Matrix Games Forums

I put

50x T-34/76A with 50 motorized support

vs.

50x Type 95 light tanks with 100 mortorized support (mistake in battle, I meant to put 50).


Both had 75 exp, 99 morale, 0 disruption, 0 fatigue, and 500 supplies (plenty).

The leaders were the default leaders, so there was some variation (not much tho), and I plunked them in the wrong hex (I intended clear, but got the wrong one, and it was wooded).

From the DB, the T-34/76A is a far superior tank.

Type 95
Range : 1
Accuracy : 7
Effect : 4
Amor : 30
Anti-Armor : 50
Penetration : 50
* I don't think that range, accuracy, or effect have anything to do with ground combat by the way.

T-34/76A
Range : 1
Accuracy : 8
Effect : 12
Amor : 85
Anti-Armor : 100
Penetration : 100
* I don't think that range, accuracy, or effect have anything to do with ground combat by the way.

I believe that it basically pits the anti-armor and/or penetration vs. the armor rating, just like it does with bombs vs. ships or cannons vs. planes.

Anyway, the odds were surprising. I set them both to deliberate attack.

Japan attacked first. Base 51. Adjusted 41.
Russia defended Base 48. Adjusted 29.

Japan got 1 to 1 odds.

Then Russia attacked. And got 0 to 1 odds. I couldn't write fast enough for the base and adjusted for the second attack. But I remember that Japan's defense was adjusted up considerably, which is why Russia got 0-1.


Interestingly enough, the actual distruction of tanks was as follows :

Japan lost
8 Type 95 tanks disabled.
16 Type 95 tanks destroyed.

Russia lost
2 T-34s disabled
2 T-34s destroyed

The japanese unit had very little disruption/morale/fatigue loss however. And Russia had has something like 90 disruption (probably from the 0-1 attack).

Just posting the results. I"m glad to see that the Russian tanks seem to have soundly beat the much smaller Japanese. But you'd have never know from the odds portayed (and why is Russia so disrupted).

I'm tempted to set up a 76mm anti-tank gun battery in the woods, to see how they fair vs. IJA tanks. AT battery should do quite well. But we'll see.

-F-

Hmm, from the odds you described - I'm pleasantly surprised the tank battle went so well for the Russians.

I'm glad to see that the tank combat model seems to work well.[;)]

B

Some questions/comments:

Where did the combat occur? Who owns the base? What about prep points? Supply?

To be fair, you should have the battle taking place in clear hex with no base. You should do it with one side attacking and the other defending, then reverse roles. Then do it again, using shock attacks.

I am suspicious of the fairness of the ground combat routine with both sides set to attack (IJ goes first).

Leaders should be as close to identical as you can manage.

Well, it was only one test, and there were some elements that I didn't control correctly. But yes, I'm glad to see that the Typ 95s got clobbered.

I suppose it would be interesting to run it a 2nd turn, to see if the Russians would have gotten handled due to their high disruption. Disruption will GREATLY reduce combat effectiveness (in the WitP model).

-F-

Where did the combat occur? Who owns the base? What about prep points? Supply?
in 30,32. A wooded (non-base) hex in burma. I was aiming for 32,32 (clear), but I entered the hex wrong. I chose a non-base, so that neither side would have any advantages.

To be fair, you should have the battle taking place in clear hex with no base.
Yes, I tried that, but I put in the wrong hex (it was non-base wooded).

You should do it with one side attacking and the other defending, then reverse roles. Then do it again, using shock attacks.
Very true (and all of your examples on fresh restarts, not in sequence. But all I'm really doing is waiting on a turn from my PBEM oppoent, so I haven't had time to run thru 4 restarts and 4 turns. :^) I might actually do that tomorrow, if I'm bored again.

I am suspicious of the fairness of the ground combat routine with both sides set to attack (IJ goes first).
Such is the model in WitP. Many have "expressed concern" about it. It could have just as easily blown up in their face tho. If Japan had gotten 0-1 for whatever reason, then russia attacked, the Russian attack would have been far more devistating I'm sure.

Leaders should be as close to identical as you can manage.
I can make them identicle. But I didn't take the time to change them. But yes, you're right.

(* clicks on "receive mail".... *)

Sigh.

Parker, quite reading this post, and run the turn.

That's one reason I like playing against the AI... he's not hassling me when I'm slow on finishing a turn! [:'(]

I ran it again, in hex 32.32 (clear). Both leaders were the same (75 in all attributes). Japan only attacked.

Units started with

IJA Type 95
2 disabled
48 active

Support
2 disabled
48 active

vs.

T-34/76a
5 disabled
45 active

Support
5 disabled
45 active

Both formations had 50 support. The disabled tanks to start, are the work of the engine. In the DB, I had them set at 0 disablements.

Japan deliber attacked, and got 2-1.

Japan AV Base 53, adjusted to 100.

Russia AV Base ??, adjusted to 46.

Russia retreated.

Final status

IJA
1 disabled Type 95 (-1)
48 active Type 95
2 disabled support
48 active support
morale = 99
disruption = 0
fatigue = 5
exp = 76 (+1)

Russia
10 disabled Type 95 (+5)
32 active Type 95 (-13)
12 disabled support (+7)
31 active support (-14)
morale = 74 (-25)
disruption = 48 (+48)
fatigue = 96 (+96)
exp = 76


That was surprising. Little girlie tanks blew the snot out of the T-34s. Doubt that would have happend historically.

Let's try this again with the Russians attacking.

WitP engine = flip a coin to see who is the victor?

New game. Russia deliber attacked, and got 0-1. (!)

Russia AV Base 48, adjusted to 44.

Japan AV Base 53, adjusted to 99.

Final status

IJA
5 disabled Type 95 (+3)
45 active Type 95 (-3)
1 disabled support (-1)
49 active support (+1) (so this guy was a "healed" disabled one).
morale = 99
disruption = 0
fatigue = 5
exp = 75
* no units destroyed.

Russia
5 disabled T-34
44 active T-34 (-1)
3 disabled support (+-2)
47 active support (+2) (so these guys were "healed" disabled support)
morale = 98 (-1)
disruption = 55 (+55)
fatigue = 5 (+5)
exp = 75
* so the Russians lost 1 T-34 in the attack, and did nothing to Japan.

Hrumph. I was rather expecting better results. I'm also concrened that the anti-armor rating maybe is NOT being reflected in the odds.

****

Brain fart.

I just checked for HQs.

Allies have no command HQ within range of that hex. But IJA -does- have Burma Army (command HQ), a little to the SE. The unit is in range, and appears to be getting the 90% bonus for the HQ.

Well, at least we know that command HQs are important!

-F-

It does look like you tested HQ effects more than the actual unit capabilities. Still the result is not what one would expect, is it? No amount of leadership should make up for the fact that the Japanese tank can't actually hurt the Russians.

A low velocity 37mm should have virtually no effect on the armor of a T-34 (of any model). By contrast a 76mm shell hit on one of Japan's tin foil light tanks should be nearly always fatal. Even with their effectiveness doubled because of the HQ, 2 x 0 = 0. Perhaps the Japs are using that ammo that the Haunted Tank carried in the comic book. Don't think J.E.B. Stuart's ghost would be helping them out though.

What was that?! Sgt. Rock?! I remember those! I little Stuart taking on Tiger tanks, and half the Wehrmacht!

I'll try to do more tests today, but I have a turn to work on...

:^)
-F-

Been offline for a couple of days - sorta thought this thread would have had something further to report. I wasn't really planning to write it all up but:

I conducted a little experiment myself. Using Scen 7 playing head to head I arranged for a fight between 2 Jap Tank Regts with 1/3rd of a Mech Corps on a clear terrain hex NW of Vladivostok and East of Mukden. Before the battle I moved all the Japanese border forces out of the way, stood down both air forces and essentially road marched the opposing forces to the hex in question. The Japanese had Type 97 and Type 89 Tanks (close to 200 or so). The Russians had T34/85s, Su85s, Su100s and JSU152s (around 100 tanks/spgs but the Soviets had arty and infantry support in significant amounts and the Japanese had essentially none of either).
After all forces arrived in the projected arena I saved and then went back and ran 1) a Deliberate Attack by the Japanese
2) a Shock Attack by the Japanese
3) a Deliberate Attack by the Russians
4) a Shock Attack by the Russians
Each attack was run from the originally saved setup.
There was little to choose from in the results from either side's attacks. Losses of vehicles were fairly close in both Deliberate Attacks. The Russians lost fairly heavily in their Shock Attack; the Japanese less so.

The heaviest Japanese gun in the combat was a 57mm. The Russians had 76mm
towed AT guns, 85mm guns on their MBTs, and 100mm and 152mm guns on their SPGs. I'm pretty sure that IJA tank armor was akin to tinfoil by the standards of the 1944-45 European battlefield. A hit by any Russian AT weapon or a 152 HE round would almost certainly be a hard kill. With only 57mm and 37mm weaons the Japanese would be most likely to cause a "soft kill" against the Russians if they had any effect at all. I didn't check individual unit status after each run. I did after some of them though. Decreases in numbers of tanks and increases in disabled tanks seemed fairly equal the times I did look.

Not at all a scientific experiment but I'm inclined to believe that in WitP:
A TANK IS A TANK IS A TANK

What was that?! Sgt. Rock?! I remember those! I little Stuart taking on Tiger tanks, and half the Wehrmacht!

From Sgt. Rock comic book - there was one segment called "The Haunted Tank".

My favorite is where The Haunted Tank got flipped over and was sliding down an embackment upside down and scored a fatal hit on a Tiger with its 37 mm. gun...[8|][X(][:'(]

Don't you just love poetic licence?[:D]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Don't you just love poetic licence?[:D]

Truly inspiring!! Probably explains how the Japanese fought the Soviets on equal footing in Feinder's and Spence's battles...

Sooooo, yet another disappointing aspect of the WITP combat model? Anyone gonna test this some more to highlight it undeniably? I rarely have internet access and my PC is not online so unfortunately I can't run any.

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

What was that?! Sgt. Rock?! I remember those! I little Stuart taking on Tiger tanks, and half the Wehrmacht!

From Sgt. Rock comic book - there was one segment called "The Haunted Tank".

My favorite is where The Haunted Tank got flipped over and was sliding down an embackment upside down and scored a fatal hit on a Tiger with its 37 mm. gun...[8|][X(][:'(]

Actually, there was a documented case of an M5A1 Stuart putting 6 or 7 rounds of 37mm AP into a Tiger I's engine comparment, and the crew abandoned it. See, it IS possible... with imagination.

I remember the USS Stevens short strips in GI Combat. Neato.[:)]

Actually, there was a documented case of an M5A1 Stuart putting 6 or 7 rounds of 37mm AP into a Tiger I's engine comparment, and the crew abandoned it. See, it IS possible... with imagination.

Ah yes - anything is possible, but some things are more possible than others.[:D]

IIRC, good ol' "Haunted Tank" managed this with one shot, and (iirc) it was against frontal armor. [X(] (while upside down, sliding down an embankment...)[:'(]

Worst tanks with better command and support can win against superior tanks, the Germans ran almost up to Moscow with mostly medium tanks facing KV-1 and T-34.

As for how WITP engine works, it seems to me that firepower is not the main factor to kill the enemy. Two units of same size may fight for weeks and still be at 95% OB, while any unt retreating lost 14-15% of its OOB. And the game probably uses firepower to disable enemy squads during battles (and occasionally destroy) but not so much of it.

As for the Japanese tanks resisting a 152mm I won't be surprised if each "hit" wil saw a check of anti-armor vs armor and the first hit disabled the tank, the second will destroy it, so every Japanese tank is harder to destroy than in RL.

On the other hand the fact that the majority of tank losses took place during a retreat is fairly historical. In WWII most of the tanks lost were scuttled by their crews because of mechanical failure or lack of fuel or a hit that may be perfectly reparable. From the tanks that were out of order in a battle, the winning side was usually able to recover and recover up to 75% of them.