Unit continue attack !!!

[fulcrum90]

Hi

I would know why an unit decide itself to "continue attack". I´m playing Brian Topp´s "Operation Zitadelle" and ever have units that continue the attack, disrupting my plans. I´m triying using only units of the same formation (golden flag), only minimal losses attack, not direct support. I tried with only infantry or armor units and result is the same. Defender is in limited looses setting....I tried launching attacks with good probability of sucess too... If I had using ignore looses attacks can understad that my units decide continue attacking till end but with minimal looses is something strange...and frustrating.

[Oberst_Klink]

ORIGINAL: fulcrum90

Hi

I would know why an unit decide itself to "continue attack". I´m playing Brian Topp´s "Operation Zitadelle" and ever have units that continue the attack, disrupting my plans. I´m triying using only units of the same formation (golden flag), only minimal losses attack, not direct support. I tried with only infantry or armor units and result is the same. Defender is in limited looses setting....I tried launching attacks with good probability of sucess too... If I had using ignore looses attacks can understad that my units decide continue attacking till end but with minimal looses is something strange...and frustrating.

Camarada! Enviar una captura de pantalla del planificador de ataque, por favor. Gracias!

kLiNk, Oberst

[sPzAbt653]

I just tried a turn 1, focusing on squeezing max rounds, but only got 2. [:@]

It's a large scenario with lots of possible attacks, which increases the odds of gaining 'continues attack' results.

MRPB is set to the default of 99. You could change that if you want.

-----------------------------------------

Acabo de intentar un giro de 1, centrándose en exprimir rondas máximo, pero solo recibió 2. [: @]

Es un escenario grande con un montón de posibles ataques, lo que aumenta las probabilidades de ganar ", continúa el ataque " los resultados.

MRPB se establece en el valor predeterminado de 99. Usted podría cambiar eso si quieres.

[fulcrum90]

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

I just tried a turn 1, focusing on squeezing max rounds, but only got 2. [:@]

It's a large scenario with lots of possible attacks, which increases the odds of gaining 'continues attack' results.

MRPB is set to the default of 99. You could change that if you want.

sPzAbt653, Do you think that size of scenario increase this?? So scenarios like BERLIN - Götterdämmerung or Drang nach Osten ( my favourites) would be unplayable...but you can play them without have units continuing attacks every battle.. Yes, I changed the MRPB to 3 and results are better but still have too much units doing that. I think that must to be another reason..

[fulcrum90]

ORIGINAL: Oberst_Klink Camarada! Enviar una captura de pantalla del planificador de ataque, por favor. Gracias! kLiNk, Oberst

All my attacks are with minimal looses and full cooperation units like this, camarada Oberst_Klink

[Oberst_Klink]

Limit the MBR to 3, like Kamerad sPzAbt653 said... most of the scenarios are still modeled after the TOW 3.0 stuff. It's also a question of proficiency how many battle rounds per turn will take place. When you take the German side, the same problem happens as well btw?

[Telumar]

Mere Armour and high proficiency units come to mind. They are very likely to produce 'continue attack'messages. Especially Armour vs Armour. Just opened the scenario to find some German units that start with 85% proficiency. Now imagine they win in a series of engagements raising their proficiencies further.

[sPzAbt653]

ORIGINAL: fulcrum90

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

I just tried a turn 1, focusing on squeezing max rounds, but only got 2. [:@]

It's a large scenario with lots of possible attacks, which increases the odds of gaining 'continues attack' results.

MRPB is set to the default of 99. You could change that if you want.

sPzAbt653, Do you think that size of scenario increase this?? So scenarios like BERLIN - Götterdämmerung or Drang nach Osten ( my favourites) would be unplayable...but you can play them without have units continuing attacks every battle.. Yes, I changed the MRPB to 3 and results are better but still have too much units doing that. I think that must to be another reason..

Not unplayable, but it has been well recognized as an issue. There may be other issues such as unit proficiency or maybe formation proficiencies. The more units involved in combat in one round, the more likely there will be some that 'continue'. Even with MRPB lowered, you will still get turn burn. In scenarios with so many units, I try attacking with only one unit from each hex, and at minimal losses. That usually gets the most rounds. Each round rotate units in the attack so that everybody doesn't get worn out, while the defender (hopefully) will. In some scenarios the best you can hope for is 3 rounds.

[sPzAbt653]

I think that must to be another reason..

I agree, but don't know what. Start FitE or D21 and only plot artillery or air bombardments (no ground unit attacks) for the first round and usually the turn will burn. As I recall, it happens in other scenarios, too. No idea why, it seems kind of wonky. The point is, there is something going on that is difficult to understand. So we can only try our best !

[fulcrum90]

ORIGINAL: Oberst_Klink

Limit the MBR to 3, like Kamerad sPzAbt653 said... most of the scenarios are still modeled after the TOW 3.0 stuff. It's also a question of proficiency how many battle rounds per turn will take place. When you take the German side, the same problem happens as well btw?

soviet proficiency is 70%, not too low..Testing with german side I don´t see too much "continue attacks" (proficiency 75%)

[fulcrum90]

ORIGINAL: Telumar

Mere Armour and high proficiency units come to mind. They are very likely to produce 'continue attack'messages. Especially Armour vs Armour. Just opened the scenario to find some German units that start with 85% proficiency. Now imagine they win in a series of engagements raising their proficiencies further.

I remember that issue playing Crusader 41 and using armour units but now I find that regular infantry units fight till end using minimal looses.

[fulcrum90]

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

ORIGINAL: fulcrum90

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

I just tried a turn 1, focusing on squeezing max rounds, but only got 2. [:@]

It's a large scenario with lots of possible attacks, which increases the odds of gaining 'continues attack' results.

MRPB is set to the default of 99. You could change that if you want.

sPzAbt653, Do you think that size of scenario increase this?? So scenarios like BERLIN - Götterdämmerung or Drang nach Osten ( my favourites) would be unplayable...but you can play them without have units continuing attacks every battle.. Yes, I changed the MRPB to 3 and results are better but still have too much units doing that. I think that must to be another reason..

Not unplayable, but it has been well recognized as an issue. There may be other issues such as unit proficiency or maybe formation proficiencies. The more units involved in combat in one round, the more likely there will be some that 'continue'. Even with MRPB lowered, you will still get turn burn. In scenarios with so many units, I try attacking with only one unit from each hex, and at minimal losses. That usually gets the most rounds. Each round rotate units in the attack so that everybody doesn't get worn out, while the defender (hopefully) will. In some scenarios the best you can hope for is 3 rounds.

Yes, I know that is very difficult get more than 3 or 4 rounds playing some scenarios. Minimal looses isn´t a guarantee. But see that an regular infantry burn 40% of turn with 3 continue attacks when you only are using minimal looses is something frustrating...so in this case is better use two units that a dozen in the attack??

[sPzAbt653]

...so in this case is better use two units that a dozen in the attack??

I would say yes, but it all depends on the situation. In this screen shot I'm only attacking with the top unit in each hex, and you can see that two hexes are attacking one. This gives the best odds with the least units involved. All artillery is on tactical reserve, and there are two infantry corps behind the front that can move divisions forward into the line (either now or during later rounds once you see what develops). This way you won't get a massive attack with heavy casualties, you will rather get a sapping attack, forcing the defender to retreat in maybe 20% of the combats. But with each round you can repeat the same process and hopefully get 3 or 4 rounds and get some good penetrations somewhere.

Experimentation proves what works best for each scenario.

-----------------------------------

... por lo que en este caso es mejor utilizar dos unidades que una docena en el ataque? [/ quote]

Yo diría que sí, pero todo depende de la situación. En esta captura de pantalla Sólo estoy atacando con la unidad superior en cada hexagonal, y se puede ver que dos hexágonos están atacando a uno. Esto le da las mejores probabilidades con el mínimo de unidades implicadas. Toda la artillería está en reserva táctica, y hay dos cuerpos de infantería detrás de la frente que se puede mover hacia adelante las divisiones en la línea (ya sea ahora o durante las rondas posteriores una vez que vea lo que se desarrolla). De esta manera usted no tendrá un ataque masivo con fuertes bajas, usted no conseguirá un ataque agotando, forzando al defensor a retirarse en unos 20% de los combates. Pero con cada ronda puede repetir el mismo proceso y, con suerte 3 o 4 rondas y obtener algunas buenas penetraciones en alguna parte.

La experimentación demuestra que funciona mejor para cada escenario.

[Telumar]

Note that attacking fortified units also could add to turn burn.

[fulcrum90]

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

I would say yes, but it all depends on the situation. In this screen shot I'm only attacking with the top unit in each hex, and you can see that two hexes are attacking one. This gives the best odds with the least units involved. All artillery is on tactical reserve, and there are two infantry corps behind the front that can move divisions forward into the line (either now or during later rounds once you see what develops). This way you won't get a massive attack with heavy casualties, you will rather get a sapping attack, forcing the defender to retreat in maybe 20% of the combats. But with each round you can repeat the same process and hopefully get 3 or 4 rounds and get some good penetrations somewhere.

Experimentation proves what works best for each scenario.

Yes, but perhaps this is fine for armour german units but not for soviets. If I use only two unit in an attack results are too poor..

[fulcrum90]

ORIGINAL: Telumar

Note that attacking fortified units also could add to turn burn.

Yes, german units are very well fortified but the problem is that I use minimal looses as proof attack and see that this test burnt all turn. Two rounds in a game turn using minimal looses look to me too poor..
Btw, I changed the MRPB to 3 and can get till five rounds so perhaps this scenario has some unknow problem with game engine.

[sPzAbt653]

Yes, but perhaps this is fine for armour german units but not for soviets.

Sorry, I didn't realise you are playing the Soviet side. The Soviets should only get one or two rounds per turn, as they made mass attacks with no flexibility. I wouldn't use minimal mosses with Soviet attacks, I would direct fire with as much artillery as possible, and use limit or ignore losses. Your attacking units will soon become worthless. but you have reserve armies to take their place.

------------------------

Lo sentimos, no me di cuenta que usted está jugando el lado soviético. Los soviéticos sólo debe tener una o dos rondas por turno, como hicieron los ataques en masa sin flexibilidad. Yo no usaría musgos mínimo con ataques soviéticos, que dirigiría el fuego con la artillería de lo posible y limitar el uso o ignorar las pérdidas. Sus unidades de ataque pronto se convertirá en valor. pero hay ejércitos de reserva para ocupar su lugar.

------------------------

I changed the MRPB to 3 and can get till five rounds so perhaps this scenario has some unknow problem with game engine.

You might only get 1 round with MRPB set to 3, you could also get 8 or 9, that's just the way it is !

-----------------------

Sólo puede ser que consiga una ronda con MRPB establece en 3, también se puede obtener 8 o 9, que es la forma en que lo es!

-----------------------

[el cid]

Fulcrum, have you tried editing the scenario and changing the attrition divider?

Do you get heavy losses during the combat? if not maybe the attriotion divider is set too high, and perhaps this is the intention of the developer, to allow only one or two rounds per turn.

[fulcrum90]

ORIGINAL: el cid

Fulcrum, have you tried editing the scenario and changing the attrition divider?

Do you get heavy losses during the combat? if not maybe the attriotion divider is set too high, and perhaps this is the intention of the developer, to allow only one or two rounds per turn.

I don´t get heavy losses, perhaps 4% in one attack. Attrion isn´t too high, only ten. With only two rounds per turn I doubt that can get Kiev at historical date.

[fulcrum90]

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

Sorry, I didn't realise you are playing the Soviet side. The Soviets should only get one or two rounds per turn, as they made mass attacks with no flexibility. I wouldn't use minimal mosses with Soviet attacks, I would direct fire with as much artillery as possible, and use limit or ignore losses. Your attacking units will soon become worthless. but you have reserve armies to take their place.

Thanks for your suggestion....I´ll try your tactic but this is 1943 and soviet armies can´t get too much looses. Reserve amies have low proficiency and are cannon fodder. Direct fire is only possible with air units because artillery have range of one hex