Matrix Games Forums

Since in an Attack a Ground Element seems to be always engaging an enemy Ground Element with all of it's Ammo Use at once, I am struggling with the realism of hit ratios/hits for effect for direct firing AP-shells (PaK/Tank).
See this Thread for more information, I am not going to copy all I pointed out there again.
I tested freight consumtion/hit ratios and so on in Tank vs Tank.

---

Historically:
In Tank vs Tank combat there were multiple analysis/studies made on how effective they were during WW2 and how many shots/hits were needed to damage/destroy/immobilize a tank. I don't feel like going too deep on that since that's not a place for this kind of debate. But obviously it's not what some ComputerGames may suggest (1-2-3 shot-kills), but it's also far from what is currently "real" in the game.
Let's assume a average number of 15 shots for a kill would be a number we could acknowledge on. (I am using this already high number so the game's realism doesn't seem too far off )

In Game:
"Officially" (What's shown in Combat Log/Report)
Looking at the Combat Reports and ignoring freight consumtion for now, we get a "official" Hit ratio of about 14%, so 500 "shots" do hit about 70 times (generous rounding) for effect, not differentiating between DAM/DES. So we need about 7 shots to have 1 shot for effect. Which seems okay'ish since the previously stated debatable 15shots are shots to kill and not for effect. "Real" (Including freight usage)
Each of the "shots" in the combat log/Combat resolution window is actually a engagement Ground Elemen vs Ground Element which consumes all Amo Use at once.
Since Ammo Use seems to be defined by "ShellWeight*RoF=AmmoUse" and our Panthers do have a RoF of 11, this means each of this "shots" represents actually 11 shots worth of freight.

Knowing this, 11-times the number of shots done, so 500*11=5500shots.
Those 5500shots had 70 hits for effect.
So we got a hit for effect ratio of 1.27%.

Comparing this number to our "official" 7 shots and our "historical" 15 shots makes clear that there is some realism lost in this regard, since 1.27% ratio means, we'd need 78.7 actual shots to have one shot having an effect, which is (obviously due to math) ~11times the "official" rate and still ~5times the stated 15 (which is debatable but may have been needed for 1 kill historically).

Final Words & possible fix:
I feel like there is seriously something off concerning those AP-shell Ammo Use values which is contradicting any historical number (of which I know of).

The easiest solution in my opinion would be to reduce the Ammo Usage of AP shells fired by "/5" ...or even more/lower ....if that's possible with this Combat Engine.

Notes:
I only tested Attacks.
Only Clear Terrain & Clear Weather.
I tried to keep this report short and simple as good as I could without posting several Tests/screens and so on, I can go deeper but the numbers should already show by themselves that there is something far off.

I thought I was crazy when testing this. And thankfully, I AM!
A whilea go I received a PBEM game where there was an Artillery Division which had already taken part in 2 Attacks and after performing another Attack it was still sitting at 90'ish % of its Ammunition, this concerned me, since Artilelry barrages were expensive to maintain and after Barraging 2-3 Hours the SovietA rtillery needed almost a whole day to get the needed Ammo to be able to Barrage again.

I tested again in StB Editor and this are the results: Both are attacks, but I also tested a Battle with the Tanks defending (had same results).
I tested as well with some Soviet T-34, results were the same.
As you can see, each reported Shot in game of an Artillery, seems to be an actual Shot (1 shell/projectile).
Whereas the Medium Tank cosumes his whole Ammo Use for each reported Shot in the game. And since Ammo Use is of the unit lb and is calculated by "Projectile weight x RoF", it actually uses 11 shells/projectiles per shot.

The numbers.
The Gun Shot 3910 Shells, which is a FPE of 7.82 and did hit 0.41 times per Element (HPE).
0.41/7.82=0.05243 -> 5.243% hit ratio.

The Tank shot 5674.5 "Bursts", which is FPE 11.7 and did hit 2.34 times per Element (HPE).
2.34/11.7=0.2 -> 20% hit ratio.

So from this it at first sight appears to be alright that indirect fire is less accurate than direct fire.
But as we in the test see, the Tank consumes a whole RoF of Ammunition, so with 11RoF the Tank actually shot 62,419.5 Shells. This gives a hit ratio of 2.34HPE/(11RoFx11.7FPE)=0.0181818 -> 1.82% hit ratio for a direct firing tank.

Quick test with Infantry, it's the same as with the Tanks, but here it somewhat makes sense to use it all, it's just the tanks where things fall apart from reality.

Wiedrock wrote: Fri Mar 24, 2023 7:58 pm

---

Historically:
In Tank vs Tank combat there were multiple analysis/studies made on how effective they were during WW2 and how many shots/hits were needed to damage/destroy/immobilize a tank. I don't feel like going too deep on that since that's not a place for this kind of debate. But obviously it's not what some ComputerGames may suggest (1-2-3 shot-kills), but it's also far from what is currently "real" in the game.
Let's assume a average number of 15 shots for a kill would be a number we could acknowledge on. (I am using this already high number so the game's realism doesn't seem too far off )

This is an abstraction at Division model, not individual tank vs tank at x range. 15 rounds per kill rings a bell and sounds plausible for a succesful single engagement, but there will also be many failed ones.

At Division/Regiment level, 100 to 1 sounds more than plausible if factoring in the various leaks. Look at total ammo expenditures.

As an example, here is the ammo on hand and consumption for 3rd Panzer Armee from 10th October 1944. These are 10 day reports. This seems to have been a period of fairly heavy combat if one compares the usage numbers with some later reports. (EDIT: This was when the Kurland Pocket was closed by the Red Army after 3rd Panzer AOK opened it up for a few days in the last week of September.)

This was for 3 Infantry Divisions, 1 Grenadier Division, 1 Panzer Division, 1 Stug Brigade and some misc. units.

https://wwii.germandocsinrussia.org/de/ ... ect/zoom/7


Starts at Page 481, AP types start at page 488.

AP Ammo consumption

37mm PAK 207 (16 guns)
50mm PAK 85 (5 guns)
75mm PAK 4062 (80 guns)
75mm PAK 97/38 176 (5 guns)
76.2mm PAK36 202 (7 guns)

3128 Panzerschreck rounds
4858 Panzerfaust rounds

Stugs and Panzers

75mm KwK 40 + StuK L43/48 2851 (24 Panzers, 69 Stugs)
75mm L70 1590 (43 Panthers)


Ignoring the 37mm/50mm/Panzerschreck/-faust that is a total of 8'881 rounds or an average of 39 rounds per gun. I don't know what the claimes were but probably closer to 100 than 600.

EDIT: Missed the Russian weapons further back, but no material effect.


As an aside, note the ammo consumption for the MP44, over 600k rounds, about the same as MP consumption and 50% more than what the rifles consumed. Total MG Ammo consumed is nearly 6 Million.

This is from the end of September so covers the 3rd Panzerarmees attack to open up and relieve Army Group North. Which was successful before being pushed back a few days later.

This could probably be set up as scenario to test out various aspects of the combat model if one were so inclined. It's a well documented operation, 1-2 turns with limited OB and both attack and defense.

https://wwii.germandocsinrussia.org/de/ ... ect/zoom/7

Starts at Page 516.


EDIT; really doens't get any better than this.

War Diary 3rd Panzer AOK

September 1944
https://wwii.germandocsinrussia.org/de/ ... rid/zoom/1

October 1944
https://wwii.germandocsinrussia.org/de/ ... 44-entwurf


Daily Reports 3rd Panzer AOK

September 1944
https://wwii.germandocsinrussia.org/de/ ... rid/zoom/1
https://wwii.germandocsinrussia.org/de/ ... ect/zoom/4

October 1944
https://wwii.germandocsinrussia.org/de/ ... rid/zoom/1

Quartermaster Reports October 1944
https://wwii.germandocsinrussia.org/de/ ... ect/zoom/4

Thanks MECHFO. But before looking at numbers things have to be clear on what's going on behind the scenes.

The Sheet
It's all tested in the Editor game V1.03.07 StB Scenario.
Unit MOR/EXP was 75 and everything else set to 100%. Usually used 500 Elements, occasionally 1000.
I mostly tested Attacks, some defenses gave same results (same consumed lb of Ammo per "Shot"), so I stuck to Attacks.
This testin series is not supposed to exclusively show weird things in HPE, but may give some hints to issues similar to this Thread.
It started small and grew, I randomly picked elements which to test. Comprehensively one would go through all the 100'ish Ground Element Types and see what's their way of counting shells.

The greyed collumns are calculation results, white ones are inserted values form ingame UI/Editor.
Access to the Sheet.

1. I take Artillery as the base, since that one makes sense, since one Shot = 1 Shell.
   Therefore FPE, HPE and consumed Ammo are correct.
   Since FPE and HPE are correct, the Hitratio can be calculated by using them and is therefore "correct" too.
   Therefore Artillery will be the one "extreme" to compare against.
2. Now let's take a look at the Infantry/Squad section.
   That one should be alright using a whole Ammo Use when firing with their plenty of arms they have.
   Opposed to Artillery, Infantry will be the other extreme, using a whole AU when firing.
3. Now let's take a look at the Mortar section.
   It is only consuming 80% of what Artillery would consume. I guess this is related to needing less proprellants, so overall this should be alright as it is done, someone put some mind into this and reduced it (compared to Artillery) by 20%.
   BUT if you see the 50mm Mortar you see that this one is using the whole AU when doing 1 "Shot", so that Mortar suddenly is "Bursting".
4. Now let's take a look at the 75mm leIG18 and the sIG33, those are Infantry Guns they suddenly use the whole AU per "Shot".
5. Now let's take a look at the 75mm leFK18 and Katyushas those are "Light Artillery"/"SP Rocket Launcher" and works like Artillery.
6. Now let's take a look at the purple coloured lines. Those are the "(armored) SP Rocket Launchers". This lines are besides the Sturmmörser (which has a RoF of 1 and makes sense) a complete abomonation, I have no idea how this numbers are being generated at all.
   • They neither use Ammo at Arillery Rates.
   • Nor do they use one AU per "Shot" like the red ones/Infantry.
   • Additionally the consumed Ammo per shot varies.
   At least here, the Devs (if not interested into looking at the other things) should have a look at what's going on and/or correct my results if my game goes crazy.
   And if the Hit Ratio is intended to be so low for these Elements, it's okay, but then they should at least work like Heavy Artillery reducing Fortification levels (which at least I couldn't observe being the case).
7. Now let's look at the rest.
   Besides the Artillery, Ligth Artillery, Katyushas and Mortars, everything (what has been tested so far) is consuming a whole RoF per "Shot", so it "Bursts". Therefore...
   • Hit Ratios are off from reality
   • UI numbers don't make any sense
   • Ammo consumed skyrockets

Concerning ROCKETS. As I pointed out in this Thread the Ground Type of "(armored) SP Rocket Launcher" uses a full AU (and more) while "Unarmored SP Rocket Launcher" consumes Ammo at rates of Artillery.
Let's go through the calculations:

• I+J
  • I: Simply compares Ammo (UStons) before and after combat.
  • J: Compares consumed Ammo to listed "Shots" done in game. So it shows the lb consumed per "Shot". The Artillery with a RoF of 4 is using 1/4AU per "Shot" while a tank is using 1/1AU per "Shot".
• E+K
  Now compare the observed behaviours of Ammo consumption with the FPE/HPE numbers, as can clearly be seen, it looks like the assets using the Artillery/Mortar way of shooting are having a way higher FPE on average.
  This is caused by tracking each individual Shell, and is the most realistic one, the player gets the actual Hit-Ratio by comparing FPE and HPE, nothing confused and obscured. Things make sense.
  But looking at the red lines, we see that the FPE are rock bottom.
  This means we have two measures in how numbers are generated, presented in the same window in a comparative manner "sorting for FPE/HPE".
• L+M
  • L: Hit Ratios shown ingame can be calculated by HPE/FPE, we get a Hit Ratio of 20% for Tanks, 75% for Flak and 5% for Artillery.
    Just looking at those numbers, all makes somewhat sense, I won't state on if it actually are "realistic numbers" or not but generally we see that direct firing weapons have a higher accuracy and therefore a higher Hit Rate.
    BUT....
  • M: Since the red marked lines are actually shooting a full set of RoF, the Hit Ratios need to be modified, therefore suddenly the direct firing weapons end up at Flak 3.5% and Tanks 1.8% Hit Ratio, to name those two before mentioned ones. This makes them have less accuracy than any indirect firing Artillery.
    (Note: for the yellow lines this collumn can be ignored)
• N+O+P
  Simple listing of "Shots" shown in the UI, Hits (calculated using rounded decimals of HPE) and the actual shots fired when taking the consumed Ammo/freight into account which one "Shot" consumes.

---

Summarized:
Ofcourse compromises have to me made, but as stated, using (at least) two completely different ways to measure and present things confuses the whole meaning of the FPE/HPE window, which is essentially the only window giving us, ...should be giving us some sense of effectiveness of weapon systems. But this meaning of it is (imho) not achieved by the way as things are currently. This goes on top of the issue that HPE/FPE numbers are occasionally decimal-shifted (which may be caused by some of this?!).
And this loss of comparability is just one piece of the issue, as stated also Hit Rates become unhistoric to the point which currently has indirect firing Weapons having mroe ACC than direct firing weapons.

If this all is caused by the "need" to increase Ammo/freight consumption to meet historic numbers, here some notes on how things could be eventually be made different.

• If one wants to increase consumption during combat
  • use not just the projectiles/shells but also the avarage propellants/casings/cartridge weights to calculate Ammo Use values (or just double those numbers currently used) [Division "Need" would need to be modified]
  • use the same method like done for the Mortar but make it 150% or so for Tanks/Artillery/AT-Guns, to account for some wasted shots and other losses of Ammo
  • use the same method like done for the Mortar but make it 250% to account for some wasted shots and other losses of Ammo (+50%) and the usage of propellants/cartridges (+100%)
  • make ammo consumption related to EXP, 100EXP = 100% Ammo Used (like current Artillery), 50% EXP = 150% Ammo Used.
    There is some statement in the manual concerning low EXP = consumes more Ammo (IIRC), I did not look into this yet.
• If one wants to reduce Ammo received, make freight in Depots destroyable or improve effects of Air Interdiction.
• If one wants to reduce Ammo in Units, increase Ammo consumption during Logistics "frontline attrition/training" phase.

Partially this may be the cause of Soviets not having any Supply issues, first Artillery shoots (cheap) and then the Stacking-penaltied units rush in, not doing any shots because of the stacking penaltie and therefore not consuming much ammo. And additionally the Soviet SP Rockets counting as/shooting like Artillery, while Germans SP Rockets which are doing things I can not explain (consume plenty, hitting non-ty).

Currently it seems like the combat system is two different games, would be awesome if one could eventually make it one.

---

Access to the Sheet.

---

Abbrevations and others:
AU = Ammo Use
ACC = Accuracy
FPE = Fired per Element
HPE = Hits per Element
"Shots" = numbers shown in game UI
Shots = projectiles/shells flying in the direction of the enemy
"Bursts" = using a full AU volume of freight to storm the enemy, guns blazing

Wiedrock wrote: Thu Jan 11, 2024 8:46 pm Thanks MECHFO. But before looking at numbers things have to be clear on what's going on behind the scenes

I misunderstood what you were getting at. I agree that this looks very off for several categories.

MechFO wrote: Sat Jan 13, 2024 12:38 am

Wiedrock wrote: Thu Jan 11, 2024 8:46 pm Thanks MECHFO. But before looking at numbers things have to be clear on what's going on behind the scenes

I misunderstood what you were getting at. I agree that this looks very off for several categories.

Yea, sry for only that short sentence, I did not have the power to further elaborate on why those numbers did not rly help (in that moment). Still thanks, always valuable to have some primary sources to get some sense of scale of the numbers.

I've not analysed the detail but you do realise that 'in turn' resupply can occur?

RedLancer wrote: Sat Jan 13, 2024 5:25 pm I've not analysed the detail but you do realise that 'in turn' resupply can occur?

Yes, I assumed it's only for the defending side from reading this section:

Living Manual 1.23, p.458 wrote:25.1.5. Resupply during Combat
During each round of combat, defending units in the combat with less than 60
percent of their needed fuel and/or ammunition or less than 40 percent of their
needed supplies will attempt to draw freight to convert to the needed item(s) from
nearby depots. Each resupply attempt may lead to receiving up to 20 percent of the
total need of the type of supply (fuel, ammo, or supplies).
Note that attacking units cannot resupply during the combat phase.

Wiedrock wrote: Sat Jan 13, 2024 5:15 pm

MechFO wrote: Sat Jan 13, 2024 12:38 am

Wiedrock wrote: Thu Jan 11, 2024 8:46 pm Thanks MECHFO. But before looking at numbers things have to be clear on what's going on behind the scenes

I misunderstood what you were getting at. I agree that this looks very off for several categories.

Yea, sry for only that short sentence, I did not have the power to further elaborate on why those numbers did not rly help (in that moment). Still thanks, always valuable to have some primary sources to get some sense of scale of the numbers.

Not the list I was thinking of, but I found this first and it is actually more suited as it is the only source I know of where ammo, fuel and food/fodder listed directly comparable in the same document. Note this was for Sealion and the artillery ammo is not in standard packaging.

Weight and cubic meters for various types of ammo
https://wwii.germandocsinrussia.org/de/ ... ect/zoom/6

Fuel Barrels and Food/Fodder

https://wwii.germandocsinrussia.org/de/ ... ect/zoom/6

Just to show how crazy ammo usage can get in extreme cases, I stumbled across the application for a Knights Cross for the commander of the StuG company from an Infantry Divison in October 1944.

Sitting on the seam of the 299. Infantry Division and the 6th Panzer Division, he notices a Russian deep breakthrough in the 6th Panzer Divisions areas of responsibility, counter attacks on his own initiative with 7 or 8 StuGs (full strength company but 2 StuG's detached, not clear if they joined later) and an infantry platoon. He manages to retake a key village and repells several counterattacks, preventing follow on forces from passing and so helps in sealing off the penetration.

Total claims for a busy day of fighting starting at about 10am and lasting into the night:

Destroyed
1 T34
6 SU152
4 hvy PAK

Knocked out
4 SU152

Captured
1 hvy PAK, 1 L PAK, 1 ATRifle

500 dead and some captures

Own losses 5 dead and 11 wounded. No StuG losses.

Ammo expenditures

An average of 130 rounds of 75mm per StuG and 800 MG rounds.

https://wwii.germandocsinrussia.org/de/ ... ect/zoom/7

https://wwii.germandocsinrussia.org/de/ ... ect/zoom/7