Blitzkrieg or attrition?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Blitzkrieg or attrition?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Advanced Tactics Series >> Blitzkrieg or attrition?

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Blitzkrieg or attrition? - 4/27/2011 3:56:29 PM

henri51
Matrix Elite Guard

Posts: 1151
Joined: 1/16/2009
Status: offline

In my present game (see "Random take 2" AAR)I find that whatver force I use to attack, the enemy ALWAYS has at least one element of the defeated unit left. For example, typically I hit a strong enemy unit with artillery, then soften it up some more with with air power, then attack with odds of 10:1 or more with a concentric attack. The enemy unit retreats and all its elements are destroyed except for a single infantry

. As a result, instead of breaking through the line, I have to waste a strong unit's movement to hit the unit again.

This happens EVERY time, which means that it is utterly impossible to carry out overruns, and that ALL battles are WWI-style battles of attrition.

How realistic is it for a unit that has lost over 95% of its strength to retreat one hex and to force an oncoming enemy 100 times its strength to stop after one hex to fight instead of advancing its full 5-hex movement ability?

There are two ways to fix this: 1) have a probability for a defeated enemy unit to be annihilated when the odds are more than 5:1; 2) have attacks with odds greater than 10:1 not use any action points.

This would allow battles that are closer to WW2-style battles where maneuver played a more important role.

Henri

< Message edited by henri51 -- 4/27/2011 3:58:08 PM >

Post #: 1

RE: Blitzkrieg or attrition? - 4/27/2011 4:15:48 PM

ernieschwitz
Matrix Legion of Merit

Posts: 3893
Joined: 9/15/2009
From: Denmark
Status: offline

I guess that part of the solution would be to have units that you did not use in the attack that could exploit that hole created by the unit fleeing... It´s more of a change the way you play it fix, than an actual programmable fix.

(in reply to henri51)

Post #: 2

RE: Blitzkrieg or attrition? - 4/27/2011 4:59:18 PM

Tac2i
Matrix Elite Guard

Posts: 2001
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: WV USA
Status: offline

+1 ernieschwitz. Adapt and overcome: tactics, tactics, tactics. I usually have an armored car unit in reserve to smash any remnants left after the initial battle. If the situation allows, I'll have an full strength armored unit in reserve to exploit the hole in the enemy's line.

_____________________________

Tac2i (formerly webizen)

(in reply to ernieschwitz)

Post #: 3

RE: Blitzkrieg or attrition? - 4/27/2011 5:14:53 PM

GrumpyMel
Matrix Hero

Posts: 864
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Webizen

+1 ernieschwitz. Adapt and overcome: tactics, tactics, tactics. I usually have an armored car unit in reserve to smash any remnants left after the initial battle. If the situation allows, I'll have an full strength armored unit in reserve to exploit the hole in the enemy's line.

That's exactly the case, in many scenerio's the optimal strategy is to have your infantry units conduct the initial attack to punch the hole and use your armor & mobile units to exploit it.

(in reply to Tac2i)

Post #: 4

RE: Blitzkrieg or attrition? - 4/28/2011 1:01:53 AM

henri51
Matrix Elite Guard

Posts: 1151
Joined: 1/16/2009
Status: offline

Thanks for the lesson, but I am well versed in Blitzkrieg tactics, and my argument is that tactics such as you describe are not effective against a reasonably strong enemy (and given the advantages given the AI in random games, there is no such thing as a "weak" enemy - in my AAR when the British launched their initial offensive against me, they had 3 cities to my 20).

That is all very well, but consider a continuous line of enemy units. You have to clear 3 units wide to make a breakthrough without enemy zones of control. Let us say you have 3 groups of aircraft and 2 artillery in the area, which is about the most you can expect in a large scenario with a lot of units.

First you hit the central enemy unit with artillery and air power, then you make a concentric attack with 2 or 3 adjacent infantry units with mortars, infantry cannons, etc. The best result you can get is that only one infantry will be left in the enemy unit, and it backs up one hex. You have at most only one unit of the 3 infantry units you had facing the 3 enemy units with any movement points left, however you can advance one of the victorious infantry units one hex into the hole, using up all its movement points. Then you use your other artillery to hit one of the enemy units on the side of the hole, and you have no more artillery left there. You hit it again with your second air force, leaving you with one air force. You hit the side unit with 2 units, pushing it back one hex, and advance one of the victors one hex.

You now have 4 of the five units adjacent to the three original enemy units that have run out of moves. You use your last plane to hit the enemy unit on the other side of the hole, and then hit it with 2 nearby infantry, if you are lucky this unit retreats one hex, and one of your victorious units moves into the hole. You now have used all your frontline moves available, all your air power, and all your artillery, to push back 3 enemy units one hex.

No problemo you say, so now you bring in your second line of attackers (yes you had a second line -good luck - what part of the front did you leave undefended to get this second line?) Anyway let us suppose that you do have a second line. So you send one second-line unit forward into the hole, and if you are not in a forest hex, the attacker still has enough power to attack one of the retreated enemy units. But hey, all enemy units are not weak enough to have only one infantry left after the battle - some will have a couple of infantry and maybe 1 artillery, and so on. Anyway you win the battle and the enemy unit will either be destroyed or back up one more hex. If the latter happens you have gained 2 hexes at the cost of attacking with ovewhelming odds, using all of your air power, and all nearby artillery.

But let us say you are lucky (very lucky...) and ALL of your second-line attacks destroy all 3 enemy units leaving a big hole. The problem is that none of the 8-10 units that have participated in the offensive have any moves left to exploit the hole, and any other units that want to go through the hole would have to travel at least 5 hexes before breaking out.

So the result is that at best you have a hole that cannot be exploited, and in fact what you have gained is to locally push the enemy back by 2 hexes. On the AI move the hole will be stabilized, and the AI will possibly exploit the weaknesses that you left elsewhere to obtain such an overwhelming local superiority.

I have carried out attacks like this many times, and NEVER have obtained what I have described as the "best" result where all 3 enemy units were destroyed. In most case, no units are destroyed or maybe one, and I gain one or two hexes.

So I hold that it is NOT a matter of tactics, but a matter of the unrealistic factor that enemy units that have lost over 95% of their strength are stlll able to block advancing units with 100:1 odds, even if their combat power is 0.

And oh yes, this is against the AI; against a human, you will have zero chance of realizing the above unless your opponent is highly incompetent.For example, having a stronger unit every 3 hexes in a line, given the above, can ensure that no breakthrough will ever work.So welcome to World War one.

Henri

< Message edited by henri51 -- 4/28/2011 1:07:13 AM >

(in reply to GrumpyMel)

Post #: 5

RE: Blitzkrieg or attrition? - 4/28/2011 3:05:08 AM

Tac2i
Matrix Elite Guard

Posts: 2001
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: WV USA
Status: offline

Game against 4 AI, about three years into war: my latest breakthrough.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Tac2i (formerly webizen)

(in reply to henri51)

Post #: 6

RE: Blitzkrieg or attrition? - 4/28/2011 3:29:53 AM

Tac2i
Matrix Elite Guard

Posts: 2001
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: WV USA
Status: offline

Beginning of my next turn: enemy trying to reform his line. Notice how he counter-attacked my lead unit.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Webizen -- 4/28/2011 3:32:43 AM >

_____________________________

Tac2i (formerly webizen)

(in reply to Tac2i)

Post #: 7

RE: Blitzkrieg or attrition? - 4/28/2011 4:00:40 AM

kendollem
Matrix Recruit

Posts: 13
Joined: 8/4/2008
Status: offline

I do agree the game could use some kind of overran mechanic in regards to a unit wasting Ap attacking units with only a couple infantry or so with overwelming power cause that can get annoying

But even so i dont have issues forming pockets or busting threw a line .. Just doesnt happen as much as id like cause of the small survirors slowing me down ..

(in reply to henri51)

Post #: 8

RE: Blitzkrieg or attrition? - 4/28/2011 6:09:58 AM

lion_of_judah
Matrix Elite Guard

Posts: 2113
Joined: 1/8/2007
Status: offline

should one hold off bringing frontline units back up to strength after the battle and let them fight with what they have left if you do not have any reserve units behind the line, or bring those units up to strength giving them a better chance of holding the line again.

(in reply to kendollem)

Post #: 9

RE: Blitzkrieg or attrition? - 4/28/2011 6:57:25 AM

Rosseau
Matrix Legion of Merit

Posts: 2757
Joined: 9/13/2009
Status: offline

Not bringing them back up to strength feels like an exploit to me, which strengthens Henri's arguement. I'm sure there is a middle ground, and it might be an overrun mechanic in a patch, I hope.

(in reply to lion_of_judah)

Post #: 10

RE: Blitzkrieg or attrition? - 4/28/2011 7:20:48 AM

Arditi
Matrix Hero

Posts: 681
Joined: 6/24/2005
Status: offline

Evening Gents,

This game engine does not need an overrun mechanic. Please play the game some more and figure it out how to exploit through lines. The mechanics are seamless in my mind and no change is needed.
In Friendly Exchange, Arditi

_____________________________

Semper Fi
www.ironlegions.weebly.com
author of: Italy At War: Uniforms, Weapons,
Equipment and Ephemera

Released!
Japan At War: Uniforms, Weapons,
Equipment and Ephemera

(in reply to Rosseau)

Post #: 11

RE: Blitzkrieg or attrition? - 4/28/2011 9:26:11 AM

Vic
Moderator

Posts: 8262
Joined: 5/17/2004
Status: offline

And remember that "defense" is the stronger form! but that it can be broken by using combined arms and concentration of your mobile forces on specific points.
I am aware that is harder to be a succesfull panzer general under the new rules, but its defenitley still possible, especially out in the open...

_____________________________

Visit www.vrdesigns.net for the latest news, polls, screenshots and blogs on Shadow Empire, Decisive Campaigns and Advanced Tactics

(in reply to Arditi)

Post #: 12

RE: Blitzkrieg or attrition? - 4/28/2011 12:45:59 PM

henri51
Matrix Elite Guard

Posts: 1151
Joined: 1/16/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Webizen

Beginning of my next turn: enemy trying to reform his line. Notice how he counter-attacked my lead unit.

I have a similar position to yours, but it took me 5-10 moves to achieve it (and mine is in the largely forested terrain). How many moves after the continuous line situation did your situation occur? Also I note that your flank units are much more powerful than the enemy. From the picture I would estimate that your forces in the area are at least 5 times more powerful than the enemy. If this is indeed the case, and the image represents the situation 5 moves or more after the continuous line situation, it only reinforces my argument that it is practically impossible to gain more than 1 or 2 hexes per turn no matter how much strength is available.

And I am not saying that the situation I describe (single-element remnants blocking advance) should never occur- I am only saying that it should not happen ALL the time.

Henri

(in reply to Tac2i)

Post #: 13

RE: Blitzkrieg or attrition? - 4/28/2011 1:42:53 PM

Barthheart
Matrix Legion of Merit

Posts: 3194
Joined: 7/20/2004
From: Nepean, Ontario
Status: offline

henri51,

The next time you have a battle that ends with one sft holding you up, could you take a screen shot of teh battle results and post it? Also take a screen shot of the view after you hit the "Switch view" button. Similar to what I've shown here.

It might help us understand your problem better.... and see if there is a game problem or not.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty & well preserved body,
but rather to skid in broadside, totally worn out & proclaiming "WOW, what a ride!"

(in reply to henri51)

Post #: 14

RE: Blitzkrieg or attrition? - 4/28/2011 3:21:53 PM

Tac2i
Matrix Elite Guard

Posts: 2001
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: WV USA
Status: offline

First of all, each game different (standard random or 1 Town Start, map, AI war state vs you, etc).

In my 1 Town Start 4 AI game my capital is on a land hex next to the ocean. I drove inland as rapidly as possible to grab up cities with my people group. I also sent out a couple of cargo ships with infantry. Almost right away two AI declare war on me (Nippon and Peoples Republic). I soon run into the [French] Republic who is at peace with me but who has reached and occupied a city with my people group. I declare war on the Republic and soon capture the city of my people group from them. The Republic puts up a tough fight but I breakthrough and eventually isolate a large pocket around his capital. He fights hard but my noose tightens turn by turn until the Republic capital falls. Three years in they are totally defeated with no cities left.

Early in the war with the Republic my forces encounter Nippon forces. A long bitter struggle develops as I devote a large share of production to the war with the Republic. After the Republic's back is broken, I reallocate more production to the war with Nippon who by this time has a powerful army arrayed against me. The battle seesaws for a while but gradually I get the upper hand and commence a drive towards Nippon capital. Nippon mounts a very strong defense but is suffering heavy casualties. By the time I capture the Nippon capital his forces are nearly spent and my breakthrough occurs. Nippon doesn't have the resources to cut off my breakthrough and his back is nearly broken.

The cargo ship I built early on landed on a nearby continent and quickly captured a couple of cities not of my people group. Soon after I encounter Peoples Republic forces there. They push me back to a single city on the coast which I later abandon by disbanding all units there to recover some PPs. I didn't have the resources to try and maintain my position with two wars going on elsewhere.

The fourth AI, The Empire, has remained at peace with me thru three years (36 turns) for which I'm thankful. The People's Republic, which is at war with me, does not have border with me from which to attack and is involved in a War with The Empire.

At this time I've built a navy in order to control the seas around the People's Republic and have established an outpost on a peninsular on People's Republic land. I've also reinforced my border with the Empire just in case they declare war on me. My plan post Nippon's defeat is to attack People's Republic. I'll maintain peace with The Empire for the time being. Due to all the resources I've captured from the Republic, my supply of oil and raw materials is quite large thus allowing me to field large armored forces. I'm also beginning to build strategic bombers.

Oh how I like this game!!!

quote:

ORIGINAL: henri51

I have a similar position to yours, but it took me 5-10 moves to achieve it (and mine is in the largely forested terrain). How many moves after the continuous line situation did your situation occur? Also I note that your flank units are much more powerful than the enemy. From the picture I would estimate that your forces in the area are at least 5 times more powerful than the enemy. If this is indeed the case, and the image represents the situation 5 moves or more after the continuous line situation, it only reinforces my argument that it is practically impossible to gain more than 1 or 2 hexes per turn no matter how much strength is available.

And I am not saying that the situation I describe (single-element remnants blocking advance) should never occur- I am only saying that it should not happen ALL the time.

Henri

< Message edited by Webizen -- 4/28/2011 10:15:00 PM >

_____________________________

Tac2i (formerly webizen)

(in reply to henri51)

Post #: 15

RE: Blitzkrieg or attrition? - 4/28/2011 4:01:12 PM

GrumpyMel
Matrix Hero

Posts: 864
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: offline

Henri,

It sounds to me that in general you are not massing enough forces to achieve a breakthrough. If you are not attacking with better then 2:1 in the local area, then you are going to have a tough time pulling it off.... especialy with the new rules. I generaly have alot more units in the front line when going for a breakthrough style attack then you describe. Typicaly my front line infantry units would be at least triple stacked....and usualy some of the front line armor/mobile units should be stacked in the same hex with them so they get the best jump off they can to exploit the hole.

From my perspective, the real problem you are describing doesn't have to do with the lack of an over-run mechanic, but the inability to mass sufficient forces to make it happen.

Note that also scenerio's are going to vary according to design as well. In the ones I have, I'm not sure whether I'll use the new lesser concentric attack bonuses or not, yet.

(in reply to Tac2i)

Post #: 16

RE: Blitzkrieg or attrition? - 4/29/2011 12:07:06 AM

henri51
Matrix Elite Guard

Posts: 1151
Joined: 1/16/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: GrumpyMel

Henri,

It sounds to me that in general you are not massing enough forces to achieve a breakthrough. If you are not attacking with better then 2:1 in the local area, then you are going to have a tough time pulling it off.... especialy with the new rules. I generaly have alot more units in the front line when going for a breakthrough style attack then you describe. Typicaly my front line infantry units would be at least triple stacked....and usualy some of the front line armor/mobile units should be stacked in the same hex with them so they get the best jump off they can to exploit the hole.

From my perspective, the real problem you are describing doesn't have to do with the lack of an over-run mechanic, but the inability to mass sufficient forces to make it happen.

Note that also scenerio's are going to vary according to design as well. In the ones I have, I'm not sure whether I'll use the new lesser concentric attack bonuses or not, yet.

That could be, but I never attack with odds lower than 3:1 and usually 5:1 because of the attrition, and there may be other reasons. One is that the game I am playing was started before I applied the first patch, so I don't know whether that can have an effect or not. Another is that almost all my battles in that game were fought in rough or forested terrain. When I broke out in the open today, none of the battles had a single element left in the retreating unit; there could be a factor of luck (before or after), so I will wait bit more before I mke a final judgment.

Henri

< Message edited by henri51 -- 4/29/2011 12:08:47 AM >

(in reply to GrumpyMel)

Post #: 17

RE: Blitzkrieg or attrition? - 4/29/2011 6:25:08 AM

lion_of_judah
Matrix Elite Guard

Posts: 2113
Joined: 1/8/2007
Status: offline

I know morale plays a role as well. I use the book " how to make war" by Jim Dunnigan to get troop qualities. I just cannot see thirdworld armies having morales of 50 and higher. example a Namibian army unit troop quality is a "10" while A South African army unit before the change in Government has a troop quality of 68. I just find this more realistic than morale levels of 50 for certain units. That is also the same book that I used for the Indochina scenario for the morale qualities.

< Message edited by lion_of_judah -- 4/29/2011 6:45:21 AM >

(in reply to henri51)

Post #: 18

RE: Blitzkrieg or attrition? - 4/29/2011 2:04:26 PM

henri51
Matrix Elite Guard

Posts: 1151
Joined: 1/16/2009
Status: offline

There is also some ambiguity having to do with the 'power' numbers on the units, which is what I usually use to evaluate the odds. For example, if I bomb a 100-pt unit down to 20 and then attack it with a 100-pt unit, I figure I have 5:1 odds. But if you look at the actual number of elements involved, the number might be closer to 1:1 or 2:1. So the question is how good an estimation of odds are these numbes?

I have found that when I use those numbers, the 'classical' 3:1 requirements to overcome a defense is not sufficient, and attacking with 3:1 odds based on those numbers will often lead to taking more casualties than the defender. I usually try to get odds of 5:1 or better.

One could probably get a better understanding of how this works by reading the manual oncombat procedures, which I have not done...

Henri

(in reply to lion_of_judah)

Post #: 19

RE: Blitzkrieg or attrition? - 4/29/2011 6:05:54 PM

GrumpyMel
Matrix Hero

Posts: 864
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: henri51

There is also some ambiguity having to do with the 'power' numbers on the units, which is what I usually use to evaluate the odds. For example, if I bomb a 100-pt unit down to 20 and then attack it with a 100-pt unit, I figure I have 5:1 odds. But if you look at the actual number of elements involved, the number might be closer to 1:1 or 2:1. So the question is how good an estimation of odds are these numbes?

I have found that when I use those numbers, the 'classical' 3:1 requirements to overcome a defense is not sufficient, and attacking with 3:1 odds based on those numbers will often lead to taking more casualties than the defender. I usually try to get odds of 5:1 or better.

One could probably get a better understanding of how this works by reading the manual oncombat procedures, which I have not done...

Henri

In classic AT, I never really used powerpoints as a judge....I find it really easy to get thrown off that way. Even if a large enemy unit has really low readiness (hence low PP listed) just the shear number of bodies present will soak up some of the attacks... to the point where you might not even have had an opportunity to fire on all of them.

Yeah, you'll probably have a great kill ratio on them, but that doesn't mean you'll wipe them all out... you may not even be able to get them to retreat if there are enough of them to avoid getting shot at much...you may end up with a stand-off just because of that.

I found reading Vic's detailed explanation of how combat actualy gets resolved by the engine really helpfull in that regards (You can find it on his wiki...not sure of the exact URL). Anyways, there are so many things PP's don't take into account, I don't find them very usefull for determining how a battle might go. Better to look at the details of the enemy unit and the SFT's that make it up and try to guesstimate from there. YMMV.

(in reply to henri51)

Post #: 20