 said:
Quoting yourself is not so persuasive either.

If you fail to address my points or make an actual counter argument I can only repeat myself in the hopes you'll actually respond to them

markpalm1 said:
HOI2 doesn't model either of these realities well in their air model.

Again you spam out endless quotes without actually providing any analysis or an opposing argument.

Why should Paradox model carpet bombing in game when it was only used once, and hit friend and foe alike?

What about the Eisenhower quote isn't modelled?
 

Amona

Lady General
9 Badges
Jan 2, 2004
660
0
  • Darkest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Iron Cross
  • Semper Fi
  • Victoria 2
  • 500k Club
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
I am very astonished by this detailed and in parts vicious discussion.
IMHO it misses the point.
I dont like the current air war system too, for the reasons others have mentioned, no need to repeat them.
They make me want to stop playing the game, and its a game after all, and meant to be fun. So, I dont care about realism in the end, but is the following "realistic"?
German Luftwaffe was a decisive factor in the early Blitzkrieg -campaigns of 1939 - 41. I have played several games as Germany, always building a strong CAS and tac.bomber force. I employed them in my campaigns.
The campaigns to take Europe and SU were always a cakewalk, in every single game. Fine. But they would have been even if I hadnt built a single air unit.
So, realism in detail and air missions and so on is fine, but the system in the end is flawed if you can do as easily without a tactical air force at all.
Whats the point of developing the relevant doctrines, of building the expensive units? They are a complete waste of resources.
And dont say I just dont know to employ them correctly. German Luftwaffe hadnt the time for an extensive campaign in France or Russia (up to December 41) as the front moved so fast. Where conducting a long campaign, over England, it failed.
The only successfull german air campaign comparable to the HOI2 system was in Spring 42 by II.Fliegerkorps against Malta, temporarily reducing the islands worth as an offensive british base. (this detail just to show that I too know what I am talking about)
By the way, this argument "air units in WWII didnt target dug-in units on the front successfully and only searched for targets of opportunity." Incorrect.
German Luftwaffe again: Forward air officers with the army units called in VERY specific strikes by Stukas on "single foxholes", often with devastating effect.
But back to the game. So, German Luftwaffe for Blitzkrieg is a complete waste of time and resources. Thats, well, sad, isnt it? All this technologies and pretty air planes in the game... wasted.
Another example. The US strategic bombing campaign against Germany. I played several US games too. I like to play historical, so I built a strong force of strat.bombers. Okay, 12 strat bombers in groups of 2 bomb areas in Germany. They encounter not a single german fighter. Nevertheless, the campaign has to be aborted after a mere ten days, as all 12 units are down to 10 (!)% strength due to AA-fire, inflicting minimal damage on german industry.
Again, realistic?
Please, dont give me now that the strategic campaign WAS a waste of resources and so on, I know the whole discussion about this point.
Again, gamewise, why to build VERY expensive bombers to attack the enemies industry when you will in every case be better off with only armor and the means to get them to the enemy (which is interesting for UK and US, as Germany and USSR you dont need even that).
So, my point with the german and american examples is, even if the current system is really realistic (which I doubt), it simply breaks the game. Apart from naval bombers, air units are simply something you can do without.
I can play a game about napol. wars instead, thank you, a WWII game where air force and power isnt relevant to the course of the game is wasted money, or at least far less entertaining than it could be, no matter how "realistic" it may be.
IMHO, their should be an option to target a single province, the Anti-Air power should be reduced drastically, and air units should be more powerful.
I think this would make the game much more fun to play, and thats what its all about.
On this other matter, a discussion about the nature, value and details of air power and air war in WWII is surely an interesting thing for maniacs like us, but its not naturely suited to make HOI2 a better (=more fun) game to play.
 

mld0806

Field Marshal
72 Badges
Apr 7, 2003
2.774
432
Visit site
  • Stellaris
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Mount & Blade: With Fire and Sword
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Ship Simulator Extremes
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • BATTLETECH
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • East India Company Collection
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Cities in Motion
  • Divine Wind
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Semper Fi
Amona said:
Okay, 12 strat bombers in groups of 2 bomb areas in Germany. They encounter not a single german fighter. Nevertheless, the campaign has to be aborted after a mere ten days, as all 12 units are down to 10 (!)% strength due to AA-fire, inflicting minimal damage on german industry.

I haven't weighed in here (as my large arguments were linked to early on in this thread), but I have a few comments to make on this.

First, it is very sad that the argument has degenerated to the point that it did at one point, with veiled and not-so-veiled personal attacks. We managed (as linked to) to have a very in depth discussion on this without stooping to that level.

Second, there are individual incidences outside of general air doctrine that would point to specific province targeting. On the "close air support" argument, I've pointed out that the prioritization of active combat represents the forward air controller. Perhaps, and I've admitted this, they need to increase the weight that active combat is given, as well as the odds calculation of where to send air power with multiple provinces in combat at once. The AI can already calculate the odds of winning or losing a battle, so perhaps they could link this calculation with targeting. That being said, overall air doctrine of the time (and even today) was to make overall air strategy a separate, but coordinated, strategic arm and the implementation on a wider scale than the specific sections of the front (outside of close air support), so the overarching area system is MORE REALISTIC than specific province targeting. NOT PERFECT, but the failures are in tweaks needed to the current system, not the failure of the system itself to represent reality.

Third, and this is why I quoted the section above, is that people build miniscule air forces and expect results. The US Air Force at the height of the war had ~170 air divisions (in game term equivalency) in it! Germany had ~55 at it's height. If you build a dozen, or even two, air divisions and expect historical results, you will be disappointed. If you don't build the infrastructure to support your aircraft (read: Airfields) near the fronts that you wish them to operate in, then you will be disapointed. If you try to skimp by not researching/building one type of aircraft, you'll be disappointed. Unescorted bombers will be eaten alive, and they'll do little comparative damage due to the fact that it is scaled on manpower and they're taking all the damage. Fighters will do a fair enough job of defending your airspace, but you'll see your reinforcement cost higher and that you're taking more damage than you would if you had Interceptors instead.
 

Amona

Lady General
9 Badges
Jan 2, 2004
660
0
  • Darkest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Iron Cross
  • Semper Fi
  • Victoria 2
  • 500k Club
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
In direct response: 12 bomber units are 1.200 bombers, are they not?
Thats the operational strength of VIII US Bomber Command during BIG WEEK in February 44. So, thats historical, not miniscule.
Or am I mistaken that 1 unit is 100 planes?
THe at start OOBs of the air forces come out to 100 planes a unit.
55 german units a 100 = 5.500 planes. Thats roughly correct.
Thats about the size I always have playing Germany. The German Luftwaffe simply achieves nothing with that number.
And the 170 US units. How much were strategic bombers?
Furthermore, the argument was the losses to AA-fire. I just didnt mention my escort fighters as they werent relevant to my point. In ten days, my bombers flew 12.000 sorties with the loss of 1.100 planes, thats nearly 10%. Losses of 10% in big raids over a period of time due to AA-fire? Thats hardly anywhere near realitic.
I looked it up, at this point in the game I had with USA 62 air units, number growing, hardly a miniscule force. In Blitzkrieg, german Luftwaffe had never more than 450 JU 87 Stukas, thats 4 1/2 game units. Very miniscule, and decisive even so. Again, realism of the game? Do I need 10.000 Stukas to achieve at least SOMETHING with Luftwaffe?
So, the "people" dont think they can achieve results with nothing.
Oh, I know about airfields, but, Sir, can there be more then multiple provinces with 10 airfields each?
I would be glad if other readers/posters would be so kind as to take their counterparts seriously.
Just from me omitting some things you deduced I dont know what I am doing in the game.
But thats all irrelevant, as it completely misses the point:
As it is, for ME the game is not fun to play as the air war is. This is an enhancement suggestion thread/sub-forum, and people are encouraged to post their wishes. I doubt that this whole discussion about what is realistic or how the air war really was helps to determine if the customers of Paradox (and thats what we are) have fun with the game.
If anything I say here is ironic or even insulting, I beg your pardon, I noticed your fair approach and appreciate it.
To sum up, realism is fine, a discussion about the air war or other matters is fine, but all that has nothing to do with the fun (or lack thereof) people are having with the game. And its a game, when all is said and done.
 
Last edited:

mld0806

Field Marshal
72 Badges
Apr 7, 2003
2.774
432
Visit site
  • Stellaris
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Mount & Blade: With Fire and Sword
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Ship Simulator Extremes
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • BATTLETECH
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • East India Company Collection
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Cities in Motion
  • Divine Wind
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Semper Fi
Amona said:
In direct response: 12 bomber units are 1.200 bombers, are they not?
Thats the operational strength of VIII US Bomber Command during BIG WEEK in February 44. So, thats historical, not miniscule.
Or am I mistaken that 1 unit is 100 planes?
THe at start OOBs of the air forces come out to 100 planes a unit.
55 german units a 100 = 5.500 planes. Thats roughly correct.
Thats about the size I always have playing Germany. The German Luftwaffe simply achieves nothing with that number.
And the 170 US units. How much were strategic bombers?
Furthermore, the argument was the losses to AA-fire. I just didnt mention my escort fighters as they werent relevant to my point. In ten days, my bombers flew 12.000 sorties with the loss of 1.100 planes, thats nearly 10%. Losses of 10% in big raids over a period of time due to AA-fire? Thats hardly anywhere near realitic.
I looked it up, at this point in the game I had with USA 62 air units, number growing, hardly a miniscule force. In Blitzkrieg, german Luftwaffe had never more than 450 JU 87 Stukas, thats 4 1/2 game units. Very miniscule, and decisive even so. Again, realism of the game? Do I need 10.000 Stukas to achieve at least SOMETHING with Luftwaffe?
So, the "people" dont think they can achieve results with nothing.
Oh, I know about airfields, but, Sir, can there be more then multiple provinces with 10 airfields each?
I would be glad if other readers/posters would be so kind as to take their counterparts seriously.
Just from me omitting some things you deduced I dont know what I am doing in the game.
But thats all irrelevant, as it completely misses the point:
As it is, for ME the game is not fun to play as the air war is. This is an enhancement suggestion thread/sub-forum, and people are encouraged to post their wishes. I doubt that this whole discussion about what is realistic or how the air war really was helps to determine if the customers of Paradox (and thats what we are) have fun with the game.
If anything I say here is ironic or even insulting, I beg your pardon, I noticed your fair approach and appreciate it.
To sum up, realism is fine, a discussion about the air war or other matters is fine, but all that has nothing to do with the fun (or lack thereof) people are having with the game. And its a game, when all is said and done.

A few things. First, a quick search revealed 55 distinct bomber organizations in the United States air forces.

Second, here's a quote from http://www.tsj.net/avstats/losses.html that might shed some light on your losses and possibly help justify them (that being said, AA could use some toning down, I agree there):

http://www.tsj.net/avstats/losses.html said:
The type of combat engaged in. Some missions were inherently more dangerous than others. Among the Western Allies, strategic bomber missions in Europe incurred loss rates that during some periods averaged 5% on each sortie, while some individual missions incurred 10% losses. Meanwhile, losses among escorting fighters were a small fraction of this rate, and except in times of major enemy offensives such as the Battle of Britain, defensive patrols were usually safer still. Not surprisingly the highest loss rates of all were sustained by Japanese Kamikaze missions, but conventional Japanese attacks on American ships late in the war came close, often sustaining 25% or greater loss rates.

Tempo of operations. Here we show the loss rate per month, but a key factor in this rate was the number of operational sorties flown each month. Strategic bombers might fly only one or two sorties per week, while fighters defending against them often flew several sorties per day.

Bombers flying every day will take losses at an increased rate over historical. And every sortie flown at low strength becomes a waste due to the fact that damage done is scaled by manpower. If you're flying your units with low mission termination settings and allowing them to get down to 50% strength, much less making the abort point 10%, and continuing to fly, then you are going to waste resources BIG TIME.

Also, please don't think I'm ragging on your ability to use air forces, but without detailed knowledge, I have to cover some of the common "mistakes" people make when using air forces.

Finally, and this is where I differ from those wanting specific province targeting, is that the air arm is made unnecessary not by game systems, but by the inability of the AI to use them effectively. If you try an armored offensive against a USSR with an up to date air force replete with IL-2s waiting to chew on your advancing armor columns, and you don't have an air force of your own to prevent the enemy from attacking your armored columns, your offensive WILL peter out very rapidly. With two equally well handled nations and two equally well handled air forces, a side with a better air force will win. Certainly, more armor can be more beneficial than an air force when the enemy air forces aren't being applied effectively against the proper targets with the correct force groupings. However, as a major air force proponent, I would LOVE to see a nation taxing it's TC to the max with 30+ armor units come at me when I've prepared my lines to be covered with heavy CAS support.

I know this is a discussion of game mechanics and playability, and that's the angle I'm coming from. There is a fine balance between historical simulation and gameplay that has to be maintained. Something that is totally unplayable is not good for a game. However, for a historically based war game, there has to be a nod of reality. The province specific targeting of HOI 1 and what is suggested as a fix here might be a bit more playable for some, but a far stretch from reality. On the other hand, there are fixes that need to be made to the current system to avoid some of the issues some run into, I'll admit that. But scrapping the system completely is something I can't advocate for, nor accept as a "best option". Increase and tweak targeting priorities for certain things, certainly. Change the way the AI builds, groups, and employs air forces, DEFINITELY. But don't throw the baby out with the bathwater, so to speak, by sacrificing realism and micromanagement reduction just to overcome certain issues.
 

barleyman

Major
65 Badges
May 3, 2003
682
16
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Stellaris
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • 500k Club
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • BATTLETECH
  • Surviving Mars
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Majesty 2
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Semper Fi
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
I just had an abortion of Norway invasion. Fine, my Paras and Marines (2+1) got thrown back to sea by 1 Norwegian infantry division. However, what galls me is that I had 3 groups of 4 TAC air divisions (with escorts) performing "interdiction" on Southern Norway.

Only those boys didn't attack the province being invaded even once. Nada. Zilch. Considering the op lasted for a few days, there were quite a few sorties being flown, all to the WRONG province. For the record, invaded province had 1 division of infantry and NO AA.
 

mld0806

Field Marshal
72 Badges
Apr 7, 2003
2.774
432
Visit site
  • Stellaris
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Mount & Blade: With Fire and Sword
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Ship Simulator Extremes
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • BATTLETECH
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • East India Company Collection
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Cities in Motion
  • Divine Wind
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Semper Fi
barleyman said:
I just had an abortion of Norway invasion. Fine, my Paras and Marines (2+1) got thrown back to sea by 1 Norwegian infantry division. However, what galls me is that I had 3 groups of 4 TAC air divisions (with escorts) performing "interdiction" on Southern Norway.

Only those boys didn't attack the province being invaded even once. Nada. Zilch. Considering the op lasted for a few days, there were quite a few sorties being flown, all to the WRONG province. For the record, invaded province had 1 division of infantry and NO AA.

What DID they attack, if I may ask? And how many escorts? I might be able to shed some light on the issue with a little more info.
 

Amona

Lady General
9 Badges
Jan 2, 2004
660
0
  • Darkest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Iron Cross
  • Semper Fi
  • Victoria 2
  • 500k Club
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
@mld0806:
I admit, feeling very strong in historical aspects, I am not so well into the game mechanics.
To wrap up our little discussion, you are certainly right that the system shouldnt be thrown overboard completely. I dont advocate this. We concur that it needs some tweaking and fixing.
Too, I dont really see why it shouldnt be allowed to target individual provinces as an ADDED option. The arguments against the realism of such targeted strikes dont convince me at all.
On the lossrate-issue, sure, losses were often up to 10% with the bombers, or even higher (think of RAF attack on Nuremberg in 44, or the SChweinfurt attacks of VIII US Bomber Command in 43, the strike by Luftflotte 5 on northern England on August 15th, 40 in battle of Britain, etc.), but due to AA AND fighters. What I am complaining about is losses through AA alone. I am quite sure no longer, bigger campaign suffered such ratios to AA fire alone (Kamikazes I dont count).
IMHO you are right too, that its the AI performance and employment of air force is a serious issue.
But there are still some arguments you havent countered.
What about Luftwaffe and Blitzkrieg?
There were in the campaigns of 39 -41 only about 1.700 tac.bomber and 450 CAS. That amounts to roughly 2.150 strike plans, or 21 game units. I have that when playing Germany, usually even more Stukas. They achieve absolutely nothing. I could easily do with armor alone. So, why should I build them at all and research all the technologies? I do it, cause I like air power, regardless of country I play.
I just get the strong feeling again and again that I just waste my "money".
I am not interested in showíng my discussion skills or to be right all the time.
I honestly admit I, for instance, am at an end with my knowledge and skill on how to use for example The German Luftwaffe in HOI 2.
So I honestly ask you, when and if YOU play Germany, what do you do?
 

caj

Corporal
63 Badges
Jun 25, 2004
46
0
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Field Marshal
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Tyranny: Gold Edition
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Steel Division: Normandy 44
  • BATTLETECH
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Tyranny - Tales from the Tiers
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings II
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Lead and Gold
  • Leviathan: Warships
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Semper Fi
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Supreme Ruler 2020
The Air Mission Targtting is Unrealistic.

My original reason to post the request to change the Air Missions we have now is because it is unrealistic and quite wrong. The bickering between parties - I care very little for. I will say that it seems that the majority of posters agree its unrealistic and one poster - very loudly - says it's not. Last time I checked majority opinion carries some weight.

My reasons -
1. The AAF and RAF in WW2 had detailed target packages for their Tactical and Strategic bombing Campaigns. The AAF and RAF did NOT practice a free wheeling Strategic or Tactical bombing campaign as the current system has. Airgroups were assigned to attack SPECIFIC targets to fulfill strategic objectives in support of the war effort and/or up coming offensive or defensive operations. Sometimes the orders allowed for the primary, secondary and maybe on a rare occassion third target if all were clouded over or something similar. Thought if you read any WW2 history from the Allied perspective - there were many missions where the bombs were dropped 'near' the target (hoping for hits) since most of the time it was a city sized target if there were bad weather conditions.

2. If in WW2 an Air group was to bomb railyards, road junctions, factories, marshalling yards, etc.. the Group Commander better had bombed the 'target' and not something a hundred miles away. GAME TERMS: Bomb the GD Railyards, bridges, or factories of the 'province' you have been ordered to... not the adjacent ones a hundred miles away. The Idea a Strategic bomber searches for a target from 25,000 feet is totally absurd or a Tactical bomber flying at 5,000 to 10,000 feet in the sghts of flak gunners looking for a target is just as absurd.

3. AA was brought up and very incorrectly mind you about bombers flying mindlessly into it. The AAF did everything possible to avoid flak concentrations on the way to a target. They did not blindly fly into flak if it could be avoided. The only considerable flak that most bomber streams flew through were on the last legs of the mission before the 'line up' for the bombing run. GAME TERMS- They did not fly province to province searching for targets from 25,000 feet in the middle of flak and interceptors. They headed to the target in 'doglegs' and bombed and flew as quickly as they could home.

The 'Uber' argument is void - this is about mission targetting and realism not is airpower 'overpowered'.

Please Johan allow for specific target as another choice with area/regional targetting. Those of us who see the system needs change and like this specific mission will use it. Those who do not will have the option of using the area targetting instead. Everyone happy and no more arguing.

Cheers
CJ
 
Last edited:

barleyman

Major
65 Badges
May 3, 2003
682
16
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Stellaris
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • 500k Club
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • BATTLETECH
  • Surviving Mars
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Majesty 2
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Semper Fi
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
mld0806 said:
What DID they attack, if I may ask? And how many escorts? I might be able to shed some light on the issue with a little more info.

Oh, stacks had either 2+2 or 2+1. A bit unnecessary considering norwegian air power, but. They went bombing Bergen I think, bit hard to check the map from work. But a province with 1 infantry, no AA also.

So for invasions I should wait to see which province AI feels like bombing 1st and plan my beacheads 2nd? Now that's realism.
 

barleyman

Major
65 Badges
May 3, 2003
682
16
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Stellaris
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • 500k Club
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • BATTLETECH
  • Surviving Mars
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Majesty 2
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Semper Fi
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
caj said:
3. AA was brought up and very incorrectly mind you about bombers flying mindlessly into it. The AAF did everything possible to avoid flak concentrations on the way to a target. They did not blindly fly into flak if it could be avoided. The only considerable flak that most bomber streams flew through were on the last legs of the mission before the 'line up' for the bombing run. GAME TERMS- They did not fly province to province searching for targets from 25,000 feet in the middle of flak and interceptors. They headed to the target in 'doglegs' and bombed and flew as quickly as they could home.

On the other hand, FLAK guns were moved around. Not something that can happen in-game. And from vaguely recalled statistics, germans destroyed MORE strategic bombers via FLAK rather than interceptors.

In fact (slow day at work), I found some statistics: http://www.maxwell.af.mil/au/afhra/wwwroot/aafsd/aafsd_pdf/t159.pdf
Yes they did. Probably because Luftwaffe was wiped out in -44 more or less.
 

unmerged(46221)

Second Lieutenant
Jul 11, 2005
157
0
Of course the targetting system is not realistic. In reality, the pilots had a very clear mission. If they were able to achieve it or not, that is the real issue, isn't it? Because often it was not the case: at night for instance, the allies often bombed the wrong city as an example...

In my humble opinion, a better solution for air missions would be a precise target assignment, on province level, but introducing a random factor: the probability of success, which could increase with doctrines...

If one does not want to introduce random events in the game, then I would defend the actual system, which reflects somewhat the unreliability of the air forces of wwII.
 

unmerged(44861)

Second Lieutenant
May 30, 2005
119
0
Just on the targetting...what gets me most is my CAS not being able to support my attack properly. Like said earlier, if I attack area x, I want my CAS to atatck area x, not the entire region, or area y, because there is Tommy having a cup of tea....CAS were aleays specific and supported the troops, thats what they are...maybe TAC flew around a bit or not, I don't know, but a Stuka was close air support, bombing targets right in front of the advancing line, with the high pitched scream when diving down, lining up the target...helping the advancing troops. They were most definetly not in some adjacent region, where no attack is taking place, bombing dear old Tommy
 

barleyman

Major
65 Badges
May 3, 2003
682
16
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Stellaris
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • 500k Club
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • BATTLETECH
  • Surviving Mars
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Majesty 2
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Semper Fi
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
OK, I checked kristiansand debacle again just now. TAC will "interdict" troops in Stavager and Bergen, never in Kristiansand which is being invaded. In fact I saw them bomb Kristiansand BEFORE paradrop + amphibious landing but stop after the assault begins!

Considering it's quite a few planes amassed against 1 poor infantry, interdiction in this case is quite effective. Too bad they're suppressing boys not being invaded.

For the record, all 3 provinces have 1 infantry division each, Bergen has some AA + it's mountainous, Kristiansand + Stavager are hilly.
 

mld0806

Field Marshal
72 Badges
Apr 7, 2003
2.774
432
Visit site
  • Stellaris
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Mount & Blade: With Fire and Sword
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Ship Simulator Extremes
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • BATTLETECH
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • East India Company Collection
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Cities in Motion
  • Divine Wind
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Semper Fi
barleyman said:
OK, I checked kristiansand debacle again just now. TAC will "interdict" troops in Stavager and Bergen, never in Kristiansand which is being invaded. In fact I saw them bomb Kristiansand BEFORE paradrop + amphibious landing but stop after the assault begins!

Considering it's quite a few planes amassed against 1 poor infantry, interdiction in this case is quite effective. Too bad they're suppressing boys not being invaded.

For the record, all 3 provinces have 1 infantry division each, Bergen has some AA + it's mountainous, Kristiansand + Stavager are hilly.

Try launching the aircraft one hour after combat begins in Kristansand and see if that helps. Sometimes the AI will "shift fire" on stationary units and avoid units they've already hit. If there is an active combat in the region when the order is given, they SHOULD prioritize it (it's not flawless, I'll admit, and could use MORE priority). You can also try to give the order by R-CLICKing on Kirstansand (not CTRL + R-CLICK) and giving the order that way. That sometimes (but not always) sends them to the right place, at least for the first sortie.

That is the best way to work around the problems with AI targeting. If you want close air support, have them launch an hour after combat is engaged and they should, usually, support the active combat.