Hi 76mm
Good Questions.
Again, I generally agree, although I tend to consider retreat losses as part of the (flawed) combat engine rather than something separate.
I think the combat engine handles the battle only. Once the combat engine produces the conditions required to start a retreat, combat ends (we've left the combat engine).
Then retreat (a separate process) begins.
Moreover, I don't agree that the current combat engine properly takes into account numbers, etc., but not proper tactics, which I think is your contention.
I would say it this way.
The combat engine knows all the units in play(numbers), but once the range has closed every unit can see (fire at) every other unit. That is a massive problem because it's miles away from reality and completely ignores tactics and unit placement.
The combat engine has all the data it needs but is too simple to make good use of it.
In other words, I think the 2:1 rule is necessary precisely because the combat engine cannot get the 1941 results right without it--in the vast majority of Sov attacks in 1941 there were no tactics to speak of--just desperate charges by large numbers of Sov troops--so if the numerical aspect of the combat engine worked it should be able to properly reflect such attacks. And yet apparently without the 2:1 rule the combat engine cannot reflect the significant losses inflicted by the Sovs on the Germans by such attacks.
The Soviets did not inflict significant losses on the Germans in mass attacks.
The Soviets inflicted significant losses on there -own- men to achieve a normal (in casualty terms) result on the Germans
Basically this type of infantry assault without supporting arms uses up infantry(Soviet) instead or High Explosive other than that it is unremarkable.
Personally I think this feature of the war isn't really within the scope of the game or of any real importance.
But you could model it by perhaps dropping morale or maybe experience to very low levels for a small random number of Soviet attacks.
Best Regards Chuck.
