Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Better casualty calculation.

 
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 >> Better casualty calculation. Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Better casualty calculation. - 10/6/2013 9:50:29 AM   
chuckfourth

 

Posts: 181
Joined: 10/26/2011
Status: offline
Hi
Id like to suggest some tactical rules regarding assaults.

The current assault modelling appears relatively simple. As I understand it the two sides line up and march forward all weapons firing. This results in way too many specialist weapons and indirect fire weapons being damaged/destroyed.

my suggestion for how to run an assault in game.

1. Air Attacks.

2. Artillery duel.

3. Assaulting Artillery barrage on ememy positions.

4. Infantry advances.

5. Advancing infantry shelled by defending Artillery.

6. Advancing infantry comes under fire from enemy direct fire weapons, Advancing support weapons return fire.

7. Advancing infantry closes.

8. Armour exploits.


Currently the divisional and higher artillery is treated as though it was emplaced in the front line. Divisional artillery and Higher(Corps artillery) are long range indirect fire weapons. In practice sensible emplacement of this type of artillery is at its maximum range from the position to be shelled or supported.
So the Divisional and Corps guns need to be treated differently to the rest of the equipment. Basically they need to be removed from taking casualties as they are in fact removed from the battle. With some provisos, see below.

Those steps again in detail

1. Air Attacks.

Air attacks unchanged they can engage anything, the bigger the target the more likely it is to be engaged.

2. Artillery duel.

Only Heavy Guns batteries (corps artillery) engage in the artillery duel(excluding Rocket batteries) and then only those with very long ranges. The probability of qualifying Artillery firing couterbattery should be very low. And vary with nationality and equipment range.
The bigger the guns(batteries) range the more likely it will fire counterbattery.
Each battery conducting counterbattery results in one of the enemy (Divisional guns or Corps) batteries not firing. (ie they cancell each other out).
The countered battery only takes disruption, no guns are damaged.

3. Assaulting Artillery barrage on ememy positions.

The Effect should be mainly to disrupt "squad" category and 'soft' equipment from the equipment tab.
The ratio of casualties between feild pieces, squads, HMGs, Mortars etc should be the same as the ratio of these equipments to each other in the formation being bombarded. Artillery is an -area- weapon.
Anything with armour in unaffected. (Armour defeats schrapnell and chance of a direct hit is tiny.)
Neither sides Artillery (Divisional and Corps) receive any disruption or casualties.

4. Infantry advances.

Only squads(infantry, engineer, cavalry etc), assault guns, CS tanks and Flame tanks advance. Everyone else stays put.
So only these categories in the assaulting force recieve casualties.

5. Advancing infantry shelled by defending Artillery.

Indirect fire Defending Artillery fires on only advancing assault force as defined in step 4.
Defending artillery is all indirect fire guns mortars and Rockets.
The shorter range and hence later engagement time of the smaller mortars is balanced by their high rate of fire one employed. Again this is Area fire.
Result neglible on armour (direct hit extremely unlikely). "Squads" are moving and so suffering high damage/disruption.
Armour emerges unscathed
For Armoured infantry no efect.

6. Advancing infantry comes under fire from enemy direct fire weapons, Advancing support weapons return fire.

For the Attacker only the advancing assault force as defined in step 4. take casualties.
The Attackers Mortars and Infantry guns take no casualties.
Assaulting Assault guns, CS tanks, Flame tanks, fire as range permits.

Defending AT returns fire as range permits. (assuming the gunners know at what range they can penetrate the oncomming armour)
Run a subroutine here between Assaulting armour and defending AT until one or the other has 100 percent disruption/casualties.
Defending AT engages -only- Armour.
Defending "heavy squad weapons" and "squad weapons" and "man weapons" fire as the range permits.

7. Advancing infantry closes.

Now Attacking squads can fire as Range permits. Attacking casualties are still restricted to the advancing assault force.

I base the following "defenderr casualty" routine on the premise that the various formations are deployed to be mutually supporting and sited in depth, to mean that the infantry screen is placed forward and their support weapons are emplaced in depth.

Defender casualties reflect Divisional deployment, This varies but generally the formations exist in 3's so for example,

In a platoon the 3 squads will be forward, the platoon HMG sited in depth so you need to nuetralise 1 squad ( or one third of the platoons squads) before you can engage the platoons HMG. In a coy 3 platoons would be forward and the company HMGs and mortars placed behind, so you have to destroy one platoon before you can engage the -coy- mortars and HMgs. One -coy- (or its equivelent) needs to be nuetralised before you engage the battalions heavy mortars. one battalion needs to be nuetralised before you can destroy the regimental infantry guns. and so on.

When I say 'engage' there should be a probability here, ie nuetralise one coy before you can engage the battalions heavy mortars reads nuetralise one coy (or equivelent) to get a 50 per cent chance of engageing the battalions heavy mortars, nuetralise all 3 coys give you 100 per cent chance of engageing battalions heavy mortars

8. Armour exploits.

For an armoured division steps 1-7 are run as described, using the corresponding elemants in the armoured division. ie the infantry element of the armoured division is deployed first. -then- the armour is committed. Once the one third of squads within the defending division has been damaged/disrupted armour is free to engage all enemy categories of equipment(exploit).

conditions

Flak should not be employed by the Attacker at all. In the defence it is employed rarely. (as is the current case I believe)

Currently the AI commits AT and flak support units to attacks this should I think be discontinued as AT is a defensive (support) weapon, even when tracked. Tanks are for the attack.

On the defence AT weapons are only allowed to fire at armoured vehices otherwise they are not committed, (ie dont suffer any casualties) Defenders AT weapons fire as range permits.
Attackers AT weapons are not employed at all and so the Attackers AT suffer no casualties in any event. note this should include "tracked tank destroyers"


To implement this we would need more categories for ground elements. We can then differentiate between identical Coy, battalion, regimental and divisional ground elements. ie "HMG company" and "HMG battalion".

Equipment page would need to diffentiate between howitzers (indirect fire divisional guns and better) and direct fire infantry guns, currently they are all "guns" the howitzers need a new category maybe howitzer, light med and heavy. So they can then be 'abstacted' for the barrages.

Basically indirect fire artillery and AT engagements are removed from the general assault. (ie if there isnt any armour to shoot at the AT guns limber up and fight another day)


Implementation (based loosely on a german inf division)

you need as set of tables for each division

ie for example a Division might contain
3 regiments
9 battalions
27 companies
81 platoons
243 squads

and in terms of MGs
81 HMG:Platoon
27 HMG:Coy

for indirect fire weapons it might be
81 Mortar:Platoon (50mm)
54 Mortar:Coy (81mm) (two per coy)
18 Inf gun:Regiment (75mm) (6 per regiment)


calculate the ratios between the different formations supporting weapons (another table)

3 squads for each HMG:platoon.
13.5 round up 14 squads per Inf gun:regiment.

Keep a tally on how many "squads" you have destroyed (and then HMGs etc)

Then you need a set of rules to force the assaulting elements to work up the divisional heirarchy
like so.

Start engage squads only

When number of squads nuetralised equals one third of the total number of squads divided by total number of platoons (referencing the tables) then
engage HMG:Platoon[probability 50%]
When number of squads nuetralised equals one third of the total number of squads divided by total number of platoons then
engage Mortar:Platoon[probability 50%]


When number of squads nuetralised equals the total number of squads divided by total number of platoons then
engage HMG:Platoon[probability 100%]
When number of squads nuetralised equals the total number of squads divided by total number of platoons then
engage Mortar:Platoon[probability 100%]


When number of squads nuetralised equals one third of the total number of squads divided by total number of battalions then
engage Inf gun:Regiment[probability 50%]
a sliding scale or similar in here.
When number of squads nuetralised equals the total number of squads divided by total number of regiments then
engage Inf gun:Regiment[probability 100%]


For all these calculations if you fail the probabliity test engage another squad.


Obvioulsy pages and pages of such 'rules' are possible, and I think desirable.


I think this or something similar would give you a more historically accurate casualty spread. Less AT, Flak, artillery, more infantry.


There is obviously a lot of room for modifications and refinements(subroutines) here, I put this forward as a starting point only.


Unfortuneately Ive sort of losing momentum on this suggestion at the moment and might possibly futurely produce something similar for calculating attackers casualties more specifically.

Best Regards Chuck.

Post #: 1
RE: Better casualty calculation. - 10/7/2013 9:38:31 AM   
PMCN

 

Posts: 619
Joined: 9/8/2000
From: Germany
Status: offline
Have you ever watched a battle at higher resolution?

What happens is:

1. Artillery duel between opposing heavy artillery (guns)
2. Artillery duel between opposing medium artillery (howitzers and heavy morters)
3. Heavy and Medium morters fire along with long range weapons (dependent in this case very strongly on experience*)
3.1 Tanks and anti-tank long range fire occurs.
3.2 In this case defender fires first (essentially for low experience units either doesn't fire or doesn't hit then the attacker fires)
3.3 Fire in this case is MGs, Rifles and other weapons. Stupidly enough I mostly see SMG fire here...which is baffling
4. All morters fire again (heavy, medium and light), defender AT weapons fire, defender AA weapons fire, defender Infantry guns fire. Defender rifles, SMGs, and rifle gernades fire (I've never seen a hand generade attack)
4.1 Engineers assualt with flame throwers. I've never seen a sachel charge attack. I think I've seen the odd molitov cocktail but I'm not sure.
5. After defender fire is over with surviving attacker units fire.
5.1 Tanks fire main guns, and then machine guns.

*Experience greater than 50% seems to be required for much medium range fire. Also fire in a fortified zone is considerably more intense in the opening phases of the battle with artillery firing often with a higher accuracy. It is night and day to what you normally see.

The defender remainins in place generally speaking until they suffer around 10% casualties in men. After that what looks to happen is they suffer a morale check failure and bug out.
The attacker will suffer the full effect of any and all defensive fire though, I've never seen the enemy pull out due to losses suffered in the medium range fire phase.

The only time you see what is described in the manual is when the defender holds. Otherwise the defender will pull out when "something" happens not when they have been fired on by all attackers. In one memorable case the bug out occured with the first shot on them.

Personally CV modifications seem utterly divorsed from the reality of the combat system...as did that odds modifier. When a unit attacks across a river you see it in that not a lot of the attackers show up so there is a lot less fire then normal. High fortification levels don't seem to affect things that much. Terrain largely modifies how many attacker units show up at what range. Hasty to Deliberate is a major change for the attacker where they forgo a lot of the pre-combat bombardment and they usually seem to have reduced medium range fire. The defender hammers them as normal though.

Note how often morters fire. That is why 42 onwards German casualties start to spike, coupled with units having experince >50 this means the medium range fire (which in 41 doesn't happen for the soviets in general) is now occuring so German losses are again higher. Attacking Guard units will produce significantly higher than normal casualties...but due to their higher morale they tend to hang in combat longer getting more mauled then a regular rifle unit would. Tanks with experience below 50 are remarkably inefficient at attacks, but above that you see a huge change.

Just to also point out Soviet 45 mm AT guns were probably used as often to fire HE as AT. Germans used their AA guns in defense all the time, their 88s were equiped with AT rounds for that purpose. There is one Squad Leader scenario called "The Defence of the Luga Line" where the german side has a crap load of flak guns. AT rifles though do seem to be far more effective then I ever thought they were.

Over all watching the battles at higher resolution is worth your while to do. Because you then have a much better feel for what units work, how they work, and why battles go the way they do. But that is just my view on things.

(in reply to chuckfourth)
Post #: 2
RE: Better casualty calculation. - 10/7/2013 9:52:45 AM   
PMCN

 

Posts: 619
Joined: 9/8/2000
From: Germany
Status: offline
Also with regards to casaulties the game handles that well.

Damage from artillery is semi-random...Armoured Cars on both sides draw the most of it...but once they stop firing 150mm rounds at ACs the rest of the time the fire is distributed randomly over the combat formations.

Damage from various weapons is allocated sensibly to the unit taking it. On an assault your lead elements: tanks, infantry, and so on will bear the brunt of the losses. So that 10% number above is actually a considerably higher fraction of the units combat power then it looks like.

Damage to support weapons is handled reasonably well with defensive weapons generally not getting hit by rifle fire until a lot of the defenders force of infantry has been taken off the field.

Damage to support units and heavy artillery in the final fire phase generally only occurs when the attacker has overrun the defender and is a sign of an impending route. If support squads are getting hit the battle is essentially over and inside a short time it will be the resolution screen.

Tanks fire their MGs at sensible enough targets. They engage enemy tanks as well. This could probably use more work but it is hard to say. Getting caught by a flak battalion though on the offense as the russians will cost you a ton of tanks.

For the most part the game does a good job of the battle management. It isn't perfect but for a division scale game you can't fault it.

(in reply to PMCN)
Post #: 3
RE: Better casualty calculation. - 10/7/2013 12:07:46 PM   
swkuh

 

Posts: 1034
Joined: 10/5/2009
Status: offline
Thanks, Paul... knew there must be a reason for high resolution battle reports. Amazing how much detail has been coded into the combat engine.

But what can a gamer do about the findings, e.g., how to modify unit composition and attack/defense planning to exploit findings?

To Chuckles issues (a better combat model) I'd design an engine that did not fight battles bullet by bullet, unit by unit, but rather as far as possible through higher level assessments. Faster processing that way.

< Message edited by rrbill -- 10/7/2013 12:13:13 PM >

(in reply to PMCN)
Post #: 4
RE: Better casualty calculation. - 10/10/2013 8:11:12 AM   
PMCN

 

Posts: 619
Joined: 9/8/2000
From: Germany
Status: offline
rrbill it is hard for me to answer that. About the only thing I can say is that looking at CV and planning your attacks based on CVs can be: missleading to outright incorrect. CV does not include many devices which in a fight may make a huge difference. Also CV includes things like fortification level, and terrain effects which are not easily observed in the combat. Fortification level effects the chance a unit is hit or targetted in combat but at the end of the day a unit has only so many men. So a Brigade in a high fortification level in a swamp is still a brigade and if assaulted by a division will likely retreat.

The reality is that experience >50 is critical...once you are over 50 your troops fire in the medium range fire phase reliably. Tanks are almost invisible until they have an experience of 50.

The other reality is that what matters most is men and tubes (either artillary or tanks). If you outnumber the defender by a factor of 3-5 as the russian you are likely to win the attack regardless of what the CV odds are. If the defender is in a well prepared fortified zone and you attack with a lot of troops for a high level of casaulties you will force them out most of the time. Most of the time in the past when I would see posts complaining about sucessful russian attacks I would only shake my head that apparently the person attacked never looked at the first line and saw what hit them. Usually it was 3-5x as many men as they had and massive amount of artillery...so what is there to be surprised about? I killed a cut off German Panzer division in the 2nd turn of the game...I hit it with 6 Russian tank divisions...

I don't know how a lot of CV modifiers are translated into the combat system, but clearly things don't work as stated in the manual so I stopped worrying about it. I keep my attack chain of command simple but that is just because I would do that anyway. At a guess I'd think it affects how many devices show up in the fight but I don't really know and have no way to sort out what is going on.

One of the biggist problems for the German is that a CV of 1 covers everything from a burnt out shell to a full strength low experience unit. One will collapse to a hasty attack the other might not.

In 42 things change dramatically mainly due to the TO&E changes to the Russian divisions plus their increased exprience (which is a factor of their increased morale).

I may be wrong but having small amounts of air support in many battles should be better than a few large air attacks. It should over all reduce attacker losses if nothing else due to the disrupted units not participating in combat.

Also I didn't mention it but rockets so far as I can tell fire mainly in the assault phase (the last one) and they seem terribly hit and miss...but when they hit boy do they hit. I'm not sure exactly what is up there...it might ROF or an ammo issue; it hard to see what they are doing.

(in reply to swkuh)
Post #: 5
RE: Better casualty calculation. - 10/10/2013 10:22:14 AM   
821Bobo


Posts: 1793
Joined: 2/8/2011
From: Slovakia
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Paul McNeely
One of the biggist problems for the German is that a CV of 1 covers everything from a burnt out shell to a full strength low experience unit. One will collapse to a hasty attack the other might not.


This is actually quite annoying, especially when in reality both sides had good intelligence info about units in the line of contact. Some more info about enemy units in future games would be nice. It can by really frustrating to make deliberate attack on rifle division and than seeing in combat resolution it was only 4000 men strong unit. Or getting series of holds because the unit in front is not that crap you were thinking from the displayed CV.

(in reply to PMCN)
Post #: 6
RE: Better casualty calculation. - 10/10/2013 10:39:23 AM   
SigUp

 

Posts: 1038
Joined: 11/29/2012
Status: offline
What I would like for WITW / WITE2 is a weaker air recon coupled with the introduction of (signal) intelligence. So make it much harder to pick up units a certain distance from the frontline but make it possible to have estimates of the strength of Corps / Armies / Fronts at the frontline using intelligence info and have very rough and sometimes inaccurate estimates concerning units in reserve.

(in reply to 821Bobo)
Post #: 7
RE: Better casualty calculation. - 10/10/2013 1:44:57 PM   
The Guru

 

Posts: 94
Joined: 12/24/2012
Status: offline

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Paul McNeely
quote:

One of the biggist problems for the German is that a CV of 1 covers everything from a burnt out shell to a full strength low experience unit. One will collapse to a hasty attack the other might not.


This is actually quite annoying, especially when in reality both sides had good intelligence info about units in the line of contact. Some more info about enemy units in future games would be nice. It can by really frustrating to make deliberate attack on rifle division and than seeing in combat resolution it was only 4000 men strong unit. Or getting series of holds because the unit in front is not that crap you were thinking from the displayed CV.



I'm not against nasty surprises, as long as they are the product of statistics in a coherent system.
But the problem of the 1 CV units is real, and I mentioned it before. Because CV is rounded up to 1, the unit could be anything from actual 0.01 CV to 0.99. The magnitude of error is huge, such as you will never encounter for CV higher than 1. An actual 2 CV unit will never be shown as a 150, 100 or even 50. An yet the line between 1 and less and above 1 is totally arbitrary and fictitious. It represents nothing tangible in the real life.

I always wondered if troop experience was computed in the CV value from which the intelligence value derived. IMO CV estimation should primarily be based on volume of troops detectable. Experience was hard to guess, unless ground contact had been established and the units probed.

(in reply to SigUp)
Post #: 8
RE: Better casualty calculation. - 10/11/2013 2:13:14 PM   
swkuh

 

Posts: 1034
Joined: 10/5/2009
Status: offline
Guru is exactly right, about "nasty surprises" that is. But there is nothing wrong with not knowing everything about an opponent, or being misled. Indeed, intelligence should be best at points of contact, especially after combat. Intelligence further away should be harder to come by and should be a little confusing (maskarovka.) Is the game as is perfect? Hard to know (maskarovka again.)

(in reply to The Guru)
Post #: 9
RE: Better casualty calculation. - 10/22/2013 3:42:10 AM   
chuckfourth

 

Posts: 181
Joined: 10/26/2011
Status: offline
Hi Paul

yes Ive watched a lot of a lot af battles ot higher resolution.
In the last one I watched about the third line read something like "45mm AT gun fires at 150mm howitzer". -not possible-


You said
quote:


What happens is:

1. Artillery duel between opposing heavy artillery (guns)
2. Artillery duel between opposing medium artillery (howitzers and heavy morters)

It not an artillery duel they are firing at each other directly (LOS). ie these weapons do not fire at each other directly, result way too high casualty in heavy artillery.
In any case
There is not a Heavy and them medium gun artillery duel before -every- battle, far from it. Medium artillery(divisional) doesnt duel anyway, counter battery (duelling) is for corps (heavy) artillery. Medium artilleries role is to suppress the enemy
You said
quote:


Soviet 45 mm AT guns were probably used as often to fire HE as AT

the AT gun is there to protect the infantry from tanks.
AT guns do occasionally fire at infantry but....

The effect of a 45cm HE shell and that of a HMG on infanty is like comparing a had grenade to a 210 mm mortar shell. Its a waste of time and draws attention to the AT gun wich then makes it either dead or its location known, in either case it then cant perform its proper role, tank killing.

Flak is the same, its there to shoot planes. German 88mm Flak for exampe are only grudgingly or in desperation used against tanks. This is because producing a gun that can hit a plane cost severals times as much as it does to produce one that can hit a tank. Using your AA assets on a regular basis as AT means your exposed to enemy air. So sensibly its largely reserved for its correct use.

Its not a divisional level game the resolution is down to rifle squads.

The battles are the guts of the game to have the tremendous level of detail available and then not use it by having a really simple algorythm handling battles is the main fault of the game. It distorts the casualty lists and the battles result.
From this all the other higher level problems come.

To me it seems pointless to be tweaking supply, production etc etc When this fundamental aspect of the game is giving dodgy results.

Best Regards Chuck

(in reply to PMCN)
Post #: 10
RE: Better casualty calculation. - 10/22/2013 4:56:45 PM   
PMCN

 

Posts: 619
Joined: 9/8/2000
From: Germany
Status: offline
By "Artillery duel" I mean the first thing you see in every fight is the heavy artillery firing. They target random (except for armoured cars which have magnets installed to suck the rounds in on them) things on the other side. And this happens the first thing in every battle except for a hasty attack where the defenders artillery is the only thing that fires. I call this exchange of fire an "Artillery Duel"...it would be nice to see counterbattery fire and since sometimes you see the enemy guns getting blown up one can speculate on the to hit table.

The artillery in the game is NOT firing directly at the start of the battle. It is clearly indirect due to how the targets are allocated (essentially anything might be hit so far as I can tell)...baring of course the eletromagnet equipped ACs on either side. In the game Heavy Artillery only fires once at the start. I believe some of the lighter guns fire again later.

AT guns come equiped with HE rounds. Russian 45 mm AT guns routinely were used to support their infantry (and from 42 onwards were pretty much only good for that). It is hard to understand a lot of what I read about the russian defensive preperations at times because they didn't have "76 mm AT guns" what they had was 76 mm field guns that they were using as AT guns. I believe later in the war they started producing dedicated 76 mm AT guns but with the 76 mm so far as I can figure out often enough that was just the 76 mm field gun firing AP or HEAT rounds. In the main the germans gave little HE for their AT guns but even so they had it. A 45 mm HE round is less than ideal but as I recall the USMC used their 37 or 57mm ATGs to good effect in Guadal Canal battles. They certainly weren't shooting them at the non-existant Japanese tanks.

88 mm flak guns were used routinely as AT guns. The only thing that the Germans had in 41 that could take out a KV1 or T34 irrespective on the angle of fire was the 88 mm flak gun. The germans routinely used their Flak guns defensively (though so far as I am aware not offensively). There is a whole scenario in Squad Leader "The Defence of the Luga Line" where the German with the help of a bunch of flak has to stop a russian attack. The "grudging use" of large AA guns was by the allies who rarely essentially never did it. The germans equipped their 88s with AT rounds right from the start, with Rommel in 40 in France blocking a counter attack of Matilda tanks by sending in his 88's (and is, in fact, another Squad Leader Scenario from the expansion Cresendo of Doom).

I'm more than impressed by the combat system when it comes down to it. People miss a lot when they don't watch the battles. It isn't giving dodgy results either, or at least not from what I can tell. If you see an anti-tank gun firing on a 150 mm howitzer I can guarentee that the enenmy force is shattered. That would only happen (and I've never seen it happen) when there is virtually nothing left for the attacker to shoot at. At that point the enemy has been totally overrun. And I would think under those circumstances you would see that; if an AT gun crew spotted someone limbering up a 150 mm gun to drive off with...why not send a round into the gun? And the Germans did advance their AT guns in support of an attack.

A lot of the bitching by german players would have been stopped by them watching a battle. It was profoundly painful to watch attacks in 41 as the Russian. My men were getting slaughtered left and right by defensive fire. Even an attack on a Rommanian division by 5 rifle divisions was painful to watch. During the blizzard when I threw two full scale assaults in the result was probably a killing ground a square mile across of red snow. 81 mm mortars, MG42's and the like just hammered the advancing infantry. The russians take extra high casualties on the advance and one of the reasons I stopped my winter offensive was my casualties were higher then the Germans. The are only equalized by the retreat losses (if there was one). I would get sick of seeing 81 mm mortars firing or MG42, even the rifle fire was staggering. Even an attack (not during the blizzard) by a tank division, a calvary division, and 2 rifle divisions on a security regiment had 1(G):3(R) casualties until it got evened up in the retreat. But consider that; the germans had a 1:1 battle in terms of losses between a security regiment facing a corps level assault. That attack was my first clue that things don't work like the manual says, since when the retreat triggered I had seen no fire from the calvary unit (their weapons are distinctive) and absolutely no tank fire...yet the manual says that all units fire and then odds are worked out. Not the way it works. Fire occurs till "something" happens then the enemy bugs out...it looks like a morale check failure to me. It tends to happen around 10% defender casualties but I've seen really weak units pull out even before that. I am fairly sure it is morale as when I see a defender hang in it is usually a high morale unit (Guards units for example will retreat from a battle much later than a normal russian unit).

So there is little that is dodgy to see. AA guns used offensively is the main thing that for me stands out as wrong. They were and should be only used by the defender. The AT rifles seem to be also a bit too effective, I was always under the impression they were only useful for breaking tracks or shooting at light armoured halftracks, but I see a fair number of tanks on either side taken out by them.

The targetting is sensible for the most part. During an attack your advancing infantry and supporting arms gets most of the damage. Defending it is also mainly taken by your infantry and their immediate support weapons. Rear area things like heavy mortars, artillery, Flak only start getting hit when the infantry starts getting thinned out. As I keep saying 10% casualties is probably 50% of your infantry lost so your front 2 regiments just took it on the nose and your reserve regiment is pluging holes.

(in reply to chuckfourth)
Post #: 11
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> Better casualty calculation. Page: [1]
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

0.158