CFNA 1940-43 devoncop (Axis) vs warspite1 (CW) - no devoncop please

[MikeJ19]

Warspite,

I hate it when the unit I've got plans for decides to reorganize. Especially if I can see no reason for the reorg.

I noticed in your victory point shot that the enemy loss penalty fluctuates - the enemy loss penalty goes from 99 to 98 from July to August. I've noticed this elsewhere and I really do not know what the loss penalty actually covers. Do you?

Have a good day

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: MikeJ19

Warspite,

I hate it when the unit I've got plans for decides to reorganize. Especially if I can see no reason for the reorg.

I noticed in your victory point shot that the enemy loss penalty fluctuates - the enemy loss penalty goes from 99 to 98 from July to August. I've noticed this elsewhere and I really do not know what the loss penalty actually covers. Do you?

Have a good day

The loss penalty is increased by losses and decreased by replacements.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: MikeJ19

Warspite,

I hate it when the unit I've got plans for decides to reorganize. Especially if I can see no reason for the reorg.

I noticed in your victory point shot that the enemy loss penalty fluctuates - the enemy loss penalty goes from 99 to 98 from July to August. I've noticed this elsewhere and I really do not know what the loss penalty actually covers. Do you?

Have a good day

warspite1

I'm assuming its losses of men and equipment as it seems to fluctuate after turns with big losses.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: MikeJ19

Warspite,

I hate it when the unit I've got plans for decides to reorganize. Especially if I can see no reason for the reorg.

I noticed in your victory point shot that the enemy loss penalty fluctuates - the enemy loss penalty goes from 99 to 98 from July to August. I've noticed this elsewhere and I really do not know what the loss penalty actually covers. Do you?

Have a good day

The loss penalty is increased by losses and decreased by replacements.

warspite1

Yeah, what he said [:)]

[warspite1]

Turn 204
29th August 1943

In a staggering - but not surprising - display of ineptitude - I manage to copy over my saved screenshots....

All I have therefore is the summary combat losses. As can be seen the turn was pretty good from an Allied perspective all in all. I wanted to make in roads on the coast road, but the reorganising of the 51st Highland Division put paid to any hopes there. The gains made were further south where the surrounded Sussex battalion were rescued - and just to the north of that position where mixed Kiwi, Indian, Australian and British troops have started to push north.

The attack here (Battle 19) cost the Italians and Germans heavily in infantry and artillery of all types. A look at the air war indicates (please ) that the Axis air forces are struggling to put up the numbers. Even so the Allied bombers came in for rough treatment despite the size of the escort - Battle 19 being particularly frustrating.....

[MikeJ19]

Curtis,

Thanks for the info on the loss penalty - makes sense to me now, I think.

[warspite1]

Turn 205 - Axis Turn
2nd September 1942

Some movement south of the Depression at last....


This picture part way through the turn pre-bombardments.

[warspite1]

Turn 205 - Axis Turn
2nd September 1942

A quite painful turn for the CW given the small number of bombardments employed.... Another CW Hurricane evaporates [8|] The turn was perhaps interesting for the few Me-109's that appeared.

[warspite1]

Turn 205
2nd September 1942

There was something of a swing victory points wise toward the CW last turn - despite that last Axis go. I guess the overall aircraft losses were expensive...

[warspite1]

Turn 205
2nd September 1942

You couldn't make it up....[:@] Hot on the heels of the newly arrived 51st Highland Division going into reorg, my best infantry - the 2nd New Zealand - now do the same... I mean how the hell???

But as before, I can't let a simple lack of infantry delay things!

I open proceedings with some bombardments before switching to combat - and three attacks. My focus remains the coastal road but and I manage to push the enemy back here. To the south of the railway line two further gains are made - one of which is against a lone German battalion that dishes out a large number of casualties to the CW forces.

[warspite1]

Turn 205
2nd September 1942

Further bombardment ensues before another couple of assaults are ordered. There is no real opportunity to attack on the coast road which is a real shame, but that is okay - if, if I can drive northwest toward Ruseiwat Ridge, then in theory I have a chance of encircling devoncops units on the coastal plain. This won't happen but I can dream can't I? [:)]

There is one big attack here (the northern-most of the two) that accounts for almost 100 infantry squads and 60 tanks - most of these German.

[warspite1]

Turn 205
2nd September 2018

The final round is a mix of bombardment and 3 assaults. Tank formations try and force a gap in the enemy lines south of El Hammam but this is the only attack that gains territory and the enemy hold elsewhere.

[warspite1]

Turn 205
2nd September 2018

The final bill and its a bit of a mixed bag. I end the turn as I started it, with air superiority but once again the results are incredibly disappointing. The Allied fighters flew 4 sorties to every 1 Axis but the Allies lost more fighters - as well as 40 bombers.

The other negative was the loss of almost 60 anti-tank guns which really hurts. However, the Axis losses in infantry and tanks is pleasing to see.

I haven't yet committed the Greek Brigade to the fray and hopefully the Kiwis will be back next turn. Let's just hope no other key units decide they need R+R......

[warspite1]

Turn 206
5th September 1942

A pretty awful turn for me and the victory points swing back in the Axis favour by two points.

My gain on the coast road was wiped out and I lost more than 50 field guns. The unfathomable goings on in the air continues - I continue to have air superiority according to the air table - and I got completely trashed in the air.... again????

My mood is massively improved with the news that not only is the 51st Infantry Division reorganising....again... but so is the recently arrived 44th Division - that's 6 field artillery, 2 anti-tank and 18 battalions out of the order of battle straight off.

[warspite1]

Turn 206
5th September 1942

The opening round saw a series of bombardments along the front. Results were not spectacular but the artillery was spread out rather than concentrated this time.

For round 3 no less than 6 attacks are ordered - in the north to try and take back Burg El Arab - two attacks to try and put pressure on El Hammam - and finally three attacks toward Alam Halfa.

[warspite1]

Turn 206
5th September 1942

I haven't looked at the casualty nos. at this stage but the attacks were all successful in gaining ground.

I decide to continue with three more attacks - and these too succeed - at varying cost - in pushing the enemy back. But at the end of the round I fail a proficiency test - which is really irritating in the extreme at this time. The end of the turn means I can't take a picture but if you look at the picture above I can confirm that my lead armour elements are now just two hexes from El Hammam - but the breach is two hexes wide not one (subject to what devonccop has in response). Instead of a picture of the front I will do a round up of the costs....

The infantry losses were pretty serious.....

[MikeJ19]

Warspite,

Units reorganizing without any apparent reason is so frustrating. I understand your pain.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: MikeJ19

Warspite,

Units reorganizing without any apparent reason is so frustrating. I understand your pain.

warspite1

I guess there is a reason [;)] - what is so annoying here is that the 51st Highland have only recently arrived and have reorganised in two of the last three turns..... [:(]

[Szilard]

This inspired me to actually RTFM to work out what goes on ...

Section 9.1.10:

"Units of Formations failing a Formation Quality
Check at the beginning of a Turn are considered
to be Reorganizing and will only be available for
non-combat orders. They will accept all other
orders, and they will Defend normally, but are not
available for launching Attacks or Bombardments.
Formation Quality is the average of the
Formation’s Proficiency and average assigned
unit Quality. Formation Quality is reduced if
many units are divided. The Formation passes the
Quality Check if this value is greater than a random
number from 1 to 100, or [?? presumably this should be "and"]
if the number of units that
experienced severe combat results in the previous
Turn is smaller than a random number from 1 to
the number of units in the Formation."


And:


19.1.2. Unit Quality Calculation
Quality = (2 x proficiency + readiness) / 3


So: The 51st Div has formation proficiency of 70 and all of its assigned units appear to start out at 70 also. At 100% unit readiness, average Unit Quality = (2*70+100)/3 = 80. Which gives Formation Quality = average(70,80) = 75. So the division has a 25% chance of re-org each turn. Modulo increases in unit proficiency, reductions in readiness and severe combat results. And modulo loss of div HQ and losses to support squads.

To me, that seems too high for a good quality C'wealth division. I think British C&C failings should include a Force Proficiency aspect. Something like re-org check against average of Formation Quality and Force Proficiency. At the moment, Force Proficiency mainly impacts early turn endings.

Anyway, it would have been nice if after all these years, the system would allow for both Force and Formation Proficiency to be varied via events, reflecting eg Monty arriving to hand out cigs, tidy up the lesser mortals' messes & take a grip on things.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Szilard

This inspired me to actually RTFM to work out what goes on ...

Section 9.1.10:

"Units of Formations failing a Formation Quality
Check at the beginning of a Turn are considered
to be Reorganizing and will only be available for
non-combat orders. They will accept all other
orders, and they will Defend normally, but are not
available for launching Attacks or Bombardments.
Formation Quality is the average of the
Formation’s Proficiency and average assigned
unit Quality. Formation Quality is reduced if
many units are divided. The Formation passes the
Quality Check if this value is greater than a random
number from 1 to 100, or [?? presumably this should be "and"]
if the number of units that
experienced severe combat results in the previous
Turn is smaller than a random number from 1 to
the number of units in the Formation."


And:


19.1.2. Unit Quality Calculation
Quality = (2 x proficiency + readiness) / 3


So: The 51st Div has formation proficiency of 70 and all of its assigned units appear to start out at 70 also. At 100% unit readiness, average Unit Quality = (2*70+100)/3 = 80. Which gives Formation Quality = average(70,80) = 75. So the division has a 25% chance of re-org each turn. Modulo increases in unit proficiency, reductions in readiness and severe combat results. And modulo loss of div HQ and losses to support squads.

To me, that seems too high for a good quality C'wealth division. I think British C&C failings should include a Force Proficiency aspect. Something like re-org check against average of Formation Quality and Force Proficiency. At the moment, Force Proficiency mainly impacts early turn endings.

Anyway, it would have been nice if after all these years, the system would allow for both Force and Formation Proficiency to be varied via events, reflecting eg Monty arriving to hand out cigs, tidy up the lesser mortals' messes & take a grip on things.

warspite1

Thanks for that Szilard. Numbers and maths an' **** leaves me cold [:(] so its nice that you've been able to put some context on this definition.

I agree for a 1942 Commonwealth - certainly post Monty - a 1 in 4 chance seems excessive.