Generals getting killed

[Dr. Foo]

I got so sick of losing commanders that I editied everyone to 7 Mech 7 Inf so the losses no longer matter. [:D]

[randallw]

Giving bad news to Stalin was bad for health.

[elmo3]

I am running a test with a new build and looking at leader deaths.  There have been 21 Axis leaders KIA in 73 turns so that is less than one KIA every three weeks.  The Soviets had 11 KIA and 4 executed.  There used to be an issue with KIAs not getting reported from the enemy part of a turn that might be causing the reported Soviet losses to be too low since many of their leaders would be KIA during Axis attacks and I'm checking on that.

[ComradeP]

The problem is that at that rate, the German non-assigned leader pool will be empty by, roughly, late 1944.

[Walloc]

For the sake of making a comparison with history you'd consider PoW as killed too right?
No difference in engine betwen KIA and PoW right, KIA is all there is, right?

Kind regards,

Rasmus

[ComradeP]

Any kind of message listed under "fate" means the leader's gone for the rest of the game I believe.

[Titanwarrior89]

Yes, but thats close to 4 months of heavy fighting so wouldn't that be about right?

ORIGINAL: Cerion

Humm, I have lost 7 leaders after turn 15 as german. I believe is a level too high.

[elmo3]

The Fate column shows KIA and executed.  There is no POW result so that should be considered KIA.  As ComradeP says, if they are KIA or EXC then they are gone for good.  We're looking into leaders being added to the available pool over time so that might ease the fear of running out of leaders.  I've never seen either side run out of leaders in any of my tests.

[abulbulian]

So this excessive leaders getting killed bug was not fixed in last patch? A little hesitant to start a pbem, knowing I could run out of axis leaders by 44.

[:(]

[elmo3]

You should not run out as it looks like more leaders are added over time.  Waiting for the programmers to confirm that.

Edit - confirmed that more leaders are added as they approach their availability date.

[Cerion]

Yes, but thats close to 4 months of heavy fighting so wouldn't that be about right?
quote:

ORIGINAL: Cerion

Humm, I have lost 7 leaders after turn 15 as german. I believe is a level too high.

I have no HQs near the enemy. Besides, they are HQ leaders (Corps, etc), no divisional leaders. The historical number of non-divisional generals (and GFM) fallen in combat, the first year of the campaign in the east was very small. I have in mind, for example, Von Reichenau, and actually died of a heart attack in january 1942.

I think the number of deceased leaders should be increasing over the years (unless they are made stupid next to the front line) from an initial number in 1941, quite low, to highest one in 1945. A multiplier to increase it as time goes on.

I do not mean that I can stay without leaders only that it would be frustrating to get to June 1943 without Manstein and Guderian (and if they fall at this rate could happen at any time if only for pure statistical [:D]).

[Joel Billings]

Although the leader loss rate is too high, you shouldn't run out of leaders. Also, it's likely this will be adjusted before you get too far into any PBEM game.

[Titanwarrior89]

Turn 30 GC and only 7 killed. Not to bad I think(Axis). Six german and one minor.

[turska]

Duh, another Army commander dead. It was during blizzard so i guess he went out for a walk and got lost & froze to death.

[76mm]

Turn 12 of Leningrad scenario, and only one loss that I've noticed, but of course it was Manstein.

[Singleton Mosby]

ORIGINAL: BigAnorak

As long as I can have Manstein![:)]

I killed Model in turn three. Might be a completely different game in '43 and '44 now.

[Walloc]

At the request of Joel and after a short correnspondance with Elmo3. I've over the last few days compiled a full list of all german generals exported from the game. To make reference point to how many was/should be killed for the dev team to use. If wanted. Ill post here as a .csv file with comment as doing the list things pop out. The raw data is in the file for dev team to use as please. Their subjective opinion on what constitudes a KIA/POW/WIA might be different then mine.
Note this is only german generals and not axis allies but as germans was in the thick of action through out the war it makes a good reference point IMO.

Disclaimer. Since i go by the list of generals in game. It could happen that a general on the eastern front is KIA and not recorded by me. The list seems fairly exhaustive, but no garanties from my side.
Out of the 255 on the list generals there 3 cases of incomplete info. Reasons in the raw data. Shouldnt throw off the data a whole lot tho.

Terms.

Ill introduce 2 terms cuz of the way the game engine as i understand it handles leader casulties in 2 different ways and cuz i think it has an impact on how many leaders should be killed by the 2 different ways. Either leaders can be killed by a roll that apparently takes places between the turns and its noted in the log.
Also a leader can be killed if its HQ, (possibly needs to be isolated) takes part in combat during the turn.

DDT = dead during turns
DBT = dead between turns


Raw data terms.

lived = Not applical for a KIA result in any way. Many of these are ofc captured at the end of the war. Any PoW in late 45 is in this category not the PoW category or else the results would be wholely inaccurate with a near 100% POW rate.
Ppl made PoWs in the Ruhr, Courland pockets and so on is in this category too.

Died = can mean just about any reason. Notes should note if on eastern front and if in command there for applical for KIA result, (died) means i dont think its applical and reason why in Notes. Fx died while in fuhrerreserve or what ever.

PoW = captured, but this can be any where. Notes should note if applical aka if on eastern front and in command. (PoW) means not applical to game IMO since taking PoW on western front or such.

KIA = killed and again (KIA) means not applical IMO, reason in notes like KIA on western front.


I've had to set some subjective parameters for generals on the list to fit into being KIA of the game engine. Ppl and devs might ofc differ with those but u will hafta go in with ur own and look at raw data to come up with ur numbers then.
So my numbers are lot less than those on the list actually died or PoWed. Problem is for example when u have ppl on the list being in führerreserve commeting suicide. Do they count or not. Is a general on the list taken PoW in Tunis applical for a KIA result on the eastern front. If so u ofc drive up casulty rate tho not per say to do will KIA rate of generals on the eastern front.
My parameters is that u hafta have been in command some how at the time and on the eastern front. This makes for an accurate kill rate per turn, but doesnt reduce the pool of officers as it should. Problem is if u multiply the numbers by those that is on list and die/pow to any cause the chance of a Model, Guderian in command on the eastern front gets killed is much higher than it should be. How devs want to deal with that dilema is up too them [:)]


For a resume of applical KIA/POW in game as i see it.


1941(all of it): 2 generals on list KIAed. 1 army commander killed in plane crashing in mine field and 1 korps commander killed in air attack. Both died to the DBT rolls IMO.


1942(all of it) 0, yes zero(u could argue for 1, but he isnt in command at time)

So after first 72ish turns u if using history as a bench mark should have 2 KIA generals. Not counting statisical uncertainty ofc. Sorta interresting to compare with Elmo3s test.


1943(defending sucks, for KIA rates of generals apparently)

Jan: 1, KIA Korps commander killed by blue on blue fire. DBT roll
Feb: 5, 1 WIA/KIA and 4 PoWs(all Stalingrad), KIA DBT and 1 army commander 3 korps commanders DDT rolls IMO. Even if considered DBT rolls its sorta special in that they'd be very close to enemy units through out jan 43 by nature of being in a pocket. If DBT have a range modifier.
March-July 0
Aug: 1, KIA korps commader DBT
Sep-Dec: 0

By end of 43(124ish turns) we on 9 in all 5 DBT and 4 DDT

1944:(pockets and ruptured front makes living harder)
April: 1 KIA DBT army
June: 3 KIA korps commander DBT, 1 korps PoW DDT
July: 1 KIA korps DBT, 3 PoW korps DDT, 1 PoW army DDT
Aug: 3 PoW korps DDT, 1 KIA army DBT
Sep: 2 KIA korps DBT, 1 PoW DDT Korps commander

16 in 1944, 8 DBT and 8 DDT. 3 Army commanders in all.
Note all but 2 of this losses occur as a result of either destruction of AGC or the rupture of the front in AGS. Which will in game terms make alot of DDT cuz of pockets and overrunned HQ. 7 of DBT also occur during that phase where again alot of HQ will be close to enemy in range cuz of the shattered fronts.

1945:
Jan: 2 KIA korps DBT
Feb: 1 PoW (commanding Budapest defences) DDT
March: 1 KIA army DBT

4 in all.

Through the war thats 29 in 225 turns. Of those 13 are DDT leaving 16 to the DBT rolls or 1 in every 14 turns.
No Army groups commders died, but 4 army commanders did. Rest with the Budapest exception are korps commanders.
Clearly the majority of casulties are taken not only defending but especially when fronts are shattered/ruptured. IMHO this should be shown as the in game DDT rolls.

Lastly a discussion about a modifier on DBT rolls where range to enemy count negatively the closer u are.
This might seem like a good idea and i can find many arguements for it. Just that 7 times as many corps commaders as army commanders and no army groups commanders die is an obvious one.

I do find one major reason going against this. If u look at commaders killed in Pz and later russian OMG thrusts, where units go deep into enemy territory and by nature of it gets close to enemies. If and i repeat if it from devs point of view is "best practice" to move the HQ of those formations up with the units for supply purposes. U many times cuz of the narrowness of these thrust only really have 1 place to put them and thats on units. Meaning by default they most of the time wil be close to enemy in range.
Problem then becomes that empericallly this wasnt dangerous in terms of KIA, not a single Pz korps commander is killed/POWEd during these deep operations through out the war on the eastern front.
Just wanting to note that issue.


Hope is of use and kind regards,

Rasmus

P.S the csv file is zipped and uploaded in support forum as it wouldnt take here.

[jimkehn]

Playing Case Blau as Russian and have lost 2 leaders by turn 8.

[Joel Billings]

Thanks Rasmus for the detailed accounting. Very enlightening. Now does anyone want to do something similar for the Soviets? [:)]

[Flaviusx]

Slight nitpick: one Army Group Commander did die, by suicide. Von Kluge. (Admittedly, he was on the Western Front at the time.) I'm not sure the game properly accounts or can account for the rash of executions and suicides among the officer corps following the 1944 assassination attempt.

But the basic point made above about generalship losses does stand.