Matrix Games Forums

New screenshots for War in the West!Pike & Shot is now available!Server Maintenance Battle Academy 2 gets updated!Deal of the Week: Advanced Tactics Gold Ask Buzz Aldrin!Pike & Shot gets Release Date and Twitch Session!Deal of the Week Espana 1936War in the West coming in December!Space Program Manager will be launching on Steam
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Looking at DCCB

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Decisive Campaigns: Case Blue >> RE: Looking at DCCB Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Looking at DCCB - 11/26/2012 11:05:36 PM   
Bletchley_Geek


Posts: 3065
Joined: 11/26/2009
From: Living in the fair city of Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Reconvet

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bletchley_Geek

quote:

ORIGINAL: 76mm
Another thing I wanted to mention: I was surprised by the high morale of the Sov units in this game, often it was higher than my German units, although morale was certainly all over the map, I think the lowest I saw was 7, and the highest 100. Overall I would have expected Sov morale to be lower.


Morale and experience values for certain German divisions seem to be a bit low. I mean, I have noticed that, in the Voronezh scenario, Grossdeutschland is modeled with its regiments having 50 experience. I need to check the values for Soviet formations on the editor, but I'd be surprised if I find experience values for 5th Tk Army tank corps units to be above 10. That is, I'm fine with elite German units not having 100's in all departments, but I'd be surprised to see that they're rated similarly as freshly formed Soviet formations.


Experience levels for reinforcement nonguard soviet units is 30, german panzer units arrive with 45 iirc.


That's not too much of a difference, really. From the manual:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Reconvet
A unit with 100% experience will fight 4 times as well in battle as unit with 0% experience.


That basically means that a freshly recruited Soviet Rifle divisions is considered to fight as well just slightly worse than a German panzer division. As anybody familiar with the WitE forums knows, I'm far from being a 'German fanboy', but this is just not right (from my point of view).

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bletchley_Geek
Experience does have its value in DCCB. But in this game I've learned the hard way to first look at readiness, supply stocks and integrity before I send/expose units to battle. I'd bet your GD had attacked before they were mauled, maybe several turns in a row, which caused its readiness to be lower than 70% and had used up its supply stock to lower than 0.5. Units with integrity lower than 50% run a high risk to break if taking further heavy losses in battle. In DCCB you really have to give your units some rest once in a while, or your losses will get catastrophic real quick.


You lose your bet. GD was my exploitation unit, it had just pushed away a weak Soviet infantry regiment.

I hadn't really looked at readiness/integrity values, but I'd be surprised that they were so low as to determine such a catastrophic bad performance. On the other hand, I wonder how you can 'rest' units, when you need basically to stack up full divisions if you want a change to have chance to hold hexes against those massive counterattacks, and avoid encirclement at the same time.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Reconvet]
In my pbem with Bonners I successfully started to counterattack his german units (including his panzer divisions) after they had taken one or two hexes. I used rested troops I was able to mass in a second line, and if those counterattacks included a higher number of tanks I frequently was able to break several tired german regiments. My AAR is lagging hopelessly behind, but I'll post a screenshot of such an attack:


Thank you for your screenshots, Reconvet

That's a quite, ehm, unsettling combat result. You just wiped out two Panzer Divisions - inflicting on them 2/3 losses... from what for all practical purposes was a frontal assault (you attacked from several hexsides, but it's not like the Germans couldn't just pull out seeing that avalanche coming their way). It also seems that you were able to bring to bear a full Soviet Army (3 Rifle Divisions, 1 Tank Corps, 1 Cavalry Corps plus assorted support units) into one single hex. That's a bit out of whack.

Your tank losses are surprisingly low, for this period, as well. Looks like a battle out of early 1945 rather than late 1942.

I think I'll be doing some experiments with the editor, tweaking unit parameters. These results are very unconvincing.

< Message edited by Bletchley_Geek -- 11/26/2012 11:11:24 PM >

(in reply to Reconvet)
Post #: 91
RE: Looking at DCCB - 11/27/2012 7:15:49 AM   
Reconvet

 

Posts: 353
Joined: 1/17/2011
Status: offline
First of all: I am not a fanboy of any side, and I don't get money from the DCCB publishers. I just see I have way more fun with this product (and pbem) than I had with WitE. Here we have a better supply system and players units don't get their combat value artificially diminished/augmented during certain periods (in WitE axis units are turned into ants during winter while soviets run on fake steroids until getting artificially weakened again after certain dates). Trappenjagd here allowes for a fair struggle for both sides.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bletchley_Geek
Another thing I wanted to mention: I was surprised by the high morale of the Sov units in this game, often it was higher than my German units, although morale was certainly all over the map, I think the lowest I saw was 7, and the highest 100. Overall I would have expected Sov morale to be lower.


Morale seems to be gained in combat by killing enemy soldiers. Don't allow your opponent easy victories, don't drive your troops too hard, deal him bloody defeats, and your units will have no morale problem. And your corps/army commanders have several cards to improve morale in units where it suffered, as have some army/front commanders. Get rid of what you saw in WitE, where morale was a restricting factor for experience, imho the system here is more fairly balanced.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bletchley_Geek
quote:

ORIGINAL: Reconvet
Experience levels for reinforcement nonguard soviet units is 30, german panzer units arrive with 45 iirc.


That's not too much of a difference, really. From the manual:

quote:

MANUAL:
A unit with 100% experience will fight 4 times as well in battle as unit with 0% experience.


That basically means that a freshly recruited Soviet Rifle divisions is considered to fight as well just slightly worse than a German panzer division. As anybody familiar with the WitE forums knows, I'm far from being a 'German fanboy', but this is just not right (from my point of view).


Believe me, you WILL feel this 15% difference in experience. Once you play with it for some time and get a better feeling when to attack and move with different readiness levels, you will see that one german infantry division has the combat strength of two to three soviet rifle divisions.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bletchley_Geek

quote:

ORIGINAL: ReconvetExperience does have its value in DCCB. But in this game I've learned the hard way to first look at readiness, supply stocks and integrity before I send/expose units to battle. I'd bet your GD had attacked before they were mauled, maybe several turns in a row, which caused its readiness to be lower than 70% and had used up its supply stock to lower than 0.5. Units with integrity lower than 50% run a high risk to break if taking further heavy losses in battle. In DCCB you really have to give your units some rest once in a while, or your losses will get catastrophic real quick.


You lose your bet. GD was my exploitation unit, it had just pushed away a weak Soviet infantry regiment.

I hadn't really looked at readiness/integrity values, but I'd be surprised that they were so low as to determine such a catastrophic bad performance. On the other hand, I wonder how you can 'rest' units, when you need basically to stack up full divisions if you want a change to have chance to hold hexes against those massive counterattacks, and avoid encirclement at the same time.


Then my second suspicion would be that your GD had moved before attacking and then moved on after the fight into the conquered hex. First of all moving eats up both readiness AND supply. So you already got weakened into the fight, exhausted your unit further with fighting, used up more ammo while fighting, and ended up significantly weakened in the new hex (no ammo or very low ammo is very bad also on defense...). I learned not to move/attack with units if possible when their readiness is lower than 85%, and let their supply stacks get over 1 (better 1.5) before moving/attacking with them.

In DCCB readiness diferences between attackers/defenders/counterattackers are a huge factor when it comes to determine battle results and losses. One strategy you could use is occupying a newly conquered hex with a unit which didn't participate in the battle and/or let your occupiers end up with improved entrenchment via playing an entrench card of a corps/army commander and/or playing a higher level card to enhance defensive strenght.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Reconvet]
In my pbem with Bonners I successfully started to counterattack his german units (including his panzer divisions) after they had taken one or two hexes. I used rested troops I was able to mass in a second line, and if those counterattacks included a higher number of tanks I frequently was able to break several tired german regiments. My AAR is lagging hopelessly behind, but I'll post a screenshot of such an attack:


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bletchley_Geek
That's a quite, ehm, unsettling combat result. You just wiped out two Panzer Divisions - inflicting on them 2/3 losses... from what for all practical purposes was a frontal assault (you attacked from several hexsides, but it's not like the Germans couldn't just pull out seeing that avalanche coming their way). It also seems that you were able to bring to bear a full Soviet Army (3 Rifle Divisions, 1 Tank Corps, 1 Cavalry Corps plus assorted support units) into one single hex. That's a bit out of whack.

Your tank losses are surprisingly low, for this period, as well. Looks like a battle out of early 1945 rather than late 1942.


It really was an extraordinary combat result. I'd have to check but both of his panzer divisions there had participated in two or even three attacks. As mentionned: Guessing relative readiness differences before you attack is very important in DCCB, and enemy units with very low readiness and not yet dug in on open fields are a prime target to exploit with your rested tanks. As for retreating facing such an attack: If you are too tired and your vehicles are out of diesel it's very hard to run away...

As for my attacking units: Most counters are regiments, so I had about 2 divisions worth of infantry (cavalry division is about equal to a strong rifle regiment), 1 tank corps, two tank brigades and an AT unit. Most of these already went into the battle with integrity around 50%. So I didn't have what I'd call full army strenght for this attack.

Low tank losses: If defending units are out of ammo, have no prepared defensive positions and go into the fight near their breaking point, then the battle can turn into a rout real quick. This overrun capability is something I really enjoy here and terribly missed in WitE. This battle result was an extreme example for sure, but I wouldn't call it out of whack. Both sides can get such battle results when the other side is not planning ahead sufficiently in what condition and position he leaves his troops at the end of his turn.


< Message edited by Reconvet -- 11/27/2012 9:44:46 AM >


_____________________________

The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.


(in reply to Bletchley_Geek)
Post #: 92
RE: Looking at DCCB - 11/27/2012 6:12:08 PM   
LiquidSky


Posts: 875
Joined: 6/24/2008
Status: offline
Just some random thoughts on combat:

Units cannot break until they reach 50% integrity. That means half the unit has already been wiped out.

A panicked unit will suffer greater casualties in combat...a unit panics when it loses more units then it's morale can handle.

Units can carry up to 20 'rounds' of ammo. Every 10AP's spent in combat is a round. It takes more then a day to regain it. So if you fight continuously, you will end up with little/no ammo.

The different components that make up a unit have different strengths. Infantry has a soft attack of 10. Most tanks are from 40-50.

A single counter can hold off the enemy for a turn. If it is rested. At a good entrenchment level. And has a decent morale level.

Almost no hex can withstand a full strike of supplied artillery, followed by an airstrike....and an attack card. Especially if you attack from three hex sides.

Units lose readiness for moving. Attacking. Being attacked. Being bombarded/airstruck. You only regain a bit each turn. More if you are in green supply, less if you are not. None if you are red.

Tanks are much better at attacking then defending.

Basically, you have to think about combat in this game. Do you have sufficient reason to attack? Do you have follow up troops to take the hex and hold it from counter attack? Do you even take the hex? Do you exploit behind him in hopes that he will back up his line? Or are you just giving him an easy attack from multiple hex sides?

Ideally, I will hit a hex with fully supplied artillery, and a 100-120 stack of planes. I will play an army card on the corp to get Freedom/Lead/Gamble. I may play attack on a division, or I may save it for defense after taking the hex. After combat, I will take the hex with a division that did not attack ( and either play defense or entrenchment)

I will sometimes launch spoiler strikes on units that could counterattack me. (to lower his readiness)

_____________________________

What's the sense of sending $2 million missiles to hit a $10 tent that's empty?

— President George W. Bush, Oval Office meeting, 13 September 2001.

(in reply to Reconvet)
Post #: 93
RE: Looking at DCCB - 11/27/2012 8:56:13 PM   
Bonners


Posts: 470
Joined: 8/24/2012
From: Stockport, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LiquidSky


Ideally, I will hit a hex with fully supplied artillery, and a 100-120 stack of planes. I will play an army card on the corp to get Freedom/Lead/Gamble. I may play attack on a division, or I may save it for defense after taking the hex. After combat, I will take the hex with a division that did not attack ( and either play defense or entrenchment)

I will sometimes launch spoiler strikes on units that could counterattack me. (to lower his readiness)


All this is something that is gradually dawning on me. The whole post is really informative and the moving into hexes with weakened units really sums up where I have gone wrong in both my campaigns where I've been the Germans on the attack.

However, let's take the discussion one step further. That is all very well in an ideal world, but unfortunately you have OKH breathing down your neck. How do you try and push offensives a little bit further and faster when you are running out of time to take objectives? That is where I really struggle. I always seem to be behind schedule and that is when I end up doing rash and hasty attacks or broad front attacks.

(in reply to LiquidSky)
Post #: 94
RE: Looking at DCCB - 11/27/2012 9:12:16 PM   
Reconvet

 

Posts: 353
Joined: 1/17/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bonners

However, let's take the discussion one step further. That is all very well in an ideal world, but unfortunately you have OKH breathing down your neck. How do you try and push offensives a little bit further and faster when you are running out of time to take objectives? That is where I really struggle. I always seem to be behind schedule and that is when I end up doing rash and hasty attacks or broad front attacks.



I can't really comment yet on Axis strategies, haven't played a pbem from their side yet. My guess is I would not go for all 3 major objectives (Voronezh/Millerowo/Rostow) at the same time but concentrate on two of those, at least in Trappenjagd. If you split up your mobile units on all 3 objectives you are probably bound to fail on more than one. And use your mobile units on terrain suited for tanks (river crossings is better left to infantry divisions, your panzer divisions are too precious for that), search opportunities to let them overrun enemy counters. Each counter you take off the map is one you don't have to fight again.



_____________________________

The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.


(in reply to Bonners)
Post #: 95
RE: Looking at DCCB - 11/27/2012 9:14:02 PM   
Reconvet

 

Posts: 353
Joined: 1/17/2011
Status: offline
---

< Message edited by Reconvet -- 11/28/2012 12:11:48 PM >


_____________________________

The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.


(in reply to Bonners)
Post #: 96
RE: Looking at DCCB - 11/28/2012 3:06:09 AM   
LiquidSky


Posts: 875
Joined: 6/24/2008
Status: offline


A few of the objectives I have needed to take, I have gotten because I threatened the flanks. I made my opponent decide if keeping the objective was more important then losing the units.

But sometimes you just can't take the objective. In my game, I did not take Rostov the first time. I may have let it go the second time as well, (but I think I took it the second time). Stalingrad I let go the first time ( Actually, I was no where near it ). The second time I was close to the city, but didn't bother trying as I figured the lost of men was not as important as the objective. I played the card Avoid Stalingrad so I wouldn't see a third time.

Minor objectives pop up randomly. I had two 4 pointers right next to each other in the Caucaus. So I tasked two Panzer Korps to driving south to take them. Because of my aar, my opponent knew one of them, and actually tried to prevent me from taking it, but to no avail. Others pop up in places where I am weak...so I ignore them. Better to lose prestige then men. And you can always get prestige later.

_____________________________

What's the sense of sending $2 million missiles to hit a $10 tent that's empty?

— President George W. Bush, Oval Office meeting, 13 September 2001.

(in reply to Reconvet)
Post #: 97
RE: Looking at DCCB - 11/28/2012 3:12:26 AM   
LiquidSky


Posts: 875
Joined: 6/24/2008
Status: offline


Millerowo is easy to take....it can be outflanked. The Russians will probably hand it to you for free.

Voronezh or Rostov will be hard. Very hard. I don't think you can take both against a competent Russian. He may hold on to both if he is reckless in abandoning the middle. The terrain is just too good. So it is probably best to pick one or the other. Either bring up all the artillery/11th army and assault your way into Rostov, or use the mobile units to try and cut south of Voronezh to cut it off. I took Voronezh to a trick by bombing all the bridges leading into the city, when his HQ's were on the wrong side of the river....

I did flirt with the idea of ignoring Rostov. If you do, you will not be asked to take anything in the Caucaus until Stalingrad falls. But there is no Avoid Rostov card, so you will pay in prestige. (and give the Russians prestige)

_____________________________

What's the sense of sending $2 million missiles to hit a $10 tent that's empty?

— President George W. Bush, Oval Office meeting, 13 September 2001.

(in reply to LiquidSky)
Post #: 98
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Decisive Campaigns: Case Blue >> RE: Looking at DCCB Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.084