Casualities

[Cfant]

Hi!

Maybe it's just me, but for me it seems the casualites-rate is strange: about 25% damaged and 75% destroyed. Shouldn't it be the opposite, at least when soldiers are concerned? I think it was about 3-4 wounded for one dead in WW2.

[larryfulkerson]

What scenario are you talking about my friend?

[Cfant]

My impresson through several scenarios. Just curious if it's just me

[larryfulkerson]

I for one would like to know the process that decides which units are destroyed and
which are mearly disabled. There's a process I'm sure but I have no idea how it
works for the formula for it. Maybe Ralph will enlighten us. Or Bob. Or whoever
knows.

[gbaby]

This is getting too tied up in terms and what they mean to individual players. It is all abstract. Destroyed does not mean "killed" vs disabled does not mean "wounded". In game terms, it just signifies what goes back to the replacement bucket for dispersal as replacements. I think it balances out pretty well, where you get HUGE replacements on unit "evaporations".

You cut off enemy supply so you can prevent disabled from going to the replacement pool, that is all that matters to me. Debate of killed vs wounded really does not apply, in my opinion. It is all about what goes back to be re-used as replacements. I like it as it is.