Retreat losses

This new stand alone release based on the legendary War in the Pacific from 2 by 3 Games adds significant improvements and changes to enhance game play, improve realism, and increase historical accuracy. With dozens of new features, new art, and engine improvements, War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
Yaab
Posts: 5118
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2011 2:09 pm
Location: Poland

Re: Retreat losses

Post by Yaab »

It would be nice to have the China change in scen001 and scen002.
Chris21wen
Posts: 7079
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2002 10:00 am
Location: Cottesmore, Rutland

Re: Retreat losses

Post by Chris21wen »

Yaab wrote: Tue Nov 14, 2023 9:41 am I just dawned on me that you can lose all artillery in a retreat.

Consider.
A big Jap LCU starts an arty duel with US arty units which have superior 155mm guns. After some time, all Jap 75mm field guns are disabled. An US LCUs attack the Japs. Japs lose the battle (they now have less firepower), retreat and lose all the guns.

Now consider Allied China in the beginning. A Chinese corps starts the war with i.e 10 active guns, 20 disabled (guns as arty+mortars). Japs attack, the Chinese retreat and lose 20 guns. The Chinese cannot replace those guns (their build rates are VERY LOW). It is setting up the Chinese for a failure. Instead, the scen001 could start like this:
-the Chinese corps has 10 active guns
-the 20 disabled guns are moved to the device pool
-the arty build rates stay the same

Now, the Chinese would
-save a lots of their starting field guns,
-could channel the guns from the device pools to units behind the immediate frontlines
-build rates stay the same, but the Chinese stay more competitive since their field guns are not destroyed en masse in early frontline battles
They may well start the game with many disabled guns but their war did not start in 1941, it started in 1937. The disabled guns reflect this.
User avatar
Yaab
Posts: 5118
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2011 2:09 pm
Location: Poland

Re: Retreat losses

Post by Yaab »

Yes, but if the RL war in China, starting in 1937, had used the WITP:AE retreat algorithims, then the starting Chinese units in Dec 1941 should have no artillery devices at all. The arty build rates in no way could have covered losses of disabled arty devices.

Actually, the Chinese LCUs in Dec 1941 have the highest total of all guns available to them in 1941-1945 period. Some units can start with 12 x 75mm field arty, half of it disabled. Some start with 36 mortars (20 disabled) etc. Once they lose a few battles in Dec 1941-Jan 42 , their guns grand total will never get greater again due to the anemic arty build rates.

At least the units sitting on the Railine should have more active guns since they could, in theory, send back their damaged arty devices by rail to rear areas for repair, the same way damaged aircraft are sent back.
User avatar
Yaab
Posts: 5118
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2011 2:09 pm
Location: Poland

Re: Retreat losses

Post by Yaab »

Just a random thought.

Since you cannot replenish Chinese mortar/field arty losses (their replacemnt rates are atrocious), and you lose disabled guns/mortars during retreats, it would actually make more sense to defend hexes with... HQ units.

Consider. A Chinese LCU and Chinese HQ defend a hex. The LCU has lots of disabled guns. Then, just put the HQ unit on Combat stance, while the LCU is set to Reserve. You lose a battle, the HQ is thrashed, the LCU retreats saving its disabled guns/mortars. You have just lost some generic support squads in the HQ units, that's all. Support devices are ample in the Allied pools. You lost the battle, but you saved the precious artillery devices.
User avatar
Sardaukar
Posts: 11497
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Finland/Israel

Re: Retreat losses

Post by Sardaukar »

Basically, disabled artillery are ones that you don't have transport for when you have to retreat.

About every army lost lot of artillery in that situation.
"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-

Image
User avatar
Yaab
Posts: 5118
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2011 2:09 pm
Location: Poland

Re: Retreat losses

Post by Yaab »

I wish leader Admin/Aggressiveness ratings and gun caliber played a role in determining the losses . A 70mm mortar can be put on some requsitioned cart or carried by impressed labor, if a leader shows some initiative.
User avatar
Platoonist
Posts: 2517
Joined: Sun May 11, 2003 4:53 am
Location: Kila Hana

Re: Retreat losses

Post by Platoonist »

Yaab wrote: Sun Jan 07, 2024 6:21 pm I wish leader Admin/Aggressiveness ratings and gun caliber played a role in determining the losses . A 70mm mortar can be put on some requsitioned cart or carried by impressed labor, if a leader shows some initiative.
Sadly, from what I've read of the war in China a high initiative leader was a warlord who made sure his family, personal possessions, furniture and concubines got loaded first on any requestioned transport.
Image
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 19848
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

Re: Retreat losses

Post by BBfanboy »

Platoonist wrote: Sun Jan 07, 2024 6:53 pm
Yaab wrote: Sun Jan 07, 2024 6:21 pm I wish leader Admin/Aggressiveness ratings and gun caliber played a role in determining the losses . A 70mm mortar can be put on some requsitioned cart or carried by impressed labor, if a leader shows some initiative.
Sadly, from what I've read of the war in China a high initiative leader was a warlord who made sure his family, personal possessions, furniture and concubines got loaded first on any requestioned transport.
So you are suggesting the game should have some model concubines to be more realistic? I could get behind that!
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
User avatar
Yaab
Posts: 5118
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2011 2:09 pm
Location: Poland

Re: Retreat losses

Post by Yaab »

Sardaukar wrote: Sun Jan 07, 2024 12:23 am Basically, disabled artillery are ones that you don't have transport for when you have to retreat.

About every army lost lot of artillery in that situation.
I was going to accept your explanation as reasonable, when something dawned on me.

If you take an LCU with disabled field arty devices and move it to an adjacent hex, the LCU will finish its move after some time. It will arrive in the adjacent hex with all its DISABLED GUNS INTACT. Thus, disablement in field arty devices cannot mean only lack of gun transportation - it can mean also mechnical failure (breechload broken), lack of a trained crew, worn out rifling or lack of lubrication. You can move the gun, but you cannot shoot it. Thus, losing all disabled guns during a retreat is,in my oopinion, too harsh a penalty.
GetAssista
Posts: 2820
Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2009 6:13 am

Re: Retreat losses

Post by GetAssista »

Yaab wrote: Tue Jan 16, 2024 9:34 am If you take an LCU with disabled field arty devices and move it to an adjacent hex, the LCU will finish its move after some time. It will arrive in the adjacent hex with all its DISABLED GUNS INTACT. Thus, disablement in field arty devices cannot mean only lack of gun transportation - it can mean also mechnical failure (breechload broken), lack of a trained crew, worn out rifling or lack of lubrication. You can move the gun, but you cannot shoot it. Thus, losing all disabled guns during a retreat is,in my oopinion, too harsh a penalty.
Moving in your usual mode is different from retreat tho. In the latter case you need to do it quick and under stress/fire, so you need better transport capabilities to pull it off. Losing inoperable devices is quite logical in this case - you leave them behind to save what is still useful
User avatar
Yaab
Posts: 5118
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2011 2:09 pm
Location: Poland

Re: Retreat losses

Post by Yaab »

Encouraged by my successful retreats in China, I tried to repeat those feats in the Kota Bahru battle on 8 Dec,1941, and failed

FMSV brigade is tasked with defence of Kota Bahru. The FMSV bde is set to Combat, while the BF and 8th Indian Bde are set to Reserve.

Here is the 8th Indian Brigade pre-battle. This is the unit I want to save. I set the brigade to Reserve, and order it to move to Kruala Krai
Image

Resolved the battle several times with results which perplexed me.

RESULT 1: 8th Brigade is damaged, as if it took part in the battle. Here is the screenshot
Image


RESULT 2: 8th Brigade is lightly damaged, not sure if it took part in the battle. I had changed its leader prior to the battle for a more inept one.
Image


NOW, let's talk about the losses.

In both RESULTS the brigade lost:
-all 18 pdr guns (active+disabled), all 3.7" mountain guns (active+disabled), all 2 pdr AA guns (active+disabled), all engineer vehicles (1 active).
That sucked because I wanted to save the field artillery, and the loss was TOTAL (all guns lost). Why?

In both RESULTS the brigade lost:
-several combat engineer and engineer squads.
The loss to enginer squads is perplexing. Are they on the frontline perhaps? If so, why?

And now the fun part.

In RESULT 1, the brigade lost several Indian infantry squads + support squads, as if the brigade was commited to the battle.

However, in RESULT 2, the brigade did not lose a single indian infantry squad+support squad, as if it took no part in the battle.

So, how do I make sense of both RESULTS?

RESULT 1 - bde committed to the battle + the brigade takes considerable losses to eng+combat en devices g AND loses all its field arty+2pdr AA+eng vehicle.

RESULT 2 - bde not commited to battle + YET the brigade takes considerable losses to eng+combat eng devices AND looses all its field arty+2pdr AA+eng vehicle.

RESULT 2 makes no sense. Infantry+support squads casually retreat while all field guns are lost, and while engineers +combat engineer bleed (are engs covering the retreat? If so, why engineers cover the retreat and not infantry squads? Are engineers protecting arty guns in the rear areas behind the frontline?

Anyway, what I noticed is this.
In both RESULTS the brigade lost ALL non-squad devices with load cost of 9 or more :

3.7" mountain gun (load cost 9) ( The 3.7" jungle gun variant has load cost 7)
2 pdr AA (load cost 11)
18 pdr guns (load cost 10)

Also, since engineer constitute a different catgeory of devices (non-infantry devices) here are their load costs:
engineer vehicle (load cost 15)
engineer (load cost 10)
Indian combat engineer (load cost 10)

Take note that devices with smaller load costs (3" mortars - load cost 4, Vickers AAMG - load cost 8) from the 8th Brigade suffer some losses, but always can be saved.

This arbitrary nature of the cut-off reminds me of this:

Air transport, manual, page 170
Non-squad and non-engineer type devices of a load cost greater than 9 can NOT be transported.

My second guess is that I retreated towards Kuala Krai which is a Jungle hex with a trail. In China I was retreating form Clear to Clear hex with good roads. Surprisingly, in my China example, the unit retrataed across a river and still saved ALL its guns. So maybe, if I retreat into difficult terrain (jungle, forest, monutian) with no roads, I ditch my heavy equipment somehow?

Basically, the battle is a complete shambles for me because each time I lose my most important assets (field arty, combat eng, eng, eng vehicles etc.) and save the most generic assets (inf squads, MG squads, support squads). I am not even saving the ACTIVE field arty devices.

I just don't undertsand the results.

The battle was repeated several times. Not once was I able to save any artillery with load cost 9 or more.
User avatar
RangerJoe
Posts: 16620
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:39 pm
Location: Who knows?

Re: Retreat losses

Post by RangerJoe »

With no vehicles to move the guns during a retreat, how are they moved? Especially if they retreated where there is no road into jungle and/or rough terrain. The support weapons that were saved are man portable.

In the Reserve mode, the unit may participate in the battle if the possibility were to exist that they could keep from losing the battle. Have you tried moving the units out in move mode?

During retreats, units will discard equipment to save the men whether or not the commanders want that to happen. However, as during the Frozen Chosin, if the unit turns 180 degrees and attacks in that direction then they may bring all of their equipment, wounded, dead, and prisoners with them. All powered by frozen Tootsie Rolls!

https://eisenhower.armymwr.com/info/cul ... tsie-rolls

"When the ‘Chosin Few’ meet for reunions, the Tootsie Roll company “always sends boxes of Tootsie Rolls,” Traynor said."

https://chicago.suntimes.com/2016/6/24/ ... -s-history
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child

User avatar
Yaab
Posts: 5118
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2011 2:09 pm
Location: Poland

Re: Retreat losses

Post by Yaab »

BTW, I found another cutoff in the manual for devices with load cost of 9 or more. P.110, loading devices onto ships.

"Heavy Equipment: Non-troop devices with load cost of 9 or more. This is heavy artillery, tanks, motorized support, and other vehicles."
Post Reply

Return to “War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition”