Infantry Assaults

[Paul Vebber]

A note on patch progress in this area. Crews and snipers attacking tanks were tested, outof 20 attempts with an average 2% success rate, none were succesful.

IT is now harder for troops to pass their pre-assault morale check, especially if they have much of any suppression. A 75 morale unit with no suppression will have a 50/50 chance or so. A bug was also fixed that was essentially tripling the hit chance behind the scenes.

[orc4hire]

Thanks Paul. It sounds like that will bring things down to a reasonable level.

[Larry Holt]

Originally posted by Paul Vebber:
A note on patch progress in this area. Crews ... A bug was also fixed that was essentially tripling the hit chance behind the scenes.

That's why we love matrix. Players bring up this issue, Matrix looks at it and when warranted (as in this case) we get what we want, a bug fix.


------------------
An old soldier but not yet a faded one.
OK, maybe just a bit faded.

[BA Evans]

Hi Larry,

From previous discussions, I believe that the % chance during an assault is NOT the % chance to hit, it is the % chance to DESTROY! Supposedly this took into account the weapons used, experience, and other factors

Can this be confirmed, Paul?

I am referring to the assault percent, not shooting or using the 'c' key.

Thanks,
BA Evans

Originally posted by Larry Holt:
Fantastic discussion!!

OK, I have two gripes:

1)Soviet squads equipped with moltov cocktails (could also be other armies with them but I've only tried the Soviets): They have some chance to hit, shown by the pop up box just before the attack is resolved. It seems if they hit, they are always (100% of the time) effective. BUT just because they hit the target does not mean that the burning gasoline should always destroy the target. I mean, AT rounds must first hit, then penetrate. I do not have any statistical analysis from WWII on the number of MCs thown that were effective but one of the things I learned in the current US Army is that MCs are NOT very effective. When the container breaks, most of the fuel is consumed in a fire ball, leaving little fuel for raising the temperature of the target to the burning point. I think MCs should either have a two step attack resolution (hit then effect) or have their effectiveness reduced.

2) My attacks by elite (~110 experience) German engineers on imobilized Soviet tanks show a probability of around 30%! How hard is it to place a satchel charge under an imobile tank? Granted some troops would be shaking in their boots for fear of supporting fire hitting them while crawling up on a tank but elite, battle hardened troops? I think the routine should boost the to hit probability way up there (+90% or so) for veteran or elite troops with low suppression (5 or so). Clearly green troops or highly suppressed troops could still rush up and stumble or run away from fear so they should not get any advantage.

[BlitzSS]

Great job of debuging Paul and company, Thanks.

[Scipio Africanus]

Hi Larry,
I agree with you completely- in fact I almost always take infantry over tanks and then try to confuse my tank heavy enemy into error upon error...

I was just responding to one of the main lines in this thread in which someone was saying that they were able to charge infantry across open ground at a bunch of (AI) tanks and never lost a unit. Having won many battles against human controlled tank formations with my Russian infantry, I have never come close with the "charge 'em up the hill" routine. In fact, my infantry in open ground gets hosed by tanks unless they are supplemented by combined arms tactics...

I should have been more clear about to whom I was speaking.

Cheers,

------------------
Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus

[Scipio Africanus]

That's correct B.A.- I had asked Paul a while back why I was getting higher bazooka percentages at 2 hexes than 1- the 2 hex number is % to hit (and good luck once you've done that) and the 1 hex number is % to kill.

------------------
Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus