It is not clear to me what the values in the combat display window include.
Here's what is displayed after I have selected attackers (for example)and the Attack button is active.
Select attackers: Stack: 400/600 vs 186. Concentric: +100%. This is the screen displayed for an attack on Brest-Litovsk from 6 adjacent hexes, 1 attacking unit in each of the surrounding 6 hexes against 3 defending units in the City.
Questions:
1) How, if at all does the +100% bonus relate to the 400/600 numbers in the display?
2) Does the stacking point ratio displayed here have any relation to the combat value of the units in the attack?
3) Does the +100% have any relevance to the stacking point ratio or does it affect combat value of the units? If the latter, how can I get a "ballpark" sense of what the combat values of the attacking and defending units actually are?
Combat Odds
Combat Odds
Walt
RE: Combat Odds
ORIGINAL: wadortch
It is not clear to me what the values in the combat display window include.
Here's what is displayed after I have selected attackers (for example)and the Attack button is active.
Select attackers: Stack: 400/600 vs 186. Concentric: +100%. This is the screen displayed for an attack on Brest-Litovsk from 6 adjacent hexes, 1 attacking unit in each of the surrounding 6 hexes against 3 defending units in the City.
Questions:
1) How, if at all does the +100% bonus relate to the 400/600 numbers in the display?
2) Does the stacking point ratio displayed here have any relation to the combat value of the units in the attack?
3) Does the +100% have any relevance to the stacking point ratio or does it affect combat value of the units? If the latter, how can I get a "ballpark" sense of what the combat values of the attacking and defending units actually are?
1. Not related.
2. They are not directly related, but often they track closely together unless there are stacking points accumulated from a previous combat in that hex.
3. The latter, combat value of units. You may have to just play enough to get a feel for it, but remember, it's not just the combat values, the Action Points and Effectiveness play a huge roll as well.
n.b. if your units were all from the same army the bonus goes up to 200%!
HTH [:)]
Rex Lex or Lex Rex?
RE: Combat Odds
Hi wadortch,
Willgamer is correct and the manual gives more detail.
5.2.9 Stacking
5.2.10 Concentric attacks
Cheers,
Cameron
Willgamer is correct and the manual gives more detail.
5.2.9 Stacking
5.2.10 Concentric attacks
Cheers,
Cameron
RE: Combat Odds
Hello Cameron and thanks for your reply.
I found more good information in the War Room Thread, Attack vs Size Discussion, and apologize for not checking that out before I started this thread as it addresses my questions here in part.
However, it would still be great to hear from you as to some basic benchmarks in the combat model and what it takes to win a round of combat.
I have engaged a number of regular Soviet Infantry Divisions on Turn 2 (the opening move turn) in plain terrain with mixed results. Stacking point ratio's close to 1 to 1, Combat Power close to 1 to 1 in plain terrain, German units have 100 or more AP's when the attack button is hit. Germans win most of the time (but not as often under 1.02 as in 1.01) but not always (again as noted, in this case in plains terrain).
I understand that there are many variables in combat once that is initiated that include available AP's, readiness, morale and all the rest but my basic question remains which is what is the basic modified ratio in the model that creates a win for the attacker?
You may guess easily I am an old wargamer used to that ancient Avalon Hill CRT table but the question is valid. How does the DCB model combat outcomes under various modified (per all the variables) combat ratios between an attacking and defending force?
I found more good information in the War Room Thread, Attack vs Size Discussion, and apologize for not checking that out before I started this thread as it addresses my questions here in part.
However, it would still be great to hear from you as to some basic benchmarks in the combat model and what it takes to win a round of combat.
I have engaged a number of regular Soviet Infantry Divisions on Turn 2 (the opening move turn) in plain terrain with mixed results. Stacking point ratio's close to 1 to 1, Combat Power close to 1 to 1 in plain terrain, German units have 100 or more AP's when the attack button is hit. Germans win most of the time (but not as often under 1.02 as in 1.01) but not always (again as noted, in this case in plains terrain).
I understand that there are many variables in combat once that is initiated that include available AP's, readiness, morale and all the rest but my basic question remains which is what is the basic modified ratio in the model that creates a win for the attacker?
You may guess easily I am an old wargamer used to that ancient Avalon Hill CRT table but the question is valid. How does the DCB model combat outcomes under various modified (per all the variables) combat ratios between an attacking and defending force?
Walt
RE: Combat Odds
On the first turn with combat the SU troops have a -50% defense from Blitzkrieg shock. The German units are all in Blitzkrieg mode, and so get a +50% offense. So if two units had 50 combat power each, then the German would attack with 75 and the SU would defend with 25 for 3-1. So win most of the time, but not always.
SU units defending in forest get a +40% defense mod, and there are defense mods for other terrain as well, so there are variables.
Also the combat is done on a sliding scale, where less damage is done in earlier "rounds" (Use of AP) and more in later.
So you could win with 1 unit attacking, but suffer more casualties and use up more AP than if you attacked with more units.
Additionally the AP cost to enter the defenders hex is essentially (not 100% of the time, but almost always) "paid" for by the attack. So if I have two German units facing one SU unit, and I want both to end up in the hex, I might as well attack with both (especially in early turns) as I will most likely pay the minimum 40 AP for the attack and get to enter the hex, while if I attack with one unit and win the other that did not attack will still pay 40 AP to enter that hex.
It is not a complicated system on the surface, but there is really a lot of depth to it.
SU units defending in forest get a +40% defense mod, and there are defense mods for other terrain as well, so there are variables.
Also the combat is done on a sliding scale, where less damage is done in earlier "rounds" (Use of AP) and more in later.
So you could win with 1 unit attacking, but suffer more casualties and use up more AP than if you attacked with more units.
Additionally the AP cost to enter the defenders hex is essentially (not 100% of the time, but almost always) "paid" for by the attack. So if I have two German units facing one SU unit, and I want both to end up in the hex, I might as well attack with both (especially in early turns) as I will most likely pay the minimum 40 AP for the attack and get to enter the hex, while if I attack with one unit and win the other that did not attack will still pay 40 AP to enter that hex.
It is not a complicated system on the surface, but there is really a lot of depth to it.
-
WingedIncubus
- Posts: 566
- Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2007 2:17 am
RE: Combat Odds
Do you use your Command Focus cards on your PanzerGruppe leader to maximize your stats? Do you use your Infantry to take neighboring hexes before launching a concerted attack on 3+ sides? Do you choose favourable terrain to attack, and avoid good defenders?
IMHO, what I feel the "problem" is that some beginning players have false expectations: That Soviet regular troops are to be pushovers that can be sneezed at one-on-one to melt away before the mighty German juggernaut. So they attack gung-ho on a wide front without utilizing all the tools available to them on a cost-benefit analysis, and they are puzzled when sometimes the Russians stand firm and it doesn't work.
First, never underestimate the power of confirmation bias. More often than not, when attacked 1.5 to 2-to 1 in stack ratio Soviet regulars will retreat. Smaller than that... eh too effy for me unless the objective (like closing a pocket, for example) is worth the risk. There is a part of randomness and weights, though, that doesn't make it so all the time.
Second, toe-to-toe they are weaker than German divisions, yes, but not that weak. And while they can pose a stiff resistance, they are far from being overpowered either. T2 and T3 can be lethal for the Soviets if the German player does exploit all his available assets to maximize his offensive power when he is at his strongest: Luftwaffe, Artillery, Command points, relationships, etc. Remember that all of these are usually set at T2, so they come into effect on T3.
Third, the Germans' biggest asset is mobility. Even their Slow Divisions can always move, and often quite farther than their Soviet counterparts. The German armies are always activated; the Soviet player... well let's say they aren't more often than not.
Fourth, when attacking a stack it takes only one Division staying put on the battle report to make all defenders remain in the hex. So yes, even if you attack 6 counters in a hex and 5 of them are Retreating or Panicking if the last one doesn't retreat they all stay in the targeted hex, and in short your attack is "wasted" because this attack will have increaed the stack amount carried over will often make follow-up attacks prohibitive.
Right now, I feel there's a right balance: The German player now must use its forces intelligently : Decide on an objective worth the fight, recon to find the weakest part of the Soviet lines, pierce through the Soviets through with Panzers and exploit the hole, and use the Infantry to weaken/mop up the rest into small pockets to be annihilated. OR, if the Panzers are unavailable, grind its way forward with targeted, intelligent assaults hex-by-hex to bring in Infantry Divisions with enough APs to attack the stack's flank and increase the stack attack size. Hit the hexes where the Soviet is weakest, maximize firepower and stack attacks on hexes he is strongest. On the long run this pays off. It causes far more headaches on the Soviet player than attacking forward, willy-nilly, on a wide front.
Each time he attacks, the German player must ask himself, in order, the following three questions :
a) Do I have enough assets (Divs, Stack ratio, APs in Reserve) to be confident in my chances to win the assault?
b) Can I maximize my chances more, right now, by either bringing attacking Divisions from more neighboring hexes, pocketing, moving the HQ closer, moving my Divisions in better position, etc.
c) Is the assault worth the cost in AP to further my objective, or can I ignore it?
In one of my current PBEM games with 1.02F I have taken both Riga, Minsk, and Lvov on T4; and I am far from being MichaelT. I consider myself a competent beginner German player, and like any human I am subject to mistakes and miscalculations. Yes, on T2 I have encountered this so called stiffer resistance. After a few tries I haven't found it made my campaign any more miserable than under 1.01. I simply worked my way around them : if they aren't retreating on T2, they often are in T3.
Do it wrong, and a fighting Soviet player can transform the German war into a quagmire. Yeah, the Soviet will always be pocketed and lose troops, LOTS of troops, HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS of troops. But even in 1.02 more are coming in the way. Because what the Soviet players has is space and lots of blockers to trade for time. Time to organize, time to get rid of these incompetent fools, time to bring in reinforcements as quick as possible, and lots of manpower of not-that-weak moujiks. In short, make it drag, make each hex you take as costly and painful as practicable. The Soviet player has more counters, he can place them, and in the right situation he can afford to order them to all-out attack until the last Russian falls.
IMHO, what I feel the "problem" is that some beginning players have false expectations: That Soviet regular troops are to be pushovers that can be sneezed at one-on-one to melt away before the mighty German juggernaut. So they attack gung-ho on a wide front without utilizing all the tools available to them on a cost-benefit analysis, and they are puzzled when sometimes the Russians stand firm and it doesn't work.
First, never underestimate the power of confirmation bias. More often than not, when attacked 1.5 to 2-to 1 in stack ratio Soviet regulars will retreat. Smaller than that... eh too effy for me unless the objective (like closing a pocket, for example) is worth the risk. There is a part of randomness and weights, though, that doesn't make it so all the time.
Second, toe-to-toe they are weaker than German divisions, yes, but not that weak. And while they can pose a stiff resistance, they are far from being overpowered either. T2 and T3 can be lethal for the Soviets if the German player does exploit all his available assets to maximize his offensive power when he is at his strongest: Luftwaffe, Artillery, Command points, relationships, etc. Remember that all of these are usually set at T2, so they come into effect on T3.
Third, the Germans' biggest asset is mobility. Even their Slow Divisions can always move, and often quite farther than their Soviet counterparts. The German armies are always activated; the Soviet player... well let's say they aren't more often than not.
Fourth, when attacking a stack it takes only one Division staying put on the battle report to make all defenders remain in the hex. So yes, even if you attack 6 counters in a hex and 5 of them are Retreating or Panicking if the last one doesn't retreat they all stay in the targeted hex, and in short your attack is "wasted" because this attack will have increaed the stack amount carried over will often make follow-up attacks prohibitive.
Right now, I feel there's a right balance: The German player now must use its forces intelligently : Decide on an objective worth the fight, recon to find the weakest part of the Soviet lines, pierce through the Soviets through with Panzers and exploit the hole, and use the Infantry to weaken/mop up the rest into small pockets to be annihilated. OR, if the Panzers are unavailable, grind its way forward with targeted, intelligent assaults hex-by-hex to bring in Infantry Divisions with enough APs to attack the stack's flank and increase the stack attack size. Hit the hexes where the Soviet is weakest, maximize firepower and stack attacks on hexes he is strongest. On the long run this pays off. It causes far more headaches on the Soviet player than attacking forward, willy-nilly, on a wide front.
Each time he attacks, the German player must ask himself, in order, the following three questions :
a) Do I have enough assets (Divs, Stack ratio, APs in Reserve) to be confident in my chances to win the assault?
b) Can I maximize my chances more, right now, by either bringing attacking Divisions from more neighboring hexes, pocketing, moving the HQ closer, moving my Divisions in better position, etc.
c) Is the assault worth the cost in AP to further my objective, or can I ignore it?
In one of my current PBEM games with 1.02F I have taken both Riga, Minsk, and Lvov on T4; and I am far from being MichaelT. I consider myself a competent beginner German player, and like any human I am subject to mistakes and miscalculations. Yes, on T2 I have encountered this so called stiffer resistance. After a few tries I haven't found it made my campaign any more miserable than under 1.01. I simply worked my way around them : if they aren't retreating on T2, they often are in T3.
Do it wrong, and a fighting Soviet player can transform the German war into a quagmire. Yeah, the Soviet will always be pocketed and lose troops, LOTS of troops, HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS of troops. But even in 1.02 more are coming in the way. Because what the Soviet players has is space and lots of blockers to trade for time. Time to organize, time to get rid of these incompetent fools, time to bring in reinforcements as quick as possible, and lots of manpower of not-that-weak moujiks. In short, make it drag, make each hex you take as costly and painful as practicable. The Soviet player has more counters, he can place them, and in the right situation he can afford to order them to all-out attack until the last Russian falls.
RE: Combat Odds
Hello RicinVa and Drakken.
Thanks much for your insightful and helpful replies.
What I am getting from you both is that all other factors such as morale and readiness being equal (and with bonuses factored in and with sufficient AP's) you want to achieve 2-1 or higher ratios to ensure an attack will prevail. Fair take away message? Love to hear from Cameron on this too.
Last question relates to AP expenditure. Say I have 3 units attacking, 2 with 100 APs and one with 50.Do all units stop attacking when the unit with 50 exhausts its AP's?
Thanks much for your insightful and helpful replies.
What I am getting from you both is that all other factors such as morale and readiness being equal (and with bonuses factored in and with sufficient AP's) you want to achieve 2-1 or higher ratios to ensure an attack will prevail. Fair take away message? Love to hear from Cameron on this too.
Last question relates to AP expenditure. Say I have 3 units attacking, 2 with 100 APs and one with 50.Do all units stop attacking when the unit with 50 exhausts its AP's?
Walt
RE: Combat Odds
A lot depends on what posture the Units have. In Blitz mode a 2-1 would mostly suffice normally a 3:1 would be better.
Ideally you want to win with a Minimum use of AP and low own losses.
Re AP - All Units Keep attacking as long as they have AP, so the 2 Units would attack for the full 10 rounds if needed
Ideally you want to win with a Minimum use of AP and low own losses.
Re AP - All Units Keep attacking as long as they have AP, so the 2 Units would attack for the full 10 rounds if needed
-
WingedIncubus
- Posts: 566
- Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2007 2:17 am
RE: Combat Odds
1. Yes, as per standard military doctrine for the Offence: Aiming for 2-to-1 in normal attack; 3-to-1 and over for fortified positions; 1.5-to-1 against already weakened Divisions.
That's another thing I love about this game : both players are elegantly encouraged to apply their respective side's battle doctrines. No more artificially-increased CV that makes the Germans magically superior by default and Soviet Rifle Divisions nigh-on useless.
Let's say you had 1000 troops and on the attack, and I had 1000 troops in defence, waiting for you in defensive positions quickly prepared in 4 days, would you go ahead and attack me? What would be your ideal number of troops to have a confident chance of making me retreat? How would you maximize your troops to better use your troops while exploiting the weaknesses of my assets and position? The game's stacking system and use of various bonuses and maluses represent that.
2. The 100 APs would keep firing for the whole 10 rounds, unless the last defender breaks off, the 50 APs will stop firing after 5.
That's another thing I love about this game : both players are elegantly encouraged to apply their respective side's battle doctrines. No more artificially-increased CV that makes the Germans magically superior by default and Soviet Rifle Divisions nigh-on useless.
Let's say you had 1000 troops and on the attack, and I had 1000 troops in defence, waiting for you in defensive positions quickly prepared in 4 days, would you go ahead and attack me? What would be your ideal number of troops to have a confident chance of making me retreat? How would you maximize your troops to better use your troops while exploiting the weaknesses of my assets and position? The game's stacking system and use of various bonuses and maluses represent that.
2. The 100 APs would keep firing for the whole 10 rounds, unless the last defender breaks off, the 50 APs will stop firing after 5.
-
WingedIncubus
- Posts: 566
- Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2007 2:17 am
RE: Combat Odds
No problem.
I do this because this game is a real gem, and should become a classic. Fixes and tweaks are needed here and there, of course, but the core game is sound. The more players become interested and grow to like the game design, the bigger and better the community becomes.
I do this because this game is a real gem, and should become a classic. Fixes and tweaks are needed here and there, of course, but the core game is sound. The more players become interested and grow to like the game design, the bigger and better the community becomes.