Casualties?

[Hidde]

I haven't seen this mentioned so I probably missed something but as I look at screenshots in different AAR:s I almost always see huge losses for the defender. Several times bigger than the attacker it looks to me.
There's something I miss, right? Because if I'm right it seems to me that battle results are out of wack. That's something I find a real imersion killer. I learned that when I played AACW right after it was released.
I'm very interessted in buying this game even if I have to wait some time due to having bought to many games recently. But I also want to be assured that the battle outcomes are within reason.

[JAMiAM]

This is probably the result of only making, and then showing, the attacks that are successful and properly planned. Trust me, there are often occasions where my attacks go awry. Sometimes they are the result of pushing too hard, with too tired troops. Other times, the recon on the hex was poor and my forces get into more than what I expected going into the combat. Sometimes unseen support assets contribute to the defense. Sometimes, just a run of bad luck. Sometimes, a particularly lethal combination of all the above...[:D]

[Hidde]

Thanks.
Sounds good.

[IRONCROM]

ORIGINAL: JAMiAM

This is probably the result of only making, and then showing, the attacks that are successful and properly planned. Trust me, there are often occasions where my attacks go awry. Sometimes they are the result of pushing too hard, with too tired troops. Other times, the recon on the hex was poor and my forces get into more than what I expected going into the combat. Sometimes unseen support assets contribute to the defense. Sometimes, just a run of bad luck. Sometimes, a particularly lethal combination of all the above...[:D]

Jamiam is right here. In my AAR I often highlight sucessful attacks. I show bad ones too but not as often.
Mostly cause I don't have as many bad ones as I do good ones. Not because the game favors the attacker or something, but because I tend to soften these units up before I attack them with Arty or airstrikes.
My forces seem to be doing so much better in cases like this, cause the enemies rediness is so low from being pounded into the ground with long range attacks.
I would say that in most cases where the attackers strength is equal to the defenders strength, that the battle will favor the defender. Unless you soften the target first.

[seille]

@Hidde
There are many possible reasons for those very successful attacks. JAMiAM and IRON told you some already.
I want to add here reduced readiness for the defender. Some scenario´s use action cards that reduce the defenders readiness
to simulate a surprising attack. Here you´ll always see very high losses for the defender depending on how much the readiness was cutted.
The experience of the troops is a nother important point. The german initial 100XP troops in "europe 1939" are (nearly) unstoppable.
 
As IRON wrote when you prepare your attacks with artillery and/or air strikes it reduces the enemy defense a lot.
Plus the AAR usually doesn´t show if there was a concentric bonus for the attacker. It has a very high impact on the combat outcome.

[Hidde]

I see. I have to prepare and be thorough before attacking. That sounds good and much what I'm looking for.
Alas, have many games waiting to be played. And more good looking ones I want to buy or games that is about to get released: EIA,GoA,CEAW,FOF,BFTB,H&M, not to mention games from outside Matrix (Witcher comes to mind). There's not enough time.
Thanks for the answers.