Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Generals getting killed

 
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] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> RE: Generals getting killed Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Generals getting killed - 12/23/2010 11:12:54 PM   
notenome

 

Posts: 608
Joined: 12/28/2009
Status: offline
This could probably be fixed by dividing the chance by rank. By far the most common casualties should be major generals (which oddly Ive never seen die). So if the chance of a general dying is divided by distance from the front, add a second division based on rank (/2 for lt general /4 for gen /8 oberst /16 field marshall) and a multiplier if his hex sees combat. Also it is worth noting that many famous German generals such as Hausser and Rommel almost died (Hausser even lost an eye).

(in reply to elmo3)
Post #: 31
RE: Generals getting killed - 12/24/2010 3:28:00 AM   
randallw

 

Posts: 2057
Joined: 9/2/2010
Status: offline
I'm currently on the 4th turn of the big campaign; two generals killed in combat ( one in charge of the airborne corps of the Northwest Front on turn 1, so he was really close to danger, the other of an infantry corps on turn 3 ).

Also, Pavlov was arrested and executed.  He will be suffering a virtual death many times over, in computers around the globe.

(in reply to notenome)
Post #: 32
RE: Generals getting killed - 12/24/2010 7:54:41 AM   
vinnie71

 

Posts: 964
Joined: 8/27/2008
Status: offline
But let's not get carried away with all this 'leading from the front' image that German propoganda liked us to believe. Leaders like Rommel, Guderian, Hausser etc, actually went to vantage points near the front and not in the front. They normally wanted to be at hand with their Luftwaffe coordinators to manage crucial areas, but other than that, they did not really join into battle - it would have been counterproductive. It seems that only Rommel enjoyed personal combat so much that he went up front (like at the seizure of Tobruk). Divisional commanders may have deployed forward (normally with the advanced portion of their HQ) and therefore they were more susceptible to being caught up in a firefight or bombardment. Earlier in the thread, someone mentioned the number of general killed in action and the numbers are pretty small considering that the Wehrmacht deployed over 300 divisions for several years and there was quite a turnover of generals due to promotions, reassignments etc.

Therefore I believe that the number of deaths for non encircled units should be lessoned a bit since as the Axis at least, it is normal to lose 1 or 2 generals a turn.

(in reply to randallw)
Post #: 33
RE: Generals getting killed - 12/24/2010 12:09:54 PM   
ComradeP

 

Posts: 7192
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: offline
Axis leader casualties:

German: http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=76&t=135564

Other Axis: http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=55&t=145558

Axis losses indeed seem to be too high.

Soviet:






Attachment (1)

_____________________________

SSG tester
WitE Alpha tester
Panzer Corps Beta tester
Unity of Command scenario designer

(in reply to vinnie71)
Post #: 34
RE: Generals getting killed - 12/24/2010 4:06:28 PM   
dwesolick


Posts: 593
Joined: 6/24/2002
From: Colorado
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: amatteucci

So I'm amazed at the leaders loss rates some players get. BTW, I presume that German leaders should have a bonus against ending up being executed, or if they do, they should be based on a random basis (maybe after 20 June 1944) since, IIRC, many were shot for conspiracy and treason but no one because of incompetence on the field.


Yeah, that's right. Hitler dismissed generals left and right (and sometimes brought them back again...and again--like Rundstedt), but didn't execute them until after the July 1944 bomb plot. Stalin, on the other hand, executed MANY officers. Most famously, of course, in the pre-war purges when 25k-35k (depending upon source) were murdered. During the war Red Army generals were routinely shot for incompetence (or for just getting on Stalin's nerves...like that one Red Air Force general who told Stalin--to his face---that he was forcing his men to go in the air in "flying coffins"...big mistake).

Anyway, playing as Germans in GC 41 on turn 16 and I've only lost a couple generals killed (one Rumanian and one Luftwaffe) and had a couple dismissed, so the leader "bug" isn't biting me too badly.

_____________________________

"The Navy has a moth-eaten tradition that the captain who loses his ship is disgraced. What do they have all those ships for, if not to hurl them at the enemy?" --Douglas MacArthur

(in reply to amatteucci)
Post #: 35
RE: Generals getting killed - 12/24/2010 5:35:06 PM   
kuancmdr

 

Posts: 5
Joined: 12/21/2010
Status: offline
If somehow the game continues to kill off the Generals of both sides to excessive levels..

Will the game have enough officers of rank like Colonel and promote them to General or will the game generate generic Generals to cover the losses...?


_____________________________

Kai Kassai

(in reply to dwesolick)
Post #: 36
RE: Generals getting killed - 12/24/2010 5:48:13 PM   
turska

 

Posts: 22
Joined: 7/22/2007
Status: offline
After few less important KIA's like luftwaffe and Rumanians, but now i lost Model. Argh. And he was safely few hex'es behind the front lines.

(in reply to kuancmdr)
Post #: 37
RE: Generals getting killed - 12/24/2010 6:29:43 PM   
Titanwarrior89


Posts: 3283
Joined: 8/28/2003
From: arkansas
Status: offline
I have lost 5 leaders after turn 18(GC). Two were high level leaders....I like the ideal of leaders losses but needs some adjustment but I am glad that its builted into the system.

_____________________________

"Before Guadalcanal the enemy advanced at his pleasure. After Guadalcanal, he retreated at ours".

"Mama, There's Rabbits in the Garden"

(in reply to turska)
Post #: 38
RE: Generals getting killed - 12/25/2010 1:08:46 PM   
turska

 

Posts: 22
Joined: 7/22/2007
Status: offline
Couple more turns and i lost my third army commander. (Previously Von Kluge from 4th army and one Rumanian army commander) This time commander of the 6th army wich was some 10 hexes behind the front line.

(in reply to Titanwarrior89)
Post #: 39
RE: Generals getting killed - 12/25/2010 3:47:22 PM   
Cerion

 

Posts: 101
Joined: 9/16/2009
From: Europe
Status: offline
Humm, I have lost 7 leaders after turn 15 as german. I believe is a level too high.

(in reply to turska)
Post #: 40
RE: Generals getting killed - 12/25/2010 6:22:37 PM   
Dr. Foo


Posts: 666
Joined: 8/31/2004
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline
I got so sick of losing commanders that I editied everyone to 7 Mech 7 Inf so the losses no longer matter.

_____________________________

*Warning: Dr. Foo is not an actual doctor.
Do not accept or follow any medical advice*

(in reply to elmo3)
Post #: 41
RE: Generals getting killed - 12/25/2010 11:13:01 PM   
randallw

 

Posts: 2057
Joined: 9/2/2010
Status: offline
Giving bad news to Stalin was bad for health.

(in reply to Dr. Foo)
Post #: 42
RE: Generals getting killed - 12/26/2010 11:38:21 AM   
elmo3

 

Posts: 5820
Joined: 1/22/2002
Status: offline
I am running a test with a new build and looking at leader deaths.  There have been 21 Axis leaders KIA in 73 turns so that is less than one KIA every three weeks.  The Soviets had 11 KIA and 4 executed.  There used to be an issue with KIAs not getting reported from the enemy part of a turn that might be causing the reported Soviet losses to be too low since many of their leaders would be KIA during Axis attacks and I'm checking on that.

_____________________________

We don't stop playing because we grow old, we grow old because we stop playing. - George Bernard Shaw

WitE alpha/beta tester
Sanctus Reach beta tester
Desert War 1940-42 beta tester

(in reply to randallw)
Post #: 43
RE: Generals getting killed - 12/26/2010 11:44:55 AM   
ComradeP

 

Posts: 7192
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: offline
The problem is that at that rate, the German non-assigned leader pool will be empty by, roughly, late 1944.

_____________________________

SSG tester
WitE Alpha tester
Panzer Corps Beta tester
Unity of Command scenario designer

(in reply to elmo3)
Post #: 44
RE: Generals getting killed - 12/26/2010 12:51:11 PM   
Walloc

 

Posts: 3141
Joined: 10/30/2006
From: Denmark
Status: offline
For the sake of making a comparison with history you'd consider PoW as killed too right?
No difference in engine betwen KIA and PoW right, KIA is all there is, right?

Kind regards,

Rasmus

(in reply to ComradeP)
Post #: 45
RE: Generals getting killed - 12/26/2010 12:52:53 PM   
ComradeP

 

Posts: 7192
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: offline
Any kind of message listed under "fate" means the leader's gone for the rest of the game I believe.

_____________________________

SSG tester
WitE Alpha tester
Panzer Corps Beta tester
Unity of Command scenario designer

(in reply to Walloc)
Post #: 46
RE: Generals getting killed - 12/26/2010 1:48:07 PM   
Titanwarrior89


Posts: 3283
Joined: 8/28/2003
From: arkansas
Status: offline
Yes, but thats close to 4 months of heavy fighting so wouldn't that be about right?
quote:

ORIGINAL: Cerion

Humm, I have lost 7 leaders after turn 15 as german. I believe is a level too high.



_____________________________

"Before Guadalcanal the enemy advanced at his pleasure. After Guadalcanal, he retreated at ours".

"Mama, There's Rabbits in the Garden"

(in reply to Cerion)
Post #: 47
RE: Generals getting killed - 12/26/2010 2:12:31 PM   
elmo3

 

Posts: 5820
Joined: 1/22/2002
Status: offline
The Fate column shows KIA and executed.  There is no POW result so that should be considered KIA.  As ComradeP says, if they are KIA or EXC then they are gone for good.  We're looking into leaders being added to the available pool over time so that might ease the fear of running out of leaders.  I've never seen either side run out of leaders in any of my tests.

_____________________________

We don't stop playing because we grow old, we grow old because we stop playing. - George Bernard Shaw

WitE alpha/beta tester
Sanctus Reach beta tester
Desert War 1940-42 beta tester

(in reply to Titanwarrior89)
Post #: 48
RE: Generals getting killed - 12/26/2010 3:02:14 PM   
abulbulian


Posts: 1047
Joined: 3/31/2005
Status: offline
So this excessive leaders getting killed bug was not fixed in last patch? A little hesitant to start a pbem, knowing I could run out of axis leaders by 44.


(in reply to elmo3)
Post #: 49
RE: Generals getting killed - 12/26/2010 3:57:56 PM   
elmo3

 

Posts: 5820
Joined: 1/22/2002
Status: offline
You should not run out as it looks like more leaders are added over time.  Waiting for the programmers to confirm that.

Edit - confirmed that more leaders are added as they approach their availability date.

< Message edited by elmo3 -- 12/26/2010 4:02:47 PM >


_____________________________

We don't stop playing because we grow old, we grow old because we stop playing. - George Bernard Shaw

WitE alpha/beta tester
Sanctus Reach beta tester
Desert War 1940-42 beta tester

(in reply to abulbulian)
Post #: 50
RE: Generals getting killed - 12/26/2010 8:57:05 PM   
Cerion

 

Posts: 101
Joined: 9/16/2009
From: Europe
Status: offline
quote:

Yes, but thats close to 4 months of heavy fighting so wouldn't that be about right?
quote:

ORIGINAL: Cerion

Humm, I have lost 7 leaders after turn 15 as german. I believe is a level too high.


I have no HQs near the enemy. Besides, they are HQ leaders (Corps, etc), no divisional leaders. The historical number of non-divisional generals (and GFM) fallen in combat, the first year of the campaign in the east was very small. I have in mind, for example, Von Reichenau, and actually died of a heart attack in january 1942.

I think the number of deceased leaders should be increasing over the years (unless they are made stupid next to the front line) from an initial number in 1941, quite low, to highest one in 1945. A multiplier to increase it as time goes on.

I do not mean that I can stay without leaders only that it would be frustrating to get to June 1943 without Manstein and Guderian (and if they fall at this rate could happen at any time if only for pure statistical ).

(in reply to elmo3)
Post #: 51
RE: Generals getting killed - 12/26/2010 9:06:42 PM   
Joel Billings


Posts: 32265
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: offline
Although the leader loss rate is too high, you shouldn't run out of leaders. Also, it's likely this will be adjusted before you get too far into any PBEM game.

_____________________________

All understanding comes after the fact.
-- Soren Kierkegaard

(in reply to Cerion)
Post #: 52
RE: Generals getting killed - 12/27/2010 2:23:27 AM   
Titanwarrior89


Posts: 3283
Joined: 8/28/2003
From: arkansas
Status: offline
Turn 30 GC and only 7 killed. Not to bad I think(Axis). Six german and one minor.

_____________________________

"Before Guadalcanal the enemy advanced at his pleasure. After Guadalcanal, he retreated at ours".

"Mama, There's Rabbits in the Garden"

(in reply to elmo3)
Post #: 53
RE: Generals getting killed - 12/27/2010 7:43:16 AM   
turska

 

Posts: 22
Joined: 7/22/2007
Status: offline
Duh, another Army commander dead. It was during blizzard so i guess he went out for a walk and got lost & froze to death. :)

(in reply to Titanwarrior89)
Post #: 54
RE: Generals getting killed - 12/27/2010 7:57:08 AM   
76mm


Posts: 4688
Joined: 5/2/2004
From: Washington, DC
Status: offline
Turn 12 of Leningrad scenario, and only one loss that I've noticed, but of course it was Manstein.

(in reply to turska)
Post #: 55
RE: Generals getting killed - 12/27/2010 11:02:15 AM   
Singleton Mosby


Posts: 47
Joined: 9/11/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BigAnorak

As long as I can have Manstein!


I killed Model in turn three. Might be a completely different game in '43 and '44 now.

(in reply to MengJiao)
Post #: 56
RE: Generals getting killed - 12/27/2010 2:23:29 PM   
Walloc

 

Posts: 3141
Joined: 10/30/2006
From: Denmark
Status: offline
At the request of Joel and after a short correnspondance with Elmo3. I've over the last few days compiled a full list of all german generals exported from the game. To make reference point to how many was/should be killed for the dev team to use. If wanted. Ill post here as a .csv file with comment as doing the list things pop out. The raw data is in the file for dev team to use as please. Their subjective opinion on what constitudes a KIA/POW/WIA might be different then mine.
Note this is only german generals and not axis allies but as germans was in the thick of action through out the war it makes a good reference point IMO.

Disclaimer. Since i go by the list of generals in game. It could happen that a general on the eastern front is KIA and not recorded by me. The list seems fairly exhaustive, but no garanties from my side.
Out of the 255 on the list generals there 3 cases of incomplete info. Reasons in the raw data. Shouldnt throw off the data a whole lot tho.

Terms.

Ill introduce 2 terms cuz of the way the game engine as i understand it handles leader casulties in 2 different ways and cuz i think it has an impact on how many leaders should be killed by the 2 different ways. Either leaders can be killed by a roll that apparently takes places between the turns and its noted in the log.
Also a leader can be killed if its HQ, (possibly needs to be isolated) takes part in combat during the turn.

DDT = dead during turns
DBT = dead between turns


Raw data terms.

lived = Not applical for a KIA result in any way. Many of these are ofc captured at the end of the war. Any PoW in late 45 is in this category not the PoW category or else the results would be wholely inaccurate with a near 100% POW rate.
Ppl made PoWs in the Ruhr, Courland pockets and so on is in this category too.

Died = can mean just about any reason. Notes should note if on eastern front and if in command there for applical for KIA result, (died) means i dont think its applical and reason why in Notes. Fx died while in fuhrerreserve or what ever.

PoW = captured, but this can be any where. Notes should note if applical aka if on eastern front and in command. (PoW) means not applical to game IMO since taking PoW on western front or such.

KIA = killed and again (KIA) means not applical IMO, reason in notes like KIA on western front.


I've had to set some subjective parameters for generals on the list to fit into being KIA of the game engine. Ppl and devs might ofc differ with those but u will hafta go in with ur own and look at raw data to come up with ur numbers then.
So my numbers are lot less than those on the list actually died or PoWed. Problem is for example when u have ppl on the list being in führerreserve commeting suicide. Do they count or not. Is a general on the list taken PoW in Tunis applical for a KIA result on the eastern front. If so u ofc drive up casulty rate tho not per say to do will KIA rate of generals on the eastern front.
My parameters is that u hafta have been in command some how at the time and on the eastern front. This makes for an accurate kill rate per turn, but doesnt reduce the pool of officers as it should. Problem is if u multiply the numbers by those that is on list and die/pow to any cause the chance of a Model, Guderian in command on the eastern front gets killed is much higher than it should be. How devs want to deal with that dilema is up too them


For a resume of applical KIA/POW in game as i see it.


1941(all of it): 2 generals on list KIAed. 1 army commander killed in plane crashing in mine field and 1 korps commander killed in air attack. Both died to the DBT rolls IMO.


1942(all of it) 0, yes zero(u could argue for 1, but he isnt in command at time)

So after first 72ish turns u if using history as a bench mark should have 2 KIA generals. Not counting statisical uncertainty ofc. Sorta interresting to compare with Elmo3s test.


1943(defending sucks, for KIA rates of generals apparently)

Jan: 1, KIA Korps commander killed by blue on blue fire. DBT roll
Feb: 5, 1 WIA/KIA and 4 PoWs(all Stalingrad), KIA DBT and 1 army commander 3 korps commanders DDT rolls IMO. Even if considered DBT rolls its sorta special in that they'd be very close to enemy units through out jan 43 by nature of being in a pocket. If DBT have a range modifier.
March-July 0
Aug: 1, KIA korps commader DBT
Sep-Dec: 0

By end of 43(124ish turns) we on 9 in all 5 DBT and 4 DDT

1944:(pockets and ruptured front makes living harder)
April: 1 KIA DBT army
June: 3 KIA korps commander DBT, 1 korps PoW DDT
July: 1 KIA korps DBT, 3 PoW korps DDT, 1 PoW army DDT
Aug: 3 PoW korps DDT, 1 KIA army DBT
Sep: 2 KIA korps DBT, 1 PoW DDT Korps commander

16 in 1944, 8 DBT and 8 DDT. 3 Army commanders in all.
Note all but 2 of this losses occur as a result of either destruction of AGC or the rupture of the front in AGS. Which will in game terms make alot of DDT cuz of pockets and overrunned HQ. 7 of DBT also occur during that phase where again alot of HQ will be close to enemy in range cuz of the shattered fronts.

1945:
Jan: 2 KIA korps DBT
Feb: 1 PoW (commanding Budapest defences) DDT
March: 1 KIA army DBT

4 in all.

Through the war thats 29 in 225 turns. Of those 13 are DDT leaving 16 to the DBT rolls or 1 in every 14 turns.
No Army groups commders died, but 4 army commanders did. Rest with the Budapest exception are korps commanders.
Clearly the majority of casulties are taken not only defending but especially when fronts are shattered/ruptured. IMHO this should be shown as the in game DDT rolls.

Lastly a discussion about a modifier on DBT rolls where range to enemy count negatively the closer u are.
This might seem like a good idea and i can find many arguements for it. Just that 7 times as many corps commaders as army commanders and no army groups commanders die is an obvious one.

I do find one major reason going against this. If u look at commaders killed in Pz and later russian OMG thrusts, where units go deep into enemy territory and by nature of it gets close to enemies. If and i repeat if it from devs point of view is "best practice" to move the HQ of those formations up with the units for supply purposes. U many times cuz of the narrowness of these thrust only really have 1 place to put them and thats on units. Meaning by default they most of the time wil be close to enemy in range.
Problem then becomes that empericallly this wasnt dangerous in terms of KIA, not a single Pz korps commander is killed/POWEd during these deep operations through out the war on the eastern front.
Just wanting to note that issue.


Hope is of use and kind regards,

Rasmus

P.S the csv file is zipped and uploaded in support forum as it wouldnt take here.

< Message edited by Walloc -- 12/27/2010 2:50:41 PM >

(in reply to 76mm)
Post #: 57
RE: Generals getting killed - 12/27/2010 2:31:38 PM   
jimkehn


Posts: 265
Joined: 2/5/2003
From: Western Nebraska
Status: offline
Playing Case Blau as Russian and have lost 2 leaders by turn 8.

(in reply to Walloc)
Post #: 58
RE: Generals getting killed - 12/27/2010 7:00:56 PM   
Joel Billings


Posts: 32265
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: offline
Thanks Rasmus for the detailed accounting. Very enlightening. Now does anyone want to do something similar for the Soviets?

_____________________________

All understanding comes after the fact.
-- Soren Kierkegaard

(in reply to Walloc)
Post #: 59
RE: Generals getting killed - 12/27/2010 7:14:05 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 7750
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
Slight nitpick: one Army Group Commander did die, by suicide. Von Kluge. (Admittedly, he was on the Western Front at the time.) I'm not sure the game properly accounts or can account for the rash of executions and suicides among the officer corps following the 1944 assassination attempt.

But the basic point made above about generalship losses does stand.



_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> RE: Generals getting killed Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   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

2.857