what is the opinion on this 1 to 1 retreat result for the Russian's

[Oleg Mastruko]

ORIGINAL: Ketza

I suppose I am still naive enough to believe that is is possible to have a discussion on the internet with different points of view and not call people names. Thats just me.

Yea, and I am naive enough to think a guy can correctly read the table HE sent himself, and if he mis-reads the data so blatantly as in the example above, that he'd at least apologize, but that's just me.

[Ketza]

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

ORIGINAL: Ketza

I suppose I am still naive enough to believe that is is possible to have a discussion on the internet with different points of view and not call people names. Thats just me.

Yea, and I am naive enough to think a guy can correctly read the table HE sent himself, and if he mis-reads the data so blatantly as in the example above, that he'd at least apologize, but that's just me.

And that Oleg is why you are the Soviet Fan boy we have all to come to love.

[;)]

[KamilS]

Well, I think that whole point of this discussion is - does Soviet +1 attack modifier equal higher casualties or it doesn't.

Assuming, that what Klydon says about casualties is true and defending Germans units are more damaged than attacking Soviet - proportionally of course (we are talking about battles when result is pretty close), then if he is right whole idea of +1 is nothing less than lack of balance.

I am saying it as a WitE fan-boy [;)]

[KamilS]

I think temporary solution could be removing additional German casualties when they are forced to retread due to +1 rule.

In the longer run, both +1 rule and proposed scraping of retreat losses could be affected by several factors, for example morale, command or numbers of involved units, initial and final odds etc.


What do you think?



At the moment situation is weird. Soviets are punished by that rule if they don't need it, and Germans if odds were pretty even

Example. Soviet win thanks to rule - gain:

- they get hex (+1)
- they suffer higher casualties (-1)
- Germans suffer retreat casualties (+1)


In they would have won without that rule - loss:

- they got hex that they would get anyway (0)
- they suffer higher losses (-1)
- Germans suffer from retreat, but they would retreat anyway (0)

I think wining 3:1 or 4:1 shouldn't see mitigations of higher casualties rule for Soviets - if chance of wining is not high or very high they would use tactics causing high losses, but if chance of wining was almost equal to 100% I doubt applying tactics leading to high losses would take place.

[gradenko2k]

ORIGINAL: Kamil

Well, I think that whole point of this discussion is - does Soviet +1 attack modifier equal higher casualties or it doesn't.

Assuming, that what Klydon says about casualties is true and defending Germans units are more damaged than attacking Soviet - proportionally of course (we are talking about battles when result is pretty close), then if he is right whole idea of +1 is nothing less than lack of balance.

I am saying it as a WitE fan-boy [;)]

We don't really have a point of comparison - Soviet casualties are generally consistent, and the "extra casualties" modifier is ostensibly always on, so we don't know what casualties would have been like if it were off.

What we do know is that given the consistent amount of Soviet casualties, and the consistent amount of German casualties, the Germans aren't able to absorb the kind of losses that they take.

The assumption here is that if the modifier were off, then the loss ratios across the two sides would even more lopsidedly in favor of the Red Army.

[Apollo11]

Hi all,

ORIGINAL: Kamil

Well, I think that whole point of this discussion is - does Soviet +1 attack modifier equal higher casualties or it doesn't.

This is correct.

As explained in manual Gary coded 1:1 +1 for Soviets coupled with much higher Soviet losses when attacking (i.e. simulating "Human wave")...


Also, as written before, we are currently testing build that changed this rule (and introduced some other changes)! [;)]


Leo "Apollo11"

[Mynok]

Besides, I wouldn't consider 'Axis fanboy' and insult but rather a statement of fact when applied to Pelton (or myself for that matter). I've never played the Soviets and never seen Pelton play them either. [:D]

[jjdenver]

It's a terrible rule (the 1:1 auto-win)

Luckily it looks like it may go away.