[WarInEur] Comment on Attrition

[Don Lazov]

Agreed perhaps on the kludge rules, but you know me I want to punish the 
Germans (lol).

We could settle this if we use my new WitE campaign (the one that does 
not have any overrun able lines).

You want me to be Germans or Soviets (almost all options on and lets use 
the SPI colors (old fashioned) you know how to get hold of me off list.

Currently doing a solo campaign and things (if played my way, which by 
no means means the right way, just the "semi-historical" way) seem 
historical. As the Germans I push and hold at the right times and as the 
Soviets I have been "reinforcing the front" wearing out the Germans.

Gamers can "break" things.

What say you?

Don

Kent & Sue Haunschild wrote:
> Don, I am afraid your own figures condem your position.
>
>
> Let's examine your figures for the Russian front which is what 
> concerns me the most.
> You wrote:
>> Despite what Kent has said in the south in the first season I was 
>> able to drive to Kharkov and Rostov, granted the panzers were at 
>> 50-75% and a lot of the infantry was at 40-50% but the Russians were 
>> far worse. Remember that newly created units are not going to arrive 
>> at 100% readiness.
>
> Let's assume that the first season ends when the first Mud turn 
> arrives or 1-11-41.
>
> Furthermore let's assume that all the Soviet units are at 90 % 
> attrition and all the German units are at 50% attrition.
>
> Finally let's assume that the Soviets are in supply and that the 
> Germans are OOS and in a Soviet ZOC.
>
> What does the math tell us about this situation.
>
> One, the Germans will lose 12% attrition per cycle and the Soviets 
> will gain 20%.
>
> So, by the end of 41 the average German unit is at 86% attrition (50% 
> + 36%)
> (This is a 3% loss per turn for being OOS and in an enemy ZOC. The 
> Germans cannot really rotate units at this point because any movement 
> causes 4% attrition).
>
> Meanwhile the Soviets have increased from 90% to 30% (90-60%)
> (This represents a minimum gain for being in supply but in an enemy 
> ZOC of 5 % per turn.  By rotating units the Soviets could increase 
> their attrition by another 40% minimum so they could be at full 
> strength at the beginning of 1942).
>
> At this point in the game the Germans have no ZOC (lost it at 75% 
> attrition), and cannot stop Soviet units from penetrating any gap in 
> the line.
>
> They can move only one hex (lost movement points at 50% attrition) and 
> they are OOS so infantry have one movement point and mech units have 
> two.  Even retreating back to supply is not an option.
>
> If the Soviets then start attacking at 1:2 odds and accepting the AR 
> option they will inflict a further 18% attrition on any Germans units 
> attacked, while surrfering a 12% attrition loss on participating units.
>
> Let's assume that every German unit is attacked and every Soviet unit 
> participates in an attack on the first turn of cycle 1/41 and that the 
> Soviet's accept the attack retreat option in every case.
>
> Now the average German attrition level is more than 99% (86% - 16% for 
> defensive combat and -3% for OOS in enemy ZOC) while the average 
> Soviet unit is at 58%. (30% - 8% for offenisve combat - 4% for attack 
> retreat)
>
> The Soviets used their attacker retreat option to leave German ZOC and 
> therefore repair at 10% per turn. So by 2-2-42 the Russian Army is at 
> 100% of face value and the German Army is at less than 99% of face 
> value so a 6-5 has a defense strength of  0.03  (.06 for 99% attrition 
> and then halved for OOS). A 10-8 would have a defense strength of  
> 0.05.  If the Soviet wanted to add further insult they could wait to 
> the first turn of Mud when the German defense strengths would be 
> halved yet again.
>
> However, it would be pointless to wait.  Whether the effective defense 
> strength is 0.03 or 0.05  it will take less than one Soviet combat 
> factor to guarantee 12:1 odds and a DE result in the second attack on 
> 3-2-42, a third attack on 4-2-42 will eliminate any KGs and thus the 
> entire German army in cycle 2 of 42.
>
> Now how reaslistic is this appraisal? Well it depends on the 
> assumptions to some extent.  How badly attrited were the German units 
> advance during into Russia the Clear weather turns in 41?  Did they 
> retreat back to interior supply lines for the first Winter or remain 
> at the historic points of advance?
>
> The ability of the Soviets to recover was actually understated in the 
> example so they could attack sooner, but the timing of the attacks 
> doesn't really matter, because they can recover any attrition caused 
> by the combat within two turns and the German attrition is permanent 
> and cumulative. Also, their were still three more cycles of Winter and 
> Mud for the Germans to endure and if the Soviets didn't destroy them 
> during the snow turns they will easily do so during the Mud turns when 
> the German Defense strengths is halved yet again.
>
> Anyway, the point of my original post was that while I liked the 
> attrition concept, some other rules were going to need to be changed 
> to restore a game balance.
>
> I suggested that we may need to eliminate some of the kludge rules 
> that were inserted to insure Soviet survival to insure German survival 
> when playing with attrition.
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WarInEur mailing list
> WarInEur at mailman.halisp.net
> http://mailman.halisp.net/mailman/listinfo/warineur
>