Request for advice from experienced players: unit type combat strength scenario choice

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Request for advice from experienced players: unit type combat strength scenario choice

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] >> The Operational Art of War IV >> Request for advice from experienced players: unit type combat strength scenario choice

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Request for advice from experienced players: unit type ... - 1/1/2018 3:00:43 AM

tarzanofmars

Posts: 40
Joined: 11/20/2017
Status: offline

In the context of the 19th century (using a modified 19th century equipment database) what would experienced players recommend using to best replicate (it won't be perfect):

rate of fire , range and accuracy

by using the

Anti Personnel Strength, Anti Armor Strength and Defense Strength (Active Defender) settings?

This is for .5 to 1.5km hexes, so tactical and borderline strategic/tactical firefights at the company and platoon level for infantry and cavalry.

Example: the US Cavalry in the 1870's used the breechloading .45-55 Springfield carbine. The infantry used the same gun with a longer barrel with more powder at .45-70.

They both could fire about 4-5 rounds in the same amount of time the .44 and .44-40 rimfire lever action repeating rifles could fire 13 rounds, which were the weapon of choice for Plains Indians (but they usually only made up about 20% of the weapons- this is accounted for by unit type in the scenario).

The US breechloaders had effective ranges out to 300 yards, the repeaters were just about useless past 100 yards.
The breechloaders fired a much heavier bullet with much more energy, ie hits were almost always lethal even at long ranges.

The lever actions were lethal at close ranges, but at 100 yards they often only produced non-incapacitating injuries.

So how to best replicate a difference like this?

Obviously the breechloaders will have much higher Anti-Armor strength, but when no unit in the database has armor, what is the advantage here?

Should I give all humans and horses some sort of base armor?

Which of AP strength and defense strength would best replicate the huge difference in rate of fire?

And which for range and accuracy?

I'm just looking for the best possible solution as none of them really match up with the needs at the 500 meter tactical level.

Also I will be replicating .50 sharpshooter rifles, bows, lances and muskets. I am using a somewhat different approach wherein a unit/counter is made up of several different weapons, with each number representing a single soldier instead of a platoon, squad or company.

Examples:
https://imgur.com/a/WVRRJ

Any thoughts and advice very much appreciated!

Post #: 1

RE: Request for advice from experienced players: unit t... - 1/2/2018 1:58:34 AM

tarzanofmars

Posts: 40
Joined: 11/20/2017
Status: offline

Ok let me do the WWII version since I think this is what 99.99% of TOAW players do.

So anyone's advice is good, not just experienced players.

Let's say you have a unit of tanks with a slow firing, accurate and long range gun. It is fighting a unit of tanks with equal armor, but with a rapid firing, shorter ranged and slightly less powerful gun.

How do you rate them, relative to each other, using Anti Personnel Strength, Anti Armor Strength and Defense Strength?

Example, slow firing, accurate and long range tank unit is:

Made up Tank1: 5cm armor. Gun: 4 rounds per minute, 100% accuracy at 1,000 yards, penetrates 5cm armor at 500yards
Anti Personnel Strength: 12
Anti Armor Strength: 16
Defense Strength: 15

How would you rate a tank unit with a much more rapid firing, but shorter ranged, less accurate and less powerful gun, but exact same armor as the above unit:

Made up Tank2: 5cm armor. Gun: 13 rounds per minute, 100% accuracy at 400 yards, penetrates 5cm armor at 100 yards
Anti Personnel Strength: ?
Anti Armor Strength: ?
Defense Strength: ?

< Message edited by tarzanofmars -- 1/2/2018 3:18:27 AM >

(in reply to tarzanofmars)

Post #: 2

RE: Request for advice from experienced players: unit t... - 1/2/2018 9:15:05 AM

Oberst_Klink

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: tarzanofmars

Ok let me do the WWII version since I think this is what 99.99% of TOAW players do.

So anyone's advice is good, not just experienced players.

Let's say you have a unit of tanks with a slow firing, accurate and long range gun. It is fighting a unit of tanks with equal armor, but with a rapid firing, shorter ranged and slightly less powerful gun.

How do you rate them, relative to each other, using Anti Personnel Strength, Anti Armor Strength and Defense Strength?

Example, slow firing, accurate and long range tank unit is:

Made up Tank1: 5cm armor. Gun: 4 rounds per minute, 100% accuracy at 1,000 yards, penetrates 5cm armor at 500yards
Anti Personnel Strength: 12
Anti Armor Strength: 16
Defense Strength: 15

How would you rate a tank unit with a much more rapid firing, but shorter ranged, less accurate and less powerful gun, but exact same armor as the above unit:

Made up Tank2: 5cm armor. Gun: 13 rounds per minute, 100% accuracy at 400 yards, penetrates 5cm armor at 100 yards
Anti Personnel Strength: ?
Anti Armor Strength: ?
Defense Strength: ?

I'll try to dig up one of my older posts and regarding the AP/AT parameters, the best chaps to ask are the FitE2 people who totally modified the .EQP DB. In your case I'd use the 19th century DB as a guideline, because there are muskets, repeaters and bolt-action rifles available. The German needle gun e.g. a single shooter, would have the same rate of fire like a Sharps or similar. You can't circumvent testing with sandbox scenarios though.

Klink, Oberst

_____________________________

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

(in reply to tarzanofmars)

Post #: 3

RE: Request for advice from experienced players: unit t... - 1/2/2018 6:53:50 PM

tarzanofmars

Posts: 40
Joined: 11/20/2017
Status: offline

Hey Klink,

Thanks for always trying to help out, very appreciated.

I have very much already modified the 19th century db for the Indian Wars scenario I've been working on, but I generally followed its approach to the differences it had in regards to breechloaders and muskets etc. Which may very well be the best approach there is really, I just wanted some thoughts on which of the 3 combat strength attributes would best match up with rate of fire and best match up with differences in energy, without the AP factor being in play.

Maybe there is no way to do this?

What are your thoughts on a pre-armored vehicle era wherein all soldiers get a basic 'armor' rating and 'poor geometry' just so there can be slight differences in power and lethality of firearms?

Totally unknown territory haha?

I've read many of your older posts btw on armor and penetration, I spent some hours googling this before reaching out here. I do have a much better understanding how armor and penetration work now in IV and I'm really starting think I might playtest some battles where all the personnel and horses have a common armor rating, nothing that will stop a shot, but something that will just change the hit percentages at different ranges maybe?

Any advice on a safe starting number?

I read, I think it was your post, about where some armor hits send the equipment back to a holding pool for a time and not kill them? replicating damaged but not destroyed equipment, correct? This could be put to great use replicating wounded men I'm thinking.

(in reply to Oberst_Klink)

Post #: 4

RE: Request for advice from experienced players: unit t... - 1/3/2018 3:05:46 PM

Oberst_Klink

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

Well... because you simulate each man, horse and wagon... why not use the RPG approach?
You know, like in D&D; the basic defence value and at AP as the attack value or the weapon rating? And yes, not every man, horse or wagon get's killed/destroyed, but wounded/disabled respectively. Again, I wouldn't tinker with the 'armour' value that much... use the ones for the horse teams for the wagon trains and the rest... well, they're all all soft targets after all.

Klink, Oberst

_____________________________

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

(in reply to tarzanofmars)

Post #: 5

RE: Request for advice from experienced players: unit t... - 1/3/2018 6:57:11 PM

tarzanofmars

Posts: 40
Joined: 11/20/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Oberst_Klink

Well... because you simulate each man, horse and wagon... why not use the RPG approach?
You know, like in D&D; the basic defence value and at AP as the attack value or the weapon rating?

Klink, Oberst

This is very interesting, what do you mean by this exactly?

Also, at a glance do you see anything mathematically/game mechanically absurd in what I'm trying to do here?

< Message edited by tarzanofmars -- 1/3/2018 7:05:07 PM >

(in reply to Oberst_Klink)

Post #: 6

Page: [1]

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> The Operational Art of War IV >> Request for advice from experienced players: unit type combat strength scenario choice

Page: [1]