I got interested in this game, it has a lot of different and interesting settings, but the combat system looks unrealistic and cancels my desire to play it. It's about losses in general, can somebody please explain why when trying to breach enemy defenses it takes so long and losses are quite insignificant?
I think you should be a little more specific about your question, because the game has a lot of ins and outs that depend on the details of the situation, but if you are trying knock A morale German troops out of pillboxes with Russians or something like that, you will never get through the front door. Your only real hope is to flank the position and try to cut it off and isolate the occupants. This will bring their morale down two really, because they will be isolated and quickly low on ammo. Also, note that bunkers and pillboxes are hard targets, so you will be much more effective with tanks/AT guns etc. I think mortars do double disruption against them too, although, I never have much luck with mortars against hard positions.
I hope this helps.
(08-08-2018, 07:56 PM)Fortynslow Wrote: [ -> ]I think you should be a little more specific about your question, because the game has a lot of ins and outs that depend on the details of the situation, but if you are trying knock A morale German troops out of pillboxes with Russians or something like that, you will never get through the front door. Your only real hope is to flank the position and try to cut it off and isolate the occupants. This will bring their morale down two really, because they will be isolated and quickly low on ammo. Also, note that bunkers and pillboxes are hard targets, so you will be much more effective with tanks/AT guns etc. I think mortars do double disruption against them too, although, I never have much luck with mortars against hard positions.
I hope this helps.
The problem is that the troops in this game suffer too minor losses. For example, 2 full battalions of german infantry are attacking an entrenched american infantry battalion. As a result, the germans lose only 28 men.
Well thats normal, to have the "overrun" casualties numbers you need launch a well coordinated and planned assault and use a few time to do it.
In PZC the ABC of "victory by kill" is based in:
1-penetrate
2-isolate
3-disrupt
4-assault
If you want that the defender battalion be destroyed you need attack from 2 different points, with a previous movement to cut-off enemy retreat route and searching disrupt the defenders.
In the situation you describe i do this:
1-find how i can isolate the defenders.
2-before move units use arty to try disrupt defenders (you can move to enemy with less chance to be fucked by defensive fire).
3-wait next turn to have an enemy defender isolated+low ammo and with a little luck disrupted.
With this you destroy complete battalion in 3 assaults or less but after first assault the defenders become a 0 combat value unit that best thing can do is pray to somebody open a route to escape.
I imagine the USA unit was a B or C quality unit, germand B or C.. well, notice this, if you isolated the defender they lose 1 quality level C-D.
If in the defender turn they shot in next turn they lose another quality level because they become low ammo status, D-E.
And if you disrupt defenders they lose another level E-F and defend at 50% of their strenght.
Even could be worst for defender if acumulate enough fatigue, could be F-no morale.
Frontal assaults with no preparation even when you can mass 1000 soldiers VS 300 not allways are a success, the chance to suffer a defeat is high more if terrain helps defender.
If you dont have time and need the defenders position ASAP because they defend points... try only disrupt defenders and give them a scape route because when are assaulted they escape and you take the hex.
EDIT: in FWW series is a rule used in Prusia14 title that is going to be ported at least to France40, this rule says that if an assaulted unit lacks a retreat hexafter be defeated in an assault is totally destroyed in the assault.
(08-08-2018, 11:09 PM)Xaver Wrote: [ -> ]Well thats normal, to have the "overrun" casualties numbers you need launch a well coordinated and planned assault and use a few time to do it.
In PZC the ABC of "victory by kill" is based in:
1-penetrate
2-isolate
3-disrupt
4-assault
If you want that the defender battalion be destroyed you need attack from 2 different points, with a previous movement to cut-off enemy retreat route and searching disrupt the defenders.
In the situation you describe i do this:
1-find how i can isolate the defenders.
2-before move units use arty to try disrupt defenders (you can move to enemy with less chance to be fucked by defensive fire).
3-wait next turn to have an enemy defender isolated+low ammo and with a little luck disrupted.
With this you destroy complete battalion in 3 assaults or less but after first assault the defenders become a 0 combat value unit that best thing can do is pray to somebody open a route to escape.
I imagine the USA unit was a B or C quality unit, germand B or C.. well, notice this, if you isolated the defender they lose 1 quality level C-D.
If in the defender turn they shot in next turn they lose another quality level because they become low ammo status, D-E.
And if you disrupt defenders they lose another level E-F and defend at 50% of their strenght.
Even could be worst for defender if acumulate enough fatigue, could be F-no morale.
Frontal assaults with no preparation even when you can mass 1000 soldiers VS 300 not allways are a success, the chance to suffer a defeat is high more if terrain helps defender.
If you dont have time and need the defenders position ASAP because they defend points... try only disrupt defenders and give them a scape route because when are assaulted they escape and you take the hex.
EDIT: in FWW series is a rule used in Prusia14 title that is going to be ported at least to France40, this rule says that if an assaulted unit lacks a retreat hexafter be defeated in an assault is totally destroyed in the assault.
No, i mean when a lot of people, say 500 vs 1500 men are fighting the amount of men lost should be higher than in game now, i don't know exactly how much, but definetely not 30 or 40 vs 10-15.
2 hrs of tactical battle can easily exhaust both defender and attacker units.
Stalingrad is a good example of it
The battle isn't enough bloody thus you can't win be shattering the enemy once and then only pursuing him like it was in real life. You need to fight him constantly and if you can't encircle enemy formations then it's becoming WW I like war, which is definetely not realistic.
Shoud i mention that infantry has a limited ability to run from tanks in field?
Maybe i am wrong, but retreat losses are not considered in game.
Well, WWII was not napoleonic period where you can lose a lot of soldiers in a very limited range of time and space... PzC is operational and at this level you need time to acumulate enough casualties.
Apart this what do attacker and what do defender impact a lot in casualties area... for example, i play a scen from Kharkov43 as german and as soviet VS AI in 15 turns:
As soviet: 811 soldiers 38 guns and 6 vehicles for soviets VS 660 soldiers 9 vehicles for germans
As german: 668 soldiers, 15 vehicles 1 plane lfor germans VS 3.199 soldiers 95 guns, 36 vehicles 1 plane for soviets
Same PzC title other scen VS AI playing as german, in 6 turns with agresive attacks searching isolate and destroy.
Soviets: 415 soldiers
Germans: 1.954 soldiers 31 guns
In Tunisia43 as german VS AI i manage to survive 16 turns with allies totally over me in numbers (3x times infantry and 10 times more tanks) but i burn half of my force to win a minor victory.
1.282 germans + 14 guns + 35 vehicles + 1 plane
1.334 allies + 5 guns + 11 vehicles
I remember to have battles where in 2 turns i kill around 800-900 enemies in early rat-traps that could represent 5-10% of enemy forces... sometimes retreat and save troops is better than stand and finished in a bag with a red ribbon, easy points for enemy.
One thing to have in mind is that the core of casualties come after the first part of battle, you usually needs work a lot to put enemy in the situation where or lose soldiers or lose battle... or simple is cornered and destroyed while you use the spearhead to push forobjetives.
In PzC win is a mix of kill and objetives and not allways kill is the way to victory.
Other point is the heavy impact of terrain... in east titles you can create easier pockets because obstacles are less than in west titles... is not the same attack in the steppes VS bocage (a true inferno attack and counterattack).
Not sure what your expectations are Dimas - units were rarely crushed in 2 hours. Even the Rumanians, in Stalingrad, held out for a few days before their units along the Don, on the left flank of 6th Army, surrendered/were destroyed. Not 2 hours. Disruption, as in real fighting, is the key to penetration, not destroying the enemy to the last man. Once the hole opens, then things get moving, and that occurs when disruptions happen and assaults occur.
From many years experience with games, and there are plenty of threads where most agree, the attacker crushes the defender too easily overall - the games lean in favor of the attacker already, boost losses and campaigns would be over in a day or two instead of weeks.
And it isn't like the days of muskets where the sides lined up and fired at each other. You may have 600 men defending but not all will have shots and not all will hit anyone - most won't.
Rick
Even in musket and pike period the number of casualties come after one of the sides breaks and winner take prisoners... a shoot duel VS lines of soldier using musket were a lot less deadly as you can expect... even in ACW period or Franco-Prussian war with infantry weapons very capable (they only lack MGs) casualties needed time to increase their numbers.
One thing that is true PzC not cover very well is the heavy urban fight, Stalingrad or Budapest combats, because you need assault to clear terrain BUT the defensive bonus are so high that soft defenders is very very very hard, imagine a city, offers a 30-40% defensive bonus, if you have a trench 30-40%+40% leaving a poor 20% attack power, this is for me the thing PzC and PzB needs improve with a feature that made you can stack units from diferent sides in a build area to fight an infiltration combat that made faster defender degradation with attacker paying a higger price (MC serie even when has more urban terrain offer a lot stronger units for fire duels) .
In general when a big battle in PzC is over casualties usually are big if both sides fight to win.
One thing to have in consideration to is that in PzC "soldiers" represent only combatants, pure front soldiers, not are covered drivers, office guys... etc etc, even more, the strenght of arty-vehicle units are showed in guns-vehicles, think that an unit of 36 guns could represent 700 or more men, lose a gun means lose crew+the guys that move the gun using a vehicle or horses, apart the ammunition part that needs many guys to keep guns feeded, if you add that non pure combat soldiers into the casualties you can double the numbers relative easy.
I recommend you search PzC AARs and see the casualties when a battle is over
See this
http://thesharpendgaming.blogspot.com/20...ssing.html
Practically in 2 days cross a river killing 1/5 of defenders for 1/10 of casualties BUT this is more tactical scen, in a bigger scen (campaign) game enter in the 2nd phase of combat that is search and destroy the survivors using mech units to cut enemy retreat and block them until arrive infantry and clear pockets.
Ricky B is correct when talk about how easy is crush a broken enemy... in PzC when an unit is disrupted is really fucked if try scape enemy, infantry or gun units are food for the attacker that can bag them very easy... in FWW serie they made disrupted units lose less action points when are disrupted and work fine, i think this is going to be ported to PzC to to give defender the chance to try create a 2nd line or at least try save a few troops more... think that in PzC oposite to real life a destroyed units NEVER revive (except HQ units) and a disbanded unit cant add the survivors to the army pool.
A classic penetration in 2 points searching create a pocket is deadly for defender if cant escape fast, you can simple blow up a front vaporizing the units trapped between your penetration.
I do understand Dimas' question:
When 2 full strength German Bn's fire on a unit in the open for full MP (3 shots) it can easily cost 140+ casualties; but when an assault happens involving those 2 full Bn's attacking a Soviet regiment, it often costs less than 20 men for the attacker in a successful attack, even though they are exposing themselves attacking a defender. It FEELS off.
Even weirder, in an unsuccessful assault, losses are often not much higher.
That being said, PzC is by far the best operational wargame series I have ever played (WITE being the best strategic one), so I take that strange feeling for granted.
Dimas, what I think we should be considering what is being simulated is the following:
- An assault does not happen in a vacuum; all the artillery and machinegun fire happens as part of the sequence. Especially also the defensive fire: A soviet unit assaulting a German position can take horrific casualties from defensive fire before the assault resolves; this simulates the approach before contesting the firing positions.
- Soldiers are not retarded; if your point platoon gets ripped apart during an assault, the rest of the unit may hesitate and wait for further fire support; conversely, if a defending platoon notices their sister platoon being overrun by a preponderance of fire and men; will they stand and fight, and die, or will they withdraw a few 100 meters to get into a better firing position?
In this game, we need to see all the firing that happens as part of the assaults; lead and explosives do the killing; the assaults just simulate the decision that the attacking and defending forces have to make about the tenability of their respective positions.
(08-10-2018, 05:15 AM)The KrijnMinister Wrote: [ -> ]- An assault does not happen in a vacuum; all the artillery and machinegun fire happens as part of the sequence. Especially also the defensive fire: A soviet unit assaulting a German position can take horrific casualties from defensive fire before the assault resolves; this simulates the approach before contesting the firing positions.
In this game, we need to see all the firing that happens as part of the assaults; lead and explosives do the killing; the assaults just simulate the decision that the attacking and defending forces have to make about the tenability of their respective positions.
Gent:
Actually assault is a unique combat / movement action that is separate from artillery and supporting automatic weapons fire. It simulates unit(s) physically moving, firing, and assaulting into an adjacent enemy held hex. Good players will often use artillery and supporting weapons fire prior to assaulting an enemy position to get disruptions that subsequently will improve the chances of a successful assault. However, not all assaults are supported by artillery or other separate direct firing weapons.