AVF Reliability

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

AVF Reliability

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 2 >> AVF Reliability

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

AVF Reliability - 9/28/2021 7:43:34 AM

jzardos

Posts: 662
Joined: 3/15/2011
Status: offline

I'm trying to understand the reliability numbers for AFVs but the documentation in the WitE2 Ebook on 21.2.8 mentions 2 digits first being breakdowns on movement (higher is better) and second digit is survivabilty (higher is better). However, the problem is I see 4 digits and not 2.

For example a Panther D is 4540. So what does that mean? is 45 the breakdown number and 40 survivability? If so, is that 45 and 40 out of a 99 max?

thanks

Post #: 1

RE: AVF Reliability - 9/28/2021 11:25:09 AM

Denniss

Posts: 7902
Joined: 1/10/2002
From: Germany, Hannover (region)
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jzardos

For example a Panther D is 4540. So what does that mean? is 45 the breakdown number and 40 survivability? If so, is that 45 and 40 out of a 99 max?

It seems you got it.

(in reply to jzardos)

Post #: 2

RE: AVF Reliability - 9/29/2021 2:52:21 AM

jzardos

Posts: 662
Joined: 3/15/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Denniss

quote:

ORIGINAL: jzardos

For example a Panther D is 4540. So what does that mean? is 45 the breakdown number and 40 survivability? If so, is that 45 and 40 out of a 99 max?

It seems you got it.

I still must have something wrong because a Panzerjaeger II is 7060 and a Tiger 5550. I can understand the breakdown being more likely on a Tiger when moving, however, the 60 to 50 3rd and 4th digits means the Panzerjaeger II is more survivable than the Tiger? Which seems to contradict all the known literature on the Tiger. Also, the Panzerjaeger II is an open top vehicle so it's even more vulnerable. I must not be understanding something about this??

< Message edited by jzardos -- 9/29/2021 2:53:16 AM >

(in reply to Denniss)

Post #: 3

RE: AVF Reliability - 9/29/2021 3:23:10 AM

Karri

Posts: 1137
Joined: 5/24/2006
Status: offline

I think it should be two numbers (both two digits), and not two digits. The second number is not survivability, it's reliability in combat, which uses a "special survival check". Not sure what that check is exactly. perhaps just a % chance of being damaged instead of destroyed? Notice that this doesn't mean the Panzerjaeger has a higher chance of surviving combat, just higher chance of being damaged instead of destroyed. The Tiger still has way better armor ratings.

(in reply to jzardos)

Post #: 4

RE: AVF Reliability - 9/29/2021 3:38:17 AM

jzardos

Posts: 662
Joined: 3/15/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Karri

I think it should be two numbers (both two digits), and not two digits. The second number is not survivability, it's reliability in combat, which uses a "special survival check". Not sure what that check is exactly. perhaps just a % chance of being damaged instead of destroyed? Notice that this doesn't mean the Panzerjaeger has a higher chance of surviving combat, just higher chance of being damaged instead of destroyed. The Tiger still has way better armor ratings.

What you are saying doesn't match rulebook. I do agree about the number of digits as there are clearly 4 for the reliability rating on AFVs. Dennis's answer was not very satisfactory IMO.

21.2.8. AFV and Combat Vehicle Reliability
All AFV s and other combat vehicles are rated for their
reliability. This is checked when they are moved, with those
that fail the reliability check becoming damaged.
To reflect initial production �teething� problems, AFV/
Combat vehicle reliability will be less when they first come
into production and then improve until they reach their
standard reliability rating. The reliability rating of obsolete
(out of production) aircraft is treated as higher than their
normal reliability rating, which will make them more
susceptible to attrition.
The reliability rating of an AFV is actually two different
items.
The first digit represents the reliability of the AFV when
moving (if only 1 digit is shown the 1st digit is assumed to
be 0). The higher the number, the less likely the AFV will
become damaged during movement.
The second digit is survivability, and the higher the
survivability the less likely the AFV will be destroyed in
combat during a special survival check as opposed to just
being damaged.

< Message edited by jzardos -- 9/29/2021 3:39:50 AM >

(in reply to Karri)

Post #: 5

RE: AVF Reliability - 9/29/2021 3:44:30 AM

abulbulian

Posts: 1047
Joined: 3/31/2005
Status: offline

I'm wondering if the rules didn't get updated since the concept of just 2 digits for the AFV reliability rating. Thus the 2nd digit for the PzJaegar II would be a 0 and the second digit for the Tiger would be a 5. Thus, a PzJaegar II is not survivable at all with a 0 and the Tiger is much better with a 5. Just a thought. If so, I have no idea what the 3rd and 4th digits represent.

_____________________________

- Beta Tester WitE and ATG
- Alpha/Beta Tester WitW and WitE2

"Invincibility lies in the defence; the possibility of victory in the attack." - Sun Tzu

(in reply to jzardos)

Post #: 6

RE: AVF Reliability - 9/29/2021 8:37:15 AM

Denniss

Posts: 7902
Joined: 1/10/2002
From: Germany, Hannover (region)
Status: offline

must be an error in the manual then. There are clearly two digits per reliability type for AFVs so four overall

(in reply to abulbulian)

Post #: 7

RE: AVF Reliability - 9/29/2021 2:25:36 PM

Karri

Posts: 1137
Joined: 5/24/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jzardos

quote:

ORIGINAL: Karri

I think it should be two numbers (both two digits), and not two digits. The second number is not survivability, it's reliability in combat, which uses a "special survival check". Not sure what that check is exactly. perhaps just a % chance of being damaged instead of destroyed? Notice that this doesn't mean the Panzerjaeger has a higher chance of surviving combat, just higher chance of being damaged instead of destroyed. The Tiger still has way better armor ratings.

What you are saying doesn't match rulebook. I do agree about the number of digits as there are clearly 4 for the reliability rating on AFVs. Dennis's answer was not very satisfactory IMO.

21.2.8. AFV and Combat Vehicle Reliability
All AFV s and other combat vehicles are rated for their
reliability. This is checked when they are moved, with those
that fail the reliability check becoming damaged.
To reflect initial production �teething� problems, AFV/
Combat vehicle reliability will be less when they first come
into production and then improve until they reach their
standard reliability rating. The reliability rating of obsolete
(out of production) aircraft is treated as higher than their
normal reliability rating, which will make them more
susceptible to attrition.
The reliability rating of an AFV is actually two different
items.
The first digit represents the reliability of the AFV when
moving (if only 1 digit is shown the 1st digit is assumed to
be 0). The higher the number, the less likely the AFV will
become damaged during movement.
The second digit is survivability, and the higher the
survivability the less likely the AFV will be destroyed in
combat during a special survival check as opposed to just
being damaged.

Which part doesn't match? The thing about the special survival check? It's not explained further so if you have a better guess, do share it. I think I'm pretty close to truth though. It definitely isn't an overall chance of surviving combat.

(in reply to jzardos)

Post #: 8

RE: AVF Reliability - 9/29/2021 2:55:58 PM

loki100

Posts: 10920
Joined: 10/20/2012
From: Utlima Thule
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Denniss

must be an error in the manual then. There are clearly two digits per reliability type for AFVs so four overall

no error, the examples are exactly as described ie reliability move/combat, as in the text, the possibility of vehicle being <10 reliability is retained as set out (pretty sure there are none in the game but it opens the door to a 1916 scenario?)

The combat value is invoked if an element is flagged as 'destroyed' in combat (/100), if it passes this is reduced to 'damaged'

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to Denniss)

Post #: 9

RE: AVF Reliability - 9/29/2021 4:44:40 PM

Denniss

Posts: 7902
Joined: 1/10/2002
From: Germany, Hannover (region)
Status: offline

No, there are four digits overall with two each for reliability type.
There's no single-digit reliability rating type anymore in WitE2 for ground elements.
This was changed from WitW which had 2x1 digit and WitE with a single rating.
Aircraft still use the old system from WitE.

(in reply to loki100)

Post #: 10

RE: AVF Reliability - 9/29/2021 4:49:29 PM

abulbulian

Posts: 1047
Joined: 3/31/2005
Status: offline

Thanks Loki,

It was late last night when I responded, but after looking at it I found the key as you pointed out (highlighted)in the rule text. I would only change the part where it mentioned first "digit" and second "digit" to "two digit numbers'. It is confusing because a digit is defined as one number 0-9.

_____________________________

- Beta Tester WitE and ATG
- Alpha/Beta Tester WitW and WitE2

"Invincibility lies in the defence; the possibility of victory in the attack." - Sun Tzu

(in reply to Denniss)

Post #: 11