Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Ground attack vs Ground support

 
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] >> World in Flames >> Ground attack vs Ground support Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Ground attack vs Ground support - 5/8/2015 12:36:38 AM   
bo

 

Posts: 4176
Joined: 5/1/2009
Status: offline 		Posing a question more for my own benefit than for game players

I realize the importance of ground attacks because if you disorganize a unit that is either out of supply or will be soon, then they are only defending with a 1 value unless they are elite units. But for some strange reason I rarely disorganize a unit with my die rolls, and then I have lost that air unit for awhile but if I use ground support I am always entitled to its combat factor.

This what makes this game so intriguing, the what ifs. If you can help me, what are your experiences, which do you prefer? Does where you are in the turn have a factor in this decision. I really abhor losing a plane factor if my ground attack fails, oh well.

Bo

Post #: 1
RE: Ground attack vs Ground support - 5/8/2015 1:12:48 AM   
Sewerlobster


Posts: 330
Joined: 5/7/2007
From: Reading, Pa. USA
Status: offline 		I'm with you wholeheartedly, I almost never make ground attacks unless it's a surprise turn. The payoff vs odds is just too low.

_____________________________

Why choose the lesser evil: Vote Cthulhu.

(in reply to bo)
Post #: 2
RE: Ground attack vs Ground support - 5/8/2015 1:20:36 AM   
Ur_Vile_WEdge

 

Posts: 585
Joined: 6/28/2005
Status: offline
Generally, you don't want to order a groundstrike on a lone unit, about the only time I'd do so is when the guy is sitting on an island and out of supply, and I need to take it. Groundstrikes are either for surprise rounds, or when enemies are stacked 2 high.


Remember, if the hostiles are stacked 2 corps to the hex, then you'll need much more in the way of Ground Support to get the next odds shift, at the same time the ground strike is more effective since you get a chance to shoot at everyone in the hex at the same time.

And when you want to crack a hex, don't be afraid to "waste" some ground strike capacity. When I make my breakthrough in the France line, or I'm aiming at something big in Barbarossa, I'll usually try to hit the critical hex with my 2 biggest stukas, which give you a 75% chance to hit each of them if you use 5 strength guys. Concentration of force is usually how you win the land wars; it's not so much how many factors you have, it's how many factors you can bring to bear on the hex you're attacking.


(in reply to Sewerlobster)
Post #: 3
RE: Ground attack vs Ground support - 5/8/2015 1:37:08 AM   
bo

 

Posts: 4176
Joined: 5/1/2009
Status: offline 		Very good comments, appreciate it, keep them coming, experiences etc.

Bo

(in reply to bo)
Post #: 4
RE: Ground attack vs Ground support - 5/8/2015 2:14:04 AM   
paulderynck


Posts: 8201
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline 		If you intend to attack the unit, look at the ground support factor versus the unit's defense factor. An over-simplified example: Suppose the unit defends with 5 and your plane attacks with 5. In 2D10 in the attack, you are guaranteed a +2. If you ground strike, you have a 50% chance of a +2 and a 50% chance of nada. Should be an easy decision.

Of course the more units that are in the hex, the better the ground strike chances are.

On the other hand, a black print OoS unit should almost always be ground struck.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to bo)
Post #: 5
RE: Ground attack vs Ground support - 5/8/2015 4:08:51 AM   
composer99


Posts: 2923
Joined: 6/6/2005
From: Ottawa, Canada
Status: offline 		You really have to take it case by case and see what the possibilities are, but the four rules of thumb, I would say, are:

(1) If ground support gets you an odds shift (for 1d10 combat) or a guaranteed +1-+2 die roll modifier (for 2d10), then use ground support.

(2) Otherwise you are probably better off trying ground strikes, as success gets you big modifiers (+1 on the 1d10 die roll is big, and so is +2 on 2d10, and of course massively reducing out of supply defenders' combat factors is awesome).

(3) Key hexes (cities, beefy blitz hexes, Gibraltar) should be ground struck and get ground support to maximize your chances.

(4) Ground strike any HQ you can.

< Message edited by composer99 -- 5/8/2015 5:07:23 AM >

_____________________________

~ Composer99

(in reply to paulderynck)
Post #: 6
RE: Ground attack vs Ground support - 5/8/2015 12:05:31 PM   
alexvand


Posts: 380
Joined: 11/29/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline 		Or groundstrike units beside the ones you are going to attack. That way after your successful attack they cannot move and can be put out of supply which equals easy death.

This is what I'm always trying to do on the Eastern front when on the offensive. If you can imobilize units to be cut off out of supply later in a turn you get easy kills.

I actually prefer ground strikes to air support at least early in the turn.

Ground strikes on the defensive can also be devastating. A lucky russian ground strike on a key stack of armour can delay or even halt an entire offensive. What's more the threat of a ground strike on a key stack can draw off enemy fighters which can let you ground support get through later in the turn.

All these wonderful decisions make WiF awesome!

(in reply to composer99)
Post #: 7
RE: Ground attack vs Ground support - 5/8/2015 2:17:53 PM   
Jagdtiger14


Posts: 1686
Joined: 1/22/2008
From: Miami Beach
Status: offline 		Mostly I prefer ground strikes...especially when playing with fractionals. Everything alex says above expresses my opinion on this as well.

_____________________________

Conflict with the unexpected: two qualities are indispensable; first, an intellect which, even in the midst of this obscurity, is not without some traces of inner light which lead to the truth; second, the courage to follow this faint light. KvC

(in reply to alexvand)
Post #: 8
RE: Ground attack vs Ground support - 5/8/2015 5:53:43 PM   
Centuur


Posts: 8802
Joined: 6/3/2011
From: Hoorn (NED).
Status: offline 		Keep in mind that a ground strike can be used as a "probe". If it succeeds, you attack the hex this impulse. If not, you don't attack.

This can be usefull to determine whether or not you can advance this impulse. Especially when breaking strong defensive lines, this can be usefull, since you move your units after the ground strike...

By the way: I don't agree with the stated fact that you don't ground strike a land unit which is on his own. It all depends on the situation. If that unit has a lot of combat factors, why not ground strike it and kill it in an attack? A hex containing only one enemy unit can be taken more easily than a hex with multiple defenders...


_____________________________

Peter

(in reply to Jagdtiger14)
Post #: 9
RE: Ground attack vs Ground support - 5/8/2015 7:54:52 PM   
Mayhemizer_slith


Posts: 7654
Joined: 9/7/2011
From: Finland
Status: offline 		Combinatorics was my favorite part in math. I want to give few examples about different situations. In these cases units are in supply and I'm using 2d10:

1) Factor 4 bomber, attack vs 3 units total def value of 16.

Ground strike:
To flip 3 units: 6,4% -> +5
To flip 2 units: 28,8% -> avg +3,333
To flip 1 unit: 43,2% -> avg +1,667
To flip 0 units: 21,6% -> +0
AVG TOTAL (0,064x5+0,288x3,333+0,432x3,333+0,216x0)= +2

Ground support: +0,5


2) Factor 5 bomber, attack vs 2 units (corps) total def value of 10.

Ground strike:
To flip 2 units: 25% -> +4
To flip 1 unit: 50% -> +2
To flip 0 units: 25% -> +0
AVG TOTAL +2

Ground support: +1


3) 2 x factor 2 bombers, attacking Yamamoto alone and most likely he is using Defending HQ support (def value 8, HQ value 4).

Ground strike:
To flip: 36% -> +2 and negating HQ support = +4
To fail: 64% -> +0
AVG TOTAL +1,44

Ground support: +1


In many cases it a question about taking risk of failing ground strike or going with safe ground support.

Hopefully calculations are correct

< Message edited by Mayhemizer -- 5/9/2015 6:00:10 AM >

(in reply to Centuur)
Post #: 10
RE: Ground attack vs Ground support - 5/8/2015 10:12:11 PM   
bo

 

Posts: 4176
Joined: 5/1/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mayhemizer

Combinatorics was my favorite part in math. I want to give few examples about different situations. In these cases units are in supply and I'm using 2d10:

1) Factor 4 bomber, attack vs 3 units total def value of 16.

Ground strike:
To flip 3 units: 6,4% -> +5
To flip 2 units: 28,8% -> avg +3,333
To flip 1 unit: 43,2% -> avg +1,667
To flip 0 units: 21,6% -> +0
AVG TOTAL (0,064x5+0,288x3,333+0,432x3,333+0,216x0)= +2

Ground support: +0,5


2) Factor 5 bomber, attack vs 2 units (corps) total def value of 10.

Ground strike:
To flip 2 units: 25% -> +4
To flip 1 unit: 50% -> +2
To flip 0 units: 25% -> +0
AVG TOTAL +2

Ground support: +1


3) 2 x factor 2 bombers, attacking Yamamoto alone and most likely he is using Defending HQ support (def value 8, HQ value 4).

Ground strike:
To flip: 36% -> +2 and negating HQ support = +4
To fail: 64% -> +0
AVG TOTAL +1,44

Ground support: +1


In many cases it a question about taking risk of failing ground strike or going with safe ground support.

Hopefully calculations are correct



I hate statistics Really, thank you for that report Mayhemizer

Bo

< Message edited by bo -- 5/8/2015 11:10:45 PM >

(in reply to Mayhemizer_slith)
Post #: 11
RE: Ground attack vs Ground support - 5/8/2015 11:26:53 PM   
Jagdtiger14


Posts: 1686
Joined: 1/22/2008
From: Miami Beach
Status: offline 		Very good Mayhemizer! I love statistics!

Risk taking vs safe bet: If you are a reasonable risk taker combined with knowledge of statistics, you should do well in WiF!

_____________________________

Conflict with the unexpected: two qualities are indispensable; first, an intellect which, even in the midst of this obscurity, is not without some traces of inner light which lead to the truth; second, the courage to follow this faint light. KvC

(in reply to bo)
Post #: 12
RE: Ground attack vs Ground support - 5/9/2015 1:58:29 AM   
juntoalmar


Posts: 601
Joined: 9/29/2013
From: Valencia
Status: offline 		Fantastic analysis Mayhemizer!

Yes, I think the key is to maximize your gain. A 20% chances of getting a great result, may be better than a 100% chances of slightly improving your chances of success.

I am not being very successfully myself on Barbarossa scenario, but I try to ground strike often, specially in first impulses. You can ground strike units in second line, that you expect to surround and leave out of supply.



_____________________________

(my humble blog about wargames, in spanish) http://cabezadepuente.blogspot.com.es/

(in reply to Jagdtiger14)
Post #: 13
RE: Ground attack vs Ground support - 5/9/2015 4:44:48 PM   
brian brian

 

Posts: 3191
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline 		The most overlooked decision option in the game is an Air Impulse...

(in reply to juntoalmar)
Post #: 14
RE: Ground attack vs Ground support - 5/9/2015 9:55:33 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian

The most overlooked decision option in the game is an Air Impulse...

Which lets a player reorganize his air units at half the cost of reorganization points, then use them again in a later impulse in the turn.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to brian brian)
Post #: 15
RE: Ground attack vs Ground support - 5/10/2015 9:02:10 AM   
juntoalmar


Posts: 601
Joined: 9/29/2013
From: Valencia
Status: offline 		Oh, actually I had never considered this before... it may be a particularly good idea on a storm/blizzard impulse when there's not much to do on land anyway.

_____________________________

(my humble blog about wargames, in spanish) http://cabezadepuente.blogspot.com.es/

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 16
RE: Ground attack vs Ground support - 5/10/2015 9:48:54 AM   
AlbertN

 

Posts: 3693
Joined: 10/5/2010
From: Italy
Status: offline 		In late game too there are many, many planes and Air Impulse allows for quite some rebases and to rail air squadrons upfront.

When Germany is deep into Russia, that is sort of your only way to get your short range fighters to get there in a decent amount of time.
On that "Air" note I suggest though to use the variable reorg values, otherwise Strat Bombers are way too cheap to reorganize with 1-2 HQs (If they cost 1 each) and they can really cripple Axis economy.

(in reply to juntoalmar)
Post #: 17
RE: Ground attack vs Ground support - 5/10/2015 1:47:14 PM   
brian brian

 

Posts: 3191
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline 		An Air Impulse plus an Offensive Chit is a powerful thing for a rich Major Power, and not just for Strategic Bombing. On the Air Impulse, your entire Air Force pounds the enemy front line. Then, all of your HQs reorganize aircraft. On your next impulse (summer time in Europe is best for this), an O-Chit re-orgs all of your HQs. Now your Air Force flies again, and your tanks move out...

(in reply to AlbertN)
Post #: 18
RE: Ground attack vs Ground support - 5/10/2015 4:31:04 PM   
bo

 

Posts: 4176
Joined: 5/1/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian

An Air Impulse plus an Offensive Chit is a powerful thing for a rich Major Power, and not just for Strategic Bombing. On the Air Impulse, your entire Air Force pounds the enemy front line. Then, all of your HQs reorganize aircraft. On your next impulse (summer time in Europe is best for this), an O-Chit re-orgs all of your HQs. Now your Air Force flies again, and your tanks move out...


Gives me goosebumps brian

Bo

(in reply to brian brian)
Post #: 19
RE: Ground attack vs Ground support - 5/10/2015 4:32:38 PM   
bo

 

Posts: 4176
Joined: 5/1/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets


quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian

The most overlooked decision option in the game is an Air Impulse...

Which lets a player reorganize his air units at half the cost of reorganization points, then use them again in a later impulse in the turn.


Good idea rarely or maybe never used an air impulse, will have to try that one out.

Bo

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 20
RE: Ground attack vs Ground support - 5/11/2015 10:42:30 AM   
Orm


Posts: 22154
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian

An Air Impulse plus an Offensive Chit is a powerful thing for a rich Major Power, and not just for Strategic Bombing. On the Air Impulse, your entire Air Force pounds the enemy front line. Then, all of your HQs reorganize aircraft. On your next impulse (summer time in Europe is best for this), an O-Chit re-orgs all of your HQs. Now your Air Force flies again, and your tanks move out...

Or you strike their second line and their HQs. Now they have limited mobility and reorganization capability. Your aircraft is ready to strike their front line, next impulse, where you want to break through.

_____________________________

Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb -- they're often students, for heaven's sake. - Terry Pratchett

(in reply to brian brian)
Post #: 21
RE: Ground attack vs Ground support - 5/11/2015 3:12:47 PM   
bo

 

Posts: 4176
Joined: 5/1/2009
Status: offline 		Yesterday I decided to start using ground strikes in Barbarossa fast start and was pleasantly surprised by the results. On the Germans opening move I used AIR in the selection box. I did 4 ground attacks on hexes with at least 2 units in them on the northern front. In three of the hexes both units were disorganized and in the 4th hex one of the two units were disorganized, I used all available German air power to do this.

Now of course I had no movement of German armored or infantry allowed by doing that. I also did what another poster suggested and use my HQ's to reorganize all air units which only needed a 1 to be reorganized just for a test. The Russian land move was very limited but only in the North.

On the German 2nd move, 3rd impulse of the first turn the German units cut off all supply of two of the 4 Russian units which were easily disposed of in the land attack, on the German 3rd move 5th impulse of the first turn I cut off supply to the 2 remaining Russian units and disposed of them easily. On the re-airbase phase I sent 4 air units to the central and southern armies.

The weather was clear for 11 phases of the first turn so everything worked very well because of some luck involved. At the start of the second turn the Germans were in excellent shape to continue the attack in the north, decent shape with the central command and soso with the southern command near Odessa.

Even though that attack worked to perfection with luck there were some negatives. The Hq's were disorganized after the first German impulse because they reorganized the German air units, this meant they could not keep up with the German armored and infantry units in the north nor could the German units stray to far away from their supply bases which was not good as there was very little opposition in front of these units.

My conclusion is that I am not sure if I would do this again, I had good results from the ground attacks and good weather, next time might not be so good, HQ's reorganizing the air units right away might had been better in the south as compared to the northern front. It was just a test but I did not like having my HQ's disorganized so early in the first phase of the first turn. Any comments?

Bo


(in reply to bo)
Post #: 22
RE: Ground attack vs Ground support - 5/11/2015 4:26:32 PM   
Jagdtiger14


Posts: 1686
Joined: 1/22/2008
From: Miami Beach
Status: offline 		bo: If in preparing for Barbarossa, Germany had built a third O-chit, then you could use your second one to re-org your HQ's and still have an O-chit in reserve.

Don't count on a human USSR opponent keeping those types of stacks in range of German air pre-Barbarossa.

< Message edited by Jagdtiger14 -- 5/11/2015 5:27:58 PM >

_____________________________

Conflict with the unexpected: two qualities are indispensable; first, an intellect which, even in the midst of this obscurity, is not without some traces of inner light which lead to the truth; second, the courage to follow this faint light. KvC

(in reply to bo)
Post #: 23
RE: Ground attack vs Ground support - 5/11/2015 7:18:59 PM   
bo

 

Posts: 4176
Joined: 5/1/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14

bo: If in preparing for Barbarossa, Germany had built a third O-chit, then you could use your second one to re-org your HQ's and still have an O-chit in reserve.

Don't count on a human USSR opponent keeping those types of stacks in range of German air pre-Barbarossa.


Thank you Jadg, no I would not count on that, I was just trying different tactics with air power in Barbarossa fast start.

Also I rarely played or tested Barbarossa, I just worked on Guadalcanal and Fascist Tide, and truthfully I just noticed the "O" chit in fast start thanks to you and have not used it as of yet, almost all of the time if I play Barbarossa I use the new game setup I made up a long time ago. I know, I am not the brightest lamp on the street

Bo

< Message edited by bo -- 5/11/2015 8:58:00 PM >

(in reply to Jagdtiger14)
Post #: 24
RE: Ground attack vs Ground support - 5/11/2015 7:41:25 PM   
Orm


Posts: 22154
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline
quote:

I was just trying different tactics with air power in Barbarossa fast start.

Why not try it and only use one HQ to reorganize the air units? Then you have two German HQs available to advance so that the German forces can exploit the Soviet rear areas. Focus the bombers and HQs on one front.

_____________________________

Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb -- they're often students, for heaven's sake. - Terry Pratchett

(in reply to bo)
Post #: 25
RE: Ground attack vs Ground support - 5/11/2015 7:56:58 PM   
bo

 

Posts: 4176
Joined: 5/1/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm

quote:

I was just trying different tactics with air power in Barbarossa fast start.

Why not try it and only use one HQ to reorganize the air units? Then you have two German HQs available to advance so that the German forces can exploit the Soviet rear areas. Focus the bombers and HQs on one front.



That is what Terry Pratchett would do Orm, or a good player like you but not the Bo, why would I not do that, because it would make sense to do it that way I am going to start using the "O" chit Jadg made me aware of.

Bo



< Message edited by bo -- 5/11/2015 9:21:19 PM >

(in reply to Orm)
Post #: 26
RE: Ground attack vs Ground support - 5/11/2015 11:57:19 PM   
paulderynck


Posts: 8201
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline 		Not using the O-chit in Barb is like lessening the scenario length by a full turn. It's no wonder you were having so much trouble as the Germans.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to bo)
Post #: 27
RE: Ground attack vs Ground support - 5/12/2015 12:57:39 AM   
bo

 

Posts: 4176
Joined: 5/1/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

Not using the O-chit in Barb is like lessening the scenario length by a full turn. It's no wonder you were having so much trouble as the Germans.


Oh nice now you tell me Never saw it paul, no excuses.

Bo

(in reply to paulderynck)
Post #: 28
RE: Ground attack vs Ground support - 5/12/2015 1:20:11 AM   
Orm


Posts: 22154
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline 		Do not forget to use the Soviet offence to make some spectacular counter attack.

_____________________________

Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb -- they're often students, for heaven's sake. - Terry Pratchett

(in reply to bo)
Post #: 29
RE: Ground attack vs Ground support - 5/12/2015 11:34:03 PM   
bo

 

Posts: 4176
Joined: 5/1/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm

Do not forget to use the Soviet offence to make some spectacular counter attack.


Ahem Orm I am always the Germans and I do not need a spectacular counter attack
from a dumb old Russian player. Meaning me

Bo

(in reply to Orm)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> Ground attack vs Ground support Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.691