Soviet CV multiplied by 6. WAD?
Moderators: Joel Billings, elmo3, Sabre21
-
Bozo_the_Clown
- Posts: 890
- Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2013 1:51 pm
- Location: Bozotown
RE: Soviet CV multiplied by 6. WAD?
And another one. I've never had this fail. Also, I always bomb the hell out of the units before I attack. Not sure how much that matters.
- Attachments
-
- Battle2T8small.jpg (218.9 KiB) Viewed 231 times
-
Bozo_the_Clown
- Posts: 890
- Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2013 1:51 pm
- Location: Bozotown
RE: Soviet CV multiplied by 6. WAD?
I do not know how to explain the failed attack on my cavalry division he posted at the beginning of this thread. I believe it was a hasty attack across a minor river against a unit in swamp terrain. Not ideal conditions for an attack. But I just don't know how this exactly influences the MCV.
RE: Soviet CV multiplied by 6. WAD?
I have experienced Soviet modified cv swelling many times (by 200-500%), and I cannot explain it. I tried linking it to:
1) supply status (works to certain degree, with the 'red' supply units it is less common, but still can happen)
2) amount of artillery (no, does not seem to have direct correlation)
3) number of elements (no, despite the discussion here, there is no correlation, I got regiments of 3000 being attacked by divisions and the initial 5:1 odds were not good enough)
On the other hand, it happens almost exclusively in swamps and thick forests, where the x3 modifier is present. My feeling is that there may be a kind of unusual behaviour of the battle engine, as it does not happen to all units (cavalry is prime example of the unit where it can happen - whereas in most terrains the cavalry modified cv is usually lower, in those terrains it is usually higher); also, when it happens once, it does happen to those units relatively consistently. Once attacked with sufficient force (say 6:1 initial odds), suddenly this behaviour is not present anymore, leading to 20:1 victories...
The other issue I commonly experience is the overestimation of tanks when defending. It seems that tank CV is maybe 2x too high when defending, and a bit low on the offensive. Again, I do not know why, but that is what my experience has shown. I guess the battle engine again does some funny things there and treats offensive and defensive battles differently.
All in all, I would very much welcome a feature which would imprecisely suggest a result of a battle (with some degree of chance) against opponent, and the result of a defense against opponent when they attack. That would make the game much nicer to play, and some of the most unusual behaviours of the battle engine would be kind of circumvented. I would even agree to that that such a simulated battle would cost one political point or that only a limited number of those battles (due, for example, limited special intelligence forces required) could be simulated each turn (I would say 1 for Soviets in '41, 1 for Germans during '41-'42 blizzard, 3 for both Germans and Soviets at other times). I guess it would be easy to implement - just instead of actually doing the battle on attack, simulate the battle in the engine without changing the units in the end - and do it say 5 or 10 times, display chances of winning...
Of course, I would be most happy if the battle engine would be more transparent and some graphical interpretation of what was happening and how the final cv was obtained was given. That is, though, probably too much to ask... but the solution above may be done in really short time (also note that a dedicated player can already do it in the editor, but a usual player would never bother).
T.
1) supply status (works to certain degree, with the 'red' supply units it is less common, but still can happen)
2) amount of artillery (no, does not seem to have direct correlation)
3) number of elements (no, despite the discussion here, there is no correlation, I got regiments of 3000 being attacked by divisions and the initial 5:1 odds were not good enough)
On the other hand, it happens almost exclusively in swamps and thick forests, where the x3 modifier is present. My feeling is that there may be a kind of unusual behaviour of the battle engine, as it does not happen to all units (cavalry is prime example of the unit where it can happen - whereas in most terrains the cavalry modified cv is usually lower, in those terrains it is usually higher); also, when it happens once, it does happen to those units relatively consistently. Once attacked with sufficient force (say 6:1 initial odds), suddenly this behaviour is not present anymore, leading to 20:1 victories...
The other issue I commonly experience is the overestimation of tanks when defending. It seems that tank CV is maybe 2x too high when defending, and a bit low on the offensive. Again, I do not know why, but that is what my experience has shown. I guess the battle engine again does some funny things there and treats offensive and defensive battles differently.
All in all, I would very much welcome a feature which would imprecisely suggest a result of a battle (with some degree of chance) against opponent, and the result of a defense against opponent when they attack. That would make the game much nicer to play, and some of the most unusual behaviours of the battle engine would be kind of circumvented. I would even agree to that that such a simulated battle would cost one political point or that only a limited number of those battles (due, for example, limited special intelligence forces required) could be simulated each turn (I would say 1 for Soviets in '41, 1 for Germans during '41-'42 blizzard, 3 for both Germans and Soviets at other times). I guess it would be easy to implement - just instead of actually doing the battle on attack, simulate the battle in the engine without changing the units in the end - and do it say 5 or 10 times, display chances of winning...
Of course, I would be most happy if the battle engine would be more transparent and some graphical interpretation of what was happening and how the final cv was obtained was given. That is, though, probably too much to ask... but the solution above may be done in really short time (also note that a dedicated player can already do it in the editor, but a usual player would never bother).
T.
RE: Soviet CV multiplied by 6. WAD?
I do not know how to explain the failed attack on my cavalry division he posted at the beginning of this thread. I believe it was a hasty attack across a minor river against a unit in swamp terrain. Not ideal conditions for an attack. But I just don't know how this exactly influences the MCV.
It was three deliberate attacks then a hasty attack each by a division sized unit. I was interested in what the MCV of the cav unit would be. There is another thread here on whether there should be a distance penalty for leader checks for units reporting to high command. I want to explore the dynamic a little more.
I finally understand why putting Zhukov in STAVKA makes sense. Directly reporting units the leader benefit anywhere on the map.
RE: Soviet CV multiplied by 6. WAD?
1)
Please remember that there is a dense terrain CV modifier. It applies to anything fighting in mountain, rough, heavy woods, swamp and any city with a population of 14 or more. It applies to both attacker and defender, so you see this factored into initial CV (and especially combat CV) only once you attack (in case of attacker). Dense terrain doubles CV value of infantry elements, while it halves CV of afv elements. Attacking into a swamp with a panzer division means immediate CV drop (unless you are low on tanks and your infantry component is contributing a majority of CV).
2)
Another thing worth to know is that there are separate functions counting static CV (without random factors, used to display initial CV and values you see on counters) and combat CV (with random factors, used to calculate how your troops perform during battle). There are differences between functions in some situations, but they should be fairly minor (they mostly affect support units, and isolated or surrounded units). It's the random component of combat CV function that alters this value so much from the static one, and it is this value that is displayed as the modified combat value at the end of battle.
3)
For combat CV the major random factors are leader infantry/mech skill, leader morale skill, unit experience and morale. Those factors can alter the base CV value in range of 0.0625x to 8x (for defender) or 16x (for attacker). Obviously there is a regression to the mean here, because majority of the rolls is done on a TOE slot basis, however for the attacker there is one skill roll at the end of the function that when successful doubles what has been calculated up to this point for one unit. There are other random rolls made for surrounded and/or isolated units (and obviously during First Winter) that can reduce CV even further, but these are special cases and such units are usually already doomed.
4)
Then there is the important fact that at each range the CV is calculated once again from scratch. Fire combat obviously affects it by DDD (destruction, damage and disruption of elements), that lowers the base value. However, unless you have a clear advantage your attack may be stopped cold at any stage, when the CV of your units suddenly drops low (or the opponent's CV soars high), because of random factors in this specific instance (there is no correlation between one value and the next, so a strong attack may suddenly fail at the last moment). Therefore CV of your units may turn out during combat like: 200, 190, 50, 220 (provided if you survived the "50" step), 100, 250, etc. What you see as the MCV is just the last combat CV which resulted in combat ending (defender was forced to retreat or the attacker was forced to call of the attack). You are bound to see extreme cases there, as they are responsible for the combat ending in the first place. Remember that the closer (in meters) you are, the more of those comparisons you have "survived".
5)
Number of elements is important, it forms the basis of CV, but then there are so many modifiers to that value that is gets "forgotten", while it still remains very important. As I said - when you have small number of elite elements, each one of them is worth a lot of CV. Meanwhile in combat they have limits to how many units they kill, so that when confronted by large number of worse elements having the same sum total of CV, they are bound to lose. Continuing the example with Tiger: 1 Tiger at 100 morale and 100 experience is equal to 25 T-34s with 40 morale and 10 experience. So you have 0.09 CV vs 0.09 CV here. Even if the Tiger kills 10 T-34, but will be damaged in turn you still lose. Your CV dropped to 0, while the Soviet side still has 0.054 CV, even before random factors were applied. That's why CV is not the strength on counters you are used to from boardgames. It's just one part of the system, in which a numerical advantage will always be important. As a rule I try to convert my ratios from WitE to boardgame-like ratios by trying to ascertain the number of elements in enemy division (unfortunately you see this in combat detail window only after combat ends, but you can use my TOE guide as a base and reduce this number by how much you think the unit is below strength), and arrive at a number that is between the ratio of elements and the ratio of CVs, closer to the ratio of elements. That's why Soviets can win in late war starting from 1:1 to 1.5:1 CV ratios, while the Germans need something like 2:1 to 2.5:1 to win. For Soviet side 2:1 is an overkill that is worth using only if you expect a lot of reserves to trigger. I remember a situation from testing the new game (WitW), where it was very easy to rout a 2=40 unit with an 8=8 unit, just because the defender had only 700 elements (crack FJ troops in good defensive terrain, but very low on numbers) and the attacker had between 4000 to 5000. So the ratio was not 1:5 as CV shows, it was more like 2:1 in boardgame terms.
Most important thing to say is that my efforts to demonstrate those inherent characteristics of WitX combat engine (and where they fail - huge CV, low element count), allowed for a revision of random modifiers to CV, so in the new game they will fluctuate less (from the top of my head it's something like 0.25 to 2.5 range) and elements performance in combat is (as I was told) more tied to morale and experience now.
Please remember that there is a dense terrain CV modifier. It applies to anything fighting in mountain, rough, heavy woods, swamp and any city with a population of 14 or more. It applies to both attacker and defender, so you see this factored into initial CV (and especially combat CV) only once you attack (in case of attacker). Dense terrain doubles CV value of infantry elements, while it halves CV of afv elements. Attacking into a swamp with a panzer division means immediate CV drop (unless you are low on tanks and your infantry component is contributing a majority of CV).
2)
Another thing worth to know is that there are separate functions counting static CV (without random factors, used to display initial CV and values you see on counters) and combat CV (with random factors, used to calculate how your troops perform during battle). There are differences between functions in some situations, but they should be fairly minor (they mostly affect support units, and isolated or surrounded units). It's the random component of combat CV function that alters this value so much from the static one, and it is this value that is displayed as the modified combat value at the end of battle.
3)
For combat CV the major random factors are leader infantry/mech skill, leader morale skill, unit experience and morale. Those factors can alter the base CV value in range of 0.0625x to 8x (for defender) or 16x (for attacker). Obviously there is a regression to the mean here, because majority of the rolls is done on a TOE slot basis, however for the attacker there is one skill roll at the end of the function that when successful doubles what has been calculated up to this point for one unit. There are other random rolls made for surrounded and/or isolated units (and obviously during First Winter) that can reduce CV even further, but these are special cases and such units are usually already doomed.
4)
Then there is the important fact that at each range the CV is calculated once again from scratch. Fire combat obviously affects it by DDD (destruction, damage and disruption of elements), that lowers the base value. However, unless you have a clear advantage your attack may be stopped cold at any stage, when the CV of your units suddenly drops low (or the opponent's CV soars high), because of random factors in this specific instance (there is no correlation between one value and the next, so a strong attack may suddenly fail at the last moment). Therefore CV of your units may turn out during combat like: 200, 190, 50, 220 (provided if you survived the "50" step), 100, 250, etc. What you see as the MCV is just the last combat CV which resulted in combat ending (defender was forced to retreat or the attacker was forced to call of the attack). You are bound to see extreme cases there, as they are responsible for the combat ending in the first place. Remember that the closer (in meters) you are, the more of those comparisons you have "survived".
5)
Number of elements is important, it forms the basis of CV, but then there are so many modifiers to that value that is gets "forgotten", while it still remains very important. As I said - when you have small number of elite elements, each one of them is worth a lot of CV. Meanwhile in combat they have limits to how many units they kill, so that when confronted by large number of worse elements having the same sum total of CV, they are bound to lose. Continuing the example with Tiger: 1 Tiger at 100 morale and 100 experience is equal to 25 T-34s with 40 morale and 10 experience. So you have 0.09 CV vs 0.09 CV here. Even if the Tiger kills 10 T-34, but will be damaged in turn you still lose. Your CV dropped to 0, while the Soviet side still has 0.054 CV, even before random factors were applied. That's why CV is not the strength on counters you are used to from boardgames. It's just one part of the system, in which a numerical advantage will always be important. As a rule I try to convert my ratios from WitE to boardgame-like ratios by trying to ascertain the number of elements in enemy division (unfortunately you see this in combat detail window only after combat ends, but you can use my TOE guide as a base and reduce this number by how much you think the unit is below strength), and arrive at a number that is between the ratio of elements and the ratio of CVs, closer to the ratio of elements. That's why Soviets can win in late war starting from 1:1 to 1.5:1 CV ratios, while the Germans need something like 2:1 to 2.5:1 to win. For Soviet side 2:1 is an overkill that is worth using only if you expect a lot of reserves to trigger. I remember a situation from testing the new game (WitW), where it was very easy to rout a 2=40 unit with an 8=8 unit, just because the defender had only 700 elements (crack FJ troops in good defensive terrain, but very low on numbers) and the attacker had between 4000 to 5000. So the ratio was not 1:5 as CV shows, it was more like 2:1 in boardgame terms.
Most important thing to say is that my efforts to demonstrate those inherent characteristics of WitX combat engine (and where they fail - huge CV, low element count), allowed for a revision of random modifiers to CV, so in the new game they will fluctuate less (from the top of my head it's something like 0.25 to 2.5 range) and elements performance in combat is (as I was told) more tied to morale and experience now.
-
Bozo_the_Clown
- Posts: 890
- Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2013 1:51 pm
- Location: Bozotown
RE: Soviet CV multiplied by 6. WAD?
I finally understand why putting Zhukov in STAVKA makes sense. Directly reporting units the leader benefit anywhere on the map.
That was Stalins idea. Shaposhnikov got dismissed on turn 2. And Stalin didn't even consult me. [:D]
RE: Soviet CV multiplied by 6. WAD?
Unfortunately, this is true, because range comes into consideration only when going to higher HQs than the one unit is directly reporting to.
RE: Soviet CV multiplied by 6. WAD?
Morvael,
Thanks a lot for clearing all those issues. I still think that there might be some additional defensive modifier for those x3 terrains, staying from old times where infantry strength was doubled on such a terrain... Such large increases in defending cv in tough terrain happened to me way too often to believe in accidents. But it is not reliable (in a sense that once certain thereshold is broken, suddenly it does not work). But I still remember losing attacks with 20,000 infantry against a 3000 men Soviet airbornes, or a 8 cv (displayed cv, so 80 combat value in the report) divisions losing against cavalry cut off for 3 turns... Still, it is not that important at the moment I guess - the effect is not reliable and has minor effect on the game...
Nonetheless, from this discussion I gather that in the cv calculation the experience + morale factor raises cv way too quickly in case when the unit is defending (and probably in attack too, the given example with the elite infantry is a good one); the other thing is that the quality of equipment should be taken into account, so that the advanced equipment (say that Tiger tank) will be counted more than the less advanced tank (say T-34). In any case, I would much appreciate more information in the cv value (so for example over mouseover expected CV evolution depending on number of soldiers involved in battle is displayed).
To finish on a personal note, I have played this game for quite some time and I still do not understand one bit some of the combat results (which is immensely frustrating). As such I would appreciate more details and explanation of the battle process (the battle details does not give any hint as there are just elements firing *and* casualties on both sides during battle are so low that if feels that this firing has no effect whatsoever). As it is now, because of lack of reliable information why the modified cv is as it is, I cannot escape thinking that the battle engine is totally broken at times.
Once again Morvael, thanks for your posts and clarifications...
T.
Thanks a lot for clearing all those issues. I still think that there might be some additional defensive modifier for those x3 terrains, staying from old times where infantry strength was doubled on such a terrain... Such large increases in defending cv in tough terrain happened to me way too often to believe in accidents. But it is not reliable (in a sense that once certain thereshold is broken, suddenly it does not work). But I still remember losing attacks with 20,000 infantry against a 3000 men Soviet airbornes, or a 8 cv (displayed cv, so 80 combat value in the report) divisions losing against cavalry cut off for 3 turns... Still, it is not that important at the moment I guess - the effect is not reliable and has minor effect on the game...
Nonetheless, from this discussion I gather that in the cv calculation the experience + morale factor raises cv way too quickly in case when the unit is defending (and probably in attack too, the given example with the elite infantry is a good one); the other thing is that the quality of equipment should be taken into account, so that the advanced equipment (say that Tiger tank) will be counted more than the less advanced tank (say T-34). In any case, I would much appreciate more information in the cv value (so for example over mouseover expected CV evolution depending on number of soldiers involved in battle is displayed).
To finish on a personal note, I have played this game for quite some time and I still do not understand one bit some of the combat results (which is immensely frustrating). As such I would appreciate more details and explanation of the battle process (the battle details does not give any hint as there are just elements firing *and* casualties on both sides during battle are so low that if feels that this firing has no effect whatsoever). As it is now, because of lack of reliable information why the modified cv is as it is, I cannot escape thinking that the battle engine is totally broken at times.
Once again Morvael, thanks for your posts and clarifications...
T.
RE: Soviet CV multiplied by 6. WAD?
Dense terrain modifier still exists for CV, but there maybe another one in the fire functions. I'm familiar only with the CV part. I had the same feeling that "once certain thereshold is broken, suddenly it does not work", it's probably because when you have enough CV/element advantage to keep the attack going until the very end (50 meters), you will see "final" numbers with the enemy broken. However, if your advantage is minor and your units roll badly for CV at one stage the combat suddenly stops and then you get to see strange CVs (enemy very high, you very low). Basically this is possible for every failed attack, whereas successful attacks will show "realistic" numbers. At one point I tried to convince 2by3 guys to use casualties% as a measure whether the combat goes ok or badly, not CV, but it's too big change for the system at this point (and in the future probably as well).
Base CV value for ground elements is unfortunately assigned to classes (Rifle Squad 3, Medium Tank and Heavy Tank both have 9 - see section 26.1.4 in the manual), so there is no difference in an impact a Tiger has on CV vs T-34 (aside from unit morale & element experience but this is a factor outside of ground element core capabilities).
Just try to play some games vs the AI, experiment with different setups and get a feel for what you need to force an enemy out of the swamp, a fort, a city etc. for both sides. As I said, I'm fairly sure I will win when I attack at 1.6:1-1.7:1 CV ratio as the Soviets.
Base CV value for ground elements is unfortunately assigned to classes (Rifle Squad 3, Medium Tank and Heavy Tank both have 9 - see section 26.1.4 in the manual), so there is no difference in an impact a Tiger has on CV vs T-34 (aside from unit morale & element experience but this is a factor outside of ground element core capabilities).
Just try to play some games vs the AI, experiment with different setups and get a feel for what you need to force an enemy out of the swamp, a fort, a city etc. for both sides. As I said, I'm fairly sure I will win when I attack at 1.6:1-1.7:1 CV ratio as the Soviets.
-
Bozo_the_Clown
- Posts: 890
- Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2013 1:51 pm
- Location: Bozotown
RE: Soviet CV multiplied by 6. WAD?
Morvael,
Thanks for all the info! Do you know how fatigue is reflected in the combat system? My impression is that fatigue has a major impact.
Thanks for all the info! Do you know how fatigue is reflected in the combat system? My impression is that fatigue has a major impact.
RE: Soviet CV multiplied by 6. WAD?
Morvael explanation is very clear.
Hex 82.37 is swamp with minor river NW,W,SW. Attacking an ennemy unit in swamp through a minor river isn't an easy task.
Hex 82.37 is swamp with minor river NW,W,SW. Attacking an ennemy unit in swamp through a minor river isn't an easy task.
GHC 9-0-3
SHC 10-0-4
SHC 10-0-4
RE: Soviet CV multiplied by 6. WAD?
Fatigue has smaller, non-random impact on CV, but I think about 15 is added to attacking units before the shooting starts, resulting in an immediate 5% drop in CV. It may have bigger impact on the actual shooting, but I'm not familar with that aspect.
Attacking across a river into swamp is bad, of course. But check the casualties - even with retreat after failed attack losses added, the Soviets suffered worse, each time. So the combat scenario is more like this:
- Oberst, you will pull back your men now!
- Herr General, we are slaughtering the enemy, the battle will soon be won, why?
- Because Himmler's Chief Astrologists predicted in the stars that you are bound to lose. Stop immediately!
- Jawohl!
Attacking across a river into swamp is bad, of course. But check the casualties - even with retreat after failed attack losses added, the Soviets suffered worse, each time. So the combat scenario is more like this:
- Oberst, you will pull back your men now!
- Herr General, we are slaughtering the enemy, the battle will soon be won, why?
- Because Himmler's Chief Astrologists predicted in the stars that you are bound to lose. Stop immediately!
- Jawohl!
RE: Soviet CV multiplied by 6. WAD?
ORIGINAL: Bozo_the_Clown
Morvael,
Thanks for all the info! Do you know how fatigue is reflected in the combat system? My impression is that fatigue has a major impact.
According to the manual and i have observed this to be true when checking/testing it on units. There is a direct corrolation of for every 3 fatigue u get a drop of 1% in CV, so at 99 fatigue u lose 33% CV.
Rasmus
-
Bozo_the_Clown
- Posts: 890
- Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2013 1:51 pm
- Location: Bozotown
RE: Soviet CV multiplied by 6. WAD?
According to the manual and i have observed this to be true when checking/testing it on units. There is a direct corrolation of for every 3 fatigue u get a drop of 1% in CV, so at 99 fatigue u lose 33% CV.
But isn't that just referring to the CV displayed on the counter?
RE: Soviet CV multiplied by 6. WAD?
ORIGINAL: Bozo_the_Clown
According to the manual and i have observed this to be true when checking/testing it on units. There is a direct corrolation of for every 3 fatigue u get a drop of 1% in CV, so at 99 fatigue u lose 33% CV.
But isn't that just referring to the CV displayed on the counter?
Yes, which is the starting value in combat. If u question was that if it has an effect beyound that inside combat, then i cant comment more than what morvael said. One should know that any disruption incurred during combat is post combat converted into fatigue.