Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: pompack

ORIGINAL: Kwik E Mart

why even have the bombard option? you either include independent artillery units in an attack or not. end of discussion...[8|]

And Bombard is an excellent recon for exact (FOW excepted) AV counts on the defenders.

LOL! true...

Artillery Test # 3

Same setup as baseline tests #1 & #2

On the turn 2 execution the Japanese 1st Heavy Artillery with 8x24cm T45 Howitzers (Effect 340, Anti Soft 83, Anti Armor 130) and the 3rd Heavy Ind Artillery with 6x28cm Howitzers (Effect 494, Anti Soft 76, Anti Armor 157) started conducting daily bombardments of Hong Kong.

What is interesting as you will see from the data - with only two units and 14 guns bombarding, the defenders supply consumption was as much if not more than in BigJ's test wherein he had all the attacking artillery units bombarding.

Defender Disruption - No discernable Disruption was inflicted as Disruption remained at 0 throughout the test.

Defender Fatigue - Slight increase of fatigue from an Average of 3 with Enemy present to 3.167-3.83 after bombardments

Defender Casualties - negligible

Experience Increases -

Baseline test # 1
Starting Exp = 40,40,40,35,60,40 Avg=42.5
Ending Exp = 43,40,40,35,60,40 Avg = 43

Baseline test #2 (Enemy Units present, No combat)
Starting Exp = 40,40,40,35,60,40 Avg=42.5
Ending Exp = 40,40,40,35,60,40 Avg = 42.5

Art. Test #3 (two enemy units bombard)
Starting Exp = 40,40,40,35,60,40 Avg=42.5
Ending Exp = 47,40,44,38,60,41 Avg = 45

Defender Supply consumption -

So from your results I gather that over 9 tunrs you used approximately 180 more supplies (or 20 more supplies per turn), caused nil fatigue or disruption, but the enemy reaps the benefits of 5 XP with the 2 heavy units bombarding.

One interesting note is that the longer the bombardment continues, the more steep the supply drop becomes. Eventually you would run the base out of supplies, and the results do seem to compound. So in that sense, artillery is having an effect, and that effect seems to be compounded over time.

This is a true siege situation where the enemy has no way to move in supplies. In a situation where an enemy unit has a supply line, the only effect you will truly have is to increase your opponent's XP, thus making it harder for you to win. One could draw the conclusion that in a non-siege situation it is actually counter-productive to bombard enemy fortifications.

Granted, this is not at the saturation level, so we need to see the results with a larger number of tubes and higher throw weight to make any judgements.

With all that said, let me suggest this: Perhaps units should not gain experience from bombardment.

ORIGINAL: Shark7

So from your results I gather that over 9 tunrs you used approximately 180 more supplies (or 20 more supplies per turn), caused nil fatigue or disruption, but the enemy reaps the benefits of 5 XP with the 2 heavy units bombarding.

One interesting note is that the longer the bombardment continues, the more steep the supply drop becomes. Eventually you would run the base out of supplies, and the results do seem to compound. So in that sense, artillery is having an effect, and that effect seems to be compounded over time.

This is a true siege situation where the enemy has no way to move in supplies. In a situation where an enemy unit has a supply line, the only effect you will truly have is to increase your opponent's XP, thus making it harder for you to win. One could draw the conclusion that in a non-siege situation it is actually counter-productive to bombard enemy fortifications.

Granted, this is not at the saturation level, so we need to see the results with a larger number of tubes and higher throw weight to make any judgements.

With all that said, let me suggest this: Perhaps units should not gain experience from bombardment.

why not? i for one, would get a lot better at digging foxholes after a week's bombardment...[;)]

ORIGINAL: Shark7
but the enemy reaps the benefits of 5 XP with the 2 heavy units bombarding.

This is not necessarily true. I know in WitP bombardment experience gains were capped at around 45 or 50 max. After that a unit could not gain any experience from being bombarded. I assume it stayed the same in AE, but I guess it may have been changed. Someone would need to track this in their game to verify if this is still the case for sure.

Jim

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns

ORIGINAL: Shark7
but the enemy reaps the benefits of 5 XP with the 2 heavy units bombarding.

This is not necessarily true. I know in WitP bombardment experience gains were capped at around 45 or 50 max. After that a unit could not gain any experience from being bombarded. I assume it stayed the same in AE, but I guess it may have been changed. Someone would need to track this in their game to verify if this is still the case for sure.

Jim

It should be noted that in Art test #3 the unit that went from 40 to 47 experience was the 1st Middlesex battalion...it also starts the game with 100 Prep for HK. In the first baseline test it gained 3 exp just by sitting there moving from 40 to 43...whereas in test #2 with enemy units present it gained 0 exp.

ORIGINAL: Kwik E Mart

ORIGINAL: Shark7

So from your results I gather that over 9 tunrs you used approximately 180 more supplies (or 20 more supplies per turn), caused nil fatigue or disruption, but the enemy reaps the benefits of 5 XP with the 2 heavy units bombarding.

One interesting note is that the longer the bombardment continues, the more steep the supply drop becomes. Eventually you would run the base out of supplies, and the results do seem to compound. So in that sense, artillery is having an effect, and that effect seems to be compounded over time.

This is a true siege situation where the enemy has no way to move in supplies. In a situation where an enemy unit has a supply line, the only effect you will truly have is to increase your opponent's XP, thus making it harder for you to win. One could draw the conclusion that in a non-siege situation it is actually counter-productive to bombard enemy fortifications.

Granted, this is not at the saturation level, so we need to see the results with a larger number of tubes and higher throw weight to make any judgements.

With all that said, let me suggest this: Perhaps units should not gain experience from bombardment.

why not? i for one, would get a lot better at digging foxholes after a week's bombardment...[;)]

Unfortunately while one gets very good at digging foxholes, the fact that they are having to dig so many foxholes would lend one to believe that the whole 'happiness' thing would be lacking. Besides...practice digging foxholes doesn't make them any better at shooting the bad guys. [;)]

ORIGINAL: Shark7

With all that said, let me suggest this: Perhaps units should not gain experience from bombardment.

IRL, troops learn a LOT the first time somebody tries to kill them. No amount of training can prepare you for that, and to suggest - even in game terms - that nobody is learning anything, well, that's just wrong. I could see several possible tweaks to artillery bombardments, but this is not one of them.

ORIGINAL: Kull

ORIGINAL: Shark7

With all that said, let me suggest this: Perhaps units should not gain experience from bombardment.

IRL, troops learn a LOT the first time somebody tries to kill them. No amount of training can prepare you for that, and to suggest - even in game terms - that nobody is learning anything, well, that's just wrong. I could see several possible tweaks to artillery bombardments, but this is not one of them.

Actually there should be two different experience categories, offensive and defensive. You may learn a lot about not getting killed every time you go through an attack, but you don't really learn anything about taking ground while on the defense. So there should be two skill sets for LCUs, attack skills and defensive skills.

Obviously not something that will be added, so the best we can do is keep the current caps in place.

yes the skills of digging faster foxholes are not the only skill needed to be a better fighter. So the units should have a cap in increasing skills from bombardment.

ORIGINAL: Dili
yes the skills of digging faster foxholes are not the only skill needed to be a better fighter. So the units should have a cap in increasing skills from bombardment.

I'd say the most important "skill" gained in actually coming under enemy fire for the first time is a sudden realization that your platoon leader DID know what he was talking about...

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

ORIGINAL: Dili
yes the skills of digging faster foxholes are not the only skill needed to be a better fighter. So the units should have a cap in increasing skills from bombardment.

I'd say the most important "skill" gained in actually coming under enemy fire for the first time is a sudden realization that your platoon leader DID know what he was talking about...

You mean the 90-day wonder just out ROTC? [:D]

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

ORIGINAL: Dili
yes the skills of digging faster foxholes are not the only skill needed to be a better fighter. So the units should have a cap in increasing skills from bombardment.

I'd say the most important "skill" gained in actually coming under enemy fire for the first time is a sudden realization that your platoon leader DID know what he was talking about...

Or to your horror, that the Lt. that is two weeks out of officer school really doesn't. [X(]

All jokes aside, the senior sergeant really does know his stuff.

ORIGINAL: Shark7

Or to your horror, that the Lt. that is two weeks out of officer school really doesn't. [X(]

All jokes aside, the senior sergeant really does know his stuff.

[:D][:D] To be fair, I did say "leader", not "commander". [:D][:D]

Yes, people learn lots of things mostly how to keep dry and avoid the dreaded trench foot.

To keep fingers and toes working just right, I use FungiCure by Alma-Amco the finger and toe fungi specialists. And I use hi-wick ski socks under my dockers.

Those of you who serve, and those that did, know just what i'm talking about, and it works for arty too if you think about it.

But doesn't teach infiltration tactics, attack coordination within unit, with own heavy artillery and air support etc.

bump...