Hex Defenders stop shooting

[sjohnson]

Definitely confirmed through various tests - bombard a defending hex 5-6 times and attack with 1 combat unit once or twice and the defending units in the hex have no ammo left. They no longer shoot and only cause retreat losses on the enemy if the attacking CV is not high enough.

The only ground losses caused by the defender after the "soak" attacks are caused by either support units or reserves. If you make a situation where there are no reserves possible and no support units then it is quite easy to see.

Certainly, this can't be working as designed? Eg, if 3 divisions sitting in a level 3 fort were bombarded by mortar or gun regiments 3-4 times and then attacked by a single rifle division once or twice that they would shoot all their ammo in response to such a low level attack; saving none for later?

I will repost this in the tech support now.

[sjohnson]

And here is a test situation set up (43 scen) - 3 divs attached to OKH; no reserves in sight; OKH has no support units.

[sjohnson]

Hex bombarded 10-12 times by divisions & brigades. Casualties are heavy for bombarding units at first but then after 3-4 attacks drop to almost nil.

Here is the first attack by a rifle division (a single division).

[sjohnson]

Here is the fourth attack by a single rifle division. Note at this point the defenders are out of ammo after being attacked & bombarded. The only losses caused are "retreat" losses for the attacker because of the CV ratio. I suppose once the attackers says "enough shooting"; both sides get out and wrestle or something...

[sjohnson]

And finally, one can start with the main attacks - here is the first; note no ground fire losses to the attacker at all - only retreat losses because the odds failed to get above 2:1.

[sjohnson]

Finally, I can set the same scenario up, put a few artillery units in OKH and let them respond in support and you can see the same effect, however, there will be some slight ground losses to the attacker as the support artillery fires versus the main attacks.

I would think the defenders in the hex would in reality have two things happen:

1) would not fire off all of their ammo when confronted with an attack at 1:3 odds in good fortifications. They would preserve some or only one division would fire.
2) ammo resupply missions would happen throughout the "week" of combat; especially as the attacks were not overly 'stressful' if one could use that word to describe combat.

Thoughts?

[Apollo11]

Hi all,

We are aware of this (I discovered this myself and documented it extensively during ALPHA WitE long time ago) - but this was make workable with various tweaks over development time...


Leo "Apollo11"

[sjohnson]

Thanks for the reply Apollo - however I am not sure I would call this workable? I can repeat similar such examples like this until my heart is content; after a few attacks the defending units in hex simply don't shoot anymore.

It doesn't seem logical?

I would argue on the other hand though that the bombardment attacks are too ineffective - the Soviets expended 3,115 tons of ammo in this example bombarding and achieved one fort level reduction; 65 axis elements destroyed (including 20 guns); 104 elements damaged; and 33 elements disrupted.

How does one counter an opponent attacking like this - 15+ times with throw away units and single artillery units?

[sjohnson]

Reading the manual, it is clear that being treated as if there is 25% ammo is only in the case of the final CV calculation. It would seem though that this should apply for fire combat - eg they can resupply to 25% and shoot as if so and this would alleviate the above issue.

[dave_wolf]

Additionally - and related to this scenario [;)] - it is much easier to defeat a unit like this, that is with many small attacks than throwing every unit in range against the same position at once with very limited effect. IMO this is quite unrealistic and therefore unbalanced.

My apologies if this has been discussed before.

[Peltonx]

I have been posting about this for over a year and 2by3 is asleep.

Soaking attacks I use to take back door of Leningrad and take Moscow 1 division vs 3 Corp.

Its a joke, but wth I use it whenever I can.

Game engine can't handle allot of this issue's "exploits"

Thats why TDV destories germans during blizzard, and I almost encircled 20 german divisions vs smokendave34. Got 15

I figured out what TDV was doing in January a little to late for that game.

Next game I beleive i can repeat TDV's normal 50 surrended german divisions.

retreating 2 hexs a turn cant stop it as I showed in my AAR.

The same exploit can be used by SHC from 43 on to easly steam exploit GHC.

no skills required.

Very old news, but I will pretend its new hehehe

[dave_wolf]

ORIGINAL: Pelton

Very old news, but I will pretend its new hehehe

That's what a gentleman does. [;)]

[sjohnson]

Hi Dave - just popped you a mail. I'm working on the turn now.

[Apollo11]

Hi all,

Current situation is workable (before changes the attacked unit after repeated attacks and without ammo as result of it would simply rout or even surrender (if encircled) - this was possible even in beginning turns of 1941 (i.e. weak Soviets attacking the strongest Germans)...

Thus "workable" means that exploiting this game engine peculiarity will not be as advantageous for attacker as it appears at the first glance - the defending units attacked even multiple times would not simply "roll over"...


BTW, the WitW will handle this much better!


Also, if any of you guys have some example(s) of multiple attacked defending unit behaving "out of order" please report it and post savegame files - thanks in advance!


Leo "Apollo11"

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: Apollo11

Hi all,

Current situation is workable (before changes the attacked unit after repeated attacks and without ammo as result of it would simply rout or even surrender (if encircled) - this was possible even in beginning turns of 1941 (i.e. weak Soviets attacking the strongest Germans)...

Thus "workable" means that exploiting this game engine peculiarity will not be as advantageous for attacker as it appears at the first glance - the defending units attacked even multiple times would not simply "roll over"...


BTW, the WitW will handle this much better!


Also, if any of you guys have some example(s) of multiple attacked defending unit behaving "out of order" please report it and post savegame files - thanks in advance!


Leo "Apollo11"

Thats why we been posted examples now for months and months

Nothing here move on everyone, lol