Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Destroying Soviet formations in First winter?

 
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] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> The War Room >> Destroying Soviet formations in First winter? Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Destroying Soviet formations in First winter? - 11/12/2017 9:48:41 AM   
Dinglir


Posts: 556
Joined: 3/10/2016
Status: online
I have just finished my first turn of first winter blizzard after the last patch was released.

I was pretty surprised to find that I have actually destroyed a number of Soviet formations with localized counterattacks.

Is this caused by the patch or has it been like this always (remember, I have never really played the Germans before, and I haven't suffered this as the Soviets)?

I have attached a file showing one of the battle reports.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

To be is to do -- Socrates
To do is to be -- Jean-Paul Sartre
Do be do be do -- Frank Sinatra
Post #: 1
RE: Destroying Soviet formations in First winter? - 11/12/2017 10:40:15 AM   
tyronec


Posts: 1474
Joined: 8/7/2015
From: Portaferry, N. Ireland
Status: offline
Could the change in support elements have made a difference ?

(in reply to Dinglir)
Post #: 2
RE: Destroying Soviet formations in First winter? - 11/12/2017 11:52:45 AM   
morvael


Posts: 11112
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline
Counterattacks are possible and necessary if you want to keep your line of defense. But only with reduced blizzard.

(in reply to tyronec)
Post #: 3
RE: Destroying Soviet formations in First winter? - 11/13/2017 3:13:37 AM   
HardLuckYetAgain


Posts: 3061
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dinglir

I have just finished my first turn of first winter blizzard after the last patch was released.

I was pretty surprised to find that I have actually destroyed a number of Soviet formations with localized counterattacks.

Is this caused by the patch or has it been like this always (remember, I have never really played the Germans before, and I haven't suffered this as the Soviets)?

I have attached a file showing one of the battle reports.


Inexperienced units thrown in the front of my main line with Experience under 25 and no place to retreat too. I throw them out front for a reason. You should see when you open up turn 26 what I am doing.

_____________________________


(in reply to Dinglir)
Post #: 4
RE: Destroying Soviet formations in First winter? - 11/13/2017 3:16:20 AM   
HardLuckYetAgain


Posts: 3061
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dinglir

I have just finished my first turn of first winter blizzard after the last patch was released.

I was pretty surprised to find that I have actually destroyed a number of Soviet formations with localized counterattacks.

Is this caused by the patch or has it been like this always (remember, I have never really played the Germans before, and I haven't suffered this as the Soviets)?

I have attached a file showing one of the battle reports.


Inexperienced units thrown in the front of my main line with Experience under 25 and no place to retreat too. I throw them out front for a reason. You should see when you open up turn 26 what I am doing.


Basically I'm going for casualties to you. You also suffer higher loses when you do attack & I don't care about my loses as you see for turn 26

_____________________________


(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)
Post #: 5
RE: Destroying Soviet formations in First winter? - 11/13/2017 3:20:19 AM   
HardLuckYetAgain


Posts: 3061
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dinglir

I have just finished my first turn of first winter blizzard after the last patch was released.

I was pretty surprised to find that I have actually destroyed a number of Soviet formations with localized counterattacks.

Is this caused by the patch or has it been like this always (remember, I have never really played the Germans before, and I haven't suffered this as the Soviets)?

I have attached a file showing one of the battle reports.


Inexperienced units thrown in the front of my main line with Experience under 25 and no place to retreat too. I throw them out front for a reason. You should see when you open up turn 26 what I am doing.


Basically I'm going for casualties to you. You also suffer higher loses when you do attack & I don't care about my loses as you see for turn 26


I also see that the bane of attacking German Regiments is to attack them with Russian tank Brigades. The tank brigades do awesome damage to them. and after the 3rd attack it is normally pro Soviet damage. But still if I attack the German Regiment with a Division it is basically murder by firing squad damage. So for now on those pesky regiments are getting fired up by Tank brigades and or Inf brigades which do like damage to those pesky German Regiments.

_____________________________


(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)
Post #: 6
RE: Destroying Soviet formations in First winter? - 11/13/2017 4:34:48 AM   
M60A3TTS


Posts: 2368
Joined: 5/13/2011
Status: offline
I guess my tank brigades need more training.

Also, nice to see 1,200 aircraft flying and nobody gets hurt. lol.


(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)
Post #: 7
RE: Destroying Soviet formations in First winter? - 11/13/2017 6:01:38 AM   
morvael


Posts: 11112
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline
Insane number of defending aircraft in the air (I guess they were responsible for some of those 1200 Soviet casualties). Is all of Luftwaffe in one place?

(in reply to M60A3TTS)
Post #: 8
RE: Destroying Soviet formations in First winter? - 11/13/2017 6:20:27 AM   
Nix77

 

Posts: 313
Joined: 10/2/2016
From: Finland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain


quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dinglir

I have just finished my first turn of first winter blizzard after the last patch was released.

I was pretty surprised to find that I have actually destroyed a number of Soviet formations with localized counterattacks.

Is this caused by the patch or has it been like this always (remember, I have never really played the Germans before, and I haven't suffered this as the Soviets)?

I have attached a file showing one of the battle reports.


Inexperienced units thrown in the front of my main line with Experience under 25 and no place to retreat too. I throw them out front for a reason. You should see when you open up turn 26 what I am doing.


Basically I'm going for casualties to you. You also suffer higher loses when you do attack & I don't care about my loses as you see for turn 26


I also see that the bane of attacking German Regiments is to attack them with Russian tank Brigades. The tank brigades do awesome damage to them. and after the 3rd attack it is normally pro Soviet damage. But still if I attack the German Regiment with a Division it is basically murder by firing squad damage. So for now on those pesky regiments are getting fired up by Tank brigades and or Inf brigades which do like damage to those pesky German Regiments.


I'm guessing the German regiments are good because of this:

quote:

(v1.08.05)
Reworked the fire penalty for large attacking forces, introduced in 1.04.28. It is no longer based on
abstract stack points tied to unit's nominal size, but to the number of men in the attacking and defending
forces. It is also applied evenly to all elements, instead of being partially random, and affecting elements
firing at shorter ranges. When the ratio of attacking to defending men exceeds 3:1, the penalty will be
applied. However, the ratio is affected by the strength of enemy fortifications and terrain. So it's possible
to attack strong positions with more troops than enemy than in the open, and not suffer from the penalty.

The actual formula is ROUNDDOWN(SQRT(MIN(1,mend*(fl+2)/mena)),2) where mend is the number of
defending men, fl is fort level (including terrain bonus, equal to 1 in clear terrain with no fortifications), and
mena is the number of attacking men. The resulting multiplier is never larger than 1, and is applied to the
number of attacker's firing elements.

On the other hand, when fort level will exceed 1 and the attackers will outnumber defenders, defending forces will be able to fire more times. The actual formula is ROUNDDOWN(MAX(1,SQRT(MIN(fl-1,mena/menb))),2). The resulting multiplier is never less than 1, and is applied to the number of defender's firing elements.


These two multipliers work together to represent a few things. First, the diminishing returns when using
overwhelming forces to accomplish an objective that could be achieved by using much less forces.
Second, the bloodier nature of combat in defensible terrain and/or fortifications. Third, the higher
effectiveness of smaller forces that are of better quality, which will be able to deal more damage when
defending, and retain most (or all) of their strength when attacking. On the other hand (comparing to older
rules) these multipliers will allow to attack with hordes of poor quality troops, and they will be able to deal
some significant damage too, albeit suffering increased losses. Ammo restrictions apply as before, so
elements won't be able to fire if they exhaust unit's ammo. However, usually only a fraction of elements
gets to fire due to other multipliers that are applied, thus there are natural limits to how many elements
will fire, even if the defender's multiplier will be large.

In a sample battle where 109641 men attacked
22870 in clear terrain with level 5 fort, attacker's multiplier was 1.0 and defender's multiplier was 2.18.

In another battle, where 52213 men attacked 8672 men in level 1.4 fort (level 1 and 40% of next level),
attacker's multiplier was 0.85 and defender's multiplier was 1.18. So in the second battle the effectiveness
of attacking elements was 85% and of defending elements 118%.

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)
Post #: 9
RE: Destroying Soviet formations in First winter? - 11/13/2017 6:46:37 AM   
Dinglir


Posts: 556
Joined: 3/10/2016
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain
So it's possible to attack strong positions with more troops than enemy than in the open, and not suffer from the penalty.


That actually surprise me.

I have always believed that one of the main purposes of defensive positions was to restrict the enemy's lines of approach. This could be done by digging anti tank ditches and placing mines and barbed wire.

Once the lines of approach were limited, the defender could then pre register fire on the still open approaches and inflict carnage on attacking troops.

As for doing battle with weaker forces, I believe this should come with a stiff "price" in morale. This could be done by having units suffering defeats of more than 3:1 suffer an extra hit to unit morale. If above 5:1 another hit would be taken and above 10:1 yet another. After all, it is extremely demoralizing for the soldiers in the various units to believe that their leaders simply do not care about their losses and their suffering.


_____________________________

To be is to do -- Socrates
To do is to be -- Jean-Paul Sartre
Do be do be do -- Frank Sinatra

(in reply to Nix77)
Post #: 10
RE: Destroying Soviet formations in First winter? - 11/13/2017 7:17:00 AM   
Stelteck

 

Posts: 1243
Joined: 7/20/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS

I guess my tank brigades need more training.

Also, nice to see 1,200 aircraft flying and nobody gets hurt. lol.




Never saw so much planes in the air. And especially why utility planes are flying a ground support mission ?
These planes numbers are very suspicious.


< Message edited by Stelteck -- 11/13/2017 7:52:18 AM >

(in reply to M60A3TTS)
Post #: 11
RE: Destroying Soviet formations in First winter? - 11/13/2017 7:33:06 AM   
morvael


Posts: 11112
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dinglir
quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain
So it's possible to attack strong positions with more troops than enemy than in the open, and not suffer from the penalty.

Once the lines of approach were limited, the defender could then pre register fire on the still open approaches and inflict carnage on attacking troops.


Exactly this is shown in the examples. In the first example with higher fort defender has a mighty 2.18 multiplier, and the attacker 1.00. Attacker has no negative multiplier, but the relative ratio is 2.18:1 in favour of the defender. Defender should kill more attackers.
In the second example with lower fort the relative ratio is 1.39:1, though defender has only 1.18 multiplier.

It's all here:
quote:

These two multipliers work together to represent a few things. First, the diminishing returns when using overwhelming forces to accomplish an objective that could be achieved by using much less forces. Second, the bloodier nature of combat in defensible terrain and/or fortifications. Third, the higher effectiveness of smaller forces that are of better quality, which will be able to deal more damage when defending, and retain most (or all) of their strength when attacking. On the other hand (comparing to older rules) these multipliers will allow to attack with hordes of poor quality troops, and they will be able to deal some significant damage too, albeit suffering increased losses. Ammo restrictions apply as before, so elements won't be able to fire if they exhaust unit's ammo. However, usually only a fraction of elements gets to fire due to other multipliers that are applied, thus there are natural limits to how many elements will fire, even if the defender's multiplier will be large.

(in reply to Dinglir)
Post #: 12
RE: Destroying Soviet formations in First winter? - 11/13/2017 12:22:40 PM   
HardLuckYetAgain


Posts: 3061
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS

I guess my tank brigades need more training.

Also, nice to see 1,200 aircraft flying and nobody gets hurt. lol.




Well there are a couple of things that is the issue here. First, which has been pointed out, is the large number of airplanes involved in this battle. That will contribute to your overall loss of life on the Soviet side without saying. Next is your command penalty, that also added to the loss of life. The next thing is is that you have 2 divisions also attacking with the Tank Brigade. So that is my fault for not explaining exactly what is to be done. You will only attack with the Tank brigade to cause causalities on the German Regiment. Now please realize I'm just going for dead or damaged for the German side, not to make the hex retreat with these soak off attacks. When you finally attack with your divisions these regiments will take very nice losses :) Get out of the mindset of only doing one attack on the hex, imho as the Soviet ;-) Use quantity vs quality especially if you can afford the losses.


Couple of interesting things on your snap shot.

1. No aircraft got shot down, that is interesting.
2. Utility Aircraft flying in defense of a hex, that is interesting.
3. Why does the II/39th Howitzer Battalinon have a (-933) value??????????
4. As can be seen attacking German Regiments is death by firing squad!!!!! (even without the planes contribution the attackers loses would be 300~400) But come on 3 German artillery loss to 661 Soviet men & 13 artillery. I would normally say this is a one off but after having 100's of battles like this it is 100% in the code to give German Regiments/Brigades a step up on damage. German Divisions dont even get results this good. If German Divisions did more damage than this I would not be so vocal but German Division don't. Seriously, for now on I see a broken down German Regiment/Brigade they are getting attacked with Soviet Tank Brigades (full MP hasty attacks on those MoFo's) and/or Soviet Rifle brigades to inflict as many pre-casualties before the Soviet Infantry divisions attack.

_____________________________


(in reply to M60A3TTS)
Post #: 13
RE: Destroying Soviet formations in First winter? - 11/13/2017 12:28:46 PM   
morvael


Posts: 11112
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline
I think success of multiple attacks lies in the fact that ammo is exhausted because units can't conserve ammo and fire with all they got, even on a weak target.

Would be happy to see the save from that game, multiple interesting issues there to check: number of planes, utility planes (this may be simple problem with classification due to new types added), negative CV that wasn't seen for a long time.

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)
Post #: 14
RE: Destroying Soviet formations in First winter? - 11/13/2017 12:35:51 PM   
morvael


Posts: 11112
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline
I think new tactical bombers may be shown as utility aircraft if someone plays scenario with new data but old exe. I really must add a mechanism to block this, even for minor version increase.

(in reply to morvael)
Post #: 15
RE: Destroying Soviet formations in First winter? - 11/13/2017 12:38:33 PM   
HardLuckYetAgain


Posts: 3061
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nix77


quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain


quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dinglir

I have just finished my first turn of first winter blizzard after the last patch was released.

I was pretty surprised to find that I have actually destroyed a number of Soviet formations with localized counterattacks.

Is this caused by the patch or has it been like this always (remember, I have never really played the Germans before, and I haven't suffered this as the Soviets)?

I have attached a file showing one of the battle reports.


Inexperienced units thrown in the front of my main line with Experience under 25 and no place to retreat too. I throw them out front for a reason. You should see when you open up turn 26 what I am doing.


Basically I'm going for casualties to you. You also suffer higher loses when you do attack & I don't care about my loses as you see for turn 26


I also see that the bane of attacking German Regiments is to attack them with Russian tank Brigades. The tank brigades do awesome damage to them. and after the 3rd attack it is normally pro Soviet damage. But still if I attack the German Regiment with a Division it is basically murder by firing squad damage. So for now on those pesky regiments are getting fired up by Tank brigades and or Inf brigades which do like damage to those pesky German Regiments.


I'm guessing the German regiments are good because of this:

quote:

(v1.08.05)
Reworked the fire penalty for large attacking forces, introduced in 1.04.28. It is no longer based on
abstract stack points tied to unit's nominal size, but to the number of men in the attacking and defending
forces. It is also applied evenly to all elements, instead of being partially random, and affecting elements
firing at shorter ranges. When the ratio of attacking to defending men exceeds 3:1, the penalty will be
applied. However, the ratio is affected by the strength of enemy fortifications and terrain. So it's possible
to attack strong positions with more troops than enemy than in the open, and not suffer from the penalty.

The actual formula is ROUNDDOWN(SQRT(MIN(1,mend*(fl+2)/mena)),2) where mend is the number of
defending men, fl is fort level (including terrain bonus, equal to 1 in clear terrain with no fortifications), and
mena is the number of attacking men. The resulting multiplier is never larger than 1, and is applied to the
number of attacker's firing elements.

On the other hand, when fort level will exceed 1 and the attackers will outnumber defenders, defending forces will be able to fire more times. The actual formula is ROUNDDOWN(MAX(1,SQRT(MIN(fl-1,mena/menb))),2). The resulting multiplier is never less than 1, and is applied to the number of defender's firing elements.


These two multipliers work together to represent a few things. First, the diminishing returns when using
overwhelming forces to accomplish an objective that could be achieved by using much less forces.
Second, the bloodier nature of combat in defensible terrain and/or fortifications. Third, the higher
effectiveness of smaller forces that are of better quality, which will be able to deal more damage when
defending, and retain most (or all) of their strength when attacking. On the other hand (comparing to older
rules) these multipliers will allow to attack with hordes of poor quality troops, and they will be able to deal
some significant damage too, albeit suffering increased losses. Ammo restrictions apply as before, so
elements won't be able to fire if they exhaust unit's ammo. However, usually only a fraction of elements
gets to fire due to other multipliers that are applied, thus there are natural limits to how many elements
will fire, even if the defender's multiplier will be large.

In a sample battle where 109641 men attacked
22870 in clear terrain with level 5 fort, attacker's multiplier was 1.0 and defender's multiplier was 2.18.

In another battle, where 52213 men attacked 8672 men in level 1.4 fort (level 1 and 40% of next level),
attacker's multiplier was 0.85 and defender's multiplier was 1.18. So in the second battle the effectiveness
of attacking elements was 85% and of defending elements 118%.



Yes, I know about this but the question remains, "Why do German regiments/brigades inflict more casualties than a German Division when attacked by a larger force"? What makes them so special? Again maybe I'm missing something.

Secondly, why such a "HUGE" loss of life to one side and not the other. Normally the small side takes next to nothing in losses. I know there are so many variables but when I have Guard Divisions with 55+ squad experience & morale take horrendous losses to a German Regiment it just doesnt seem right. But when same Soviet Guard Division attacks a German Division the casualties look correct.

I'm no expert on these things & people smarter than I am on the rules and coding can fill me in. Until that time frame those German regiments/Brigades are getting molested by Soviet Tank Brigades/Soviet Rifle Brigades ;-)

_____________________________


(in reply to Nix77)
Post #: 16
RE: Destroying Soviet formations in First winter? - 11/13/2017 12:42:33 PM   
SparkleyTits

 

Posts: 814
Joined: 10/7/2016
From: England
Status: offline
I think with M60s air numbers post that it might be in our Eight MP game and the battles reports have made the statistics to show incorrectly as it also did the same for me when I had my turn

< Message edited by SparkleyTits -- 11/13/2017 12:43:01 PM >

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)
Post #: 17
RE: Destroying Soviet formations in First winter? - 11/13/2017 12:53:14 PM   
HardLuckYetAgain


Posts: 3061
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: morvael

I think success of multiple attacks lies in the fact that ammo is exhausted because units can't conserve ammo and fire with all they got, even on a weak target.




I'm doing this in my current game with Mild Blizzard. I had over 200+ attacks in my turn. Had 30,000+ German attrition losses and almost 30,000 casualties. I'm hoping for many more casualties for turn 27 from these attaks, we shall see.

I also have some Cav Corps decked out with 3 AT Regiments each that I want to try out on German Armor Division. Want to see how many tank casualties I can do with these Cav Corps attacking multiple times ;-) Of course I will put them with a HQ that has the AT Brigades & AT Regiments as Reserve Movement too :) Just looking to cause tank casualties. We shall see. Unless someone has already done this.






Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to morvael)
Post #: 18
RE: Destroying Soviet formations in First winter? - 11/13/2017 12:58:56 PM   
HardLuckYetAgain


Posts: 3061
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: morvael


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dinglir
quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain
So it's possible to attack strong positions with more troops than enemy than in the open, and not suffer from the penalty.

Once the lines of approach were limited, the defender could then pre register fire on the still open approaches and inflict carnage on attacking troops.


Exactly this is shown in the examples. In the first example with higher fort defender has a mighty 2.18 multiplier, and the attacker 1.00. Attacker has no negative multiplier, but the relative ratio is 2.18:1 in favour of the defender. Defender should kill more attackers.
In the second example with lower fort the relative ratio is 1.39:1, though defender has only 1.18 multiplier.

It's all here:
quote:

These two multipliers work together to represent a few things. First, the diminishing returns when using overwhelming forces to accomplish an objective that could be achieved by using much less forces. Second, the bloodier nature of combat in defensible terrain and/or fortifications. Third, the higher effectiveness of smaller forces that are of better quality, which will be able to deal more damage when defending, and retain most (or all) of their strength when attacking. On the other hand (comparing to older rules) these multipliers will allow to attack with hordes of poor quality troops, and they will be able to deal some significant damage too, albeit suffering increased losses. Ammo restrictions apply as before, so elements won't be able to fire if they exhaust unit's ammo. However, usually only a fraction of elements gets to fire due to other multipliers that are applied, thus there are natural limits to how many elements will fire, even if the defender's multiplier will be large.



So why do German Regiments seem to inflict substantial more losses than German Divisions in like situations?

< Message edited by HardLuckYetAgain -- 11/13/2017 1:00:12 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to morvael)
Post #: 19
RE: Destroying Soviet formations in First winter? - 11/13/2017 1:03:25 PM   
Stelteck

 

Posts: 1243
Joined: 7/20/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain
I'm doing this in my current game with Mild Blizzard. I had over 200+ attacks in my turn. Had 30,000+ German attrition losses and almost 30,000 casualties. I'm hoping for many more casualties for turn 27 from these attaks, we shall see.


A small question. You do not fear to raise the morale of the enemy with so many attacks ?
Maybe there is something i'am missing, but with so many victories the enemy divisions could quickly reached 99 ?

I'am currently wondering if causing damage but raising morale of the enemy worth it.

99 morale ennemy divisions are very nasty.

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)
Post #: 20
RE: Destroying Soviet formations in First winter? - 11/13/2017 1:05:37 PM   
morvael


Posts: 11112
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain
So why do German Regiments seem to inflict substantial more losses than German Divisions in like situations?


Smaller units (brigade and smaller) get +1 initiative modifier to leader rolls (affect firefight, and reserve activation). Large units (corps) get -1 initiative modifier to leader rolls.

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)
Post #: 21
RE: Destroying Soviet formations in First winter? - 11/13/2017 1:07:24 PM   
Stelteck

 

Posts: 1243
Joined: 7/20/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain
So why do German Regiments seem to inflict substantial more losses than German Divisions in like situations?


Maybe the battle algorithm take into account the relative ratio of both side before giving up ?

When attacking a division, the soviet troops receive overwhelming firepower and give up early with little damage ?
When attack a regiment, the soviet troops keep trying more time before giving up, and so take more casualties ?

(And of course in both case, soviet troops missed all their shoot).

Ps :
Ho just saw the Morvael answer. OK.



< Message edited by Stelteck -- 11/13/2017 1:08:19 PM >

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)
Post #: 22
RE: Destroying Soviet formations in First winter? - 11/13/2017 1:08:39 PM   
morvael


Posts: 11112
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Stelteck


quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain
I'm doing this in my current game with Mild Blizzard. I had over 200+ attacks in my turn. Had 30,000+ German attrition losses and almost 30,000 casualties. I'm hoping for many more casualties for turn 27 from these attaks, we shall see.


A small question. You do not fear to raise the morale of the enemy with so many attacks ?
Maybe there is something i'am missing, but with so many victories the enemy divisions could quickly reached 99 ?

I'am currently wondering if causing damage but raising morale of the enemy worth it.

99 morale ennemy divisions are very nasty.



Yes, he's killing his morale and manpower (and maybe some leaders who are sacked and/or executed because of loss counts), while vastly improving enemy morale (and his leaders win numbers which help them stay in charge) only to burn German manpower pool (and equipment pools to a degree) at higher rate. Manpower is the single most important factor for Germany, so this may be a good strategy. Or it may be very bad strategy, if Germans will make proper use of morale advantage.

< Message edited by morvael -- 11/13/2017 1:16:16 PM >

(in reply to Stelteck)
Post #: 23
RE: Destroying Soviet formations in First winter? - 11/13/2017 1:25:27 PM   
Stelteck

 

Posts: 1243
Joined: 7/20/2004
Status: offline
As morale is not really morale but more "strategic organisation and manpower qualities&shape + battle efficiency doctrine", i'am wondering if it is a good thing to ever allow the increase of morale after a battle.

(in reply to morvael)
Post #: 24
RE: Destroying Soviet formations in First winter? - 11/13/2017 1:33:49 PM   
HardLuckYetAgain


Posts: 3061
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: morvael

quote:

ORIGINAL: Stelteck


quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain
I'm doing this in my current game with Mild Blizzard. I had over 200+ attacks in my turn. Had 30,000+ German attrition losses and almost 30,000 casualties. I'm hoping for many more casualties for turn 27 from these attaks, we shall see.


A small question. You do not fear to raise the morale of the enemy with so many attacks ?
Maybe there is something i'am missing, but with so many victories the enemy divisions could quickly reached 99 ?

I'am currently wondering if causing damage but raising morale of the enemy worth it.

99 morale ennemy divisions are very nasty.



Yes, he's killing his morale and manpower (and maybe some leaders who are sacked and/or executed because of loss counts), while vastly improving enemy morale (and his leaders win numbers which help them stay in charge) only to burn German manpower pool (and equipment pools to a degree) at higher rate. Manpower is the single most important factor for Germany, so this may be a good strategy. Or it may be very bad strategy, if Germans will make proper use of morale advantage.


If you handle the soak off attacks with attaks that win & coupled with the Blizzard it works out.

_____________________________


(in reply to morvael)
Post #: 25
RE: Destroying Soviet formations in First winter? - 11/13/2017 1:36:17 PM   
EwaldvonKleist


Posts: 1556
Joined: 4/14/2016
From: Berlin, Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: morvael

I think new tactical bombers may be shown as utility aircraft if someone plays scenario with new data but old exe. I really must add a mechanism to block this, even for minor version increase.

Please don't do this. If you play server game and have agreed to a special game version, and one side inadvertely saves a server game under a newer version, you cannot go back to the older version both opponents agreed on, because the system block this.

(in reply to morvael)
Post #: 26
RE: Destroying Soviet formations in First winter? - 11/13/2017 1:45:48 PM   
morvael


Posts: 11112
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline
Sorry, I must do this. Running new data with old code is a recipe for disaster. Not to mention an opportunity to cheat, if that cheat is possible to execute during your own turn or during enemy's logistics phase.

edit: Keep a collection of old exes to load and play the game without altering version number. Upgrading to new version should always be one way affair.

< Message edited by morvael -- 11/13/2017 1:49:15 PM >

(in reply to EwaldvonKleist)
Post #: 27
RE: Destroying Soviet formations in First winter? - 11/13/2017 1:47:50 PM   
morvael


Posts: 11112
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain
If you handle the soak off attacks with attaks that win & coupled with the Blizzard it works out.


Then I'd create special Kamikaze Armies with bad leaders (who cares if they will be executed or sacked), not to hurt the stats of good leaders. But they will all still have to be attached to STAVKA, so the man at the top will still be blamed for their results.

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)
Post #: 28
RE: Destroying Soviet formations in First winter? - 11/13/2017 2:11:38 PM   
HardLuckYetAgain


Posts: 3061
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: morvael


quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain
If you handle the soak off attacks with attaks that win & coupled with the Blizzard it works out.


Then I'd create special Kamikaze Armies with bad leaders (who cares if they will be executed or sacked), not to hurt the stats of good leaders. But they will all still have to be attached to STAVKA, so the man at the top will still be blamed for their results.


German manpower loses >>>> than Soviet leader loses imo.

_____________________________


(in reply to morvael)
Post #: 29
RE: Destroying Soviet formations in First winter? - 11/13/2017 2:12:57 PM   
morvael


Posts: 11112
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Stelteck

As morale is not really morale but more "strategic organisation and manpower qualities&shape + battle efficiency doctrine", i'am wondering if it is a good thing to ever allow the increase of morale after a battle.


No, national morale is "strategic organisation and manpower qualities&shape + battle efficiency doctrine".
Unit morale is also including current attitude of the men in the unit (that's why it can deviate from national morale, but it's becoming harder the farther you're away), and that's why it's affected by events like battles.

< Message edited by morvael -- 11/13/2017 2:13:16 PM >

(in reply to Stelteck)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> The War Room >> Destroying Soviet formations in First winter? Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
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

0.188