Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Attacking Urban Centers (11.03) unrealistic low axis casualties

 
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 >> Attacking Urban Centers (11.03) unrealistic low axis casualties Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Attacking Urban Centers (11.03) unrealistic low axis ca... - 4/25/2020 9:26:48 PM   
king171717


Posts: 187
Joined: 5/14/2016
Status: offline
I feel like when I attack urban centers as Germans that I dont suffer as many casualties as you should realistic do.
Here is my mostly recent attack on Gorky a light urban center. His losses are higher cuz of routing. But mine seem so low for such a assault.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by king171717 -- 4/25/2020 9:41:38 PM >
Post #: 1
RE: Attacking Urban Centers (11.03) unrealistic low axi... - 4/25/2020 9:54:17 PM   
eskuche

 

Posts: 460
Joined: 3/27/2018
From: USA
Status: offline
I think is a misconception of what fighting in the game actually entails. Forces will engage but only with a fraction of their strength meeting the other side and shooting. At some point a commander will give a halt or retreat order to maintain order and cohesion.

(in reply to king171717)
Post #: 2
RE: Attacking Urban Centers (11.03) unrealistic low axi... - 4/25/2020 10:07:56 PM   
king171717


Posts: 187
Joined: 5/14/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: eskuche

I think is a misconception of what fighting in the game actually entails. Forces will engage but only with a fraction of their strength meeting the other side and shooting. At some point a commander will give a halt or retreat order to maintain order and cohesion.


There is no way you could take a urban center for 537 men out of action against the Soviets in ww2. The soviets who always fought so hard especially for city/urban centers. Of brest litovsk which held out very bravely showns on wiki that germans loss 429 dead, 668 wounded. I dont know how accurate that number is tho.

(in reply to eskuche)
Post #: 3
RE: Attacking Urban Centers (11.03) unrealistic low axi... - 4/25/2020 10:17:17 PM   
king171717


Posts: 187
Joined: 5/14/2016
Status: offline
do you feel like a high amount of casualties came from reteating and attrition in the eastern war as model in this game?

(in reply to eskuche)
Post #: 4
RE: Attacking Urban Centers (11.03) unrealistic low axi... - 4/25/2020 11:04:10 PM   
joelmar


Posts: 715
Joined: 3/16/2019
Status: offline
ha ha, good old Heinrici gets the job done!

It might not explain everything, but you have to look at the state of the units involved in the battle and at the fact that you had more than 5 times the number of men, almost 3 times the number of artillery, superiority of 1.5:1 in fighters, result, you clearly invalidated his air ground support by wiping out half of his bombers and probably your own bombers could bomb at will. The Soviet leader has 4 infantry ratings and he's fighting against Heinrici with his 8. All of which means probably high Soviet disruption in the battle which combined with your already high ratio of men before the battle means you got a lot of shots while he couldn't shoot back, leading to a lot of lost and damaged elements. What are the disruption numbers both by air and ground? Air disruption has this cool effect that it means even less enemy elements will be involved during the ground fight proper.

the other thing is if he had low ammunition it makes matters even worst to determine how many units shoot back.

Also, you can't know of course, but their % of TOE already damaged before the battle might explain a great part of their losses.

For casualties... it's an old axiom of war that most casualties happen during retreat. Routs being even worst of course. In "On war" Clausewitz insists a lot on this notion.

_____________________________

"So much trouble in the world!" -Bob

(in reply to king171717)
Post #: 5
RE: Attacking Urban Centers (11.03) unrealistic low axi... - 4/25/2020 11:17:51 PM   
eskuche

 

Posts: 460
Joined: 3/27/2018
From: USA
Status: offline
In my experience disruption outside of rivers or blizzards is usually inconsequential, i.e., less than 10% of total force, especially against multiple units. You'll occasionally get a battle won or lost because of lack or presence of disruption, but those would probably have to be in the 1.90-2.10 CV ratio range.

Here, retreat casualties were 10x higher than actual combat casualties, as can be expected, for BOTH sides if you look closely. It may be in fact that this isn't fully historical (or maybe it is?) but I can easily create fictional mental scenarios in which this results makes sense. Forts are breached, widespread mayhem, Soviet commander gives the order to retreat, bad communications mean that some units don't get order or get it too late, resulting in retreat casualties. Most of the artillery are left behind, and only about 15% of the force is lost manpower per se.

(in reply to joelmar)
Post #: 6
RE: Attacking Urban Centers (11.03) unrealistic low axi... - 4/25/2020 11:50:21 PM   
joelmar


Posts: 715
Joined: 3/16/2019
Status: offline
lol... you are right for disruption, I didn't see the bottom part, seems like my eyes were both in the same socket! wow!

But I have seen battles where it played an important role. I wonder if that is all there is to it? In the manual, it is said:

"Terrain and fortification level, leader initiative and combat rating, unit morale, ground element experience and fatigue, ammo status, and the type of attack all play a role in the determination of the initial and modified Combat Value as well as how the battle is fought."

There are a lot of parameters involved. An example that comes into my mind is fatigue. If fatigue accumulates during combat, it will also affect the final CV calculations if we take that sentence from the manual to the letter. But basically, we agree. Routing is never fun for the defender. It's pure chaos and in such chaos, a pursuing organised attacker thrives.





< Message edited by joelmar -- 4/25/2020 11:53:37 PM >


_____________________________

"So much trouble in the world!" -Bob

(in reply to eskuche)
Post #: 7
RE: Attacking Urban Centers (11.03) unrealistic low axi... - 4/26/2020 12:38:03 AM   
king171717


Posts: 187
Joined: 5/14/2016
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: joelmar

ha ha, good old Heinrici gets the job done!

It might not explain everything, but you have to look at the state of the units involved in the battle and at the fact that you had more than 5 times the number of men, almost 3 times the number of artillery, superiority of 1.5:1 in fighters, result, you clearly invalidated his air ground support by wiping out half of his bombers and probably your own bombers could bomb at will. The Soviet leader has 4 infantry ratings and he's fighting against Heinrici with his 8. All of which means probably high Soviet disruption in the battle which combined with your already high ratio of men before the battle means you got a lot of shots while he couldn't shoot back, leading to a lot of lost and damaged elements. What are the disruption numbers both by air and ground? Air disruption has this cool effect that it means even less enemy elements will be involved during the ground fight proper.

the other thing is if he had low ammunition it makes matters even worst to determine how many units shoot back.

Also, you can't know of course, but their % of TOE already damaged before the battle might explain a great part of their losses.

For casualties... it's an old axiom of war that most casualties happen during retreat. Routs being even worst of course. In "On war" Clausewitz insists a lot on this notion.


haha pretty happy with Heinrici job!
Ya that true. I guess with the high disruption/morale/air/ cause the soviets to have less to inflict on axis casualties. It usually lose around 500ish men when taking other urban centers.

I do feel like it should be in the thousands when attacking urban centers.


< Message edited by king171717 -- 4/26/2020 5:02:12 AM >

(in reply to joelmar)
Post #: 8
RE: Attacking Urban Centers (11.03) unrealistic low axi... - 4/26/2020 12:41:08 AM   
king171717


Posts: 187
Joined: 5/14/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: eskuche

In my experience disruption outside of rivers or blizzards is usually inconsequential, i.e., less than 10% of total force, especially against multiple units. You'll occasionally get a battle won or lost because of lack or presence of disruption, but those would probably have to be in the 1.90-2.10 CV ratio range.

Here, retreat casualties were 10x higher than actual combat casualties, as can be expected, for BOTH sides if you look closely. It may be in fact that this isn't fully historical (or maybe it is?) but I can easily create fictional mental scenarios in which this results makes sense. Forts are breached, widespread mayhem, Soviet commander gives the order to retreat, bad communications mean that some units don't get order or get it too late, resulting in retreat casualties. Most of the artillery are left behind, and only about 15% of the force is lost manpower per se.


The soviets loses are high becuz of the routing. But I'm interested in the low losses in the germans attacking a urban center. Just feel like total amount of losses should be increase for such important urban centers.

(in reply to eskuche)
Post #: 9
RE: Attacking Urban Centers (11.03) unrealistic low axi... - 4/26/2020 12:44:56 AM   
king171717


Posts: 187
Joined: 5/14/2016
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: joelmar

lol... you are right for disruption, I didn't see the bottom part, seems like my eyes were both in the same socket! wow!

But I have seen battles where it played an important role. I wonder if that is all there is to it? In the manual, it is said:

"Terrain and fortification level, leader initiative and combat rating, unit morale, ground element experience and fatigue, ammo status, and the type of attack all play a role in the determination of the initial and modified Combat Value as well as how the battle is fought."

There are a lot of parameters involved. An example that comes into my mind is fatigue. If fatigue accumulates during combat, it will also affect the final CV calculations if we take that sentence from the manual to the letter. But basically, we agree. Routing is never fun for the defender. It's pure chaos and in such chaos, a pursuing organised attacker thrives.






I find high fatigue panzer divisions to lose a lot more tanks and also high fatigue infantry suffers higher losses too. Also i find high fatigue units to always roll lower than there stated cv combat numbers.

< Message edited by king171717 -- 4/26/2020 12:49:08 AM >

(in reply to joelmar)
Post #: 10
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> Attacking Urban Centers (11.03) unrealistic low axis casualties 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

0.164