Slitherine

The same way that the finnish and romanian air forces are represented in CEAW, shouldn´t be consider to also include the hungarian air force? I told you this because hungarian air forces were by 1943-1944 the most powerful minor axis countries air force with more than 600 Messerchmitt Bf 109 fighters and with a factory at the location of Győr that produced more than 300 aircrafts of this type.

Interesting i didnt know that

Damn Hungarians they are so lame, but no so much now in my mind!

Quite interesting!

I just consulted the old OOB for Scorched Earth/Fire in the East and it also lists the Hungarian airforce at the same strength as the Finn's - ie one CEAW FTR, which receives Me-109 upgrades through the course of the war.

As a note, it also lists the Rumanian airforce as having a CEAW equivalent TAC unit in Jun 41 comprised of Blenheim's-He 111H's and Ju-87B's. During the course of the game the TAC receives upgrades options including Ju-87D's and Ju-88's. So if this OOB is correct, the Rumanians should start with a half decent TAC too!

schwerpunkt wrote:Quite interesting!

I just consulted the old OOB for Scorched Earth/Fire in the East and it also lists the Hungarian airforce at the same strength as the Finn's - ie one CEAW FTR, which receives Me-109 upgrades through the course of the war.

As a note, it also lists the Rumanian airforce as having a CEAW equivalent TAC unit in Jun 41 comprised of Blenheim's-He 111H's and Ju-87B's. During the course of the game the TAC receives upgrades options including Ju-87D's and Ju-88's. So if this OOB is correct, the Rumanians should start with a half decent TAC too!

You are right about the Blemheim´s (39), Heinkel´s (35) and Ju-87-B´s (52) at the disposal of the Romanian Air force at the beginning of Barbarossa and attached to Luftflotte 4. To those aircrafts you have mentioned it would have to add the italian Savoia Marchetti SM 79 with 24 aircrafts in the romanian air force in 1941. So, the total number of aircraft bombers available in the romanian air forces was 150 aircrafts but in CEAW it is needed 260 aircrafts to represent an air unit so may be it would be too much to include a romanian bomber unit. Let´s think that in CEAW GS 1939 scenario (as in the vanilla 1939 scenario) the french Armee de L´Air has no bomber units in CEAW and it was a larger air force than the romanian with a lot of bombers (even only about 200 were available) in 1940. Nevertheless, the romanian fighter forces were about 245 fighter aircrafts in 1941 when Barbarossa started and include mainly polish PZL P.11´s but also had british Hurricanes, german Me-109´s and the romanian IAR 80. But it was during the war against the USSR and even more when the western allies began to bomb Ploesti when the romanian fighter force become a powerful one with more than 200 Me-109´s and about 150 romanian IAR 80´s and IAR 81´s causing, along with the germans, heavy losses to the american B-24 bombers.

Adding a Hungarian fighter seems like a good idea, but then we need to add a Russian fighter too to maintain game balance. The Russian fighter can be placed inland so it won't interfere with the early phase of Barbarossa.

Please answer yes or no about such a change? If I get enough yes I can update the scenario files.

I vote yes to both things: to add a hungarian fighter and to add one more soviet fighter.

I vote yes to both as well, although I am not sure that the Soviets need any more help in this mod.

I think its something worth considering down the track once we understand the play balance issues better.

The only way to find out possible game balance issues is by trying.

But trying just to try is not always fun. The idea of the discussion is to figure out of such a change actually ADDS something to the game. If the answer is no then the idea is quickly buried. If the answer is yes, then we can try to find a way to implement it without disturbing the game balance. As a reference point I would think that the base for trying out such a change would be to increase each side with one fighter. That seems to have the least consequence, but it won't be non-existent. E. g. the Russians can send all their air units to Finland and steamroller the Finns before the Germans can respond in force. This can be done if it's done before the German units get close enough to Leningrad. Such a possible scenario was one reason we decided to send some Russian units from the at start units to the Siberian reserve arriving late 1941. Now the Russians don't have a strong counter attack capability in the first months of Barbarossa and that works pretty well.

So it may take awhile until such a change would get to the public via a patch. So the discussion now is to figure out if it's even worth testing. If it doesn't add anything to the gaming experience then it's maybe best to leave things as is. So I like to see players giving good arguments that adding a Hungarian fighter is important for historical reasons.

Initially I felt that the Romanian fighter unit actually was equivalent to the sum of the real Romanian and Hungarian fighter. So one fighter unit simulates all Axis minor air units in the south east. The Finnish fighter was added for another reason. It was to counter the Russian early strikes against Helsinki. We could have added a German fighter, but then it would become too powerful. So the Finnish fighter simulates all air units that operated in the northern theater.

I don't think that this change is needed.

I don´t think adding a hungarian fighter would unbalance anything but it seems that people don´t like this idea so let´s let the things as now. I have to say again that this is a simulation wargame and the only 100% balanced strategy game is chess. So in a simulation wargame the forces could be really unbalanced (I´ve played several wargames with much unbalanced scenarios to play) but the difference in respect with chess is that in a simulation wargames you don´t need a check mate for achieving a victory but you have to perform good tactical and/or strategic movements in which you can do better or worse than in the real war happens.

I am ok w adding the Hungarian fighter. For balance you can also add a fighter for the Russians, an idea would be to put it close-ish to the front line so the Axis can damage it a bit if they allocate enough resources to it on the first turn of Barbarossa. Ditto if adding an armour.

what about to use both fighter and both should starts on 5 steps (rumanian and hungarian)

thommo wrote:what about to use both fighter and both should starts on 5 steps (rumanian and hungarian)

The cost of getting them both to full strength (i.e., 10-steps each) would be 5 steps x 2 fighters x (10x0.6 PPs per step repaired) = 60 PPs. In effect you'd be getting a second, though weaker, fighter for 60 PPs. If you wanted to offset the cost then if you started both fighters at 2-steps this would cost, 8-steps x 2-fighters x 6 PPs/step = 96 PPs. Or approximately the cost of building a new fighter. However; this would make the axis weaker in the sense of having a Romanian and Hungarian fighter versus having a Romanian and German fighter. That is, I'd prefer spending a 100 PPs for a German fighter over a Hungarian one.

Thanks to Stauffenberg, I found this OOB for the Hungarian airforce;

http://niehorster.orbat.com/015_hungary/_aircraft.html

The Hungarians had some very decent aircraft by the end of the war!

And here you all have an interesting document about the finnish air force strength in 1939 although the article is mainly referred to the Battle of Britain: http://members.tripod.com/Rush_9/OoBob1.htm

On this link you can find interesting information about minor axis air forces in 1939: http://world.std.com/~ted7/minorafe.htm

The link below allows a picture of the Finnish forces in 1941;

http://niehorster.orbat.com/024_finland ... inland.htm

The Finns obviously received a significant number of planes from various forces between 1939 and 1941; eg

G50s from Italy, Hurricanes from Britain, MS406/410s from France (some via Germany after FoF), and some russian planes.

All in all, less planes than the Hungarians but the Finnish FTR was added for play balance I understand.

One way to solve this could be to let the Axis start with 5 step air units for Finland, Romania and Hungary and no added Russian air units.

This means it costs about the cost of 1 German fighter (90 vs 100) to get all Axis minor air units up to full strength. Even though it's better to build a German fighter than building Axis minor fighters, it's probably a good idea to upgrade the Axis minor fighters. A 5 step fighter is not very useful so in order to use them you build them to 10 steps.

I think such a solution could be added without changing game balance much. The Axis minor fighter units will be at least as good as Russian fighters so they're worth having.

All I need to do is to make some code about adding the fighters at 5 steps when they join the Axis instead of 10. 5 step air units at start is probably more accurate to each Axis minor 1941 OOB. That they can be increased to 10 steps simulates how the air force increased over the years.

How do you like this suggestion?

Stauffenberg wrote:One way to solve this could be to let the Axis start with 5 step air units for Finland, Romania and Hungary and no added Russian air units.

This means it costs about the cost of 1 German fighter (90 vs 100) to get all Axis minor air units up to full strength. Even though it's better to build a German fighter than building Axis minor fighters, it's probably a good idea to upgrade the Axis minor fighters. A 5 step fighter is not very useful so in order to use them you build them to 10 steps.

I think such a solution could be added without changing game balance much. The Axis minor fighter units will be at least as good as Russian fighters so they're worth having.

All I need to do is to make some code about adding the fighters at 5 steps when they join the Axis instead of 10. 5 step air units at start is probably more accurate to each Axis minor 1941 OOB. That they can be increased to 10 steps simulates how the air force increased over the years.

How do you like this suggestion?

Sounds good. I would say yes to this change.

I like that idea too.