Strange Combat Results...

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Strange Combat Results...

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

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific >> Strange Combat Results...

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Strange Combat Results... - 7/21/2002 3:15:13 AM

motaman

Posts: 31
Joined: 7/17/2002
Status: offline

Since I've only had this game a day (all patched), I'm not sure if this is a common thing for the game as it's my first ground battle. But here's the scenario:

I began landing my troops on Tiligara (or something like that) while doing all the prep attacks. When I felt confident enough I set the Marines on delibrate attack. The results were;
Attacking Force: 10006 men, 138 guns, 38 vehicles.
Defending Force: 3461 men, 6 guns
Assault odds 6 to 1 (Fort Level 1)
Jap Losses: 1869 men, 7 guns
Allied Losses: 2 men lost.

After nearly breaking my arm patting myself on the back, I allowed myself a break from fantasy-land long enough to realize something isnt right. Even without taking into account the fierce fighting the Japs were known for, this result would supprise even the Germans if they were to have even one battle in Poland with the same win/loss ratio. Doesnt this seem a little too one sided?

Now I know there are a few scenarios where results like this are acceptable (surrender, etc.) But as this is my first scenario, and as the Japs had the opposite reputation, I'm unsure if this is a combat system flaw or just a lucky break.

PS) I'd like to invite anyone else with strange combat results to use this post.

Post #: 1

Re: Strange Combat Results... - 7/21/2002 4:04:58 AM

Black Cat

Posts: 615
Joined: 7/4/2002
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by motaman
[B]Since I've only had this game a day (all patched), I'm not sure if this is a common thing for the game as it's my first ground battle. But here's the scenario:

I began landing my troops on Tiligara (or something like that) while doing all the prep attacks. When I felt confident enough I set the Marines on delibrate attack. The results were;
Attacking Force: 10006 men, 138 guns, 38 vehicles.
Defending Force: 3461 men, 6 guns
Assault odds 6 to 1 (Fort Level 1)
Jap Losses: 1869 men, 7 guns
Allied Losses: 2 men lost.

After nearly breaking my arm patting myself on the back, I allowed myself a break from fantasy-land long enough to realize something isnt right. Even without taking into account the fierce fighting the Japs were known for, this result would supprise even the Germans if they were to have even one battle in Poland with the same win/loss ratio. Doesnt this seem a little too one sided?

Now I know there are a few scenarios where results like this are acceptable (surrender, etc.) But as this is my first scenario, and as the Japs had the opposite reputation, I'm unsure if this is a combat system flaw or just a lucky break.

PS) I'd like to invite anyone else with strange combat results to use this post. [/B][/QUOTE]

Unusual, Not necessary "Strange" if the enemy is isolated/low supply to none, morale is 0, high fatigue, poor commander, then only a few fight, consider the rest to have committed Hari Kari ;)

The land combat model is somewhat abstracted anyway. :cool:

(in reply to motaman)

Post #: 2

- 7/21/2002 4:21:58 AM

XPav

Posts: 550
Joined: 7/10/2002
From: Northern California
Status: offline

Maybe they ran away and decided to swim to Truk.

(in reply to motaman)

Post #: 3

- 7/21/2002 4:47:16 AM

motaman

Posts: 31
Joined: 7/17/2002
Status: offline

lol, I guess that would explain a strange reporting from my screening TFs' commander. Apon searching for survivors from a sunk transport, the crews found only crates containing nothing but nose plugs and swimming fins.
The thought of that being ordered and/or seeing it take place would be quite amusing.

And..
Good points Black Cat, all those factors were the case. I guess they just didnt have any fight in them. Plus, during my buildup for the invasion, 3 groups of B17's were dropping bombs every possible turn, having 100+ men destroyed per mission. I'm sure that didnt help their resolve in defending that island.

(in reply to motaman)

Post #: 4

- 7/21/2002 4:50:56 AM

strollen

Posts: 159
Joined: 5/18/2002
Status: offline

First I think the one side nature of combat is a bit screwy.

That being said the good news is with Fog of War (FOW) on the actual results are a lot different than reported. If the combat reports say XYZ unit destroyed than actual casualities are pretty much as reported. In most cases though the casualities reports is made almost entirely of squads that have been disabled. Disable squad fight as 2nd line infantry (i.e. lousy). Disabled squads can eventually be revived by either transporting them back to a Malaria free zone, or even puting them in a large base (like Rabaul or Port Morseby) with their HQs.

However, disable units without a base and low on supply will eventually killed by the jungle. Malaria, Dengue fever, Dysentary, and numerous other tropical disease helped out by malnutrition, oppressive heat and humidity, salt water crocs, poison snakes, head hunters etc will kill troops more effectively than bullets and bombs.

Secondly a lot of the casualities represent support forces or engineers/labors. The labors were often Koreans and were unarmed and perfectly willing to give up.

Historically the fight for Tulagi was actually very bloody with the Raider and Parachute battalions of the 1st Marine division suffering 30% casualities and the Japanese SNLF force being wiped out to the last man. However, on Guadacanal the Japs
only had a handful of actual fighting man and the rest were a construction support. So the 2 men to 1,000 (disabled) result is about right for the initial attack.

(in reply to motaman)

Post #: 5

- 7/22/2002 5:19:49 AM

Drongo

Posts: 2205
Joined: 7/12/2002
From: Melb. Oztralia
Status: offline

Good to see you made it Motaman:)

"Historical" combat results aren't always the way in this game. Rather than being tied down in bloody battles against fanatical troops who don't know when their situation is hopeless, in my opinion (thats IMO for short) UV rewards those who apply the correct combination of preparation, firepower and numbers. If you get a strong enough attack against a weakened enemy, its all over. No stubborn, drawn out last stands here. Its a fairly logical outcome that you will appreciate more when you come to grips with the sheer scale of the game but I think WWII marines must wonder what they did wrong!

You'll be a grog in no time;)

PS, will keep my eyes open for any posts from you on surface combat. Enjoy.

_____________________________

Have no fear,
drink more beer.

(in reply to motaman)

Post #: 6

- 7/23/2002 7:02:50 AM

motaman

Posts: 31
Joined: 7/17/2002
Status: offline

Thanks Drongo.

(in reply to motaman)

Post #: 7