German losses?

[morvael]

Next patch will see degradation of Axis logistics capability.

[chaos45]

Degradation of Axis logistics is much needed, you know I played alot awhile back and the game has super shifted to Axis advantage since then and many games were close run things in 1941 before all the bonus stuff to the Axis all the patches since have obviously brought.

In my current game Im almost to September, and I'll be lucky if the Germans arent at the gates of Moscow 1st week of sepetember and in excellent supply, thats the reality of the game in its current form. Ohh and leningrad again is a lost cause in the current patch form IMO. I can tell you from several games, this was by far the easiest I have ever seen Soviet defenses crushed, even good divisions were worthless due to the supply and pure CV of the German onslaught and air power....and this is with no supply drops from Axis air.

Leningrad will fall at some point in September most likely early september.

Also I call WTF on German supply network in total right now, I have germans across Kerch in august 1941....after defeating the entire coastal army to get there. So either the patch is grossly out of whack, Im a horrible soviet player- possible but unlikely from my past games, or some new exploit has been found by who im playing...its on the server tho so supposedly more secure.

So yes stop putting so many pro axis things hard wired into the game, and stop nerfing the soviets ability to play the game would be appreciated. Esp since it has massive consequences on the 1941 part of the game.

I imagine the reduction in sapper squads is part of this, the no Engineer SU helping to dig in another huge part....maybe since you are removing sapper squads replace them with combat infantry squad ToE improvements/adds to the soviet divisions to replace the lost CV from full combat sapper squads?

Also I know its a small team and one of the team member was very vocal on pro Axis changes, think that needs to be toned down....if you want to add pro axis changes make them come into effect in 1943/1944 when the game starts to landside towards the soviets pending they dont auto lose in 41/42 which seems to be the case in most recently started games.

[charlie0311]

Ahem, I can win as Sov as the game now is, only the previously suggested axis rail adjustment is needed.

I play Sov with all out Blitzkrieg set up. Clear weather and no partisans for summer '41. No sov combat bonus and mild blizzard. Axis may use LW to aid the t1 attacks and ignore the red af if desired.

Yes, it's difficult and the players must understand the axis ability very well. And if that's not enough summer '42 is even worse.

Yes I used to lose quite a lot, playing good players has that side effect. Adapt, adjust, kill fascists, hehe.

[HardLuckYetAgain]

ORIGINAL: morvael

Next patch will see degradation of Axis logistics capability.

Maybe that is why there is an extra FBD in the south again. What was the reason for this addition again?

[Telemecus]

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

ORIGINAL: morvael

Next patch will see degradation of Axis logistics capability.

Maybe that is why there is an extra FBD in the south again. What was the reason for this addition again?

Taking a guess at the developers thought patterns but... having decided that Army Group Antonescu would not stay as ahistorical this had the knock on affect of further reducing rail repair in the South. So better thought of as a replacement for AGAntonescu and its rail repair SUs rather than another FBD which is why it has reduced capabilities?

[56ajax]

Thank you know who that i am really good at attrition because in a mild blizzard I forced a Fin Brigade to retreat and killed no one, not a sausage...forced a german Inf regiment attacked by 4 divs and 2 brigades to retreat and killed 13..... I assume the Soviets can't see the enemy due to the weather.

At the moment I am destroying approx 70 tanks a turn, all in attrition (thanks to my opponent for leaving some in the front line). I do not have any unit that can take on Panzers and the way the numbers are increasing each turn I am going to face 5500 tanks in early 1942.

No wonder people go over to the dark side...

[Stelteck]

Production of german tanks is increasing though the war.

The enemy tank numbers will be restored each time the panzerdivisions are put on refit in the rear. Tank number TOE is also increasing so you will probably face 10K ennemy tanks in 1943.

Early 1942 you can take one panzerdivision with a shock army of 5 cavalry corps.

[MechFO]

German losses in the beginning are ridiculous.

Losses of 1-2 squads in a divisional attack shouldn't be happening, and especially failed attacks should be more expensive. I don't know if low experience elements are leading to bad soviet hit % in the combat resolution.

If not upping the outright losses, at least there should be far more damaged elements. This would also help to prevent combat power from regenerating too quickly as well as offer a disincentive to operate out of supply range (too easy for infantry at the moment).

That said, the Germans still lose a dozen divisions in withdrawals that shouldn't happen, so that's about 150k "dead", suffer winter attrition and the historical heavy German casualties were not least because of countless Soviet attacks and counteroffensives, that failed, but did inflict losses. If the Sov player refuses to attack and gets cut off instead, this leads to self reinforcing dynamic.

EDIT: upping the combat detail shows extremely few soviet elements firing, even when several division are attacking, which of course leads to hardly any Axis elements getting damaged.

[56ajax]

ORIGINAL: MechFO

German losses in the beginning are ridiculous.

Losses of 1-2 squads in a divisional attack shouldn't be happening, and especially failed attacks should be more expensive. I don't know if low experience elements are leading to bad soviet hit % in the combat resolution.

If not upping the outright losses, at least there should be far more damaged elements. This would also help to prevent combat power from regenerating too quickly as well as offer a disincentive to operate out of supply range (too easy for infantry at the moment).

That said, the Germans still lose a dozen divisions in withdrawals that shouldn't happen, so that's about 150k "dead", suffer winter attrition and the historical heavy German casualties were not least because of countless Soviet attacks and counteroffensives, that failed, but did inflict losses. If the Sov player refuses to attack and gets cut off instead, this leads to self reinforcing dynamic.

EDIT: upping the combat detail shows extremely few soviet elements firing, even when several division are attacking, which of course leads to hardly any Axis elements getting damaged.

What i am finding that attacking is doing limited damage to the Germans other than gaining ground, and all the losses are caused by attrition.

I spend hours checking TOEs, raising morale to max, positioning units, getting commanders in the right spots, railroading units from the East and the AI has all the fun.

And generally speaking experience can't go higher than max morale of the unit, and they still rout.

Anyway perhaps my opponent is very good at defense.

[HardLuckYetAgain]

Here is a prime example of what Chaos45 is talking about. Cant win for losing (or is it can lose for winning)

If the lost total equaled 69 for the Germans maybe I would have been ok with it. [:D]

[Stelteck]

Routing a unit did a surprising low amount of damage, at least to german. I do not understand why such low looses, it is not realistic at all. At least a lot of heavy equipment should be left behind.

It is possible to give good damage to a german unit, but you have to prepare for the target unit a retreat path with multiple enemy zone of control. The more enemy units close to the retreat path, the better for doing damage.

[HardLuckYetAgain]

ORIGINAL: Stelteck

Routing a unit did a surprising low amount of damage, at least to german. I do not understand why it is not realistic at all. At least a lot of heavy equipment should be left behind.

It is possible to give good damage to a german unit, but you have to prepare for the target unit a retreat path with multiple enemy zone of control. The more enemy units close to the retreat path, the better for doing damage.

Retreat path wouldn't have made much difference if any at all. I have watched German units retreat multiple ZOC and take no extra loses to very minimal as they retreated. As Germany you basically just go balls to the wall forward while protecting your flanks and it isn't much if anything that the Russians can do about it to drive the Germans back. Attack a Germany unit with Soviets (especially prior to Sept 41) take massive Soviets loses with very minimal German loses if any. (this gets a check mark as VERY PRO German). The best defense is a good Offense but that is extremely difficult to mimic in the opening stages of this game as a Soviet player. Correct me if I'm wrong but historically Germans took some serious casualties when the Soviets counterattacked or defended in the early stages of the war if I remember correctly. (i.e. Like the Brest defenders inflicted over 1,000 casualties but you will be lucky to get 100-200 in the game).

[Wheat]

Before we get all pro-Soviet on the next round of patches, geez...after Sept 41, WTH! You can get big odds on Russkies and lose more Germans than Russisans. So the big loss thing is turned off and the Soviet fan boys want more.

Yep. Now I have played the original Russian winter rules vs my opponent and I forgot how awful it is. Just wrecked the German army. Although I took Leningrad, Moscow and Rostov in 41, I lost Rostov and Moscow in the winter and doubt I will get either back in 42. So much for even doing what the Germans did in 42 ALTHOUGH I DID BETTER THAN THEY DID IN 41.

Soviets don't need a bunch of fixes imo.

[HardLuckYetAgain]

ORIGINAL: Wheat

Before we get all pro-Soviet on the next round of patches, geez...after Sept 41, WTH! You can get big odds on Russkies and lose more Germans than Russisans. So the big loss thing is turned off and the Soviet fan boys want more.

Yep. Now I have played the original Russian winter rules vs my opponent and I forgot how awful it is. Just wrecked the German army. Although I took Leningrad, Moscow and Rostov in 41, I lost Rostov and Moscow in the winter and doubt I will get either back in 42. So much for even doing what the Germans did in 42 ALTHOUGH I DID BETTER THAN THEY DID IN 41.

Soviets don't need a bunch of fixes imo.

Hahahahhahahahaha, I am actually pro German but my previous post on the loses is correct since it is hard coded into the system to allow it. I don't care either way, I attack and take the loses anyway since a great many Soviets really don't attack much during the early months.

[MechFO]

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

Retreat path wouldn't have made much difference if any at all. I have watched German units retreat multiple ZOC and take no extra loses to very minimal as they retreated.

That is a general problem. Infantry units especially can not really be decisively fixed and destroyed in an engagement, even by mechanized units.

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain
As Germany you basically just go balls to the wall forward while protecting your flanks and it isn't much if anything that the Russians can do about it to drive the Germans back. Attack a Germany unit with Soviets (especially prior to Sept 41) take massive Soviets loses with very minimal German loses if any. (this gets a check mark as VERY PRO German). The best defense is a good Offense but that is extremely difficult to mimic in the opening stages of this game as a Soviet player. Correct me if I'm wrong but historically Germans took some serious casualties when the Soviets counterattacked or defended in the early stages of the war if I remember correctly. (i.e. Like the Brest defenders inflicted over 1,000 casualties but you will be lucky to get 100-200 in the game).

casualties or dead? Big difference.

In general isolated units lose too much CV too quickly. A week or 2 of isolation shouldn't lead to the kind of steep decline one sees unless decisively engaged, but the combat model doesn't really allow decisive engagements, so weak (in casualty terms) attacks bleed out too much supply which leads to quick CV collapse.

This contributes to the snowball effect in 41/42 and 44/45.






This is not what a multi divisional engagement where both sides are trying to fight it out should look like. This leads to snowballing encirclements, snowballing moral effects and snowballing territorial gains.

[HardLuckYetAgain]

ORIGINAL: MechFO

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

Retreat path wouldn't have made much difference if any at all. I have watched German units retreat multiple ZOC and take no extra loses to very minimal as they retreated.

That is a general problem. Infantry units especially can not really be decisively fixed and destroyed in an engagement, even by mechanized units.

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain
As Germany you basically just go balls to the wall forward while protecting your flanks and it isn't much if anything that the Russians can do about it to drive the Germans back. Attack a Germany unit with Soviets (especially prior to Sept 41) take massive Soviets loses with very minimal German loses if any. (this gets a check mark as VERY PRO German). The best defense is a good Offense but that is extremely difficult to mimic in the opening stages of this game as a Soviet player. Correct me if I'm wrong but historically Germans took some serious casualties when the Soviets counterattacked or defended in the early stages of the war if I remember correctly. (i.e. Like the Brest defenders inflicted over 1,000 casualties but you will be lucky to get 100-200 in the game).

casualties or dead? Big difference.

In general isolated units lose too much CV too quickly. A week or 2 of isolation shouldn't lead to the kind of steep decline one sees unless decisively engaged, but the combat model doesn't really allow decisive engagements, so weak (in casualty terms) attacks bleed out too much supply which leads to quick CV collapse.

This contributes to the snowball effect in 41/42 and 44/45.






This is not what a multi divisional engagement where both sides are trying to fight it out should look like. This leads to snowballing encirclements, snowballing moral effects and snowballing territorial gains.

Hmmmmmm, feels like I'm getting schooled here.......lol Must have hit a nerve ;-} Sure, I will be the punching bag, please continue

[MechFO]

Old wound...badly healed.

[mktours]

This is what used to be in 1.07, when the original developers were still taking care of the game.
After that, they leave it to some volunteers to freely do any changes they want. The combat engine has been heavily modified from the original one since then.

[Stelteck]

Your example is impressive. (Although it is not a "simple" win for the soviet, as it looks like the enemy have to retreat though enemy zone of control so take additional retreat damage).

It is still impressive and quite different what we are seeing today. I managed to do so much damage to german units only in rare circumstances where the german had a retreat path of 3/4 hex long (due to 3 counter per hex limit), each of them under zone of control of ennemy units. And it was end 1941. It was a miracle.

your example (one retreat only under fire) would be far more common.

[morvael]

Unfortunately these numbers were virtual, hiding true losses behind a simple equation calculating losses as number of men in destroyed elements and half the men in damaged elements, while in fact no men were lost from damaged elements and only some from destroyed elements. Currently the game is displaying actual immediate losses, so they correspond with losses screen, but because of that they are much lower. Think of them as not showing lightly wounded soldiers, which would return to duty in less than 7 days. I measure losses (in terms of loss screen numbers) for each version using the same set of tests, and actually the game is much more bloody now than before, and the ratio is much more realistic.