Turn 1 Axis Panzer Group Combat Results

[MechFO]

Result of the combat system that lines devices up in line and then lets them shoot each other up.

In reality in every case a Panzer Division would be the much prefered unit to deal with enemy armour. It had a much bigger tool kit to deal with enemy tanks and their crucial advantage of superior tactical coordination, training and situational awareness compensated for the stat disadvantages in ways that the in game experience system can not reflect.

The Motorized Divisions were extremely vulnerable in offensive operations due to their unprotected trucks. That the meta has become for infantry, motorized or foot, to take on enemy armour or perform breakin operations is an indication that something somewhere is not working as it should.

[DarkHorse2]

ORIGINAL: MechFO

Result of the combat system that lines devices up in line and then lets them shoot each other up.

In reality in every case a Panzer Division would be the much prefered unit to deal with enemy armour. It had a much bigger tool kit to deal with enemy tanks and their crucial advantage of superior tactical coordination, training and situational awareness compensated for the stat disadvantages in ways that the in game experience system can not reflect.

Agree.

The combat mechanics have devolved to a point where they are well beyond bizarre.

Other game systems have given armor bonuses beyond their standard CVs to reflect the shock, overrun and break-through potential. (Europa series, Atlantic Wall, Wacht Am Rhein, etc... )

http://spigames.net/MovesScans/Moves40/WERheinGPM40.pdf

I suspect something is needed in WiTE2 to provide a proper incentive and rewards for proper armor deployment and use.

[Stamb]

This is example from wite 1 and multiplayer game that I am watching.

Pazners are really able to hold their ground.

Imagine leaving panzers like this in wite 2.

You would get this:
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=5135309




P.S

They used some checkbox in game settings with improved CV calculations or something, thus CV are higher for both sides.

[MechFO]

Reflecting on it a bit more, early Soviet motorized formations should not have the +10 NM modifier. If anything it should be a malus. Or the beginning Mech and Tank Div should have very low morale.

They were unable to handle mechanized formations of this size early in the war and the multi Division coordinated offensives involving 10s of thousands of men and thousands of tanks in few hundred square kilometres we see in AAR's are fantasy.

[Stamb]

Add to this fantastic supply system that allows Soviets to use supply priority 4 for most if not all units

[AlbertN]

Soviets early Motorized stuff do not have bonus. They get a +5 somewhen in '42 I believe and get up to +10 in '43.

The issue you speak of is often due to the Soviets having a huge mobility out of admin movement AND more MPs than the Germans due to their stellar supply system.

A German infantry division advancing in Soviet hexes pay 3 MP per hex, so... at BEST it does 5 hexes without attacking, assuming all the checks and whatnot went smooth.

Soviet sitting division with 120% supplies has 16 MP, can march 5-6 Hexes, do a deliberate attack, and pull back a few more hexes assuming a German unit is on the edge of the Soviet controlled hexes.
That is what grants the Soviets their capability to gather such massive punches.
And due to the IGO-UGO system Germans are sitting duck (but that is in general for anything and Soviets too are sitting ducks in some situations where they ought not to be).

[EwaldvonKleist]

ORIGINAL: Stamb

This is example from wite 1 and multiplayer game that I am watching.

Pazners are really able to hold their ground.

Imagine leaving panzers like this in wite 2.

You would get this:
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=5135309




P.S

They used some checkbox in game settings with improved CV calculations or something, thus CV are higher for both sides.

Soft factors (fatigue, ammunition) and the combat resolution have a much higher impact on final CV and losses than in WitE1. Therefore it was possible to run wild with motorized divisions (panzer divisions suffered more due to damage to tanks from moving) and still have decent combat value to hold pockets.

In some way the WitE1 combat was decided by who was able to line up the most ground elements in the beginning, modified by leader rolls and element experience/morale, irregardless of other soft factors. WitE2 fortunately is more subtle, even if the combat model still requires finetuning.

[Erik Rutins]

ORIGINAL: hossjww30

Turn 1 combat result:

Thanks for this. I've discussed this with Joel and Gary and we agree that some additional changes are necessary. There are already a lot of checks that go on under the hood to disadvantage low experience/morale poorly led units, but there are also advantages to the defender and you'd likely see a very different result if the Soviets were attacking you. From an operational perspective, it's much more ideal to breakthrough/encircle and let them try to break out.

As you may know, we did a major revision of the combat system not too long ago to address some issues and that improved the combat overall significantly, especially for 1943+. However, the added lethality of armor combat isn't working as well in 1941.

With all that said, we agree that this result is outside of what we'd see as historical. We're going to wrap up the current update process with an official update. After that, we'll try a few changes to better reflect the breakdown and coordination issues the Soviets had, especially in 1941 with their mechanized/tank divisions. That will be in a new experimental public beta as some point in the next couple of weeks for folks to try out and give us feedback one.

While history had a very wide range of possible results, we're on the same page as far as continuing to make adjustments where we can to make sure that all cases are giving results squarely within that range.

Regards,

- Erik

[DarkHorse2]

I'll take it upon myself to give an example. 1300 Soviet tanks participated in the battle (But during the course of the battle their number could potentially grow by 2 times) and 728 German tanks.

German losses of 85 tanks irretrievably and 200 in workshops for long-term repairs, do you know which battle or suggest?

If you are referring to a historical engagement during the 1st week of Barbarossa of something of this nature, I admit I do not know.

Given the number of German Tanks (728) involved, that would have required at least 3 full Panzer Divisions.

In that case, while it is still high, a loss of 285 tanks out of 728 would have been easier to accept. Especially knowing those losses would have been spread out across multiple Panzer Divisions.

But I would have found it highly implausible that 1300 Soviet tanks could have successfully coordinated crossing the road, let alone a full coordinated engagement during the 1st week. (in fact, there are some documented examples of Soviet tank units being so confused & surprised of them literally driving into bogs/swamps and completely incompacitating their equipment themselves.)

[AlbertN]

I am not as detailed as Beethoven, but in my Soviet game I have set Stavka (and thus all subordinates) to Supply Level 4.
And that is it.

I just care of adding new depots, which fill in cheap and easy.

I can easily move via admin movement back troops that I need back in the reserve and fit them there, for refit. It can take a bit but it can help alleviate the need of freight.

From my perspective Moscow and Saratov should not be NSS; and the Soviets industrial heart is to be Siberia. (as many tabletop games have 'eastern edge of the map' as supply source for Soviet Russia!). Railyards and the like may be in need of fine tuning.
But Russians are lavishly supplied and I somehow doubt it will change in drastic ways once I get in winter or '42.

[ShaggyHiK]

ORIGINAL: DarkHorse2

Seeing a similar result of the battle, I assure you, you would find a topic on the forum where the players would ask to fix the Soviet tank troops and bring them into a "historical form".

No one is interested that the USSR in 41 years can carry out well, at best, 5-6 such attacks, after which their tanks will run out.
And I take directly good conditions for the Soviet player in my performances. In an average game where the German player doesn't stand still like a burrow and moves forward, the limit will most likely be 2-3 attacks.

[hossjww30]

I'm flattered that my combat example on turn 1 has gotten the attention of the developers. I am by no means a military historian however I have played Gary's games since the 1980's so I guess that makes me somewhat of an expert. [:D]

I'm just confused in that it seems the entire combat resolution system from WitE1 was almost totally revamped. I never once thought while playing WitE1 thought things were not historical. The consensus seems to be the panzers were overpowered but ok just tweak that a tad then.

[DarkHorse2]

The issues of initial excess Soviet supply capacity are presumed to be well founded.

But on the contrary, historically Soviet forces found themselves in supply situations in many instances worse than their German counterparts.

The number of vehicles at their disposal has been documented as woefully inadequate, with numerous Soviet mobile formations lacking so much as being unable to perform combat operations.

Additionally, the Soviet logistical system was being inundated by massive civilian flight from their villages, towns and cities.

German Operation Barbarossa of 1941 resulted in millions of Russian evacuees. The exact number is hard to approximate since many evacuated themselves rather than by the states directive. Some put the number at about sixteen and a half million.

Of primary concern was the hindrance of military movement. You cannot have millions of civilian refugees without it directly impacting roadways, rail-lines or other transportation arteries.

However, in WiTE2, this fact seems to largely be ignored, with populations seeming to teleport vast distances without any impact on the local transportation network.

[DarkHorse2]

ORIGINAL: hossjww30

I'm flattered that my combat example on turn 1 has gotten the attention of the developers. I am by no means a military historian however I have played Gary's games since the 1980's so I guess that makes me somewhat of an expert. [:D]

I'm just confused in that it seems the entire combat resolution system from WitE1 was almost totally revamped. I never once thought while playing WitE1 thought things were not historical. The consensus seems to be the panzers were overpowered but ok just tweak that a tad then.

There appears to be multiple issues at play with the current tactical combat system, especially those relating to AFVs.

1. AFVs are equipped with direct fire weapons. However, in the game, there is no evidence that obstructing terrain is factored into combat.

2. Positioning. Given a hex 10 miles across, the fact of all AFVs engaged being within range and able to fire on any other AFV within the 10 mile hex is a fantasy.

3. Target acquisition. AFVs completely ignoring all other non-AFV targets is another issue. Can you imagine an AFV ignoring pioneers planting charges all over to focus on that distant enemy AFV, barely visible?

Just considering these alone is enough to create some very weird combat results.

[Stamb]

Awesome. Take a look into this AAR https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=5135309 and you will see what Soviet players can actually do with their armor/mech formations even in the early turns. They should suffer massive penalties for attacking with 500 or 1000 tanks.

[Stamb]

Some screens from that AAR:

[Stamb]

Also while Erik is in this topic.

Please fix Soviet logistic system. It is completely unhistorical that they can use supply priority 4 for almost all of their units if not all, already from the start of the game.

Maybe add some penalties to it in `41. And then decreases that penalty in 42 and so on.

[Jango32]

It's not going to be an easy fix because of the rule that units within a 3 hex distance can draw freight without using trucks. What happens in-game is that the Soviet player can place lots and lots of depots across the front line on priority 4 that will get filled up more and more as the front line gets closer to Moscow (NSS), and because of that aforementioned rule the Soviets can safely put everything on priority 4. What would be interesting to see is if from '43 onward when the Soviets start moving forward (or should be) they can still have everything on priority 4. I think it's possible because of the trucks they preserve from abandoning the south and using the 3-hex depot rule, as well as production & mainly lend-lease, but there's not enough data for it posted on the forums.

[Erik Rutins]

ORIGINAL: Stamb
Please fix Soviet logistic system. It is completely unhistorical that they can use supply priority 4 for almost all of their units if not all, already from the start of the game.

Anyone can use Supply Priority 4. If you're saying they are actually getting far more supplies/ammo/fuel than what is historical, we can have that discussion. I'd like to see what you're seeing and some historical comparisons.

Regards,

- Erik

[ShaggyHiK]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

ORIGINAL: Stamb
Please fix Soviet logistic system. It is completely unhistorical that they can use supply priority 4 for almost all of their units if not all, already from the start of the game.

Anyone can use Supply Priority 4. If you're saying they are actually getting far more supplies/ammo/fuel than what is historical, we can have that discussion. I'd like to see what you're seeing and some historical comparisons.

Regards,

- Erik

Again, I do not understand why this applies only to the USSR. In fact, the logistic support system does not allow adequate and rapid replenishment of divisions on the line of contact, even if there is a capacious warehouse and a good railway not far in the rear.

I have the opposite opinion about what Stamb said.
The Soviet Union was able to restore entire fronts with new divisions and men in a short period of time, but there is no way in the game to replenish divisions if they were defeated without being put into reserve.

The logistics system gives a lot of fuel and ammunition, and almost does not convert cargo from warehouses into people, guns and tanks. And this applies to both sides.