Why build fortifications when this can happen??

[ny59giants]

In my game vs Damian, this combat just took place at Manila.

Ground combat at Manila/Cavite [PH]

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 103460 troops, 1567 guns, 1039 vehicles, Assault Value = 2780

Defending force 56698 troops, 1284 guns, 403 vehicles, Assault Value = 2081

Japanese engineers reduce fortifications to 2 [:@] [:@]

Japanese max assault: 2614 - adjusted assault: 1195

Allied max defense: 2246 - adjusted defense: 8889

Japanese assault odds: 0 to 1 (fort level 2)

Japanese ground losses:
7536 casualties reported
Guns lost 194
Vehicles lost 15

Allied ground losses:
454 casualties reported
Guns lost 18
Vehicles lost 1

He does not even get 1:7 odds, yet the forts are reduced. Why expend the supply to build them up when I seem to get minimum returns for my efforts.

Does anyone know if the issue of fort reduction needing to have certain odds reached before it happens has been changed for AE?? I'm not complaining about Damian's play, just the ground combat routine had me going "WTF?"

Sorry for the rant. [;)]

[Feinder]

I think this is an old issue where the "tactic" is to simply attack with only the Engineer units.  They do reduce forts "abnormally fast", while the rest of the units in the stack don't suffer any ill-effects (because they didn't participate in the attack).
 
The devs did come out and indicate that this was "unintended" and therefore many games have house rules to compell the whole stack to attack (instead of just the engineers).
 
But is there anything you can do about it?  No, not really.
 
Is it fixed in AE?  I have no idea.
 
-F-

[pad152]

It not just odds, it's also the number of engineers in the attacking units, more engineers equals more fortifications destroyed. All engineering units are treated the same in WITP, It would be nice to see a difference between construction/support engineer units and combat engineers in AE, where combat engineeriners are needed to reduce fortifications.
  

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

In my game vs Damian, this combat just took place at Manila.

Ground combat at Manila/Cavite [PH]

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 103460 troops, 1567 guns, 1039 vehicles, Assault Value = 2780

Defending force 56698 troops, 1284 guns, 403 vehicles, Assault Value = 2081

Japanese engineers reduce fortifications to 2 [:@] [:@]

Japanese max assault: 2614 - adjusted assault: 1195

Allied max defense: 2246 - adjusted defense: 8889

Japanese assault odds: 0 to 1 (fort level 2)

Japanese ground losses:
7536 casualties reported
Guns lost 194
Vehicles lost 15

Allied ground losses:
454 casualties reported
Guns lost 18
Vehicles lost 1

He does not even get 1:7 odds, yet the forts are reduced. Why expend the supply to build them up when I seem to get minimum returns for my efforts.

Does anyone know if the issue of fort reduction needing to have certain odds reached before it happens has been changed for AE?? I'm not complaining about Damian's play, just the ground combat routine had me going "WTF?"

Sorry for the rant. [;)]

My experience with Manila is that the Philippine Army can make it an incredible fortress, especially in RHS.

[2ndACR]

Nope, that is not the gambit being used. We would not see 7500 casualties for the Japanese if he was using just the engineers.
 
 But yes, Japanese engineer regiments can easily breach and knock down the fort levels. Just watch what happens when Nemo assaults in Russia with the 7-8 regiments he has there in his land death star. I have fort 8 and he will probably knock them down to 4 or so but suffer 30,000 casualties doing so. But he will still take the base from me. He has around 7,000AV to my 4,000AV.

[niceguy2005]

Hi NY59Giants.  This looks about right to me.  I agree with 2ndACR that this was not an attack by only a few units. 

I think some things are worth noting.  First, the raw assault values are about equal.  Second, he took casualties consistent with the 1:7 adjusted assault values.  Thrid, your fort levels weren't all that high to begin with, so even when they're completely gone your troops won't be doing that much worse (I'm assuming the forts came down from level 3 to level 2). 

It's also worth noting that if he is using combat engineer regiments to help reduce the forts, my expeirence is that they take a disproportionate number of casualties, so chances are good that you significantly weakened those units.  My guess is that he will have to rest his units a couple of days before assualting again.  Still, with all the combat engineers that IJ can usaully pour into a siege level 2 forts won't be much more than a speed bump to them.  IMO when you get to level 6 or so, that's when you really get a lot of value added out of fortifications.  The urban hex of Manilla will give you much more protection then those two fort levels.

[ny59giants]

The date is 30 March 42 and this was his first direct assault on Manila. [:D] He does have 3 Engineer Rgt along with his troops. I have enough supply to last into June 42 and then the urban bonus will still make it difficult for the base to actual be captured. Its just the idea of forts being knocked down a level when the combat odds are so bad that has me a little annoyed. 

[akdreemer]

ORIGINAL: pad152

It not just odds, it's also the number of engineers in the attacking units, more engineers equals more fortifications destroyed. All engineering units are treated the same in WITP, It would be nice to see a difference between construction/support engineer units and combat engineers in AE, where combat engineeriners are needed to reduce fortifications.

From my experience, and as per the manual (gasp), if there are no combat engineers present in the attacking force then forts do no get reduced.

[TheElf]

In my novice opinion, I'd say inflicting:

Japanese ground losses:
7536 casualties reported
Guns lost 194
Vehicles lost 15

...in a deliberate attack is a great result. You should be happy. Those units will be jacked up for some time. I hope he has some supply to fix them.

[2ndACR]

ORIGINAL: AlaskanWarrior

ORIGINAL: pad152

It not just odds, it's also the number of engineers in the attacking units, more engineers equals more fortifications destroyed. All engineering units are treated the same in WITP, It would be nice to see a difference between construction/support engineer units and combat engineers in AE, where combat engineeriners are needed to reduce fortifications.

From my experience, and as per the manual (gasp), if there are no combat engineers present in the attacking force then forts do no get reduced.

Only a shock attack will reduce forts without combat engineers.

[n01487477]

For the record I did have all my troops deliberately attacking & I have 3 Eng Rgt's ...

I do have a slightly different view, engineers historically were so valuable because they allowed the reduction of fortifications, digging tunnels and using mortars to reduce defensive positions. Otherwise I would never have been able to take Russian bases or ever take Manila. Fortifications should not mean immunity from attack and in a urban hex base this would mean that they can never be taken if defended correctly. Even when the fortifications at Manila are 0, I still will not be able to take this base without it running out of supply ... this is acceptable to me. Without engineers, I would have to shock ... so therefore, engineers are a golden commodity.
OK maybe a closer odd, but 1:1 would mean me having 800K troops etc, this seems a little ridiculous. And honestly, in my heart I believe the engineers should have this ability as they do so historically. I don;t think that the defender can have it both ways with terrain and fort advantages, without engineers having the chance to reduce this.
If you can persuade me otherwise, I'll accept ...

[niceguy2005]

ORIGINAL: AlaskanWarrior

ORIGINAL: pad152

It not just odds, it's also the number of engineers in the attacking units, more engineers equals more fortifications destroyed. All engineering units are treated the same in WITP, It would be nice to see a difference between construction/support engineer units and combat engineers in AE, where combat engineeriners are needed to reduce fortifications.

From my experience, and as per the manual (gasp), if there are no combat engineers present in the attacking force then forts do no get reduced.

I'm not sure what the manual says about it, but my non-formal observations lead me to believe that is not true. I think there is still a chance of forts coming down, it's just greatly diminished...but don't quote me on that.

That said, as I think about it, I would never send units that don't have combat engineers to take such a large target. I can't imagine attacking with 100 NLF units. In fact, in a recent battle with the AI, I sent some NLF units to bolster the siege at Bataan. Though I had 1:1 odds those units were essentially wiped out, while my divisions took minor casualties.

PS. Cool Sig Banner.

[niceguy2005]

ORIGINAL: n01487477

For the record I did have all my troops deliberately attacking & I have 3 Eng Rgt's ...

I do have a slightly different view, engineers historically were so valuable because they allowed the reduction of fortifications, digging tunnels and using mortars to reduce defensive positions. Otherwise I would never have been able to take Russian bases or ever take Manila. Fortifications should not mean immunity from attack and in a urban hex base this would mean that they can never be taken if defended correctly. Even when the fortifications at Manila are 0, I still will not be able to take this base without it running out of supply ... this is acceptable to me. Without engineers, I would have to shock ... so therefore, engineers are a golden commodity.
OK maybe a closer odd, but 1:1 would mean me having 800K troops etc, this seems a little ridiculous. And honestly, in my heart I believe the engineers should have this ability as they do so historically. I don;t think that the defender can have it both ways with terrain and fort advantages, without engineers having the chance to reduce this.
If you can persuade me otherwise, I'll accept ...

When looking at land combat I think it's important to weight both the adjusted value and the absolute number of troops. I think it would be kind of silly to say that it was 7:1 odds. It was 1:1 odds, its just that the going was really tough. One could say that it was an up hill battle...both ways...through a hale of bullets.

The abstracted way I would look at that combat is that the IJ force made a committed assault on part of the line - probably a little understrength. Though casualties were heavy, they managed to take some strategic ground. Thus the siege engines move forward and start the whole thing over again. [;)]

[Feinder]

For the record I did have all my troops deliberately attacking & I have 3 Eng Rgt's ...

That being the case, there should be no issue. Now if only I could that kind of milage out -my- Engineer Regiments!

[;)]

-F-

[Coach Z]

ORIGINAL: 2ndACR

Only a shock attack will reduce forts without combat engineers.

[/quote]

I only wish!
In my game with Floyd G he has attacked twice with a few Chinese Corps at Pakhoi and quickly with two Deliberate Attacks {one a 1:1} he has reduced the Japanese Forts there to Zero from 2.

While I on the other hand have attacked Ichang on numerous occasions with several divisions plus 2 Engr Rgts and in 3 months of maikng a deliberate attack once a week on the average, I have reuces his fortifications once! (did I mention that Ichnag has been surrounded on all sides for over a month).

I think that I have no clue how this works![X(] [:(]

[erstad]

Coach Z, did you get at least 1:1 odds? If not, that's the difference.

Deliberate attack achieving 1:1 odds or greater - reduces forts by 1 level.

Shock attack achieving 1:1 odds or greater - drops forts by the "ratio". So if you get a 3:1, 3 fort levels are reduced.

Combat engineers have a chance of reducing fort levels near the beginning of combat. If they do, I don't think it's cumulative with the non-engineer fort reduction. (i.e., if you get a reduction of 1 from engineers AND a 1:1 attack, I think the forts still come down one level only)

[Coach Z]

Well I got a 1:1 with a ton of Engineer Squads and haven't reduced fortifications.

[n01487477]

Coach,
I've found that if the Engineer Rgts have some AV it helps. Engineer squads are IMO the most important here. Also I co-ordinate by attacking on the same turn as Lvl Bombing the ground forces and then praying and sometimes sacrificing to the Dice Gods.

Goats and Lambs are very scarce in my part of the World...

If dabbling into the black arts is not your cuppa ...The WITP encyclopaedia also gives some good tips ...

http://witp.kodapa.com/index.php?title=Main_Page

[floydg]

ORIGINAL: Coach Z

ORIGINAL: 2ndACR

Only a shock attack will reduce forts without combat engineers.

I only wish!
In my game with Floyd G he has attacked twice with a few Chinese Corps at Pakhoi and quickly with two Deliberate Attacks {one a 1:1} he has reduced the Japanese Forts there to Zero from 2.

While I on the other hand have attacked Ichang on numerous occasions with several divisions plus 2 Engr Rgts and in 3 months of maikng a deliberate attack once a week on the average, I have reuces his fortifications once! (did I mention that Ichnag has been surrounded on all sides for over a month).

I think that I have no clue how this works![X(] [:(]

Both attacks were 1 to 1 odds.

And the goat population was un-touched for both attacks.

[:'(]

[bradfordkay]

The point is that it takes Engineer Squads, not Engineers, to reduce fortifications. If the unit has only engineers and engineer vehicles, it is useless in an assault. Those guys aren't combat engineers, but rather construction engineers. Look carefully at the TOE of the units involved.