Combat ratio affects CPP loss (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East 2 >> Feature Suggestions



Message

RedJohn -> Combat ratio affects CPP loss (2/15/2022 3:30:31 PM)

As per Albert's suggestion in one of the AAR, I think it might be good to post it here for visibility. Right now, CPP is halved for any type of attack, on any type of unit (I believe). Take a regular german ID on turn 1 and it's first attack, whether it's on a fortified zone or the beefiest tank division the soviets have, and it'll lose 50% of it's CPP - or 2 turns worth. The ratio could be literally be 327000:0 and the result is the same, half of the unit's CPP is lost.

This makes the soviet strategy obvious - throw hordes of worthless brigades and regiments infront of the enemy to blunt their first CPP attack. It doesn't matter if it's a full panzer division with 250 tanks hitting a 500 men NKVD regiment, either way it's draining half it's CPP.

So a good solution is to modify CPP based on the ratio of combat. If the soviets want to send unready men to the front they can, but it will no longer drain the germans CPP rapidly if they do. I don't know the appropriate ratios for it, but the game already uses ratios to determine combat delay.

This forces the Soviets to be careful with sending unready/weak units to the front, whereas right now there is literally no reason to avoid sending cavalry to do 15 hex deep raids or hold rivers. Either way it's an attack forced against the unit. The Germans can mitigate it somewhat by breaking down into regiments to minimize CPP loss, but it is stupid that CPP (which I believe represents the units readiness for a fight) is drained less by breaking down a unit into regiments and attacking using one of them before reforming it, rather than the full division attacking.

Thoughts?



Jango32 -> RE: Combat ratio affects CPP loss (2/15/2022 4:05:32 PM)

The CPP loss formula when defending could be adapted for attacking.



Stamb -> RE: Combat ratio affects CPP loss (2/15/2022 4:26:45 PM)

+100000

check this AAR:
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=5141454

It is enough to throw bodies, attached to a stavka and suffering enormous penalties for a rolls, in front of an Axis to stop them.

Because units without CPP are worth practically nothing, when attacking



Hardradi -> RE: Combat ratio affects CPP loss (2/15/2022 7:31:43 PM)

+1



exalted -> RE: Combat ratio affects CPP loss (2/15/2022 7:44:53 PM)

Think this is a must for PVP and very much a "nice to have" for single player.



AlbertN -> RE: Combat ratio affects CPP loss (2/16/2022 1:17:29 AM)

I fully endorse it - all along other suggestions I've made.

But definitely a German division would brush away the leftovers of a Soviet regiment / brigade or cavalry division easily.

There is already the fact that delay is accrued no matter what in case of adjacency too.
And other stuff I listed in the AAR linked above.




FriedrichII -> RE: Combat ratio affects CPP loss (2/16/2022 9:57:46 AM)

I think this is very good idea. I like the concept of implementing the CPP into this game, but I think it should be improved that for example a German Division does not lose 50 CP points if it attacks a small border guard force.
The idea to let the loss of CPPs depend on the combat ratio is very good and would improve the game experience very much.



rocketman71 -> RE: Combat ratio affects CPP loss (2/16/2022 12:55:38 PM)

I like the idea. My interpretation of CPP is the ability to carry out a complex planned attack to perfection. Taking care of stragglers shouldn't affect it much at all.



Stamb -> RE: Combat ratio affects CPP loss (2/18/2022 2:09:56 PM)

I think that 100% CPP lose during retreat is also wrong.
For example we have infantry division with 15k men. 70CPP. It has 7-20 attack/defense CV.
If it is participating in a battle and suffer low casualties and retreats - it become something like 2-3 CV in attack, 5 in defense. Why? Because it has 0 CPP. Despite low losses it is almost useless now.
But it was not fighting to the last men. Maybe it lost 500 men and 1000 are disrupted. Should there be an option of tactical retreat with an idea to regroup and counter attack?

Now it is not possible with a units that retreated.

And current CPP implementation benefits only one side. And this is a side which has more units.



Jeff_Ahl -> RE: Combat ratio affects CPP loss (2/21/2022 6:22:37 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: RedJohn

As per Albert's suggestion in one of the AAR, I think it might be good to post it here for visibility. Right now, CPP is halved for any type of attack, on any type of unit (I believe). Take a regular german ID on turn 1 and it's first attack, whether it's on a fortified zone or the beefiest tank division the soviets have, and it'll lose 50% of it's CPP - or 2 turns worth. The ratio could be literally be 327000:0 and the result is the same, half of the unit's CPP is lost.

This makes the soviet strategy obvious - throw hordes of worthless brigades and regiments infront of the enemy to blunt their first CPP attack. It doesn't matter if it's a full panzer division with 250 tanks hitting a 500 men NKVD regiment, either way it's draining half it's CPP.

So a good solution is to modify CPP based on the ratio of combat. If the soviets want to send unready men to the front they can, but it will no longer drain the germans CPP rapidly if they do. I don't know the appropriate ratios for it, but the game already uses ratios to determine combat delay.

This forces the Soviets to be careful with sending unready/weak units to the front, whereas right now there is literally no reason to avoid sending cavalry to do 15 hex deep raids or hold rivers. Either way it's an attack forced against the unit. The Germans can mitigate it somewhat by breaking down into regiments to minimize CPP loss, but it is stupid that CPP (which I believe represents the units readiness for a fight) is drained less by breaking down a unit into regiments and attacking using one of them before reforming it, rather than the full division attacking.

Thoughts?


+1



Gam3r -> RE: Combat ratio affects CPP loss (2/21/2022 8:31:20 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Stamb
retreat with an idea to regroup and counter attack?



There is a reason why you using word 'regroup' after the word 'retreat', and thats because division definitely lose something in retreat that need to be restored via regrouping.



Stamb -> RE: Combat ratio affects CPP loss (2/21/2022 8:53:07 AM)

There are already additional losses when unit is forced to retreat. Why should it have 0 CPP? If it was a retreat and not fight to the last men? I am not saying that units should not lose any CPP, but 100% CPP is too much in my opinion.



Gam3r -> RE: Combat ratio affects CPP loss (2/21/2022 9:18:14 AM)

It's not about losses. retreated unit is just armed mob that can be despersed with ease by riot police.

But i agree. number of CPP lost could be connected with number of hexes unit is forced to fall back.



vilcum -> RE: Combat ratio affects CPP loss (2/21/2022 1:47:54 PM)

I totally agree with the full list of Albert, and specially with the first (variable CCP lost) point

A) CCP loss on attack varies on combat ratio
B) 'Unready' units cannot flip hexes. (This stops raids by 'sacrificable units')
C) Ready Divisions under a specific CV or Personnel count as regiments for Hex Flipping. (Atm it's silly a German Regiment flips only its hex, and a Soviet unready CAV flips through ZoC)
D) Some units (too small, or too weak) do not exert ZoC to hinder enemy movement around them.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.453125