Maintaining Offensive Momentum

[Wiedrock]

As for the impact of CPPs on fire combat, Pavel says combat prep has a direct impact on all types of fire combat. News to me, but not surprising as Gary sometimes slips things in without us getting them documented. Part of the mystery of the great Oz.

Good to know, thanks.
The Great G you mean.

[Wiedrock]

This has me wondering about an item in the manual, from 23.8.1.

The force value of the attacking side is
calculated using the following values for each non-support,
non-artillery division unit attacking:
§§ Corps 15
§§ Division 9
§§ Brigade 5 (3 if the brigade has less than 2,000 men)
§§ Regiment 3
Once the force value exceeds 28 there is a chance that
elements will not get to fire during combat.

Does the on-map Soviet guards heavy rocket brigade get counted against the 28 or not? Strictly speaking it is neither artillery nor a division.

Seems like all "on map Rocket/Artillery" CUs are not adding to the "stacking penalty", so it's as described and they just forgot about mentioning your Brigades (maybe those Brigades were all supposed to be SUs at some point in development).

Once you change the "classification" of those very same Divisions into "Infantry" you clearly see the stacking penalty affecting the hits done. No Rockets were harmed during these tests.

You can also nicely see the difference between 2Corps (stacking 30), vs 3 Divisions(+27stack) or 3 Brigades(+9stack).
The Rockets were modified to not shoot/hit in all 4 tests.

[Joel Billings]

I'll ask Pavel re firing. There may be different unit size code for attacker firing than used in other parts of the game.

[MarkShot]

Well, I am playing WITW at the moment. The feel of fatigue and TOE% with CV and MP values is quite similar to WITE-2 at the macro level.

I think CPP, you could say is somewhat analogous to airborne and amphibious prep points, but for general offensive ground operations. It focuses the players attention more on not being able to maintain sustained combat than WITW where this is spread over a number indicators.

Quite a few games like the Paradox and AGEOD games introduce a cohesion concept and indicator. Units/stacks don't do anything well with poor cohesion. And you can view, CPP as the WITE-2 analogue of cohesion.

That's my impression after a couple of weeks of WITW following a couple of weeks of WITE-2.

And no, I will not be writing a peer reviewed paper on the subject of CPP and play implications.

[MarkShot]

BTW, it ain't all that easy in WITW either. In fact, I am beginning to like CPP on the card and soft factors as it is a better UI feature than WITW. The command quality border feature is also a nice UI touch.

NOTE: ANY GG GAME ON SALE. GRAB IT. OF COURSE, ALL ARE GEMS, BUT JUST LOSE THE QUALITY ON TODAY'S HIGH RES DISPLAYS THE FURTHER BACK YOU GO. ALL ARE EXPERT MODELS AND UIS.

[Wiedrock]

The command quality border feature is also a nice UI touch.

Could you explain what the two Command Quality/Efficiency modes do/show and what to use them exactly for? (I never can remember which is which is which.)

One I think shows the roll chances for the whole Leader Chain, but afaik for that it uses the Leader averages (which, IIRC include Air and Political) and I don't get it what this info would be helpful for (even just Mech and Inf ratings alone used for the average would not provide much info).

[MarkShot]

In WITW, you either need the CR and DTHQ column to find units beyond their commander's range which impact such things as SU transfers, escalating rolls, and direct arty support. I usually don't use the CR and instead just go to the highlight HQ units looking for blue which is the XXX HQ. Then, click on them to check the CP amount and if any subordinates are red. Then, mess around to fix problems. It is mainly an XXX problems due to the short range of 5 hexes. The other levels of HQ are fewer with much greater range. They don't need addressing each turn.

In WITE-2, for the above if your XX show bright green, then everyone all up the line is within range and not overloaded. I think dark green is you have some problems above the XXX level. This is Command Efficiency. Much easier than click around in WITW.

---

The other, Command Quality takes the above into account, but also measures are the commanders assigned along the path, I guess, above or below your national average. The more green, the range is correct, and you have superior HQs assigned. As for WITW, the only way to do this would be walk the tree identifying leaders with poor stats. (and you would have to have a sense are average stats)

Does that help?

[Wiedrock]

In WITE-2, for the above if your XX show bright green, then everyone all up the line is within range and not overloaded. I think dark green is you have some problems above the XXX level. This is Command Efficiency. Much easier than click around in WITW.

I see, yea the dark grean being once you are 1 CP over capacity is a good point you've figured out.
But I think this is just one part of the puzzle (it definitely also includes distance (not only when the "line is broken")).

The other, Command Quality takes the above into account, but also measures are the commanders assigned along the path, I guess, above or below your national average. The more green, the range is correct, and you have superior HQs assigned. As for WITW, the only way to do this would be walk the tree identifying leaders with poor stats. (and you would have to have a sense are average stats)

Yea, that's the Leaders, that one I am somewhat sure it takes the Leader Average and makes some average roll chance indicated by the colours.

[M60A3TTS]

The command quality border feature is also a nice UI touch.

Could you explain what the two Command Quality/Efficiency modes do/show and what to use them exactly for? (I never can remember which is which is which.)

One I think shows the roll chances for the whole Leader Chain, but afaik for that it uses the Leader averages (which, IIRC include Air and Political) and I don't get it what this info would be helpful for (even just Mech and Inf ratings alone used for the average would not provide much info).

Silly question I know, but has it ever been established whether a leader of a unit that is not in charge of the battle has any impact on it? That is to say if Malinovsky attacks with a corps of 30 CV and Lvov joins in with a brigade of 4 CV does Lvov have any impact?

[Wiedrock]

The command quality border feature is also a nice UI touch.

Could you explain what the two Command Quality/Efficiency modes do/show and what to use them exactly for? (I never can remember which is which is which.)

One I think shows the roll chances for the whole Leader Chain, but afaik for that it uses the Leader averages (which, IIRC include Air and Political) and I don't get it what this info would be helpful for (even just Mech and Inf ratings alone used for the average would not provide much info).

Silly question I know, but has it ever been established whether a leader of a unit that is not in charge of the battle has any impact on it? That is to say if Malinovsky attacks with a corps of 30 CV and Lvov joins in with a brigade of 4 CV does Lvov have any impact?

Not silly at all, its like what everyone wants to know.
Yes, I am 99% sure that the Leader actually in charge of his own units (being "secondary HQs") is the one that rolls the final CV rolls in battle.
I assume he also rolls the SUs.
Not sure about the other stuff like retreat decisions, RESERVES and so on.

I was only able to test this once we had figured out final CV rolls. So I did combats with a Inf and a Pz Unit with both about equal CV (but making sure one specific has always more) and then testing 9:9(main)+1:1(secondary) Leaders versus 1:9, 9:1 Leaders (Mech/Inf ratings). And the first gave always worse CV than the second one where the "correct leader had the correct 9" for his units.
So I concluded for me, it to be the case that each Leader rolls his own units's final CV and the leader shown in the combat report only rolls his own HQ's units.

[Joel Billings]

Back to the impact of size of the attacking force on combat, Gary said there could easily be different "size" formulas used for different parts of the game, but he can't remember details and he's not set up to look at the code now. Pavel's been gone this week, but it's very possible that the size formula used for how many attackers get to shoot is slightly different from the formula that impacts how much damage is done to the attacker's force when shot at by the defender. Gary and I recall that having more units on the attacker's side in a combat, leaders to either a greater chance of them being shoot at or hit (not sure which it is). Basically having lots of targets on he attacker's side means they will take more losses. I think Pavel was answering re the force size and the impact on attacker side shooting, not the impact on the attacker units being shot at. I don't think we're going to get a better answer on the exact specifics here.

[M60A3TTS]

Back to the impact of size of the attacking force on combat, Gary said there could easily be different "size" formulas used for different parts of the game, but he can't remember details and he's not set up to look at the code now. Pavel's been gone this week, but it's very possible that the size formula used for how many attackers get to shoot is slightly different from the formula that impacts how much damage is done to the attacker's force when shot at by the defender. Gary and I recall that having more units on the attacker's side in a combat, leaders to either a greater chance of them being shoot at or hit (not sure which it is). Basically having lots of targets on he attacker's side means they will take more losses. I think Pavel was answering re the force size and the impact on attacker side shooting, not the impact on the attacker units being shot at. I don't think we're going to get a better answer on the exact specifics here.

My only concern with the notion that more attackers = more targets is that it doesn't necessarily ring true. I don't care how good the crew of an MG-42 is, they aren't hitting an ML-20 gun howitzer that is 15,000 yards away. Whether it's 36 guns or 136, that MG-42 crew has zero targets. So I would hope if such a formula applies, it is somewhat nuanced
to take this into account.

[MarkShot]

When listening to Joel answer these, I think of all the code I wrote over 30+ years (wasn't always doing tech work), and if my own code was laid before me, could I explain just by glancing at it. (I did write documentation and comments, but even some of the more complex stuff I wrote for my personal use on this PC is unclear to me without going through line by line.) It is amazing how clever and obvious you can be when coding, and how later those basic thoughts become totally opaque.

[Wiedrock]

There exist 3 layers.

• One being the "Intensity Level" (or attacking force value(?)), used to possibly reduce Fortification after failed attacks.

  Once the final combat odds and intensity level of the
  combat is calculated (defined by the unit size of the
  attacking force where a division equals 9 points but
  support units are not counted for this purpose), forts
  may be destroyed if; i. Odds are >= 1.5 or combat
  intensity is > 30, in this case there is an automatic 50
  point fort reduction (one full fort level reduction) [...]

  This works as described, it also includes Artillery Divisions's "+9".
  

  ---

• One being the "Stacking Penalty" to own elements firing.

  The size of the attacking force will also impact the
  number of shots taken in combat. This fire penalty
  occurs in combats where there is a large number of
  attacking units. The force value of the attacking side is
  calculated using the following values for each non-support,
  non-artillery division unit attacking:
  § Corps 15
  § Division 9
  § Brigade 5 (3 if the brigade has less than 2,000 men)
  § Regiment 3
  Once the force value exceeds 28 there is a chance that
  elements will not get to fire during combat.

  Afaik that one works as described and makes sense I'd say. If it actually only affects the Attacker I do nto know, and what about RESERVES I do not know either.
  I think it may be a little harsh to the Soviets with 3Corps already exceeding the 28 "limit" with 3 Corps by 3*45-28=+17surplus. Which I could imagine a good thing if it would being countered with removing/reducing the penalty(by 50%) from Soviet Elements inside Corps/Units with (let's say) 85CPP+ (it's possible that this is part of the Code already and we don't know about). This would make the Soviets rly look into CPP even mroe when trying to breack 3stacked Hexes in 1943++.
  

  ---

• One being the "If you have more Elements, more will be hit and the more men you will lose". Not sure if this quote is the only/exact mentioning:

  In addition, bombardment artillery fire will receive a
  bonus when firing if the enemy (defending or attacking)
  has more units. This bonus is limited if a side has more
  than 3 divisions (or equivalents) in the battle, although it
  increases as more units are engaged, so in most cases it
  will only cause higher losses to an attacking force.

  This works and also and makes sense, not sure what the "has more units" is exactly based on/supposed to mean, I'd say it is missleading and it is just "the more elements you bring to battle - the more hits you will take" and not actually "comparing forces" or "counting "X"es" of units. You will lose more men when attacking with attached Rifle Brigades than with attached Tank Regiments, as an example (since the number of elements in those TOEs is very different.
  I think this is supposed to (from a gameplay perspective) stop your from always using maximum meatwave CV-force to win battles (e.g. using 6 Rifle Corps with 6x3 Rifle Brigades in each attack) and acknowledges preparing CPP/Refitted units (when you will have the same CV with 3 Corps compared to 6 without CPP/with bad stats) and therefore only need 3-4 Units instead of 6 to attack.
  Attached you can see the difference between
  1. a normal TOEs attack
  2. then with 900→7k Rifle Squads per Corps
  3. one with 18→7k Rifle Squads per Tank Brigade
  4. one with Germans ~300→7k Rifle Squads
  So it is not based on a "force value" (like counting the X'es, adding up +9 for Divisions and +15 for Corps and so on) or some comparison of those. I'd propose it's a simple "the more elements the easier Artillery hits".
  @M60, this is the reasone why few German (very) large caliber Guns can make more hits than several thousand Soviet guns (where you then need to further account/not forget about MOREX, CPP, FORT, stacking penalty and so on).
  Again not sure about RESERVES and rolled SUs. It's testable but I don't think needed.

[MarkShot]

Wiedrock,

Here is something that I just found that also causes div/reg/bdg go from light green to dark border ... if someone changed HQs in the chain of command (meaning you see an asterisk to the right of the HQ in the detailed unit info).

[Wiedrock]

Probably any negative factor to any roll turns it dark green.