Tanks losses due to "accident"

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Tanks losses due to "accident" - why?

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] >> Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa >> Tanks losses due to "accident" - why?

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Tanks losses due to "accident" - why? - 7/16/2018 8:20:31 PM

brian.here@yahoo.com

Posts: 12
Joined: 6/28/2012
From: Von Manstein
Status: offline

Most of my German tanks are lost because during battle they retreat and then they have what is called an "accident." I have lost hardly any as "killed." I still win the battles (it is still June). Does anyone know why so many tanks are lost due to this retreat then accident action?
Should I adjust the retreat percentage? It looks like my panzers will be widdled away to nothing due to accidents.

Thank you!

< Message edited by brian.here@yahoo.com -- 7/17/2018 12:50:50 AM >

_____________________________

Von Manstein

Post #: 1

RE: Tanks losses due to "accident" - why? - 7/16/2018 10:08:32 PM

lancer

Posts: 2963
Joined: 10/18/2005
Status: offline

Hi brain,

Tanks accumulate mileage and suffer mechanical breakdowns (p.195 of the manual under 'Wear and Tear').

This is separate, however, to 'accidents' which are a feature of the combat resolution system.

Vic will have to answer this one as it's part of the underlying game engine. Whether they occur randomly or there are contributing factors I'm not sure.

I'd exercise a degree of patience as he's busy with his new game (Shadow Empires - Scifi) and only occasionally drops by the forums.

Cheers,
Cameron (Designer)

< Message edited by lancer -- 7/16/2018 11:44:00 PM >

(in reply to brian.here@yahoo.com)

Post #: 2

RE: Tanks losses due to "accident" - why? - 7/17/2018 7:55:43 AM

Vic

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

Hi,

If a tank is in involved in combat there is a small chance it will be taken out of action due to other reasons than regular exchange of fire.

Combat is a nasty business, especially for the rather sensitive heavy tracked equipment as tanks. During combat tanks are often traversing much more difficult terrain than the roads they use during regular movement. A tank could drive over a mine, slide into a ditch, suffer a mechanical breakdown, get caught up in a local counteroffensive while it has run out of fuel or ammo causing the crew to abandon the tank.

Furthermore it models freak enemy successes in taking out tanks or panicking their crews by unconventional means (i.e circumstances where armour thickness and range play no role because enemy is literally on top of tank or disabled the tracks).

It is an amalgam rule that models all those diverse kind of reasons that tanks might get lost during combat engagement.

Gameplay wise this rule serves to make you use your panzers as a precision tool and not as a hammer. If you use your 'surgical' knife as a hammer repeatedly it will slowly go blunt. Furthermore it avoids unrealistic invincibility where every single tank can just kill multiple dozensfold of other tanks or a thousandfold of infantry.

There is a chance on an accident every time a tank 'individual' scores a serious hit (KILL or RETREAT) on an enemy target.

Hope this clears things up a bit on this rule.

Best wishes,
Vic

< Message edited by Vic -- 7/17/2018 8:01:49 AM >

_____________________________

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

(in reply to lancer)

Post #: 3

RE: Tanks losses due to "accident" - why? - 7/17/2018 11:24:01 AM

brian.here@yahoo.com

Posts: 12
Joined: 6/28/2012
From: Von Manstein
Status: offline

Thank you Cameron and thank you Vic. I appreciate you getting back with me so quickly especially while you work on Shadow Empires (Vic).

The feedback makes sense. I like Vic how you describe why it is happening ("Combat is a nasty business...") as it helps with immersion into the game. Oh, and what a game and what immersion you guys have created!

I can't thank you enough for creating such a wonderful game. I also, thoroughly enjoy the reams of statistics that are tracked each turn. I am a numbers guy so it really helps.

BTW - is there a tab in the statistic report that tracks the fuel allocated from the interior each turn (besides the logistics report each turn)? I know it does for each Army Group, but I was wondering if I could see something like:
6.22 25,000 bbls
6.26 22,000 bbls
6.30 19,800 bbls

_____________________________

Von Manstein

(in reply to Vic)

Post #: 4

RE: Tanks losses due to "accident" - why? - 7/18/2018 7:14:58 PM

Khanti

Posts: 317
Joined: 8/28/2007
From: Poland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Vic

Hi,

If a tank is in involved in combat there is a small chance it will be taken out of action due to other reasons than regular exchange of fire.

(...)

There is a chance on an accident every time a tank 'individual' scores a serious hit (KILL or RETREAT) on an enemy target.

Hope this clears things up a bit on this rule.

Best wishes,
Vic

This chance is not small. In fact from my observations chance is exactly 50%.

Well, it's not a problem of this game, it is in ALL Vic's games

You can look at the editor. Go to SFTypes. Check SFT Statistics 2. Look for line ChanceOnDeathIfMakeHit.

For all infantry based units it says 0% and none of them ever will be accidentally removed from play.
For all armor based units it says .05%.

But it's not 5%. It's de facto 50%.
To have it like 5% you need to edit every armor SFT to .005%.

I did it for my own copy of Vic's games and that works fine.

The other subject is mechanical breakdown of units (not in combat). For that part you have field maintenance for one turn (being idle).

(in reply to Vic)

Post #: 5

RE: Tanks losses due to "accident" - why? - 7/19/2018 6:50:09 AM

ernieschwitz

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

quote:

Well, it's not a problem of this game, it is in ALL Vic's games

No it's not. Advanced Tactics Gold does not have this problem ;)

(in reply to Khanti)

Post #: 6

RE: Tanks losses due to "accident" - why? - 7/19/2018 6:16:57 PM

Khanti

Posts: 317
Joined: 8/28/2007
From: Poland
Status: offline

Strange thing but you're right. This feature was added after ATG. Thanks for pointing this out.

(in reply to ernieschwitz)

Post #: 7

RE: Tanks losses due to "accident" - why? - 8/8/2018 11:29:53 PM

mikematotski

Posts: 12
Joined: 7/30/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Khanti

quote:

ORIGINAL: Vic

Hi,

If a tank is in involved in combat there is a small chance it will be taken out of action due to other reasons than regular exchange of fire.

(...)

There is a chance on an accident every time a tank 'individual' scores a serious hit (KILL or RETREAT) on an enemy target.

Hope this clears things up a bit on this rule.

Best wishes,
Vic

This chance is not small. In fact from my observations chance is exactly 50%.

Well, it's not a problem of this game, it is in ALL Vic's games

You can look at the editor. Go to SFTypes. Check SFT Statistics 2. Look for line ChanceOnDeathIfMakeHit.

For all infantry based units it says 0% and none of them ever will be accidentally removed from play.
For all armor based units it says .05%.

But it's not 5%. It's de facto 50%.
To have it like 5% you need to edit every armor SFT to .005%.

I did it for my own copy of Vic's games and that works fine.

The other subject is mechanical breakdown of units (not in combat). For that part you have field maintenance for one turn (being idle).

Hi

Im new to this game and read through some of this posts. I can see that a subject is up here about breking down tanks, is this figures accident every time a tank 'individual' scores a serious hit (KILL or RETREAT) on an enemy target = 50% correct.
I cant find where to look at the this figure you mentioned in your posts, can you explain how to change ChanceOnDeathIfMakeHit.

Thanks in advance.

Cheers
Mikematotski

(in reply to Khanti)

Post #: 8

RE: Tanks losses due to "accident" - why? - 8/30/2018 9:11:29 PM

mikematotski

Posts: 12
Joined: 7/30/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Khanti

quote:

ORIGINAL: Vic

Hi,

If a tank is in involved in combat there is a small chance it will be taken out of action due to other reasons than regular exchange of fire.

(...)

There is a chance on an accident every time a tank 'individual' scores a serious hit (KILL or RETREAT) on an enemy target.

Hope this clears things up a bit on this rule.

Best wishes,
Vic

This chance is not small. In fact from my observations chance is exactly 50%.

Well, it's not a problem of this game, it is in ALL Vic's games

You can look at the editor. Go to SFTypes. Check SFT Statistics 2. Look for line ChanceOnDeathIfMakeHit.

For all infantry based units it says 0% and none of them ever will be accidentally removed from play.
For all armor based units it says .05%.

But it's not 5%. It's de facto 50%.
To have it like 5% you need to edit every armor SFT to .005%.

I did it for my own copy of Vic's games and that works fine.

The other subject is mechanical breakdown of units (not in combat). For that part you have field maintenance for one turn (being idle).

Hi guys

Anone know how to change the parameter ChanceOnDeathIfMakeHit? I tried to find it but no luck.
Thanks in advance.

Cheers

Mike

(in reply to Khanti)

Post #: 9

RE: Tanks losses due to "accident" - why? - 9/28/2018 2:33:43 PM

Khanti

Posts: 317
Joined: 8/28/2007
From: Poland
Status: offline

First: do you have Editor enabled in game?
Second: when you start scenario you can: start game, edit or simple editor.

Use EDIT.

Then go to the top, click SFT (editor of troops), go to right STF Types table.
There is number 7 Light Tank. It does not matter what is it - its' ARMOR, so it counts.

Click on statistics 2 of that item.

And the rest was written earlier.

(in reply to mikematotski)

Post #: 10

RE: Tanks losses due to "accident" - why? - 9/28/2018 6:26:23 PM

Oberst_Klink

Posts: 4778
Joined: 2/10/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Khanti

First: do you have Editor enabled in game?
Second: when you start scenario you can: start game, edit or simple editor.

Use EDIT.

Then go to the top, click SFT (editor of troops), go to right STF Types table.
There is number 7 Light Tank. It does not matter what is it - its' ARMOR, so it counts.

Click on statistics 2 of that item.

And the rest was written earlier.

I should consider an appropriate 'accident' rate for this tin can I added...

Klink, Oberst

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Oberst_Klink -- 9/28/2018 6:27:38 PM >

_____________________________

My Blog & on Twitter.
Visit CS Legion on Twitter & Facebook for updates.

(in reply to Khanti)

Post #: 11

RE: Tanks losses due to "accident" - why? - 9/28/2018 6:37:54 PM

Khanti

Posts: 317
Joined: 8/28/2007
From: Poland
Status: offline

AFAIK the whole game uses the same accident rate. The problem is it is miscalculated (too high to be real thing).
You can consider lowering all tables.

5% is .005% in Vic's games.

(in reply to Oberst_Klink)

Post #: 12

RE: Tanks losses due to "accident" - why? - 9/28/2018 6:43:41 PM

Oberst_Klink

Posts: 4778
Joined: 2/10/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Khanti

AFAIK the whole game uses the same accident rate. The problem is it is miscalculated (too high to be real thing).
You can consider lowering all tables.

5% is .005% in Vic's games.

Dziekuje! I am still experimenting and adding some minor-Axis tanks for tests. I am glad I found some open-source graphics... I am too lazy (not skilled) in map making and graphics stuff; but good at tutorials (I think). Glad more people come back to Vic's masterpieces.

Klink, Oberst

_____________________________

My Blog & on Twitter.
Visit CS Legion on Twitter & Facebook for updates.

(in reply to Khanti)

Post #: 13

RE: Tanks losses due to "accident" - why? - 9/28/2018 6:56:48 PM

nikdav

Posts: 895
Joined: 3/9/2008
From: Italy
Status: offline

Perhaps Vic consider all the tanks as "Panthers" and so i think 50% is too optimistic, during 1943 75% of all PzV Panther were lost for accidents

(in reply to Oberst_Klink)

Post #: 14

RE: Tanks losses due to "accident" - why? - 9/28/2018 7:15:47 PM

Oberst_Klink

Posts: 4778
Joined: 2/10/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: nikdav

Perhaps Vic consider all the tanks as "Panthers" and so i think 50% is too optimistic, during 1943 75% of all PzV Panther were lost for accidents

Well... it wasn't that bad. Yes, 'we' threw them into battle (Kursk?) too early. We should consider the 'accident' rate as... 'prone to break down' rate. Anyway. You like my tin can I added? ;)

Klink, Oberst

_____________________________

My Blog & on Twitter.
Visit CS Legion on Twitter & Facebook for updates.

(in reply to nikdav)

Post #: 15

RE: Tanks losses due to "accident" - why? - 10/1/2018 6:30:45 AM

mikematotski

Posts: 12
Joined: 7/30/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Oberst_Klink

quote:

ORIGINAL: Khanti

AFAIK the whole game uses the same accident rate. The problem is it is miscalculated (too high to be real thing).
You can consider lowering all tables.

5% is .005% in Vic's games.

Dziekuje! I am still experimenting and adding some minor-Axis tanks for tests. I am glad I found some open-source graphics... I am too lazy (not skilled) in map making and graphics stuff; but good at tutorials (I think). Glad more people come back to Vic's masterpieces.

Klink, Oberst

Hi
Thanks for you answer. Is it possible to have different rate between the veichles values.
Are the program use the general value or the veichle specific?

Cheers

(in reply to Oberst_Klink)

Post #: 16

RE: Tanks losses due to "accident" - why? - 10/1/2018 2:59:23 PM

Oberst_Klink

Posts: 4778
Joined: 2/10/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline

I am checking this out this afternoon. I also noticed a mistake in the formula table...
Att soft should be: 10+cal./mm)/4+speed(km/h)/2, not 20.

Anyway; I am still playing around with the editor and I hope I can produce a test scenario
where instead of 7.Flieger.Div an Italian Arm.Div will be ready at the Volhov. Naturally,
I'll share the .LIB files and all the other stuff, too.

Klink, Oberst

_____________________________

My Blog & on Twitter.
Visit CS Legion on Twitter & Facebook for updates.

(in reply to mikematotski)

Post #: 17

RE: Tanks losses due to "accident" - why? - 10/7/2018 8:40:49 PM

Khanti

Posts: 317
Joined: 8/28/2007
From: Poland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mikematotski

Hi
Thanks for you answer. Is it possible to have different rate between the veichles values.
Are the program use the general value or the veichle specific?

Cheers

It uses item specific stats. So you can adjust any value for all SFTs. So yes every tank can have different accident rate.
Anyway *I* hate when programm kills my tanks of no reason so I tend to use flat 5% for all (.005%).

(in reply to mikematotski)

Post #: 18

RE: Tanks losses due to "accident" - why? - 10/7/2018 8:43:13 PM

Khanti

Posts: 317
Joined: 8/28/2007
From: Poland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Oberst_Klink
You like my tin can I added? ;)

Yes. Very handsome.
Gute Arbeit.

< Message edited by Khanti -- 10/7/2018 8:45:09 PM >

(in reply to Oberst_Klink)

Post #: 19

RE: Tanks losses due to "accident" - why? - 10/8/2018 7:11:54 AM

mikematotski

Posts: 12
Joined: 7/30/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Khanti

quote:

ORIGINAL: mikematotski

Hi
Thanks for you answer. Is it possible to have different rate between the veichles values.
Are the program use the general value or the veichle specific?

Cheers

It uses item specific stats. So you can adjust any value for all SFTs. So yes every tank can have different accident rate.
Anyway *I* hate when programm kills my tanks of no reason so I tend to use flat 5% for all (.005%).

Hi

Thanks for the answer.

I think the soviet armor as a armor weapon was tactical used a little different than the germans. The Soviet was not so keen that the armors survived a battle and they trusted to get new armored vehicles produced and therefore handled armor units different than German armored units. For the germans they were very keen to have the armor vheicles survived and to be used to fight another day due to there limited production capacity. So for the soviet maybe the factor 50% is correct while its a bit high for germans while for the germans its SFT value should be much lower.

Cheers

< Message edited by mikematotski -- 10/8/2018 7:12:30 AM >

(in reply to Khanti)

Post #: 20

RE: Tanks losses due to "accident" - why? - 10/8/2018 2:49:31 PM

Khanti

Posts: 317
Joined: 8/28/2007
From: Poland
Status: offline

When you look at the tips in the editor it says that 0.05% is 5%, but in fact it's not. So I assume the creator wanted to have slight chance to auto destroying some units in game (in earlier DC series games armored and air units are affected, in Barbarossa only armored, as there is no real planes here).

German tanks replacements are also diminishing, which is contrary to what I believe was in RL. As you look at replacements table you will see that with every replacement wave there is overall less tank replacements (15->10->5->-5->5 / 22->15->15->10->10 / 5->5->5->5->5). So instead of heavy losses diminishing German motorized armies there are supernatural "accidents" and lowered factory output that kills your profits ;-)

And I'm not talking about other things that affect the armored units like combat losses and mechanical breakdowns (based on mileage).

So overall: 50% destroyed tanks WITHOUT enemy fire is something rather weird. These tanks are not broken down (for repairs) but just killed (removed from play).

PS: Suggested Ger tank replacements (as I have done in my copy of std scenario)

PzII 15->15->10->5->5........[+10]
PZIII 22->15->15>15->15....[+10]
PZIV 5->5->10->10->10.......[+15]

< Message edited by Khanti -- 10/8/2018 3:25:47 PM >

(in reply to mikematotski)

Post #: 21

RE: Tanks losses due to "accident" - why? - 10/8/2018 4:00:28 PM

Oberst_Klink

Posts: 4778
Joined: 2/10/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline

I am still evaluating the combat value table... I will try to get the excel sheet ready this week, incl. auto-calculation for new types one wishes to include in further scenarios. I did notice quite a few discrepancies though... I am sure Cameron will be able to clarify them.

Klink, Oberst

_____________________________

My Blog & on Twitter.
Visit CS Legion on Twitter & Facebook for updates.

(in reply to Khanti)

Post #: 22

RE: Tanks losses due to "accident" - why? - 3/25/2019 4:24:43 PM

Bamilus

Posts: 973
Joined: 4/30/2010
From: The Old Northwest
Status: offline

I understand from posts above that accident losses are set by default to 50%. While I agree that's excessive (since the tanks are just removed permanently), I'm wondering if anyone cam confirm that lowering the value won't significantly impact game balance over course of entire game. I'd hate to start a game, make these setting changes, and then find out it imbalances game because game is supposed to be balanced around a 50% accident rate. Can anyone who has played a full campaign add some clarity?

_____________________________

Paradox Interactive Forum Refugee

(in reply to Oberst_Klink)

Post #: 23

RE: Tanks losses due to "accident" - why? - 4/23/2019 2:46:45 PM

Bamilus

Posts: 973
Joined: 4/30/2010
From: The Old Northwest
Status: offline

Welp, played a first game on normal and won sudden death victory without modifying. This leads me to believe that editing the value would make the game incredibly easy.

_____________________________

Paradox Interactive Forum Refugee

(in reply to Bamilus)

Post #: 24