PDA

View Full Version : Dieppe Raid 42



Sonko
11-11-2007, 16:52
I'm currently working on the Dieppe raid.
Fockes and F4's are defending the town Dieppe from the attacking British, American and Canadian troops.
I use the Normandy2 map.

Background:

" On Wednesday, 19 August 1942, the Allies launched a major cross-channel attack, with landings taking place at the French port of Dieppe. The Luftwaffe played a major role in countering this raid, and the air battle over Dieppe proved to be one of the Focke-Wulf 190's finest hours. The two German fighter units involved, J.G. 2 and J.G. 26, both called upon three FW 190 fighter Gruppen, along with FW 190-equipped Jabostaffeln. Other Luftwaffe units involved in the day's fighting included II./K.G. 40 with Do 217 E-2s, K.G. 2 with Do 217 E-4s, and 1.(F)/123 with a variety of single and twin-engined reconnaissance types (including a single FW 190 A-3). The Allies considered air cover essential to the success of their landings, and they could rely on around-the-clock assistance from RAF Spitfires, Hurricanes, Typhoons and Mustangs. 48 squadrons of Spitfires took part, including 42 equipped with Spitfire Vs, two with Spitfire VIs, and four with Spitfire IXs. Support for the mostly Canadian landing force was also provided by R.A.F. bomber units, along with the Spitfires of the American 31st FG and the B-17s of the 97th BG. However, Allied numerical superiority did not prove enough to secure the skies over Dieppe on 19 August 1942."http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r79/Anarchrist/city_attack_dieppe.jpg

http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r79/Anarchrist/dieppe_map1.jpg

I'll concentrate the mission on the direct attack on the city, so attacking and defending ground troops will be quite close together. Be careful not to bomb your own troops.

The planeset will be the mentioned above, the Do-217 will be represented by the Ju-88.

Screenshots will follow later.

Zorin
11-11-2007, 17:30
Basically similar to my Caen map.

Blue:

Bf 109E 7/B
Bf 109 F4
FW 190 A4

Bf 110G2

Ju88
He111
Fw200

Red:

P39D1
HurriIIc
Spitfire Vc (2cannons)
Spitfire Vb

A20C
Mosquito FB.MK.VI

This planeset works very well.

NS-IceFire
12-11-2007, 05:48
Might be a tricky planeset to represent historically for the Allied side. FW190A-4 and Bf109F-4 are obvious choices and the Ju-88 makes a good sub for the Do-217 plus the Ju-88 is fun to fly as a formation bomber. For the Allied side its trickier...

The Spitfire IXs were F.IXs which weren't quite as fast as the LF.IXs we have. The Mustangs were early Mustang Mark I and Mark II (I think) which correspond with the early and late model P-51A. We also have no Typhoon.

I might suggest the following Allied planeset:

Spitfire Vb Clipped
Spitfire LF.Vb
Spitfire LF.Vb Clipped
Spitfire LF.IXc (limited to 6 or not include it at all)
Mosquito FB.VI
Hurricane Mark IIb
Hurricane Mark IIc
A-20C (Boston III)

Its allot of options versus a relatively small number of Luftwaffe types that fulfill several roles fortunately. I would guess that it would look something like this:

FW190A-4
Bf109F-4
Bf109E-7/B (potential jabo uses and many people do enjoy the E-7 in general)
Ju-88A-4 (depending on targets you may consider locking down some armament options)
Bf110G-2 (lock the MK108s and whatever needs to be locked)

Thats reasonably historical without being over the top. The trick is the Spitfire IX as I wish we had a proper F.IX with its corresponding performance hit and the regular IXc would cause lots of problems for the FW190A-4. The LF.Vb I do enjoy in the clipped wing format as its nearly as fast as a A-4, rolls almost as fast, and suffers only in limited ammo duration and high altitude performance.

Options! Love the scenario! Do the Canadian army proud.

Boemher
12-11-2007, 15:44
Try having a few Spitfire IX H.F they have a performance hit at low altitude like the original IX because their blower kicks in higher up. Maybe add 6 Fw 190 A5 or so to balance it out too.

Sonko
13-11-2007, 09:14
Planeset

Blue:

BF-109F-4
FW-190A-4
JU-88
(leaving out the reconnaissance planes of 1.(F)/123)

Red:

SpitfireMK.Vb
SpitfireMK.IXc (=6, no default, so it should be slower than the standard version)
Mosquito FB.VI
Typhoon (=10, Tempest, rockets only)
HurricaneMK.IIb
P-51B (droptanks only)
B-17 (early model)

I try to keep it as historically correct as possible.
That means that I also try to make a good match up between Spitfire and FW190.

This is an invasion and defend scenario, so I'm not sure wether the other aircraft mentioned above should really be included or not.

Firelok
13-11-2007, 14:09
I think the Tempest is too strong (even with rockets) to stand-in for the Typhoon in a mid-42 scenario.

I used the Tempest (with rockets) in the Scheldt map I did but they are facing down FW190 A6s in that map as it's much later in the war.

I think no Tempest (w.rockets even limited numbers.) but do have the Hurricane IIc instead.

Algorex
13-11-2007, 15:31
Both the tempest and the mustang are a bit strong for the period.

NS-IceFire
13-11-2007, 22:18
Yeah I have to agree...the Tempest does a decent job as a stand in on later maps with more powerful aircraft but I don't think it will work here. Neither will the Mustang...the Mark I's used over Dieppe were not nearly as high performance as a P-51B and drop tanks forced will just mean people dropping them as soon as the spawn.

I like Boemher's idea of having the 6 Spitfire IX's be the HF model so that at least the performance is down at low level.

MajorDamage
13-11-2007, 22:54
The Clipped Mk V variants are a good match for the 190-A4 also.

Zorin
13-11-2007, 23:14
out of interest, when were the CW version put into active duty?

Algorex
14-11-2007, 05:32
out of interest, when were the CW version put into active duty?

IIRC around june '42

irish
14-11-2007, 15:20
Both the tempest and the mustang are a bit strong for the period.

why not use a P40M?

Sonko
14-11-2007, 19:30
IIRC the P-40 wasn't in Dieppe so I'll try to leave it out.


I just did some simple speed tests of the SpitfireMK.IXc, the Tempest and the P-51B.

The Spitfire (standard loadout, aswell as with dropped droptank) reached not more than 520 kph on the deck with 50% fuel. When at 530kph the speed quickly fell back to 520kph.
With empty bombracks it reached ~510kph and it "felt" much heavier, so this might be an option too, if the speed is still too high.

Somehow the automatic radiators did never open full so there was no speed penalty from them.


The P-51B reached not more than 530kph on the deck with dropped droptanks and 50% fuel.

This speed looks OK too.


As for the Tempest I can say that it reached 560kph with empty rocket racks, which appears to be a bit too fast, so I'll definately leave it out.

All allied planes were run at automatic prop pitch.

To compare these values with the FW-190A-4: It made 540kph on the deck at 1780hp/2700rpm, that means 100% prop pitch.

So I think I'll keep the SpitMK.IXc and the P-51B, both with droptanks.
And well, the Spitfire MUST have carried droptanks, because its range is rather limited - one time across the channel and back, firing a few bursts before turning home when not using a droptank.

Zorin
14-11-2007, 20:00
Have you checked the InService data given by the file in doc's MFN thread?

Start of active service:

SpitfireMkVbCLP: Nov 42
SpitfireMkVbLF + CW: Jan 43
SpitfireMkIXc + CW: Jun 43

Plus, on the Malta map we once had the F4 face the high altitude Seafire and that unbalanced the map in favor of reds.

Sonko
14-11-2007, 20:09
[...] on the Malta map we once had the F4 face the high altitude Seafire and that unbalanced the map in favor of reds.

That's why I don't use a HF Spitfire. BTW, there doesn't exist a SpitfireMK.IXcHF. The HF model is the IXe.

All earlier spitfire variants are welcome, of course. But I try to keep the set limited, is it really useful to choose between five different Spitfires?

I think we should test the map first as soon as it is finished WITH the IXc and see how it works. Removing it, or restricting it to bombs only, all that can be done after the test.

And, referring to the source, the SpitfireMK.IX definately was there.
Maybe it was an early version, as Ice said, that's why I tried to reduce some speed somehow.
http://fw190.hobbyvista.com/dieppe.htm

Zorin
14-11-2007, 20:13
Ehm, I wanted to imply that any of the Spitfires I listed would be unsuitable for your map as they were all introduced after Aug 42.

And the Seafire HF has a poor performance compared to any IXc, yet it caused a lot of trouble for the F4.

Sonko
14-11-2007, 20:21
OK I got your point now.

The Dieppe raid was kind of high time for the Luftwaffe's new FW-190 - so I want the 190 to be the main fighter on this map.

Dieppe was on the other hand the day with over 100 RAF aircraft shot down on one day. That didn't happen often in that war.

AND: The Spitfire9 will be heavily limited, as most spitfires were 5b's and modifications of the 5b.

Sonko
15-11-2007, 16:53
OK the town is as good as ready. I have made a track with a Spitfire flying by, so please download the track and tell me if it runs OK or if i need to reduce object count in the town.

http://files.filefront.com/dieppe+testntrk/;9048739;/fileinfo.html

I must say, that I have only built the town, the targets aren't ready yet. The ships are only temporary.

Sonko
15-11-2007, 18:51
Here, a screenshot of the town, taken from a FW-190:

http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r79/Anarchrist/dieppe_shot01.jpg

Firelok
15-11-2007, 18:54
Looks Ok, you might get away with spreading more houses southwards so it mixes with the village that's there.

The cliffs look a bit odd to me, with all the beach behind them, why not experiment with the cliffs pushed back so that the green part of them merges with the green land behind the beaches. Then you can give all of the beach to the allies with a promenade/seawall separating it from the town. This is caused major problems for the tanks that were landed.

The Dieppe raid is a story of astonishing incompetence and muddle headedness in the upper levels of British Command. The head of Combined Op's Lord Louis Mountbatten is due for a major share of this flak.

It's also the story of the astonishing courage of the troops who were sent there, something the commander of the German troops occupying Dieppe paid tribute to at the time.

NS-IceFire
16-11-2007, 03:12
Ehm, I wanted to imply that any of the Spitfires I listed would be unsuitable for your map as they were all introduced after Aug 42.

And the Seafire HF has a poor performance compared to any IXc, yet it caused a lot of trouble for the F4.

Actually its technically the Seafire F.III (we also have the LF.III) as there was no high altitude variant. The HF designation was used very rarely.

Despite the service introduction dates I'm more interested in balancing the map out. The LF.Vb's are a contender against the FW190 so that its not so dominating. If we were doing a proper Dieppe raid with all the right aircraft it should be a massacre for the RAF. But if we do that then nobody will be in the server :) (picky lot they are).

Algorex
16-11-2007, 03:22
To make it cristal clear boemher was refering to the Spitfire HF Mk.IX, which has the merlin 70 optimized for higher altitudes so it would be slightly slower at usual dogfight server altitudes.

It has nothing to do with the "high altitude" seafire F.III, which is infact a normal Mk.V spitfire as far as gearing and engine goes.

The Seafire LF.III and Spitfire LF Mk.V also share the performance.

Boemher
16-11-2007, 10:51
There are three perfectly acceptable planesets for this imo,

1st off all you have Fw 190 A4 and Spitfire Vb L.F which is a very close match

or

Fw 190 A5 vs Spitfire Vb L.F which imo is most accuarate

or finally and best

Fw 190 A5 vs Spitfire L.F Vb and 6 Spitfire IX H.F (look at IL2 Compare for this if you dont understand)

Sonko
21-11-2007, 01:46
The terrain as far as I made it until now:
http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r79/Anarchrist/03dieppe_beach.jpg

http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r79/Anarchrist/01dieppe_overview.jpg


Spitfire approach:
http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r79/Anarchrist/02dieppe_approach.jpg

Flak at the targets is rather light and in the town it is somewhat hidden between the houses. The airfields and surroundings are quite good protected.

Sonko
21-11-2007, 09:56
fiddling with the light:
03:00 AM
http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r79/Anarchrist/04dieppedark.jpg

04:15 AM
http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r79/Anarchrist/05dieppebright.jpg

whaddayaprefer?

Zorin
21-11-2007, 17:16
It does look very nice but I'm pretty sure you have exceeded the appreciable amount of objects.

Best will be to take a close look at it again and delete everything that isn't neccessary in terms of serving a purpose. That way you should easily get rid of 25-50% of your objects without losing th overall atmosphere.

Even I have now started to believe that less is more.

Chatanooga
21-11-2007, 17:19
I agree with Zorin here, it does look very nice, but looks like alot of objects. What size is the .mis file ?

Firelok
21-11-2007, 17:46
It does look great, my preference would be for it to be after sun up though.

I'm concerned about this density of objects in such a small area too, it can have a real impact on online performance. It's a hard thing to balance certainly with and entirely created town, cliffs and seafront and the required number of objects needed to make a decent 'impression' of a battle in full swing.
Complete it to your satisfaction then look at it all again with a critcal eye with performance in mind, you should hit upon the ideal fairly quickly.

Sonko
22-11-2007, 19:10
Now after 'tuning' a little bit, the .mis file is 75 kb large.

I changed the island in the river radically, as it ate most fps.

I'll set the time to shortly before sunset, if it is OK.

I think I might delete all the searchlights too, as they're quite useless here, except for target count.
*thinks*
I think I'll keep them. :)

You will hear from me, when I have progressed further. :)

Zorin
22-11-2007, 19:30
You should definitely use the existing quay walls instead of hundreds of object 142s. It made quite a difference to the Libau harbor performance. Sure, they don't look as good as a proper 142 installations, but most people have no eye for that anyway.

Sonko
25-11-2007, 12:17
It is finished, I'd say.

http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r79/Anarchrist/dieppe-ready.jpg

Here a track for performance testing.
http://files.filefront.com/dieppe+test02ntrk/;9119318;/fileinfo.html

The .mis file is ~66kb large.

Cheers

Sonko
25-11-2007, 18:38
Where shall I send the three files to?

Zorin
25-11-2007, 19:01
il2maps@il2hq.com

Sonko
25-11-2007, 19:17
sent :)

Firelok
26-11-2007, 16:27
Have uploaded this for testing this week.


Where shall I send the three files to?

Map Submissions Thread (http://www.battle-fields.com/commscentre/showthread.php?t=12203)
This explains UKDedicated Map Submissions proceedure for future reference. :)

Firelok
27-11-2007, 14:28
Tested this last night and there are some major balance problems in favour of red team. With 16 players flying almost all of red team were flying SpitIXs or P51s resulting in devastation for blues.

Blues bomber forces have to destroy a massive amount of very difficult targets, either landing craft or tanks on the beach. There are no soft targets to speak of at all for Blues compared to a fair amount of trucks/artillery for Reds to destroy.

The only Spitfire should be the SpitVb the others are too different from what's needed. Bearing in mind that Channel43 only has a limited number of SpitIXs and they face off against the 109G2 on that map (and still do very well.)

Sonko
30-11-2007, 12:11
OK so I'll remove the SpitfireMK.IV.
I think I'll limit the Mustang to maybe 5 or 6 planes with default loadout locked.

I fear that if I remove the MK.V LF the 190 will dominate the field but we'll see.

Landing craft can be destroyed with guns only. It is difficult to destroy them with bombs because it needs a direct hit to destroy it, it is somewhat resistant to shock waves.


I think about locking the bombs on the red fighters because there are so many weak targets. I'm not sure about the Mosquito if I should keep it or not.

Did anyone fly B-17?

Firelok
30-11-2007, 13:46
I still think there is a big difference gap between the RAf's Mustang I and the P51B that we have available. you should consider some SpitVbLFs (12 maybe) and the rest of the fighters being SpitVb.

There are nearly 60 landing craft to strafe and about 25+ tanks this is a very tall order even for a full blue team with about 10 dedicated groundpounders (which is a very rare occurance.)

Sonko
30-11-2007, 14:54
Changes include:
-removed spit9
-removed p51
-limited spit5lf to 12
-allowed sc1000 for ju88
-reduced red tanks
-slightly altered glider troops

the files have been sent to the mail adress so we hopefully can test it tonight.

Firelok
30-11-2007, 17:38
New files are uploaded.

NS-IceFire
02-12-2007, 00:30
Was pretty fun today..the LF.Vb's offered a much better challenge than the traditional Vb's which were largely lunch meat in previous variations on this kind of map versus the FW190A-4s. The targets were stunningly detailed and really great to look at. The B-17s were also a nice variation and they in some cases did quite well while other times suffering pretty badly in the face of stern opposition. But I think things went pretty well overall with the currently uploaded configuration.

Firelok
02-12-2007, 06:19
I think it could do with more SpitVbLF's, if you look at the stats blues did quite well here but were quite disciplined and sort of organised.

What Dieppe bears closest similarities to is Channel42, which it possibly might replace (I haven't decided yet.)
One of the things with Channel42 (which applies here too.) is that whichever side is more organised does very well. The FW190A4 is fast and tough true but lots of Spitfires looking out for each other is going to cause trouble.

NS-IceFire
02-12-2007, 07:18
Yeah the LF.Vb's are just good enough to make a dent in the FW190A-4s. Its a good matchup between the two as tactics and team work are the defining reasons for why one or the other wins. I'd rather just see the LF set to unlimited...there's still good cause for the regular Vb which overtakes the LF in performance above 3000 meters.

This map is allot more focused and frenetic than Channel 42. Might be the B-17s or just the target layout.

Sonko
02-12-2007, 22:40
i'm glad to hear that it works :)

Firelok
03-12-2007, 10:21
Thanks for your efforts Sonko, we are going to try it out with SpitVbLF's and SpitVb's as Icefires suggested and see how it goes.

Sonko
05-12-2007, 08:48
It was great fun yesterday evening, huge furballs over the city and the beaches.

Looking at the stats, the plane count was quite the same, around 20 kills on each side.
The target count was different, reds killed way more targets, while blue team didn't really bother about their objectives.

Firelok
05-12-2007, 11:47
It was great fun yesterday evening, huge furballs over the city and the beaches.

Looking at the stats, the plane count was quite the same, around 20 kills on each side.
The target count was different, reds killed way more targets, while blue team didn't really bother about their objectives.

Do you think more people would shoot up the landing craft if we had a Bf110 here?

Firelok
05-12-2007, 12:01
I've added this to the cycle, thanks for your efforts Sonko we really appreciate it.:)

Sonko
05-12-2007, 15:47
Do you think more people would shoot up the landing craft if we had a Bf110 here?

Probably yes, although a 109/190 can do the job even better, because all the landing craft are most easy to destroy with guns only, as bombs need to hit directly to destroy the landing craft.

Maybe there should be a hint in the brief that people don't try to attack the LC's with bombs.

Firelok
05-12-2007, 19:13
What I meant was theres lots of cannon ammo on a 110, take off drop some bombs on a tank or big ship and cannon some landing craft.

Sonko
05-12-2007, 20:00
Thats right, but the same counts for the 190, its bombload is smaller though.
but ok, the 110 features a rear gunner, very useful againsta all the spits. :mp5:

Zorin
05-12-2007, 21:43
Thats right, but the same counts for the 190, its bombload is smaller though.
but ok, the 110 features a rear gunner, very useful againsta all the spits. :mp5:

Plus, the handling of the Fw190 down low is rather unsatisfactory.

Firelok
05-12-2007, 21:48
Thats right, but the same counts for the 190, its bombload is smaller though.
but ok, the 110 features a rear gunner, very useful againsta all the spits. :mp5:

This is also a reason, anyone who wants to attack the Landing Craft targets needs to hang around there going slow and low to do any real damage.
Reds do have the B17 not short of a gunner or two on that puppy either:D

Sonko
06-12-2007, 08:38
OK, so...



add it! add it!

Only reason for me having left it out is because I haven't read of its presence.

20mm gunpods and 30mm cannons should be locked IMO.

NS-IceFire
07-12-2007, 00:25
Sometimes you just gotta add a plane to make it fun. I'm a thumbs up for the 110 as well with restricted loadouts. Keep the bombs tho...people get confused as it is with restricted 110 loadouts.

Sonko
09-03-2009, 22:29
How about introducing this one to UKD2 again?
The mission files are ready to go, only the briefing needs a line or two about the new in-game commands.

The 110 is added as are the C47 and G11 with airstart, just for the fun of it :D

Zorin
09-03-2009, 22:38
How about introducing this one to UKD2 again?
The mission files are ready to go, only the briefing needs a line or two about the new in-game commands.

The 110 is added as are the C47 and G11 with airstart, just for the fun of it :D

Let me send you the new briefing format.

Sonko
10-03-2009, 09:34
Thanks!
Stuff is done.
Do I need the FBDj interface to create the target and loadout restriction file?

Zorin
10-03-2009, 13:56
Thanks!
Stuff is done.
Do I need the FBDj interface to create the target and loadout restriction file?

Yes.

In the end you have the regular mission file straight from the FMB together with the properties file and a FBDj file that takes care of all the rest.

Sonko
09-08-2009, 20:27
I have Dieppe42 ready for UKD2!

To be added soon.

Sonko
27-08-2009, 21:06
right it was added yesterday, I put it right after tunis, so dieppe is the last map in the cycle.

Fusek
08-09-2009, 18:19
I think maybe we should delete the C-47. Only one or two C-47 dropping paras is really killing my frame rates. Maybe restrict the load out? It is still a nice plane to fly! :D

Sonko
09-09-2009, 14:42
Ha! So it was used, actually? Its just weird that your framerate drops drastically. What kind of PC do you have?

Kang
10-09-2009, 12:39
Having played this yesterday, here is short comment:
Is there actually any point to C-47s and gliders as in the paratroops having any deeper sense beyond being nice for SP missions?
The air defence of the landing craft is a bit... much. All of them firing is a fair risk to framerates and connections which in my opinion is not really justified by their effectiveness; they all are small guns with low accuracy. Sure looks neat when they all set off, but they aren't nearly as effective as the axis air defence is, so I'd suggest silencing a few of those guns and instead if it has to be put up another destroyer or so.

irish
10-09-2009, 14:43
1) My FPS take a real hit with the C47's dropping paratroops also.

I avg around 30-40FPS and get (literally) 2 FPS for five minutes after the paras drop.

Let's get rid of the C47....the air drops are pointless in the scheme of things.


2) Did the Canadians really land gliders on the Invasion beaches? I mean *literally* on the beaches? Maybe delete the gliders as they pose a blue on blue risk.



........Other than that, this map is (and has been since it's intro way back) a favorite of mine. The heavy firing over the beaches gives the impression of a desperate battle and the planeset is gravy

Sonko
10-09-2009, 16:07
Doh, I thought I had silenced most of the ships, somehow they were reactivated, I'll look into it later, I don't have enough time today.

The C47 was added just for the fun of it, for the same reason I added the U2S or the Fi Storch on some maps. I'll remove it.

I can't recall if it was historically accurate with the gliders, heh maybe I could shift them off the beach towards the greener areas, it might be more realistic and for a compromise, because I like having more than one target.

Ah and its good to hear that you like the map :)

Fusek
10-09-2009, 18:18
I really like the rest of the map! Hmm.... B-17s * Homers donut voice*

Sonko
10-09-2009, 20:53
I took it off the cycle, it will be added when it's been reworked.

Sonko
17-09-2009, 21:33
back in the cycle, the gliders have now landed somewhat further south.
the glider and c47 are removed from the selectable planes.
the mission time has been set to 90 minutes, most of the ships are asleep for 90 minutes so there should not be much firing.

Kang
02-03-2010, 21:02
Playing this today (half an hour or so ago) the server after a short while insisted on the blue side having 0 planes left, despite them not having lost any yet, but didn't end the map because of it either. I presume that is some sort of glitch.

Sonko
02-03-2010, 21:11
I'll correct it.