Troops Landing losses

[MadDawg]

Hi All,

Currently I have seen some pretty huge losses when I land at a base with no defensive units (one unit today lost 18 squads and a bunch of weapons). Anyone have any idea what this represent? It seems like a lot of troops to loose even accounting for accidents, etc?

Dawg

[Xargun]

ORIGINAL: MadDawg

Hi All,

Currently I have seen some pretty huge losses when I land at a base with no defensive units (one unit today lost 18 squads and a bunch of weapons). Anyone have any idea what this represent? It seems like a lot of troops to loose even accounting for accidents, etc?

Dawg

You are experiencing mostly men getting sick, disrupted, tired - whatever you want to call it.. They aren't actually getting killed - just taken out of combat. You can prepare your units which cut down on these losses quite a bit. Other than that I don't know of anything else you can do, other than have an HQ with them (and amphibious command ship - if allies).

Xargun

[Onime No Kyo]

I notice that the AI takes a lot fewer losses. The most I have seen so far is several hundred. Maybe this has to do with it being 1941. Or maybe the silly thing knows something that we dont. [:D]

[grraven2004]

Also could be taking into account that some of the citizens might resist an invasion as well as the other factors mentioned.

[Onime No Kyo]

I remember the question came up in a beta some time ago. What they said was that its rather easy to fall overboard, break a leg, hit your head, etc climbing over cargo nets under enemy fire. But like Xarg said, I think most of it comes from disruption, troops landing in the wrong place, being sea sick and so on.

[MadDawg]

Thanks for the feedback guys!

One thing though...wouldnt the disruption part of the landing be handing up upping the distruption value of the units? I think this would be much easier for them to recover from than the losses they currently take.

In the example I notices I had a unit of about 27 squads take 18 of those as losses in an uncontested landing (dont forget Im talking about empty bases here ). It just seems that about 180 of my guys having broken legs and bumped heads out of a total of around 270 is well, kinda high, hehe. [:)]

The possability locals are contesting the landings is another idea, but Im not sure that happened on a large scale...

Dawg

[GBirkn]

As I saw it explained by one of the beta testers, disruption goes up too, but the "casualties" you see in the reports of landings are of troops and weapons being disabled, rather than disrupted. Disabled means that they can't fight at all until they get repaired, while disrupted means they fight, but not as well.

So imagine these casualties representing a soldier who drops his rifle in the ocean, a howitzer out of action for lack of spare parts that were packed on the wrong ship, that sort of thing. They still exist, but need some time and supplies to get back in action.

[Mr.Frag]

Correct, destroyed counts as 2 kills, disabled counts as 1. Rested, the disabled boys will recover.

[Erik Rutins]

Did you give them enough time to get their prep level up before the invasion? That helps reduce losses.

Regards,

- Erik

[freeboy]

hum prep level.. is that on the unit or the tf screen?

[MarkD34]

Its on the individual ground unit screen bottom right hand corner "set future objectives".The number in () is the prep points the unit has from 0 to 100.

[freeboy]

doh.. makes sense now that you think of it.. probably bounced out the first few times do to brain hard drive over scan and lack of sleep.. got in trouble with the wife again.. up till 5 AM this morn.. [:-]

[MadDawg]

Thanks for the feedback guys! [:)]

No, no preperation as this was the first turn of the corel sea battle where troops are automatically set up to capture Lunga, etc, so I let them go. The unit I am referring to is the one that captured Lunga. I just checked it has 17 lost squads and has 17 active, thus it has basically lost half of its men to accidents whilst hopping off at an undefended island.

So, I guess my next question is...doesnt this seem a little high?

When there Japanese invaded Guam early in the were they went in vs 122 odd Marines and only suffered 1 dead and 6 wounded. Although these troops were obviously taken off guard and the Japanese prepared. considering the landing on Lunga was uncontested, Im just wondering if 170 men out of action seems a bit much. Below is a link with the description of the guam battle, posted early, for those interested...

http://www.ospreypublishing.com/title_d ... ew=extract

Dawg