Combat results wonky?

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Combat results wonky?

      I just completed a substantial battle, and I can't say I'm too happy with the results.

      I attacked a 15-unit stack with a 24-unit stack. It was in clear terrain, no forts, and same levels of tech for all units. Morale almost 100% on both sides.

      He had 13 inf and 2 light tanks. I had 14 inf, 6 light tanks and 4 ACs.

      Since I had a total of 10 AFVs to his 2 - a 5 to 1 advantage - I was expecting a massacre. Instead, here are the combat results:

      Round 1: He loses 7 inf, I lose 4 inf and an LT. He has 8 units left, I have 19.
      Round 2: He loses 3 inf and 1 LT, I lose 3 inf. He has 4 units left, I have 16.
      Round 3: He loses 3 inf, I lose 1 inf. He has 1 LT left, I have 15 units.
      Round 4: He loses his LT, I lose nothing.

      To summarize, he lost a total of 15 units, I lost 9.

      I think this is a pretty poor result given that I had a massive 5:1 advantage in AFV, fighting in ideal AFV terrain. An advantage like that ought to result in a massacre IMO, but instead my units killed only about 50% more units than the enemy did, with his pitiful 2 LTs. I should have got a result like that just from sheer weight of numbers, let alone any AFV advantage.

      It makes me wonder - is this just an especially bad result, or are tank units - light tank units at least - underpowered?

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Joe Bentleigh ().

    • i don't have extensive knowledge about stats at the moment, but by looking at the army composition it tells otherwise and some reference to the stats of course, here is what i found out.

      you have the advantage of weight and more armor, while he have infantry, the problem in the equation is very simple...you attack him.

      I'm using level 1 equation since its easy to compare.

      Infantry have a defense value of 3 on inf and 1.5 for armor, against LT of 2.5, and AC of 2, along with your inf on the offense with value of 2

      the enemy have a defense value of 41.5 against inf, and value of 26 on armor
      you have 61 on inf and 25 on armor

      this may look little but you have a higher chance of killing inf while he have higher chances of killing armor by 1 point.
      of course it is little but 1 point is pretty big on a die roll.
      "Victory needs no explenation, defeat allows none"
      -imperium thought of the day

    • I would also like to point out that the more units of a type you have, the lower that their 'efficiency' will be. This means that although the strength might increase, the contribution to attack strength by each individual unit of that type is reduced if you field many of them. Although in this case the difference was minimal, it is something to keep in mind when fielding large armies of one unit type.
      Kalantigos
      Master Chief Petty Officer.
      Game Moderator
      EN Community Support
      Bytro Labs | Call of War

    • Kalantigos wrote:

      I would also like to point out that the more units of a type you have, the lower that their 'efficiency' will be. This means that although the strength might increase, the contribution to attack strength by each individual unit of that type is reduced if you field many of them. Although in this case the difference was minimal, it is something to keep in mind when fielding large armies of one unit type.
      Yes, I know that, thanks for the reminder.

      The poor combat results are continuing. I just attacked a stack of 11 inf in open terrain with my 10 AFVs plus 8 inf. Last combat round: 2 inf killed on each side.

    • Yes, I heard about unit "efficiency" getting decrease in larger stacks of the same unit.
      Is it best to limit one type of unit in a stack to keep the "efficiency" decrease a minimum? And use combine arms?
      I'm going to play a private game to test out certain game mechanics, so I'm going to look at this if I have the time to test it out.
      "Victory needs no explenation, defeat allows none"
      -imperium thought of the day

    • V1nd1cat0r wrote:

      Yes, I heard about unit "efficiency" getting decrease in larger stacks of the same unit.

      Is it best to limit one type of unit in a stack to keep the "efficiency" decrease a minimum? And use combine arms?
      I'm going to play a private game to test out certain game mechanics, so I'm going to look at this if I have the time to test it out.
      Well, you get maximum efficiency from say, a stack of 5 bombers. The bombers will decrease efficiency if you add more bombers to the stack, but their absolute bombing power will still increase. So whether or not it is "best" to limit one type of unit in a stack really depends on the circumstances and on what your goals are.

      As to combined arms, after the losses to infantry units in my last few combined arms attacks, I'm beginning to think it would be better to attack in clear and forest terrain with pure AFV stacks and just use infantry defensively, because they sure seem to get whacked when attacking other infantry units.

    • infantry have an attack value of 2 defending from infantry, and a value of 3 defending from infantry. On a 1-on-1 the defending infantry will win.

      Infantry maybe versatile, but there much more stronger on the defence, put them on a fort and give them an AA or AT and they will hold the line tight. But because there cheaper and easy to maintain there ok on the offense but will often be the bulk of your force, if not then there your second-line force, give them a job and they will do it.
      "Victory needs no explenation, defeat allows none"
      -imperium thought of the day

    • Thanks for the info vindicator - but to get back to the original point of this thread - the results I am getting with light tanks and ACs against infantry are INSANE.

      I attacked a stack of 8 infantry and 1 AA gun with 4 ACs, 6 LTs and 7 inf in open unfortified terrain. Each side's forces have close to 100% morale. The results so far:

      Round1: He loses 2 inf, I lose 2 inf. He has 7 units left, I have 15.
      Round2: He loses 1 inf, I lose nothing. He has 6 units left, I have 15.
      Round3: He loses 2 inf, I lose 1 inf and 1 LT. He has 4 units left, I have 13.

      For crying out loud, he has lost only one less unit than me in three rounds of combat when I am attacking him with TEN AFV regiments every turn PLUS as many inf as he has. And all I can get in terms of casualties is virtual PARITY?????

      Methinks this game still needs a lot of work ...

      ... and yet another round where my NINE AFV regiments can kill only one infantry regiment between them ...

      The post was edited 4 times, last by Joe Bentleigh ().

    • Hmmm, that's interesting, I just brought up an additional 2 LT regiments and they appear to have killed another two infantry regiments all by themselves - although I've noticed that combat rounds sometimes seem to occur more frequently than once per hour in this game. Could my suspicion be right that AFVs actually perform better against infantry without infantry support?

    • Very interesting, it seems to reflect something very...accurate

      This is a theory so don't take it seriously
      If Tanks operate better without infantry support but get poor result with infantry then I theorize the effectiveness of tanks is not on its stack but how they were employed as a unit, and of course terrain, tech level, maybe even the stack but that's not my point.

      Tanks were made and used late in WW1, they were used to destroy fortification and cross no-mans land unharmed. After the war many countries make new and better tanks, but it is how they were employed by every country can make or break a tank effectiveness

      UK, France, Italy, Japan, and some others use the tank as an infantry support vehicle, this make their tanks spread out alone protected by infantry.

      US, Germany, and the USSR used their tanks differently, the Germans created the blitzkrieg, this make tanks into individual divisions working in groups of 5 to 10 tanks.

      If this theory is true then Tank effectiveness gets decrease if stack together with a lot of infantry, but work well if not better if stack with other tanks.

      This is how I theorize why the result is not favorable even if using superior force, your tanks are actually "footslogging" with infantry making them vulnerable, it would be great is someone can test this theory out.
      "Victory needs no explenation, defeat allows none"
      -imperium thought of the day

    • It got even worse after the last report. Two rounds actually went by when my stack of nine AFV's plus 5 inf couldn't kill even ONE infantry unit! But when I brought those two new LT's up, which were in their own stack, it looks like they killed off the remaining 3 inf in only 2 rounds.

      Unfortunately, I was unable to confirm the two lone LT's killed the last three units as I merged them with the larger stack after the battle before I remembered that individual units record their kills in their info screen. Still, the last 3 inf were killed in rounds at 20 past the hour, when those two LT's started fighting, whereas the rounds of the large stack had been taking place on the hour. So it remains a mystery at this point.

      Regardless, the performance of those nine (originally ten) AFV's against infantry in ideal terrain, for round after round, was pitiful.