Combat resolution screen

[Pford]

The combat resolution screen brings a lot of suspense to the game and watching the battles play out is big fun. Have you considered adding a background like a period graphic to the rather bland, tan coloured background?

Question: The Union expels the Confeds from Grafton, inflicting 800 casualties according to the CRS. But the results show no damaged or destroyed units. Do the 800 lost represent just chrome?

[willgamer]

ORIGINAL: Pford

Question: The Union expels the Confeds from Grafton, inflicting 800 casualties according to the CRS. But the results show no damaged or destroyed units. Do the 800 lost represent just chrome?

Not just chrome.

Game Manual p.116- Combat Attrition represents the losses an infantry or militia unit takes during combat when it does not suffer a hit. Only infantry and militia units can suffer combat attrition. The impact of combat attrition is represented in the game through a combat modifier that is applied to an infantry or militia unit whenever the overall accumulated attrition for a side reaches a certain point.

HTH! [:)]

[Pford]

Lol, HTH?

[willgamer]

ORIGINAL: Pford

Lol, HTH?

Hope That Helps! [8D]

[dpstafford]

Hope That Helps! [8D]

Not so much. The poster wants to know which unit took the loss, and how can he tell?!?

[Twotribes]

I want to know why the Rebels have more troops at the start of every battle and take almost no losses in every battle. It is 1862 and I can not win a fight to save my soul. And I always lose 10 times or more the number of Union troops to Confederate. It is on normal. Just had a battle where I lost 27000 men and the Confederates lost 2700. Not to mention I lose my medium artillery ( not heavy) faster than I can make it.

[tedhealy]

Heh, I'd like to know just the opposite playing as CSA.  USA brings in 50,000 vs my 50,000 defending in level 1 fort at Humboldt, number of guns are about equal at 200 a side and I get pushed out taking higher losses.  Grant vs Van Dorn.  Nothing like 27000 to 2700 though, losses were within a couple 1000 of each other.  Shouldn't the defender have the advantage there, in addition shouldn't the attacker take more losses going against my fort defense?

I've had several defensive battles like that in the west with even numbers more or less (plus very close strength numbers on the 2 bar graphs in the combat res screen) and I'm in a fort yet I lose and lose higher numbers of troops. 

Then one positive for me as CSA has been Lee.  He wins close battles.  I suppose that goes to show how important ACs are as it seems like Grant and Lee are darn near impossible to beat.  I can't say I've seen enough battles to draw any conclusions though, just seems odd that on defense I'm easily pushed out of forts and take more losses in relatively even match ups where I'd think the advantage goes to the defender.

[tran505]

I saw similar battle casulaty results in my game, as I posted in another thread. Union losing 4-1, 6-1, even 8 or 10-1 happens even to Grant. As I said, I just wish there was for the player to disengage from that type of fight instead of having the computer continue the fight for "7 engagements" leaving me to do nothing but view the carnage. I am in my first game at the end of the Summer of '62, with Grant still bottled up in Paducah -- and getting his head handed to him each time he steps outside of the "Paducah Pocket". I am sure I am doing something wrong, but ohboy is it painful to watch!


- Paul

[Joel Billings]

First off, AC's are absolutely critical to winning battles (deciding who retreats). Grant's 4 attack rating versus Van Dorn's 2 defense rating is a big differential, and will far outweigh any fort. Remember, leader's are huge, and the attack/defense ratings are 1-4. A differential of 1 is meaningful, a differential of two is huge. I'm pretty sure the manual goes through how the combat value of the forces is determined for retreat purposes and you should see that a good AC is very important. Only a fort level 2 will counter a major leadership disadvantage.

As for losses of 27000 to 2700, I can't defend that unless the side was out of supply and/or cut off from retreat. We tried to make a combat model that generally reflected the kinds of losses CW battles had. Occasionally you'll have a situation like Vicksburg or Fort Donelson where one side surrenders a large force though. If you have a save for a battle that you think is way off, feel free to send it to 2by3@2by3games.com and I'll take a look and see if I can explain why that battle is coming out so one-sided.

[tran505]

Joel:

My current theory is that I didn't bring along enough artillery. I seemed to be outgunned and I was falling behind several thousand to zero before I got my first hit. I am restarting and am going to build a lot more artillery and see what happens. When rivers are available, I am guessing the navy can help out as well.

Bring up the GUNS !!

P

[Twotribes]

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Combat resolution screen

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Twotribes
Users viewing this topic: Twotribes
Tree Style [Subscribe] Subscribe Printable Version
[Reply to Message] All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War Between the States >> Combat resolution screen Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic Newer Topic >>
Combat resolution screen - 6/17/2008 1:26:13 PM
No New Messages
Pford
Matrix Trooper




Posts: 69
Joined: 11/10/2006
Status: offline The combat resolution screen brings a lot of suspense to the game and watching the battles play out is big fun. Have you considered adding a background like a period

Yes I was out gunned that might be it.

[Joel Billings]

You do need to have some guns (1 for every 3-4 infantry or cavalry is a good rule of thumb as a minimum. That's not enough to explain 10 to 1 losses though. Of course if they had all their units with 4 skill leaders like Longstreet, and an AC with a an infantry skill of 4, and you had leaders with skills of 2, that can make a big difference as well. Not having the enemy units scoted (or the area the enemy came from if they were attacking) can also be huge. Always scout likely areas of approach if denfending, and scout areas you are going to attack just prior to the attack.

[oldspec4]

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

You do need to have some guns (1 for every 3-4 infantry or cavalry is a good rule of thumb as a minimum. That's not enough to explain 10 to 1 losses though. Of course if they had all their units with 4 skill leaders like Longstreet, and an AC with a an infantry skill of 4, and you had leaders with skills of 2, that can make a big difference as well. Not having the enemy units scoted (or the area the enemy came from if they were attacking) can also be huge. Always scout likely areas of approach if denfending, and scout areas you are going to attack just prior to the attack.

I'm still trying to get my arms around the scouting thing. Does scouting provide some offensive and/or defensive combat modification?

[Erik Rutins]

Yes, enemy units that your scouts did not spot get a bonus on their attacks against you. Similarly, units of yours that the enemy did not spot before battle get a bonus on their attacks against the enemy.

[oldspec4]

Think that I've answered my own question on a scouting combat modifier...believe there is a surprise bonus for units not spotted.

[Poliorcetes]

Yes, there is a large bonus for being "hidden."&nbsp; Artillary can't hit you at long range (-99 modifier) and at close range you get a -1 bonus.&nbsp; That's the key for the CSA, reacting in hidden troops from adjacent regions.&nbsp; If you go head to head with the Union and are not hidden, you tend to get whacked.
&nbsp;
On the Union side you have to watch out for all sorts of defender bonuses (like Being in Home territory, Having been shot at by artillary already, crossing rivers, etc.)&nbsp;&nbsp;
&nbsp;
A typical mistake for me has been not to scout Washington, leaving a large group of hidden troops to jump out at me at their leisure.
&nbsp;
Poliorcetes