Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: ShaggyHiK

With the artillery fix, this is how it should be. Direct losses from attacks have slightly decreased. In addition, the NKVD retreated not by 1 hex, but by all 3 hexes, which means that their defensive positions were seriously disrupted. The losses of the German side are everywhere 0 people.

In fact, it just so happened from history that the organization of small groups is easier to maintain in difficult conditions than the organization of large units, which is why I disagree with the view that in one hasty attack you can completely knock out a subdivision to an unusable state. It is also known from history that in some cases, Soviet border guards could well stubbornly defend individual defense units, which made it possible to gain time.
It seems to me that in these screenshots, an order of magnitude more reasonable battles are taking place compared to what was in the early patches. I would like to see how it works in 42, 43, 44 years.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jango32

Regardless of who plays as which side, I believe this is something that affects both Axis and Soviet hasty attacks. That security regiment sitting in clear terrain getting attacked by a not isolated tank division should have had a lot more casualties and perhaps even rout.

The fact that it got away with a mere slap on the wrist at 75/87 TOE with 0 CV against 17000 Soviet CV is not promising for the future of hasty attacks, especially when either side will attempt to pocket units in large scale encirclements and potentially hasty attack units along the way.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Stamb
Turn 2, probably full TOE and supply/ammo/fuel not sure about CPP motorized division (it means higher than average German unit morale) with 14k people attacks 1.6k Soviets in perfect conditions (clear air, ground) which leads to a loss of ~450 and probably few more disrupted/damaged elements and you call this as this is how it should be?
Really?

Probably you are a Soviet player that would like to stop Axis around Novgorod/Smolensk/Kiev/Odessa. Will it be an interesting game for you?
I can understand that you was one of the loudest in a topic "Soviets has no playability now" as it was way to strong, but calling this one an intended situation...

Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC



For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Stamb
I have hard time imagining how non motorized infantry can disengage from motorized corps that has almost 10x amount of units.
With current CPP system where you lose 50% of CPP i would be surprised if 1/3 of motorized division in a hasty attack would not be able to route them.

Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC



For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Stamb

I have hard time imagining how non motorized infantry can disengage from motorized corps that has almost 10x amount of units.
With current CPP system where you lose 50% of CPP i would be surprised if 1/3 of motorized division in a hasty attack would not be able to route them.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Maybe we could actually test out this new update for, say, a few weeks and many turns before giving up on it? Playing a campaign should mean playing it to its full length, not giving up if a few battles don't turn out exactly as we'd like.

From a historical standpoint, yes that battle result is also entirely plausible.

The CVs there in the second battle (which also seems quite plausible) at 0 and 17,000 are something we've seen before when one side goes down to zero. I would take that as a bit of an artifact rather than as especially meaningful. For display purposes, we could likely make it look better, but looking at the forces themselves and the fact that one side clearly made its checks and the other did not, the result seems ok.

Regards,

- Erik

quote:

ORIGINAL: ShaggyHiK

quote:

ORIGINAL: Stamb

I have hard time imagining how non motorized infantry can disengage from motorized corps that has almost 10x amount of units.
With current CPP system where you lose 50% of CPP i would be surprised if 1/3 of motorized division in a hasty attack would not be able to route them.

Apparently you are not completely aware of how to conduct an offensive in real hostilities, because you describe a picture that is painted in a movie, it has little to do with reality.

No serious commander will divide his division into a bunch of small groups for a goal that is not worth the effort, 1,500 people are not equivalent to the capture of Pskov.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Stamb
But in a game you are forced too.
Otherwise you lose 50% CPP to a weak target that is just standing on your way. And without CPP units are pretty weak. This is how game works.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ShaggyHiK

quote:

ORIGINAL: Stamb
But in a game you are forced too.
Otherwise you lose 50% CPP to a weak target that is just standing on your way. And without CPP units are pretty weak. This is how game works.

As far as I know, when the attack comes with an overwhelming advantage of more than 10 to 1, there is little or no CPP spending.

quote:

23.2.2
CPP ’s will be lost at a rate of one per hex as they move using the tactical movement mode.Units that participate in an attack will lose half their CPP once the battle is resolved.If a unit is attacked and forced to retreat it will lose all its CPP. If it is attacked and the attack fails the lost CPP will vary according to the final odds and the intensity of the attack:
if the odds were >=1.5 to 1, then the defender will lose half their CPP
if the final odds were >=1 to 1, the defender will lose one quarter of their CPP
if the final odds were less than 1-1 the defender will lose 10% of their CPP
A SU gains or losses CPP according to the actions of the unit they are attached to. In addition, if a SU is re-attached (either to a different HQ or to or from a Combat Unit) it will lose 50% of its existing CPP.Units sent to the National Reserve will also lose all their retained CPP.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Stamb

I have hard time imagining how non motorized infantry can disengage from motorized corps

quote:

ORIGINAL: Stamb

I have hard time imagining how non motorized infantry can disengage from motorized corps that has almost 10x amount of units.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jango32

To me it would appear that hasty attacks are very much on the low end now in terms of losses and to an extent combat results.

In order to test this, I've gone back to a 4 vs 4 PBEM game's turn 2 and recreated a few battles fought there in the new patch with the same moves done and with the same units.

....


In both situations, this was 36th Motorized's very first combat of the game, with 66 CPP on hand, against an NKVD border guard unit.

quote:

ORIGINAL: GibsonPete
~You obviously are unaware of the 82nd Airborne's Anit Armor defense. The entire division was broken into a multilayered defense box consisting of elements as small as a squad. Serious enough for you.