Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: hawker

I don't think it has anything to do with over crowding. I think it has to do with how many guns the allies have and their defensive positions. In RL this is a battle that would probably take days or weeks to decide.

Niceguy,
My point is,how you can defend 60 mile radius against 600000 troops,you will be overrun no matter how well you dug in.

That is only 166.6 troops per square mile. Still dense, but not unthinkable.

Hawker, I'm not trying to argue with you, I just don't see the result as extraordinary, at least not given the epic proportion of the battle. The ground combat system is an abstraction, it can't be taken too literally. It's too bad there aren't little mini animations to go along with all the behind the scenes calculations that go on.

I think you did over-run the enemies position and probably did push them back, at the cost of a lot of dead Japanese soldiers. But did you push them all 60 miles out of the hex, probably not. In RL it takes a while to push 150,000 troops anywhere, let alone 60 miles. While I think you did over-run some of their positions, you probably still have many more to go. I can almost guarantee that if you continue using good WitP practices you will over-run the enemy. If you could look into the enemy units screen, you would see more and more of his guns becoming disabled. Each day the unit may have the same number of troops, but its fighting effectiveness will be deminished.

Frankly, I would be disappointed in WitP if a battle of this size could be resolved in a day.

That is only 166.6 troops per square mile. Still dense, but not unthinkable.

Hawker, I'm not trying to argue with you, I just don't see the result as extraordinary, at least not given the epic proportion of the battle. The ground combat system is an abstraction, it can't be taken too literally. It's too bad there aren't little mini animations to go along with all the behind the scenes calculations that go on.

I think you did over-run the enemies position and probably did push them back, at the cost of a lot of dead Japanese soldiers. But did you push them all 60 miles out of the hex, probably not. In RL it takes a while to push 150,000 troops anywhere, let alone 60 miles. While I think you did over-run some of their positions, you probably still have many more to go. I can almost guarantee that if you continue using good WitP practices you will over-run the enemy. If you could look into the enemy units screen, you would see more and more of his guns becoming disabled. Each day the unit may have the same number of troops, but its fighting effectiveness will be deminished.

Frankly, I would be disappointed in WitP if a battle of this size could be resolved in a day.

Niceguy,we are not arguing[;)].
I wish to hear opinions from you guys of this matter with LCUs.
For me that is strange result.

I dont care for 20000 loses.But 0-1 is something else.

0-1 is not necessarily so bad. Anything less than 1-1 is 0-1. It might be 99-100; then again it might be 99-1000. The only way you can know is to watch (or at least sit through) the entire ground combat animation so you can see the base and adjusted assault values. If you are not willing to do that, you may as well forget about trying to figure out ground combat. Sorry, that is just the way it is.

You have some work to do. Do some bombardments, do some ground support air strikes. Next time you assault watch the animation and tell us how many base and adjusted assault points each side has. Then we'll have something to work with.

Hawker, your problem is maybe you have too much troops there... so all can't draw supplies and so fight at a reduced rate. Also are all your divisions in green for support ? Probably not, I have 190 000 men in Manila in one of my games and I needed 6 Army HQ to have enough support squads for all. Without enough support, an unit is fighting at -25% IIRC.

Also the hex you are attacking is a forest, doubling the defense, and Soviet troops have more and bigger guns than yours. Their supply line is also shorter. And prep point don't count outside a city. The basic result is that you were unlucky to achieve a 0 to 1 ratio, but the normal ratio should be 1 to 1 in this situation.

Also the Soviet troops are not all green and anyway all should be at 100% prep since four of five months, so had trained at the max Soviet exp, whatever it is, but still better than any Allied troop Japan met during the first month of the war.

So the solution is ? Manoeuver, you just need 150 000 men to let them in the hex to keep the Soviet there and send the 450 000 else to another road to attack Vladivostok. So the Soviet will retreat or be cut of supply and then will quickly lost its fighting power.

As for the remark someone said about troops hodling for ever outside bases, that is only true for surrounded troops. If an unit has a valid retreat path, it will retreat. If not it may require ratio of 50 to 1 to surrender... while in a base it will surrender as soon as the base fell...

What happened in the air on that turn? In my (limited) expirience, even a weak ground attack by bombers can significantly change the outcome of a concurrent ground combat.

Just a thought...

Hawker,
Everything ADM. Laurent says is on the mark. I have been playing the Soviets for the last 10 game months and they are not push overs. Particularly when fortified and supplied. Their beginning EXP is around 60-70 and some units may be higher. Just ask my OLD PBEM opponent. He quit after a failed invasion of the USSR.

In an attack such as the one you are conducting prepping the battle field will take a LONG time. Consider each LBA attack, two if you are lucky, per day will only affect 1 LCU for each seperate LBA attack in that hex. Over time against one LCU that will have a visible effect, but if your opponent has 20-30 LCUs in that hex what is the likelyhood of consecutive, effective attacks on a given l LCU? How bout 1 in 20-30?

Another thing. Don't expect to win a hex on the first attack. REGARDLESS what advantages you have. NEVER shock attack on the 1st attack unless you are in the open with no forts and have a reasonable chance to win outright. You are recreating the battle of Stalingrad. How quickly did the aggressor overwhelm the defender there?

Consider this attack a probe. take some time and rest the troops that need to recover their disablements BEFORE you make another push or else your road to being stranded without enough assault value to win will be downhill from here. Consider attacking delibereately with only half your forceevery other day. Divide the work load between them, you have the numbers advantage. HIS units will fight every day, and yours will only fight every other day.

ORIGINAL: AmiralLaurent
Also the Soviet troops are not all green and anyway all should be at 100% prep since four of five months

One note about scenarios on my map. When I modify the scenarios, I set prep locations for all Soviet LCUs in bases to that base, and prep points at 100%, in the same way that Chinese units were done. This is only for units IN bases, however.

Andrew

That 600,000 isn't all combat troops right? Doesn't that number include support troops? I thought that there were usually 3 or 4 support troops for each frontline man. Whereas, when defending, even the cooks might be shooting.

In any case, I would hate to see battles with 3/4 of a million people end in one day. That would be horrible. 0-1 doesn't mean you are losing the battle, it just means you didn't win it yet.

WHAT AM I DOING WRONG? I'd yell but don't have the right emoticon to represent my mounting frustration with this puppy. Having a bad day and need a smoke but still...

Ground combat at Merak

Allied Deliberate attack
Attacking force 3298 troops, 40 guns, 0 vehicles
Defending force 1701 troops, 14 guns, 0 vehicles
Allied assault odds: 158 to 1
Allied ground losses:
23 casualties reported[&:][&:][&:][&:][&:][:@][8|]

On top of this I'm losing 10,000 Chinese a month because I'm defenceless against the ZOC rules in CHS with the static units and low supply. Pure slaughter. This enter the hex with a guy holding a stop sign and tie down an Army nonsense is really beginning to irritate the f--k out of me.

I can tell both of you what you're doing wrong.

You're assuming the combat system A) is working correctly; B) would make sense even if it was.

[:'(]

More seriously, the attacks on the Soviet troops don't really bother me. Combat is not predictable and some variation should occur. I don't like it when results like that happen to me either, but I'm trying to learn to live with it.

As for Ron's example, THAT I do have a problem with because it is the norm in my experience. I honestly can't see how there isn't at least one major bug that leads to that kind of BS, because combat odds appear to have absolutely no effect on casualty levels or who takes them.

On top of this I'm losing 10,000 Chinese a month because I'm defenceless against the ZOC rules in CHS with the static units and low supply. Pure slaughter. This enter the hex with a guy holding a stop sign and tie down an Army nonsense is really beginning to irritate the f--k out of me.

Although I agree the ground system is broken...as far as China it does add a certain je ne sais quoi.[;)] Afterall how else can what replicate that quagmire. [:)]

ORIGINAL: treespider

On top of this I'm losing 10,000 Chinese a month because I'm defenceless against the ZOC rules in CHS with the static units and low supply. Pure slaughter. This enter the hex with a guy holding a stop sign and tie down an Army nonsense is really beginning to irritate the f--k out of me.

Although I agree the ground system is broken...as far as China it does add a certain je ne sais quoi.[;)] Afterall how else can what replicate that quagmire. [:)]

The quagmire IS in CHS because of the supply shortage for China (enough to feed the little buggers but don't think about launching any major offensives against the Japanese). As the Japanese, don't expect to go on a blitzkrieg like you could do in the stock because of the sheer number of Chinese units. The static units are killing me and I think is overkill (lack of supply kills movement anyway) but worse is the damn land model...I don't think I have a good thing to say about it at the moment I'm so annoyed and disgusted that something like this makes the grade. Fails at basically every level...ask anyone and I doubt very many cudos will be heard. I know the scale is difficult but at least try to be innovative within the framework of age old basics of hex based wargamie design. Most of the movement and ZOC rules are contradictory.

The inability to command an orderly retreat even into friendly ZOCs is mind-boggling--apparently you have to either win, lose, or be stuck there forever?

I suppose I could be doing something wrong, but the order to withdraw always seems reset to a defensive state.

ORIGINAL: Ideologue

The inability to command an orderly retreat even into friendly ZOCs is mind-boggling--apparently you have to either win, lose, or be stuck there forever?

I suppose I could be doing something wrong, but the order to withdraw always seems reset to a defensive state.

You "have to" select a friendly city for the units to move. No guaranteeing that they won't move toward the enemy though, because they follow the quickest route to the base and don;t take into account enemy LCUs.[8|][X(]

Ron said:

The quagmire IS in CHS because of the supply shortage for China (enough to feed the little buggers but don't think about launching any major offensives against the Japanese). As the Japanese, don't expect to go on a blitzkrieg like you could do in the stock because of the sheer number of Chinese units.The static units are killing me and I think is overkill (lack of supply kills movement anyway)

Sounds pretty historical then.

The static units were included because:

A) historically those units stayed in those areas throughout the war and near as I can tell could be considered "warlord armies"

B) With so many more units the static units kept the mobile Chinese at roughly the same number as stock.

I'm curious how Chinese supply is working out in comparison to stock. I converted a bunch of the "produced" supply to a regular daily allotment which cannot be bombed like you can do with resources and HI and IIRC the daly supply continues to be received even if a base is "under seige"

but worse is the damn land model...I don't think I have a good thing to say about it at the moment I'm so annoyed and disgusted that something like this makes the grade. Fails at basically every level...ask anyone and I doubt very many cudos will be heard. I know the scale is difficult but at least try to be innovative within the framework of age old basics of hex based wargamie design. Most of the movement and ZOC rules are contradictory.

I agree the land combat model is broken in general.

ORIGINAL: treespider

Ron said:

The quagmire IS in CHS because of the supply shortage for China (enough to feed the little buggers but don't think about launching any major offensives against the Japanese). As the Japanese, don't expect to go on a blitzkrieg like you could do in the stock because of the sheer number of Chinese units.The static units are killing me and I think is overkill (lack of supply kills movement anyway)

Sounds pretty historical then.

The static units were included because:

A) historically those units stayed in those areas throughout the war and near as I can tell could be considered "warlord armies"

B) With so many more units the static units kept the mobile Chinese at roughly the same number as stock.

I'm curious how Chinese supply is working out in comparison to stock. I converted a bunch of the "produced" supply to a regular daily allotment which cannot be bombed like you can do with resources and HI and IIRC the daly supply continues to be received even if a base is "under seige"

but worse is the damn land model...I don't think I have a good thing to say about it at the moment I'm so annoyed and disgusted that something like this makes the grade. Fails at basically every level...ask anyone and I doubt very many cudos will be heard. I know the scale is difficult but at least try to be innovative within the framework of age old basics of hex based wargamie design. Most of the movement and ZOC rules are contradictory.

I agree the land combat model is broken in general.

The idea behind the static units was sound and solid. It just turns out that in conjuction with the other alterations and adjustments in CHS regarding China static units are redundant and vulnerable to maneuver units. All the losses are being caused in my PBEM by the ZOC/movement issues and the static VP caches static Chinese units are. Otherwise China would pretty much be static anyway, with bombardment exchanges and odd minor offensives being the norm...even the Rice War is possible. If static units are to remain, they should be concentrated in bases further from the front than where many are now...waiting to be devoured.

Supply is screwy but that is because of the game. Bases (HQs) keep more than enough supply needed before distributing the excess. As a result units outside of bases basically receive no supply. Those not even on roads are basically out of supply for the duration. Really slows things down. C47s don't alleviate this in 1942 because there is just too many starving units. Perhaps more smaller resource centres in each base. Perhaps more bases could be added as supply distribution centres because some of the current distances are pretty long.

I'll post some screenies in my PBEM AAR outlining the supply situation in China when I get a chance. It is June 42 so it is getting interesting and potentially useful.

Thanks all for opinions,you guys are great help[&o][&o].

Hawker, your problem is maybe you have too much troops there... so all can't draw supplies and so fight at a reduced rate. Also are all your divisions in green for support ? Probably not, I have 190 000 men in Manila in one of my games and I needed 6 Army HQ to have enough support squads for all. Without enough support, an unit is fighting at -25% IIRC.

Also the hex you are attacking is a forest, doubling the defense, and Soviet troops have more and bigger guns than yours. Their supply line is also shorter. And prep point don't count outside a city. The basic result is that you were unlucky to achieve a 0 to 1 ratio, but the normal ratio should be 1 to 1 in this situation.

Also the Soviet troops are not all green and anyway all should be at 100% prep since four of five months, so had trained at the max Soviet exp, whatever it is, but still better than any Allied troop Japan met during the first month of the war.

So the solution is ? Manoeuver, you just need 150 000 men to let them in the hex to keep the Soviet there and send the 450 000 else to another road to attack Vladivostok. So the Soviet will retreat or be cut of supply and then will quickly lost its fighting power.

As for the remark someone said about troops hodling for ever outside bases, that is only true for surrounded troops. If an unit has a valid retreat path, it will retreat. If not it may require ratio of 50 to 1 to surrender... while in a base it will surrender as soon as the base fell...

Great thinking Amiral,i will explain next moves in my AAR because GH can look this one.
P.S.Support is in GREEN,i have enough HQs in area.

0-1 is not necessarily so bad. Anything less than 1-1 is 0-1. It might be 99-100; then again it might be 99-1000. The only way you can know is to watch (or at least sit through) the entire ground combat animation so you can see the base and adjusted assault values. If you are not willing to do that, you may as well forget about trying to figure out ground combat. Sorry, that is just the way it is.

You have some work to do. Do some bombardments, do some ground support air strikes. Next time you assault watch the animation and tell us how many base and adjusted assault points each side has. Then we'll have something to work with.

Irrelevant,
I will surely do that next time,i am not look in combat replay because i was certain i will win.

What happened in the air on that turn? In my (limited) expirience, even a weak ground attack by bombers can significantly change the outcome of a concurrent ground combat.

Just a thought...

Dino,
There is no bombardment that turn.

Hawker,
Everything ADM. Laurent says is on the mark. I have been playing the Soviets for the last 10 game months and they are not push overs. Particularly when fortified and supplied. Their beginning EXP is around 60-70 and some units may be higher. Just ask my OLD PBEM opponent. He quit after a failed invasion of the USSR.

In an attack such as the one you are conducting prepping the battle field will take a LONG time. Consider each LBA attack, two if you are lucky, per day will only affect 1 LCU for each seperate LBA attack in that hex. Over time against one LCU that will have a visible effect, but if your opponent has 20-30 LCUs in that hex what is the likelyhood of consecutive, effective attacks on a given l LCU? How bout 1 in 20-30?

Another thing. Don't expect to win a hex on the first attack. REGARDLESS what advantages you have. NEVER shock attack on the 1st attack unless you are in the open with no forts and have a reasonable chance to win outright. You are recreating the battle of Stalingrad. How quickly did the aggressor overwhelm the defender there?

Consider this attack a probe. take some time and rest the troops that need to recover their disablements BEFORE you make another push or else your road to being stranded without enough assault value to win will be downhill from here. Consider attacking delibereately with only half your forceevery other day. Divide the work load between them, you have the numbers advantage. HIS units will fight every day, and yours will only fight every other day.

You are always very resourceful Elf[&o]

I can tell both of you what you're doing wrong.

You're assuming the combat system A) is working correctly; B) would make sense even if it was.

Hard way to learn.

I still cannot believe that this is possible in RL.
I think i read some thread long ago,i think Feinder set up a test. In that test Japanese tanks show better results against T-34,in RL that is impossible.

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005

I don't think it has anything to do with over crowding. I think it has to do with how many guns the allies have and their defensive positions. In RL this is a battle that would probably take days or weeks to decide.

Exactly.

The game sould report battles as ongoing events, rather than discrete actions.

And there should be "battles" going on in every single hex that contains opposing enemy forces, at some level or another.

Defender is in woods, therefore his AV is tripled. Defender probably has level 9 forts unless you took time to reduce them with engineer only assaults so his AV is again tripled. So basically multiply his 150000 troops by 6, so you have 600000 troops to his 900000 troops.

Then your fatigue and disruption is probably much higher than his since your troops had to move into the hex.

I'd say bomb him for several weeks or months and launch some engineer assaults while doing that. Then try the attack again a month or two down the road and you'll probably see much better results.

Jim

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

You "have to" select a friendly city for the units to move. No guaranteeing that they won't move toward the enemy though, because they follow the quickest route to the base and don;t take into account enemy LCUs.[8|][X(]

Am I wrong to find that odd?

Still, at least it's a way.