Artillery Death Stars Post Patch Two Hot Fix

This new stand alone release based on the legendary War in the Pacific from 2 by 3 Games adds significant improvements and changes to enhance game play, improve realism, and increase historical accuracy. With dozens of new features, new art, and engine improvements, War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

Post Reply
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

Artillery Death Stars Post Patch Two Hot Fix

Post by Canoerebel »

I had hoped that Artillery Death Stars would be toned down by Patch Two, but that definately isn't the case.

Since Miller and I installed Patch Two early this week, he has engaged in six or eight bombardments at Changsha, employing eight artillery units there. The losses inflicted average about 1,000 per day and about 10 infantry and 20 non-combat squads per day. At this rate, over the course of a month the Chinese would lose roughly 300 infantry squads, which is 100 more than the Chinese receive in a month.

Bear in mind that the Chinese were well rested, behind 8.75 forts (until a Japanese deliberate attack at 1:8 odds dropped forts to 7.0 in one turn), and have decent experience (avg. low 50s).

The point being that the Japanese can inflict casualties at a higher rate in just one hex than the Chinese can replace in the entire country. What, you might inquire, would happen if the Japanese were to bombard in multiple hexes? Well, a Japanese army of seven infantry divisions, several regiments and brigades, and seven artillery (three mortar, three medium FA, and one heavy FA) just arrived at Sian, where the Chinese are well-rested, have 4 forts, and 4,000 AV (the Japanese also have 4,000 AV). Here's the results:

Ground combat at Sian (83,41)

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 110187 troops, 1048 guns, 478 vehicles, Assault Value = 4010

Defending force 103976 troops, 487 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 3930

Japanese ground losses:
59 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 3 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Allied ground losses:
6223 casualties reported
Squads: 65 destroyed, 147 disabled
Non Combat: 137 destroyed, 319 disabled
Engineers: 11 destroyed, 17 disabled
Guns lost 11 (2 destroyed, 9 disabled)

Assaulting units:
31st Infantry Regiment
36th Division
5th Infantry Regiment
35th Division
4th Ind.Mixed Brigade
17th Infantry Regiment
8th Engineer Regiment
15th Ind.Mixed Brigade
37th Division
15th Division
32nd Division
41st Division
23rd Division
12th Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion
6th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
11th Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion
4th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
6th Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
1st Army
9th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
13th Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion

Defending units:
76th Chinese Corps
43rd Chinese Corps
93rd Chinese Corps
3rd Chinese Corps
57th Chinese Corps
61st Chinese Corps
48th Chinese Corps
91st Chinese Corps
5th New Chinese Corps
34th Chinese Corps
115th Red Chinese Division
22nd Chinese Corps
16th Chinese Corps
9th Chinese Corps
69th Chinese Corps
7th Chinese Corps
27th Chinese Corps
15th Chinese Corps
35th Chinese Corps
33rd Chinese Corps
8th New Chinese Corps
2nd Group Army
38th Group Army
Lusu War Area
8th Group Army
15th Chinese Base Force
37th Group Army
34th Group Army
7th Group Army
Red Chinese Army
7th Construction Regiment

6,223 men lost to a single bombardment. 65 infantry squads destroyed. 137 non-combat squads destroyed. In a single day.

Here's the report from the next day, which I hope contains a bit of a typo, though given the nature of Artillery Death Stars I am not sure:

Ground combat at Sian (83,41)

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 110142 troops, 1048 guns, 478 vehicles, Assault Value = 4005

Defending force 99548 troops, 485 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 3695

Japanese ground losses:
60 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 2 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Vehicles lost 1 (0 destroyed, 1 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
1718 casualties reported
Squads: 42949658 destroyed, 117 disabled
Non Combat: 37 destroyed, 152 disabled
Engineers: 2 destroyed, 5 disabled
Guns lost 8 (1 destroyed, 7 disabled)

Assaulting units:
41st Division
15th Ind.Mixed Brigade
8th Engineer Regiment
17th Infantry Regiment
37th Division
4th Ind.Mixed Brigade
15th Division
5th Infantry Regiment
31st Infantry Regiment
32nd Division
36th Division
35th Division
23rd Division
9th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
1st Army
12th Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion
6th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
6th Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
11th Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion
4th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
13th Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion

Defending units:
61st Chinese Corps
76th Chinese Corps
3rd Chinese Corps
22nd Chinese Corps
115th Red Chinese Division
91st Chinese Corps
27th Chinese Corps
9th Chinese Corps
7th Chinese Corps
5th New Chinese Corps
33rd Chinese Corps
93rd Chinese Corps
48th Chinese Corps
16th Chinese Corps
57th Chinese Corps
69th Chinese Corps
43rd Chinese Corps
15th Chinese Corps
35th Chinese Corps
34th Chinese Corps
8th New Chinese Corps
7th Group Army
8th Group Army
Lusu War Area
37th Group Army
15th Chinese Base Force
38th Group Army
Red Chinese Army
2nd Group Army
34th Group Army
7th Construction Regiment

Over two days, I lost 400 AV. At this rate, the Japanese can reduce Sian by bombardment in a few weeks. But I don't have that long. Either I'd have to withdraw as all the units in my army dropped to double-digit AVs in order to save my army, or Miller can deliberate attack once he knocks my AV down from 4,000 to, say 1,500, and take the base.



"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
stuman
Posts: 3933
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 8:59 am
Location: Elvis' Hometown

RE: Artillery Death Stars Continue Post Patch Two

Post by stuman »

You have been playing longer than me and thus I defer to your analysis. But I do not think that result seems necessarily skewed to me. I think I am so used to games representing the Eastern Front that to see 9 or so well trained divisions , with twice the arty tubes ( and good ones ) take on a less wll trained opponent, who doesn't seem to have even a single vehicle, well I would expect some major carnage.

But I agree that losing 42 MILLION squads seems excessive [:)]
" Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room. " President Muffley

Image
USS Henrico
Posts: 152
Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2009 11:05 am
Location: Charlottesville, VA

RE: Artillery Death Stars Continue Post Patch Two

Post by USS Henrico »

Questions come to my mind:

1)Is there an additional hit to supply for bombarding in Patch 2? (I have a PBEM going on and haven't upgraded yet)

2)Are the massive casualties coming from using the stand alone artillery units or are we seeing it from the inherent artillery in division/regiments?

3)Can we isolate the casualties to specific artillery weapons that are being fired so that players can come up with house rules to avoid overusing them, and push for these killers to be toned down in the next patch (whenever that is)?

4)Is there an issue (bug?) with how the forts protect against artillery fire in general? Or against specific artillery weapons?

Seems like we can come up with a solution(s) if we can pinpoint the cause.
April 2, 1945. The USS Henrico, supporting the invasion of Okinawa, is struck by a Francis operating as a Kamikaze, killing 51. Among the wounded was the father of this poster.
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: Artillery Death Stars Continue Post Patch Two

Post by Canoerebel »

The problem, as I see it, is that the Japanese are going to wipe out yet another major base on the Chinese MLR - and don't even have to attack to do so.  If the Japansse can sustain bombardments like this there is no reason that they can't take any base.  If Miller and I hadn't declared a cease fire that lasted for about two or three months, he'd have already taken Sian.  There's only one base between Sian and Chungking - Kienko.  It's next.

We'll have to see what happens.  Perhaps he won't be successful.  Perhaps these bombardments are sucking his supplies dry; or perhaps the garrison requirements will prevent him from advancing much further.  But from everything I've seen in the game the Japanese can pretty much advance at will assuming they are willing to employ Artillery Death Stars and bomb strategic resources.  It's totally up to the Japanese player whether he wants to conquer China.  It is not within the Allied player's ability to stop him.

Also, well-rested troops in fortified hexes should not be taking casualties on this scale.  In just one day in one hex the Japanese destroyed 68 squads - 1/3rd what the Chinese will draw as replacements in the entire country in a month.  China is supposed to be a quagmire for both sides - a place where the going is tough and meaningful progress is slow.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
stuman
Posts: 3933
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 8:59 am
Location: Elvis' Hometown

RE: Artillery Death Stars Continue Post Patch Two

Post by stuman »

Let us know what is up ( probably just a reporting bug ) with the 43 million squad loss after you run another turn.
" Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room. " President Muffley

Image
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: Artillery Death Stars Continue Post Patch Two

Post by Canoerebel »

I don't think I actually lost 43 million men that second bombardment.  My AV is about 3,500 (having dropped form 3,900 over two turns) and Miller doesn't suddenly have 25,673 points for ground casualties inflicted.  [:D]
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
khyberbill
Posts: 1941
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 6:29 pm
Location: new milford, ct

RE: Artillery Death Stars Continue Post Patch Two

Post by khyberbill »

I guess this is WAD and what Matrix desires because they have certainly heard a lot about it and had chances to make changes.

Being behind forts doesn't seem to help against artillery barrages, or if it does, it certainly isn't noticeable. The big difference with Patch 2, is that now it takes 10 days to destroy 100 squads instead of one day. However, once the attack comes, you lose the other 900 squads. A city such as Sian will now fall in 21 days instead of 7. In my PBEM, I had a similar amount of troops in Sian and the result was about 20 corps with less than 30 squads of infrantry in each. Several had no infantry left at all. Four days of artillery, three deliberate attacks and it fell.

Not only do you lose lots of infantry, but lots of points. An aggressive game in China and Burma should certainly lead to the destruction of China and a points victory by the end of 43 with all the troops available to be bought out from Chungking and perhaps some of the troops from PI.

What new HR have you entertained?

Good luck!
"Its a dog eat dog world Sammy and I am wearing Milkbone underwear" -Norm.
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: Artillery Death Stars Continue Post Patch Two

Post by Canoerebel »

No House Rules is our motto!  We're both hoping this will help us ferret out things -good or bad - for the benefit of the game and our brother gamers as a whole.  We started with this in mind, but I have allowed some of the problems to get under my skin.  It was just a gradual result of seeing things go wrong, trying to address them in some creative way, then only to see them get worse or a patch tweak things that negated my efforts.  I can give examples, but my fingers hurt from typing.[:D]
 
I think (and have always thought) that the developers are anxious to address whatever problems exist as soon as they know they exist.  At present, though, we're still early in the process and a consensus hasn't developed yet.  There are still players out there who think China is okay and that the submarine warfare glitches I've reported are an anomaly and so forth.  If and when a consensus develops that a problem exists the developers will hop right on it.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
Erik Rutins
Posts: 39324
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 4:00 pm
Location: Vermont, USA
Contact:

RE: Artillery Death Stars Continue Post Patch Two

Post by Erik Rutins »

We are continuing to look into this.
Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC


Image

For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: Artillery Death Stars Continue Post Patch Two

Post by Canoerebel »

Thanks, Eric, I know that you guys are monitoring things and I appreciate the way you approach the game.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
khyberbill
Posts: 1941
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 6:29 pm
Location: new milford, ct

RE: Artillery Death Stars Continue Post Patch Two

Post by khyberbill »

Canoerebel, as a follow up to your recent actions, the below combats just came in from my foe, Zachary and we are doing two day turns. Below is the results of the most recent attack in Changsha (12/10/42):

Ground combat at Changsha (82,52)

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 100992 troops, 998 guns, 164 vehicles, Assault Value = 3225

Defending force 139411 troops, 767 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 4131


Allied ground losses:
627 casualties reported
Squads: 42 destroyed, 20 disabled
Non Combat: 21 destroyed, 33 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 1 disabled
Guns lost 4 (0 destroyed, 4 disabled)


Assaulting units:
116th Division
17th Division
55th Infantry Brigade
6th Division
12th Ind.Mixed Brigade
61st Infantry Brigade
15th Division
3rd Division
39th Division
40th Division
1st Ind.Mixed Brigade
15th Ind.Medium Field Artillery Regiment
11th Army
14th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
1st Mortar Battalion

Defending units:
18th Chinese Corps
76th Chinese Corps
73rd Chinese Corps
85th Chinese Corps
21st Chinese Corps
44th Chinese Corps
79th Chinese Corps
53rd Chinese Corps
71st Chinese Corps
37th Chinese Corps
46th Chinese Corps
59th Chinese Corps
49th Chinese Corps
60th Chinese Corps
10th Chinese Corps
87th Chinese Corps
24th Group Army
29th Group Army
17th Chinese Base Force
22nd Artillery Regiment
6th Chinese Base Force
34th Group Army
4th Group Army
11th Chinese Base Force
7th War Area
27th Group Army
9th War Area
14th Group Army
38th Group Army
31st Group Army
36th Group Army
19th Group Army
12th Group Army
56th AT Gun Regiment

As you can see, the damage was done with a relatively small force on the part of the Japanese. However, almost 20% of the monthly infantry reinforcement was destroyed in this one bombardment.

Below is the bombardment of the second day:

Ground combat at Changsha (82,52)

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 102029 troops, 998 guns, 164 vehicles, Assault Value = 3307

Defending force 154849 troops, 848 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 4833

Japanese ground losses:
42 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 1 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled


Allied ground losses:
564 casualties reported
Squads: 23 destroyed, 31 disabled
Non Combat: 6 destroyed, 16 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 3 disabled
Guns lost 2 (0 destroyed, 2 disabled)


Assaulting units:
61st Infantry Brigade
55th Infantry Brigade
116th Division
40th Division
12th Ind.Mixed Brigade
6th Division
15th Division
39th Division
17th Division
3rd Division
1st Ind.Mixed Brigade
15th Ind.Medium Field Artillery Regiment
14th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
11th Army
1st Mortar Battalion

Defending units:
71st Chinese Corps
44th Chinese Corps
37th Chinese Corps
49th Chinese Corps
73rd Chinese Corps
21st Chinese Corps
10th Chinese Corps
87th Chinese Corps
63rd Chinese Corps
18th Chinese Corps
79th Chinese Corps
85th Chinese Corps
46th Chinese Corps
59th Chinese Corps
60th Chinese Corps
53rd Chinese Corps
76th Chinese Corps
99th Chinese Corps
12th Group Army
38th Group Army
29th Group Army
34th Group Army
7th War Area
36th Group Army
4th Group Army
6th Chinese Base Force
24th Group Army
11th Chinese Base Force
27th Group Army
31st Group Army
9th War Area
14th Group Army
22nd Artillery Regiment
19th Group Army
17th Chinese Base Force
56th AT Gun Regiment

Over 10% of the monthly infantry destroyed on the second day. Over 30% in two days. Previous to this, a similar force had destroyed about 40 corps around Sian in several engagements as I tried to keep a line of defense. When Changsha falls in the next few days there are no really strong units left to protect Chungking. All the shattered Corps from earlier fights are sitting there. The reinforcement pool is empty, has been since May.
"Its a dog eat dog world Sammy and I am wearing Milkbone underwear" -Norm.
User avatar
Mynok
Posts: 12108
Joined: Sat Nov 30, 2002 12:12 am
Contact:

RE: Artillery Death Stars Continue Post Patch Two

Post by Mynok »


Keep at the testing guys. Kudos for being forthcoming and honest without denigrating the devs as I know they are looking at this. We all have a stake in making this game better. [8D]
"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown
User avatar
stuman
Posts: 3933
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 8:59 am
Location: Elvis' Hometown

RE: Artillery Death Stars Continue Post Patch Two

Post by stuman »

Let me ask the question another way : is it unreasonable to think that 1000 guns firing at a big bunch of moderately trained troops ( my assumption [;)] ) would " destroy " 60 squads out of the thousands engaged ? Isn't that about .5 % in terms of total Allied troops? That does not seem unreasonable to me. ( this is looking at kyhberbills numbers ).

Now equating losses with a replacement rate; I just do not know if that is a good measuring stick or not.
" Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room. " President Muffley

Image
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: Artillery Death Stars Continue Post Patch Two

Post by Canoerebel »

You're looking at one part of a circular and deadly problem in China, so look at the sitaution as a whole:

1. The Chinese cannot fight in the open. They take devastating, overwhelming, massive losses.
2. Therefore, the only option is to get the Chinese onto good defensive terrain and into bases hexes with good fortifications.
3. But fortifications are not durable. Artillery death stars, engineers, and deliberate attacks reduce them readily and quickly.
4. Meaning that the only real defensive option to the Chinese isn't effective.
5. Meaning the Japanese can advance at will and the Chinese have to retreat, giving up vast sections of the country.
6. So, China isn't the slow, slogging, usual stalemate it's supposed to be.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
Kull
Posts: 2744
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 3:43 am
Location: El Paso, TX

RE: Artillery Death Stars Continue Post Patch Two

Post by Kull »

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

We are continuing to look into this.

There was an excellent discussion of the matter in this thread:

tm.asp?m=2293922&mpage=1&key=

A little bit of angst and posturing, but mostly good, thoughtful analysis. Whether some of the suggestions could be coded is another matter entirely, but definitely worth reading. I have this gut level fear that "fixing" China will completely hose the island warfare, but hopefully I'm wrong and the code can be tweaked to support both.
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: Artillery Death Stars Continue Post Patch Two

Post by Canoerebel »

That's true.  There may be creative ways of addressing the sitaution, though, that will leave the main model (and therefore the island campaigns) untouched.  Perhaps creating a special "terrain" in China that simply makes advancing much slower and the use of artillery much less effective.
 
I think China would be fine if Chinese fortifications were more durable, if artillery wasb't a death star, and if the Japanese can't employ strategic bombing. 
 
I'm all in favor of a quagmire in China.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
stuman
Posts: 3933
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 8:59 am
Location: Elvis' Hometown

RE: Artillery Death Stars Continue Post Patch Two

Post by stuman »

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

You're looking at one part of a circular and deadly problem in China, so look at the sitaution as a whole:

1. The Chinese cannot fight in the open. They take devastating, overwhelming, massive losses.
2. Therefore, the only option is to get the Chinese onto good defensive terrain and into bases hexes with good fortifications.
3. But fortifications are not durable. Artillery death stars, engineers, and deliberate attacks reduce them readily and quickly.
4. Meaning that the only real defensive option to the Chinese isn't effective.
5. Meaning the Japanese can advance at will and the Chinese have to retreat, giving up vast sections of the country.
6. So, China isn't the slow, slogging, usual stalemate it's supposed to be.

I do not mean to keep wearing you guys out, but in the short run, are there a few HRs you can suggest to make China play more like you think it should ? Something not too difficult to monitor ? I am honestly not sure what I would suggest atm.
" Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room. " President Muffley

Image
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: Artillery Death Stars Continue Post Patch Two

Post by Canoerebel »

There are some good house rules that would help:
 
1.  No strategic bombing in China (on either side) until probably 1944.
2.  Restrict artillery significantly - probably allow no more than one artillery unit per 30,000 or maybe even 50,000 troops. (From what I've seen in my game, "one unit per division" is still far, far too potent).
 
Note, however, that the only way we're going to get a handle on the true state of the game is for players to forego House Rules and work the game hard to ferret out the gremlins (pardon me, I must be waxing eloquent tonight).  Some folks understandably don't want to invest that much time in an out-of-kilter match, so they'll use House Rules to address problems. 
 
So please bear with us folks that are forging ahead without House Rules.  Sometimes we (meaning "me") will yelp and squeal and holler "foul," but by doing so at least we are bringing forward the "raw data" that may be helpful in identifying and fixing problems.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
stuman
Posts: 3933
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 8:59 am
Location: Elvis' Hometown

RE: Artillery Death Stars Continue Post Patch Two

Post by stuman »

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

There are some good house rules that would help:

1.  No strategic bombing in China (on either side) until probably 1944.
2.  Restrict artillery significantly - probably allow no more than one artillery unit per 30,000 or maybe even 50,000 troops. (From what I've seen in my game, "one unit per division" is still far, far too potent).

Note, however, that the only way we're going to get a handle on the true state of the game is for players to forego House Rules and work the game hard to ferret out the gremlins (pardon me, I must be waxing eloquent tonight).  Some folks understandably don't want to invest that much time in an out-of-kilter match, so they'll use House Rules to address problems. 

So please bear with us folks that are forging ahead without House Rules.  Sometimes we (meaning "me") will yelp and squeal and holler "foul," but by doing so at least we are bringing forward the "raw data" that may be helpful in identifying and fixing problems.

Well that makes sense tbh. thx for the input
" Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room. " President Muffley

Image
User avatar
budman999
Posts: 34
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2004 8:54 pm

RE: Artillery Death Stars Continue Post Patch Two

Post by budman999 »

I was an ex-artilleryman in the Canadian Forces for several years; top artillery technician in our regiment, part of a FOO crew, safety staff, and gun bunny, etc...
It appears to me that the artillery model is "inaccurate" as it currently stands. The casualties inflicted seem to be too high, and the logistical nightmares caused by "deathstar" artillery should be nearly impossible to overcome in the Pacific theatre, even for the Allies.
Casualties inflicted should be extremely high if: a) the enemy is caught by surprise (and only for a short while) and/or b) the enemy has no form of entrenchments or fortifications and/or c) the terrain is not suitable for defence.
Fortifications of any sort dramatically reduce the casualty effects of artillery fire. Even simple foxholes or shell scrapes can signifcantly reduce the number of casulaties inflicted and any major forms of fortifications should negate the great majority of casualties. Every soldier is taught to 'dig in' whenever they can, as this is effective versus artillery fire.

From the internet:
"Surprise may be essential or irrelevant. It depends on what effects are required and whether or not the target is likely to move or quickly improve its protective posture. During World War II UK researchers concluded that for impact fuzed munitions the relative risk were as follows:
•men standing - 1
•men lying - 1/3
•men firing from trenches - 1/15-1/50
•men crouching in trenches - 1/25-1/100
Airburst munitions significantly increase the relative risk for lying men, etc. Historically most casualties occur in the first 10-15 seconds of fire, i.e. the time needed to react and improve protective posture, however, this is less relevant if airburst is used."

So using a very generic model from the above, perhaps the effects could be similar to this:
1 - Entrenchment level 0 = 100% efffect from bombardment
2 - Entrenchment levels 1-9 = 100% - 10 * the current entrenchment level of the units ie. level 4 would suffer only 60% of the effects of the bombardment, etc...

As for death stars I would propose a simple formula for this:
1 - If the bombarding unit is the sole artillery unit bombarding a hex the effect is at 100% for the unit;
2 - If there is more than one artillery unit in the hex, then a random roll would apply to every artillery unit in the bombarding group's hex. This roll would apply similar to this:
a) one unit selected at random would fire at 100%;
b) each additional unit would fire at an effect of 100 divided by the total number of artillery units in the bombarding group's hex.
For example: if there are 4 artillery units in a hex, 1 would fire at 100% and the remaining 3 would fire at 25% of the bombardment value.

For logistics purposes the following rules could apply:
1 - Any unit using bombardment will use 5 x the logistics supply of a normal (non-artillery) unit.
2 - If the unit cannot draw 5 x the supply the unit could still fire but then the effects of the bombardment are reduced by 20% for each 20% of supply (rounded down) that
the unit cannnot draw. Example: An artillery unit wishes to bombard. A normal (non-artillery) unit would require 1000 supply. An artillery unit using bombardment
would require 5 x 1000 (5000) supply to fire at 100%. If there was only 2000 supply the unit would fire at 40% of its bombardment value.

Note that I haven't really studied the WITP AE model of artillery, nor am I privy to the inside of how the model works, but 'simple' rules like the above could
curtail the 'abuse' of artillery that I am reading about these boards.

Ubique.


Ubique
Post Reply

Return to “War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition”