Matrix Games Forums

Hi all,
I suspect there's a problem in AFV reliability, sherman tanks (notoriously very reliable) break down very often when moving;
instead panther tank (famous for the opposite) seem very reliable.
In general it seems AFV breakdowns behave the opposite one's expecting

So I run a test moving some armoured units for 15 hexes in clear weather and plain ground (after deactivating all air directives) too evaluate how many AFV break down on the road.
These are the stunning results! (i think AFV reliabilty has been changed last year, and now is represented just by first digit; the second being survivability)
What do you think?

Reliability for AFV's is not a percentage. The first number is it's reliability when moving...so a 9 for the sherman and a 4 for the panther.

The second number is survivability.... the sherman is a 6 the panther is an 8.

So the Sherman is less likely to breakdown moving, but is more likely to be destroyed in combat.

EDIT: Ahh..I see in your test the Panthers are surviving moving better.

I completely agree with you Liquidsy for the theory.
But the test (and my game experience) gave me opposite results.
In game sherman tanks break down much more than panther whem moving!!! [:(]
Probably I've not been clear enough in describing my test results.
In first row, i.e.,I moved a canadian division for 15 hexes and 86 shermans broke down (of 266 available), so 32.33%.
Another row, The 116th panzer division moved the same distance and broke down 6 panthers (of 48 available) so just 12.50%.

Hey MrBlizzard,
I may be wrong and some of the more experienced guys can correct me but I think when calculating breakdowns the engine also takes into account Morale, Experience and Support available. You are basically comparing two different units and the results wont be optimal. Thanks for the tests thought, I know it takes a lot of effort to do them.

Best regards,
Xhoel

ORIGINAL: MrBlizzard

I completely agree with you Liquidsy for the theory.
But the test (and my game experience) gave me opposite results.
In game sherman tanks break down much more than panther whem moving!!! [:(]
Probably I've not been clear enough in describing my test results.
In first row, i.e.,I moved a canadian division for 15 hexes and 86 shermans broke down (of 266 available), so 32.33%.
Another row, The 116th panzer division moved the same distance and broke down 6 panthers (of 48 available) so just 12.50%.

I recall something similar in very early versions of the game when to move an Allied armoured division its full MP was fatal, you could shed 100s of tanks.

That was rebalanced and maybe its slipped again?

But there is a second part to this process. Since the Germans are short (relatively) of support squads, their damaged tanks stay damaged. The Allies have a lot - especially if you are using the full command chain so those damaged tanks will be ready next turn.

In effect, and I presume this is intentional, the game system penalises long moves by Allied armour but they can recover quickly. It also really encourages you to allow them to refit out of ZoC rather leave them locked into the front line (if you can)

No problem, it didn't take too much time (I used some scenaries)
and I agree with you of course; maybe the engine takes into account also fatigue,
when you're tired it's easier to have an accident and damage the vehicle.

here some pics from my tests

first the canadians after moving and breaking down a lot of tanks
Canadians have 75 of experience and morale

here the german 116th division BEFORE moving (it started with 48 panthers available)
(experience 75 like the canadians and morale 74, almost equal

and here the same division AFTER moving,

Just 6 panther A broke down

And at last the Canadians BEFORE moving.

Strange indeed. Maybe influenced by more local support on hand vs need in the german unit.

ORIGINAL: loki100

ORIGINAL: MrBlizzard

I completely agree with you Liquidsy for the theory.
But the test (and my game experience) gave me opposite results.
In game sherman tanks break down much more than panther whem moving!!! [:(]
Probably I've not been clear enough in describing my test results.
In first row, i.e.,I moved a canadian division for 15 hexes and 86 shermans broke down (of 266 available), so 32.33%.
Another row, The 116th panzer division moved the same distance and broke down 6 panthers (of 48 available) so just 12.50%.

I recall something similar in very early versions of the game when to move an Allied armoured division its full MP was fatal, you could shed 100s of tanks.

That was rebalanced and maybe its slipped again?

But there is a second part to this process. Since the Germans are short (relatively) of support squads, their damaged tanks stay damaged. The Allies have a lot - especially if you are using the full command chain so those damaged tanks will be ready next turn.

In effect, and I presume this is intentional, the game system penalises long moves by Allied armour but they can recover quickly. It also really encourages you to allow them to refit out of ZoC rather leave them locked into the front line (if you can)

Sincerely i hope it's slipped away something that can be fixed [:)]
If panther and sherman would have exchanged reliability in an completely a-historic way just for rebalancing game... ehm... can't believe it [8|]
We shouldn't forget that a large part of damaged vehicles (40%? ) are permanently lost!
In battleground italy 43-45 scenary, playing as Allies, I lost the triple of AFVs than germans at turn 55 (3000 vs 1000);
the most just moving without fighting...
with this situation the Germans can move their panzer divisions from the front to everywhere 15 hexes away keeping their panzer intact.

It would explain why my tank losses are so high and hard to replace in my current game

but

the Germans can move their panzer divisions from the front to everywhere 15 hexes away keeping their panzer intact

there is a way to ensure that any German tank movements on key sectors are very costly [;)]

ORIGINAL: loki100

but

there is a way to ensure that any German tank movements on key sectors are very costly [;)]

yeah! thanks again! [8D]

LiquidSky,

That's not the manual's definition of the Reliability figure, though Mr. Blizzard's screen showing a 99 for the armored cars contradicts the manual:

"All aircraft and AFV/Combat vehicles have a reliability rating which ranges from “really good” (lower numbers) to “really bad” (higher numbers). An example of a 5 would be an armoured car and a 45 would be a Panther D AFV. These reliability ratings are checked when aircraft conduct a mission or AFV/Combat vehicles are moved, with those that fail the reliability check becoming damaged. To reflect initial production “teething” problems, aircraft and AFV/Combat vehicle reliability will be increased by five when they first come into production and then decrease by one each month until they reach their standard reliability rating. The reliability rating of obsolete (out of production) aircraft is treated as higher than their normal reliability rating, which will make them more susceptible to attrition."

Cary

please use the living manual as reference, your quote is outdated as AFV reliability function had changed in 1.00.07. The movement effects look suspicious, something might not follow the new setup.

Hmmm in that case it looks quite suspicious and should be looked into. Thanks for the effort, its appreciated

I looked at the code and problem is with AME and CW ground elements, which has at least 2x higher chance to be damaged (treated as captured equipment). I'll bug and fix it.

Hopefully it will get released in coming beta.

That's great! thanks a lot!

edit: could you have a look also at german tanks? they look very reliable, even panthers