Changes and tweaks to career mode

[Eisenfaustus]

32 minutes ago, Yogiflight said:

Another observation I always make is, the enemy fighters are always attacking from above. No matter if we are intercepting bombers or ground attack aircrafts, we always approach at the altitude of the aircrafts we intercept, while the escort fighters are, of course, flying higher. You would never intercept in such a stupid way, IRL.

Absolutely - another reason why I tend to play as squadron leader only. 

[Yogiflight]

3 hours ago, Eisenfaustus said:

Absolutely - another reason why I tend to play as squadron leader only. 

With the lack of leading possibility, this doesn't make too much sense to me.

[Eisenfaustus]

6 hours ago, Yogiflight said:

With the lack of leading possibility, this doesn't make too much sense to me.

I see your point - yet the possibilities of the squadron leader I often use:

- for careers like Rhineland move the 2nd waypoint closer to the action for air starts

- change group and aircraft composition before the mission 

- choose for myself the mission I want to fly

- in the air: climb above the ordered flight height so that my unit at least starts with an energy advantage. 
 

but yes - I would love the ai commands to be more effective as well. A communication overhaul bringing this game back to the level of Il2 46 is a pipedream of mine

[csThor]

What may help outside AI improvements:

 

Separate the flight into sub-units. Fighters operated in tactical formations ... so if you have eight fighters set up two Schwärme / 4-ships, if you have six then use three Rotten/Pairs or (if you fly for the VVS) then three Vics. That way one could inject a secondary "command layer" for the player ... he'd have something to manage and could order his subordinates to do something specific instead of watching them tunnel-visioning according to the mission logic and get slaughtered. I don't see many if any problems with this given my rather limited knowledge of the mission editor (though I bet a "professional" could throw a few spanners into these ruminations of mine  ).

[Noisemaker]

On 2/17/2022 at 7:36 AM, LukeFF said:

By the way, 13/14/15, etc mean the following:

 

13: Moscow

14: Stalingrad

15: Kuban

18: Rhineland

That's an odd numbering system.  It would seem to suggest that there are two modules between Kuban and Rhineland (Normandy as 17 most likely), and that there are 2-3 before Moscow.

Hmmmm...

22 hours ago, Yogiflight said:

EDIT: Another observation I always make is, the enemy fighters are always attacking from above. No matter if we are intercepting bombers or ground attack aircrafts, we always approach at the altitude of the aircrafts we intercept, while the escort fighters are, of course, flying higher. You would never intercept in such a stupid way, IRL.

I've seen this (and mentioned it in the bug reports section) several times.  It's quite annoying doing a cover mission or intercept and bringing your flight up to 20000 plus feet to get the jump on the enemy, only to merge with them 1-2 thousand feet above you, because the mission parameters were set to your altitude, and not the target altitude.

[Eisenfaustus]

@LukeFF I know that enemy planes count is dependent on difficulty - the harder the more. But is it also dependant on your flight size? On medium difficulty does the game try to match your flight size or can you tip the balance by altering squadsize as leader?

[LukeFF]

4 hours ago, Eisenfaustus said:

@LukeFF I know that enemy planes count is dependent on difficulty - the harder the more. But is it also dependant on your flight size? On medium difficulty does the game try to match your flight size or can you tip the balance by altering squadsize as leader?

 

I don't think there's any matching done, no.

[Ram399]

2 hours ago, LukeFF said:

I don't think there's any matching done, no.

Unless this is a recent change in my experience on intercept flights the size of the opposing escort will mirror your own flight size based off of difficulty.
Generally speaking the moderate level tries to keep it at a rough parity- but its been a while since I have tested this.

[LukeFF]

On 2/13/2022 at 5:28 AM, Alexmarine said:

Also, MG151/20 and 30mm cannons only for the Kuban career time frame? Wouldn't mind it along a better mission rotation as from the documents showed by Thor and Yogi

 

Yes, MG 151/20s were first deployed on Hs 129s in 1943.

 

On 2/13/2022 at 9:17 AM, csThor said:

Yes and no. Armed recon for Schlachtflieger was a specified mission type to be flown by small groups at first light every day of ops (if tactical recon was unavailable). The more common and IMO more important mission type would be "Traffic interdiction" since that can contain vehicles on roads (including armored formations), trains and even ships on rivers and canals. The mission would specify an area in between two geographic points (how large depends on the type of aircraft and the timeframe) and then have the flight "patrol" it for enemy ground movements. The mission goal would be about establishing a "presence" over the specified area for a certain time with destroyed vehicles/tanks/trains/barges as a secondary thing in the mission logic.

 

One could call it armed recon, of course (I think it would fit Allied terminology this way), but as I said the Luftwaffe specified exactly what "Armed Recon" was supposed to be (and when it was to be flown).

 

Would interdiction missions also apply to Hs 129s in the fall of 1942? I have Martin Pegg's book and so am familiar with the entries about them attacking trains and vehicles in the Stalingrad sector, plus the section later on referring to Luftwaffe armed recon.

 

Basically, I'm trying to compile information to send to @=FB=VikS showing that this mission type was not only for Ju 88 C-6s but also planes like the Hs 129 and perhaps also jabo Bf 109 Es. If you can point me to an extract from one of those documents from the German Docs in Russia website, that would be even better. Thanks!

Edited February 21, 2022 by LukeFF

[LukeFF]

Ok, so I've machine-translated some of the text from page 49 of the document @Eisenfaustus linked to and found this bit:

 

Quote

In the free battle flight, the battle wing is assigned a battle area in which it independently conducts the battle, taking into account and in the sense of the order and the intention of the ground force. Targets for free battle flight are: Traffic on roads, trails, approach troughs, accumulations of troops and columns on approach and assemblies on roads, in the field, and in localities, tank emplacements, loadouts, unloadouts, railroad trains, ammunition, and operating material depots. The moving targets are either reconnoitered in advance by assigned reconnaissance planes of the battle group, or the battle group has individual battle planes reconnoiter the targets themselves during the approach.

C. Deployment in tactical space

 

18 The main strength and effect of the battle plane as a battle-decisive weapon lies in the tactical area. Up to about 60 km behind the front line is the area in which, if the ground force makes a fluid advance, the battle plane can conduct its fight in such a way as to exert a lasting influence on the course of the battle. In the tactical area, the attack of the battle pilots extends to troop concentrations and the advance of the enemy, major shifts behind the front, marching motorized columns of all branches of the armed forces, supply installations, command posts, and headquarters of higher staffs.

 

Is there anything else in there about interdiction that I may have missed?

[csThor]

That's the core of it, but I'd send the entirety of it starting on page 46 all the way up to page 52 (because it also contains important notes to mission and attack profiles). Want me to translate that for you? Machine translation is fine for getting the gist but it sounds wonky in parts.

Remember two things, however: First this is an educational document for teaching new officers and second it's dated in late 1943. Meaning by that time the Hs 129 was already assigned the role of Panzerjäger (which becomes very obvious in the part concerning a theoretical river crossing supporting the Army's assault - it's always "except the Panzerjäger") and the mainstay was to be the Fw 190. 

 

In practice I doubt an a/c as slow as the Hs 129 would be sent into the "tactical area". Bf 109 E and later Fw 190 were simply much faster and much more survivable over enemy territory and also able to cover more ground more quickly.

[LukeFF]

36 minutes ago, csThor said:

That's the core of it, but I'd send the entirety of it starting on page 46 all the way up to page 52 (because it also contains important notes to mission and attack profiles). Want me to translate that for you? Machine translation is fine for getting the gist but it sounds wonky in parts.

Remember two things, however: First this is an educational document for teaching new officers and second it's dated in late 1943. Meaning by that time the Hs 129 was already assigned the role of Panzerjäger (which becomes very obvious in the part concerning a theoretical river crossing supporting the Army's assault - it's always "except the Panzerjäger") and the mainstay was to be the Fw 190. 

 

Understood, and yes, it would be great if you could provide a more proper translation. Thanks! ??

 

38 minutes ago, csThor said:

In practice I doubt an a/c as slow as the Hs 129 would be sent into the "tactical area". Bf 109 E and later Fw 190 were simply much faster and much more survivable over enemy territory and also able to cover more ground more quickly.

 

I'm thinking the same thing as well, but that makes me wonder why in summer / fall 1942 we have instances where Hs 129s were sent to attack and destroy trains. The most likely reason is that Soviet opposition in the air was so weak that it was worth the risk. In 1943 sure, of course they weren't sent out like that, but in mid / late 1942 there was still a chance of doing that with a reasonable chance of success, it seems.

[Alexmarine]

2 hours ago, csThor said:

 the mainstay was meant to be the Fw 190. 

 

Don't forget that by the start of the soviet summer offensive a good part of the SG units were still flying on Ju-87Ds, the conversion process was still going on even in the early days of 1945 for some units

[csThor]

Of course, but the theoretical nature of the document reveals itself in demands such as "every fighter is to carry bombs all the time". That is a clear dig at the Luftwaffe's fighter mindset originating from Richthofen. It is clearly a theory as the fighter force (to which the Schlachtflieger belonged prior to getting their own Inspector General in 1943) wouldn't budge from their views and, given the deteriorating situation especially WRT to fuel, couldn't. Extending their training to incorporate ground attacks (which even pre-war was never the case) was both impossible and unrealistic ... but untrained pilots do not produce results. As such the document should not be taken as gospel but as an outline of the theories on which the Schlachtflieger arm was to operate. Real life would always demand compromises.

[csThor]

Okay, I went through the pages 45-52 and translated them. In parts that was a real bitch, wording is sometimes weird (the german language of the timeframe has distinctive characteristics that are "weird" to our modern ears) and at times I struggled to provide an accurate translation. I have highlighted two or three such comments of mine in red. Maybe one of you can suggest a better translation.

Translation.zip

[Alexmarine]

On 2/17/2022 at 5:17 PM, LukeFF said:

 the one thing I do know that was globally changed with all dive-bombing aircraft is that they now fly at 1500 meters. From what I was told, this is an AI issue with the way they are told to dive-bomb; if the altitude was set above 1500 meters, they would glide down to that altitude before initiating their diving attack.

 

You sure it's an issue and not a feature? I didn't realized it at the time but gliding to 1500m before initiating the final dive is basically the procedure of IJN dive bombers during WW2 

https://youtu.be/MLfbYHPWx2o

 

Pacific confirmed? 

[LukeFF]

Just to add to the notes that were made about career mode:

• This new traffic interdiction mission is meant to depict German ground attack operations behind the front lines where they would seek out and attack any ground targets they found - vehicles, guns, tanks, etc. Structurally, these missions are very close to Armed Recon missions flown by the RAF and USAAF, so it's my guess we'll see that mission type sooner rather than later. All German ground attack squadrons - except for the Hs 129 units on Kuban - can fly these interdiction missions.
• III./KG 76, unlike the other two Ju 88 C-6 units, has a mix of A-4s and C-6s. Not to worry, though - there is a configuration file that controls what type of missions each plane can fly, so you won't have C-6s sent out on level bombing missions, etc. In other words, the missions for these two planes are entirely separate.
• Photos of C-6s operating in the East are few and far between, but the few I have found show them without external bomb racks, so the default bomb loadout is always just internal bombs.
• Likewise, it's a bit of an educated guess right now, but according to the advice and research of VikS, MG 151/20s and MG 131s started being fitted to C-6s in 1943, so I've locked those two mods for Stalingrad but have made them available and enabled by default starting with Kuban. If anyone has more info on weapons used by the C-6 in the East, I would much appreciate it.
• For the Rhineland map, the Fw 190 A-6 has been removed from I./JG 26 and II./JG 26 (most of these planes were gone from these two units while they were still in Normandy).
• Some further adjustments were made to the award system - in particular, to earn an award by destroying a particular number of ground targets, the minimum number was increased.
• For the Fw 190 F-8, most of the loadouts are now based on research in Jan Horn's book on KG 51 (Das Flurschaden Geschwader). This means at a minimum a loadout of a centerline SC 500, and in other cases additional SD 70 bombs on the wings. On Attack Vehicle Column missions, the loadout is now 8x SD 70s. Traffic Interdiction missions use the 1x SC 250 + 4 SD 70 loadout. Similar changes were made to the Fw 190 A-6 when it's configured as a G-3 (these might still need further adjustments).
• For the Fw 190 D-9, the bomb loadout on Attack Vehicle Column missions is now 4x SD 70s.
• For the Bf 109 E-7, the bomb loadout on Attack Vehicle Column missions is now 4x SC 50s.
• For the Fw 190 A-5, similar changes were made for ground attack missions (can't remember exactly what at the moment, since I'm not at my gaming computer right now).
• Some edits to AI German Rhineland squadrons, in particular what aircraft they are assigned.

Edited March 15, 2022 by LukeFF

[Yogiflight]

Hi Luke, apart from a bug that appeared with the update, that on the Moscow map my 110 missions lead to the south instead to the north,where the frontline is, the number of 110s per mission got reduced from six to four. Is there a special reason for that?

[LukeFF]

1 hour ago, Yogiflight said:

Hi Luke, apart from a bug that appeared with the update, that on the Moscow map my 110 missions lead to the south instead to the north,where the frontline is, the number of 110s per mission got reduced from six to four. Is there a special reason for that?

 

Yes, I'm trying to keep things consistent with the other German units and what I've read in official documentation, namely that these missions were typically flown in flights of 4. I can always bump it back up if people are finding Bf 110 missions too difficult with just 4 planes. 

[Alexmarine]

25 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

 I can always bump it back up if people are finding Bf 110 missions too difficult with just 4 planes. 

 

Hope not, if people don't like the mission generator creating historical-based flights they are free to take control of their units and change whatever they prefer about a planned mission (or enjoy one of the faster, more customisable game modes). Leave the algorithm generating missions as historical as possible, thanks.

 

Btw, no fix for dive bombing? Are the Stuka still teasing IJN Val's procedures? 

[LukeFF]

8 minutes ago, Alexmarine said:

Btw, no fix for dive bombing? Are the Stuka still teasing IJN Val's procedures? 

 

Lol yes. ? I imagine this will have to be something fixed with an update to the AI. At least, that is the way I understood it when it was explained to me.

[Yogiflight]

10 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

19 minutes ago, Alexmarine said:

Btw, no fix for dive bombing? Are the Stuka still teasing IJN Val's procedures? 

 

Lol yes. ? I imagine this will have to be something fixed with an update to the AI. At least, that is the way I understood it when it was explained to me.

What is wrong with the AI? The only thing I found not like it should be, was that not all pilots dropped their bombs. But this issue is in the bombing misions of the 110, too. And those missions are in 1500m. You still can fly Stuka missions with the old altitudes of 2500 or 3000m on the Stalingrad map, I just checked it. I had to delete the career two times, but the third career was with the old altitudes.

 

26 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

At least, that is the way I understood it when it was explained to me.

Yes, my Russian isn't too good either

[Alexmarine]

4 minutes ago, Yogiflight said:

I had to delete the career two times, but the third career was with the old altitudes.

 

 

I wasn't that persistent and I just thought it would have kept using the lower dive altitudes, will try to restart a campaign untill I see the old values coming up then.

[Yogiflight]

8 hours ago, Alexmarine said:

 

I wasn't that persistent and I just thought it would have kept using the lower dive altitudes, will try to restart a campaign untill I see the old values coming up then.

Just in case it makes a difference, I tried it with the II./St. G2, based at Oblivskaya.

[Yogiflight]

Why does the Hs 129 have long straight exhaust pipes, except when equipped with the MK 103, which gives them short, bent upwards pipes?

English Wikipedia states, that the short exhaust pipes, together with the MK 103 and the missing antenna mast were the external differences for the B-2 version, compared to the B-1. Is this correct or were the short pipes introduced at some point during the B-2 production?

[LukeFF]

1 minute ago, Yogiflight said:

Why does the Hs 129 have long straight exhaust pipes, except when equipped with the MK 103, which gives them short, bent upwards pipes?

English Wikipedia states, that the short exhaust pipes, together with the MK 103 and the missing antenna mast were the external differences for the B-2 version, compared to the B-1. Is this correct or were the short pipes introduced at some point during the B-2 production?

 

From what I understand, the short exhaust pipes were a feature of later production (i.e., 1943-44) Hs 129s, so it was decided to tie them with the MK 103 mod. 

[Yogiflight]

8 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

From what I understand, the short exhaust pipes were a feature of later production (i.e., 1943-44) Hs 129s, so it was decided to tie them with the MK 103 mod. 

Yes, that would make sense. Especially as there were not too many B-1s produced.

[LukeFF]

So, for the latest update, the main change was to the Ju 87 D-3. It used to be that the AI wouldn't drop more than one bomb in a dive, but now that's been fixed. As a result, I went back and reworked the loadouts. Now, the main loadout for most missions is 1x SC 250 + 4x SD 70. For bridge bombing missions, the loadout is 1x SC 500. All of the irrelevant mods for dive-bombing missions are disabled, as well as the crazy huge SC 1800. The dive siren is enabled by default through the end of the Kuban campaign (although units were removing it by the end of 1942, in looking through images of Volume 5 of Black Cross / Red Star, some Ju 87s were still fitted with the siren throughout the battles of 1943).

[easterling77]

Thanks for the constant improvments.

These are much appreciated

[LukeFF]

56 minutes ago, easterling77 said:

Thanks for the constant improvments.

These are much appreciated

 

Welcome!

 

I now remember there was one other thing: the timeline for the MG 131 and the MG 151/20 in the Ju 88 C-6 was changed: now these mods will be first available for the Normandy campaign. In looking at photos from a number of sources, my conclusion is they first saw usage on C-6s at some point after ~mid-1943, which is when they exit the Kuban map as a playable asset.

[Alexmarine]

Hi @LukeFF, have something regarding Stalingrad career:

The Italian 21° Gruppo CT with their MC202 is currently based at Pitomnik but historically they were based at both Tatsinskaya and Kantemirowka (unfortunately this one outside the game map). Do you think pushing them back again at Tatsinskaya will impair gameplay too much? In case can I suggest to have them appear only when the player actively join the unit? Just like for the FW190 unit also based at Pitomnik.

[LukeFF]

1 hour ago, Alexmarine said:

Hi @LukeFF, have something regarding Stalingrad career:

The Italian 21° Gruppo CT with their MC202 is currently based at Pitomnik but historically they were based at both Tatsinskaya and Kantemirowka (unfortunately this one outside the game map). Do you think pushing them back again at Tatsinskaya will impair gameplay too much? In case can I suggest to have them appear only when the player actively join the unit? Just like for the FW190 unit also based at Pitomnik.

 

No, I don't think moving them back to Tatsinskaya would be a problem. The reason I did that back in the day was because at the time they would always be the fighter escort assigned to German bomber flights. Now that that's no longer an issue, I can relocate them.

 

Just one thing: what source says 21st Gruppo was based at Tatsinskaya?

 

I./JG 51 also wouldn't be an issue to move. 

[Alexmarine]

1 hour ago, LukeFF said:

I./JG 51 also wouldn't be an issue to move. 

 

I./JG 51 is a "bonus" unit. Let it be there at Pitomnik along the other german fighters unit.

1 hour ago, LukeFF said:

 

Just one thing: what source says 21st Gruppo was based at Tatsinskaya?

 

For now I am checking out various Italian sites, but I am trying to get quotes from some books. Not an easy task I admit, I'll keep looking a little more...

[LukeFF]

2 hours ago, Alexmarine said:

For now I am checking out various Italian sites, but I am trying to get quotes from some books. Not an easy task I admit, I'll keep looking a little more...

 

Got it. I see Wikipedia mentions them being at Tatsinskaya, but another source backing that up would be great. 

[LukeFF]

1 hour ago, LukeFF said:

Got it. I see Wikipedia mentions them being at Tatsinskaya, but another source backing that up would be great. 

 

Ok, I found the source of the Wikipedia quote - it's from Volume 3 of Black Cross / Red Star.

 

I'll update the files and send them to the developers for inclusion in the next update.

[Alexmarine]

1 hour ago, LukeFF said:

 

Ok, I found the source of the Wikipedia quote - it's from Volume 3 of Black Cross / Red Star.

 

I'll update the files and send them to the developers for inclusion in the next update.

 

Thanks! Italian sources were way too dodgy and mixed with annedocts that were hard to believe and made me wary to cite them.

On the other hand some stuff seems to be repeated in various versions and sounds more believable (regarding possible modifications as standard and type of ordnance used), along type of miasions commonly flown. Those seems to come from a work published in the 80s in Italy, 

 

If you have time to add some more details to the unit before next update along the move to Tatsinskaya I'll be happy to oblige

[LukeFF]

1 hour ago, Alexmarine said:

 

Thanks! Italian sources were way too dodgy and mixed with annedocts that were hard to believe and made me wary to cite them.

On the other hand some stuff seems to be repeated in various versions and sounds more believable (regarding possible modifications as standard and type of ordnance used), along type of miasions commonly flown. Those seems to come from a work published in the 80s in Italy, 

 

If you have time to add some more details to the unit before next update along the move to Tatsinskaya I'll be happy to oblige

 

Yes, that would be great. Up to this point I've been working with limited information, so any more info you could pass along about mission types flown and loadouts carried would be much appreciated.

[Alexmarine]

1 hour ago, LukeFF said:

 

Yes, that would be great. Up to this point I've been working with limited information, so any more info you could pass along about mission types flown and loadouts carried would be much appreciated.

 

About modifiations and ordnances: Apart from absolutely no Gunpods available, I would also exclude the 100Kg bombs, the only bombs I see cited around are the 50Kg ones which were noted for being pretty much ineffective against most targets (and mainly used by the MC200 in any case); Armored glass seems to appear on some planes in photos while not on others, I would leave it available at player discretion but not given by default; Same for the 7.7mm wing guns, from most photo they don't seems to have been installed but I can't fully exclude that some of them were received and maybe mounted, again I would leave them available at player discretion.

 

About mission type: given that only 12 Macchi were around it seems that were almost exclusively used in the pure fighter role, conducting mainly free-hunts in the period before the soviet winter offensive along with saltuary escort missions (mainly their own MC200 units, maybe assign them Ju-87 escorts for the time being); after the start of the soviet offensive there seems to be a spike of escort mission above any other kind for both ground strikes again but also for the Stalingrad airlift (so make those coincide with the airlift period); to add some variety at the same time of the last few weeks I would also add a few ground attack missions mainly against russian ground columns advancing westward and troops concentration.

 

If possible have the unit be at 12 planes strength for the duration of the campaign with flight strength going from a minimum of 3 to a maximum of 6 planes per sortie.

 

Btw, can you give me the exact in-game date by which the unit will be based at Tatsinskaya?

 

Thanks;

 

Alex

[LukeFF]

8 hours ago, Alexmarine said:

 

About modifiations and ordnances: Apart from absolutely no Gunpods available, I would also exclude the 100Kg bombs, the only bombs I see cited around are the 50Kg ones which were noted for being pretty much ineffective against most targets (and mainly used by the MC200 in any case); Armored glass seems to appear on some planes in photos while not on others, I would leave it available at player discretion but not given by default; Same for the 7.7mm wing guns, from most photo they don't seems to have been installed but I can't fully exclude that some of them were received and maybe mounted, again I would leave them available at player discretion.

 

About mission type: given that only 12 Macchi were around it seems that were almost exclusively used in the pure fighter role, conducting mainly free-hunts in the period before the soviet winter offensive along with saltuary escort missions (mainly their own MC200 units, maybe assign them Ju-87 escorts for the time being); after the start of the soviet offensive there seems to be a spike of escort mission above any other kind for both ground strikes again but also for the Stalingrad airlift (so make those coincide with the airlift period); to add some variety at the same time of the last few weeks I would also add a few ground attack missions mainly against russian ground columns advancing westward and troops concentration.

 

If possible have the unit be at 12 planes strength for the duration of the campaign with flight strength going from a minimum of 3 to a maximum of 6 planes per sortie.

 

Btw, can you give me the exact in-game date by which the unit will be based at Tatsinskaya?

 

Thanks;

 

Alex

 

Excellent, sounds good, thanks! ? I can work with that.

 

They will be at Tatsinskaya from early September to early December 1942.

 

 

[Alexmarine]

27 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

 

They will be at Tatsinskaya from early September to early December 1942.

 

 

I think you can have them on station a little more into December, I see them relocated in Stalino only by January '43 and the italian sources point out to Kantemirowka being evacuated on the 21st of December at the latest. Given that Tatsinskaya seems to have been overrun by soviet troops on the 24th with only Ju-52 units still on site  I think we can have the Macchi still linger there untill the 21st.

 

 

11 minutes ago, Alexmarine said:

 

Edited April 24, 2022 by Alexmarine
Editing and a little correction