Matrix Games Forums

I have spent the last 3 days going through how ground combat works. The manual talks much about CVs and combat, but does not say so much about how the static CV value relate to the combat simulation performed by the game. For me, there has always been a mysterious disconnect my conceptualization of this.

Of course, I know you can just push counters around without understanding anything, but that is the least satisfying way to play.

I want to check if I understand the general process which the game uses.

Game data such as HQ/distance/MP/etc... checks feed into battle pre-combat. Game data such as TOE element parameters and dynamic unit/element values feed into the battle during combat. Conditions such as terrain or ammo stored feed into the battle during combat. CV values and modifiers feed into the battle outcome post-combat.

So, it is a five step process. (neglecting air combat)

(1) Determine what CUs and SUs will participate in the battle simulation.

(2) The sum of CVs for all participants will give you the initial CV total for both sides. This is an abstract representation of how the battle might go in a vacuum on a level playing field.

(3) The battle simulation will be run with the chosen participants (which is an iterative process simulating range and phases of battle). Various modifiers from game data may conditionally alter the engine's behavior such as ammo stock percentages or terrain limitations. At the lowest level, the interaction between device and element is simulated as a fire event which continues until all devices and elements have participated to the minimal range of simulation.

(4) Again compute the sum of CVs for the participants left standing.

(5) Apply the CV modifiers to the raw CV values of #4. Compare this step's CV ratios between attacker and defender to determine the outcome and other pluses or maluses which impact the engaged units in future battles and phases.

So, in summation the final CV ratio is not intended as way to get a trivial outcome as in some games by a single die roll. The final CV ratio is meant to condense a significant number of force multiplier coefficients and the simulated outcome into one understandable ratio. Kind of like a PH or PSI involves many atoms/molecules, but the single number gives a good generalization of the situation.

Am I finally illuminated (taken me about one year to get here)?

Thanks.

MarkShot wrote: Fri Oct 21, 2022 2:01 pm Am I finally illuminated (taken me about one year to get here)?

For me it's just 1 week so far but I have the same problem as you.
I'll try to give you my general understanding of this topic, note that I've not gone deeply into "which multiplier is used in which phase of ground combat" yet.

---

MarkShot wrote: Fri Oct 21, 2022 2:01 pm [...] but does not say so much about how the static CV value relate to the combat simulation performed by the game. For me, there has always been a mysterious disconnect my conceptualization of this.

The following quote from the game manual may help you if you read it again. The bold written part helped me to disconnect CV from actual fighting in my brain.

WITE2 Game Manual p.270 wrote: Displayed Unit CV’s are determined by a complex formula
that takes into account the different ground elements
making up the unit as well as unit morale, experience,
fatigue, leadership and supply. CV values displayed for
units are non-random approximations of what in combat is
a series of die rolls and thus somewhat random values, so
no single CV can be more than a guide to how the unit will
perform in any particular combat. [...]
The elements that go into calculating the CV are set
out in annex 34.4. Elements may be more or less effective
than this notional value. For example, each heavy tank
contributes a value of 9 but a late war IS-2 or King Tiger
will be far more effective in combat than an early war KV-2.
Equally, in 1941 both the Soviet BT-7 and T-34 are medium
tanks but the latter is far more effective.
This may not affect the combat result (hold or retreat)
but may have a major impact on the losses incurred.

---

MarkShot wrote: Fri Oct 21, 2022 2:01 pm So, it is a five step process. (neglecting air combat)

Neglection the math behind it is okay, but (for me) it is of greater importance to further understand the relationship between CV and combat. Since planes do not have any CV and are just beeing used to reduce the intermediate CV of the enemy by disruption, damaging and destroying ground elements.

---

MarkShot wrote: Fri Oct 21, 2022 2:01 pm (1)
[...]
(5) [...]

As stated I have not dug deep into the phases, I just want to add, that the initial CV of the defender is already reduced/increased by terrain modifiers/fortification (also included in the "attack tooltip").

---

Final notes:
At the moment for my understanding/immersion I see initial CV as "this could be done value" and the post-battleCV as "this has been done" and inbetween there is a lot of stuff involved which can't be planned before an attack since

Helmuth von Moltke (1871) wrote:No plan of operations extends with any certainty beyond the first encounter with the main enemy forces.

Inbetween therefore is alot of randomness and luck involved (as in real wars).
Note that my "this has been done" in the game actually is also somewhat a "this could instantly be done next" since the destroyed/damaged/disrupted ground units do not count towards the final CV.

I reviewed all my battles from the scenario.

Besides an ill conceived air plan; I planned to cut German supply and that yielded nothing. I will go for units next time and ground support.

My errors were:

Not being careful enough with SU assignments.

Not being careful enough with terrain modifiers like armor attacking infantry in light forest is reduced 25%.

Using excessive force. So too many 3 hex deliberate attacks. Too much use of the reserve mechanic. Getting an 8:1 win is very cost compared to a 3:1 win.