Achtung (Missing) Panzers !

[saygame]

Version 1.04.28 beta.

I've been concerned for awhile about Panzer losses seeming overstated I've resorted to a "Achtung (Fragile) Panzers" approach in my tactics by minimizing Pz division combat useage while I investiage and see what I can do to correct rather large losses.

So I reolved to spreadsheet panzer losses. In tracking each vehicle type by using the database reports, turn by turn, I think I've found something. There's at least a reporting error in the reports (or my misunderstanding of what the reports report) and maybe even a hidden seepage of losses (but I can't see under the hood). Here's how you can observe it easily without a save to replicate it.

Take turn 1. Germans start out (unfortunately...<grin>) with 152 PzIb's. PzIb's are obsolete and wont be producing any new ones. Cool.

Take turn 4 (for example). Add up your pool of PzIb's, (all types), then add in your ready PzI's ones and your damaged ones (from production report's database referral by type). Subtract this total number from 152. The difference should be panzers permanetly destroyed, right? In my games they don't match up.

In my present PBEM game, the permanent loss report says 3 PzIb's have been permanently lost on turn 4. But I have 67 PzIb, in my pool (all types), 55 ready and 13 damaged (all told 135). That indicates a permanent loss of 17. Quite a difference.

The permanent losses report seem way understated compared to what's actually on hand. Or am I just confused what permanent loss means?

I'm certainly aware that there are inter-turn repairs and inter turn attritional losses for being in contact. Still, if you start with 152 panzers and now have 135 panzers, the differerence is 17 panzers permanmently destroyed, not 3 as reported.

[Helpless]

PzI is considered as old equipment and some portion can be scrapped when placed in the pool.

[saygame]

Aren't "scapped" counted as "permanently lost too? [&:]

Ok try the number on one that isn't obsolete like the PzIII L-42 or others. I feel relatively confident you'll find similar discrepancies from what I'm seeing. I am. Just gets a little more confusing when you add in production numbers.

[Helpless]

Aren't "scapped" counted as "permanently lost too?

No, scrapping currently doesn't log as loss.

Every equipment which has end date last year is considered to be obsoleted and can get scrapped with rate of 1/10 per turn of available in the pool.

PzIII L42 has end date of 1942/6 it means that it will be considered obsoleted as of 1.1.1943

[HRL58]

ORIGINAL: saygame

Aren't "scapped" counted as "permanently lost too? [&:]

Ok try the number on one that isn't obsolete like the PzIII L-42 or others. I feel relatively confident you'll find similar discrepancies from what I'm seeing. I am. Just gets a little more confusing when you add in production numbers.

I dont think all the scrapped should be permanent losses. As i remember from Grigsbys old game "War in Russia" part of them was being used as chassis for self propelled artillery and sp anti-tank, at least the Pz38 (or was it the PzII?) was used that way historically when building the Wespe.

[saygame]

Thanks. It's all good.

This explains a significant part of my frustration at tank force structure losses. Under your definitions, Pavel, the Ib's, IIc's, IIIe's, 35 t's and the sIG33's are all going to have chances to lose additional tanks to "scrapping". This fills in another missing piece to the mosiac explaining early high tank losses to the force structure. And is another good reason to "use them or lose them".

I was aware that the Germans used heavy cannibalization of their early Pz I and II and eventually III chassis for Marders and the like. I just had believed total tank losses in each category were represented by the term "Total Permanent Loss". And my astonishment at early losses without accompanying combat now is somewhat explained. As I said, thanks, it's all good.

saygame

[Joel Billings]

The rule is actually that 1/3 of the build cost of scrapped units is converted to armaments points which can then be used to build new items.

[saygame]

Even better. I love it, when exploring the inner mechanisms of a game system, details like this turn up! It reveals your great care and nurturing of a game system that you all take when approaching history, its details and gaming. And that is a common virtue most of us seem to share......an honoring of the details. Thanks again and good work!