Infantry Casualties at 50m

[vic]

superb analysis...IMHO infantry lethality, particularly at shorter ranges, has always (i.e. even the DOS version) been WAY over the top. the whole move close, get massacred, bounce without shooting back routine has always, for me, detracted from the game. even in urban environments it is impossible for opposing units to remain adjacent to one another for more than a turn or two as one or the other will surely be routed or destroyed.

WWII infantry advancing slowly/carefully while in cover (e.g. urban environment) isn't the same as napoleonic era troops marching shoulder-to-shoulder up to the muzzles of the enemies guns. one of the reasons SPWW2 squads draw so many casualties is that, apparently, the entire population of the squad is considered as being "available" as a target in covered terrain. in fact, squads would advance slowly by individuals (e.g. point man) and/or small teams by alteranting movement with staionary periods providing for cover of movement of others.

rifle fire, particularly the bolt-action type, effectiveness in SPWW2 is murderous beyond belief. the bolt action rifle's major role was to provide a sense of "self-defense comfort" to the bearer and be a noisemaker and marginal suppressor of fire. producing casualties at the SPWW2 rate during WWII would have seen the war over in 1940 as all combatants would have exhausted all available manpower resources quickly.

couple this with your excellent observation on movement and fire in SPWW2 (move one at a time against "all units in range" opfire) and squads get shredded rapidly and fire not a shot in reply.

i ran exhaustive tests, even reducing rifle range to a more practical 7 hexes (that being effective range, not the spec for ammo max range) and even reducing HE kill to 0. it helped some but at range 1 it was still incredibly bloody.

my conclusions:
1. rifle fire is IN GENERAL 4-5 times too lethal (i.e. needs to be reduced by roughly 65-75%) and
2. at range 1 it is about 10 times too lethal (i.e. needs to be reduced by about 90%).
3. units encountering enemy at range 1 should ALWAYS return fire at least once before "bouncing" if forced to retreat (i.e. move adjacent, take fire, give fire, retreat.) fire for the moving unit in this situation should be calculated BEFORE deducting casualty losses caused by the initial defender "volley".
4. moving infantry unit casualties from direct fire should be restricted when moving adjacent to stationary enemy infantry units according to speed:
a. moving slowly, only 20% of squad personnel can be casualties
b. moving 40%
c. moving fast 80%

so a 12 man squad moving slowly in heavy cover adjacent to a defending squad could lose NO MORE than 12x 20% or 2.4 casualties.

all other conditions equal, opposing squads on adjacent hexes in cover in "one-on-one" situations should be able to hold postion and fire on their opposition for a number of turns without retreating or suffering crippling losses.

with both sides having similar manpower levels, in cover, motionless and dishing out about as much suppression as they get casualties would be low. one might get the occasional grenade casualty but that would be it. forcing the issue would require more manpower/firepower to tip the balance in favor of the stronger party.

best,
vic

[Smersh]

good suggestions, but can these even be implemented with the game code? and there will always be people who disaggree.

[thatguy96]

3. units encountering enemy at range 1 should ALWAYS return fire at least once before "bouncing" if forced to retreat (i.e. move adjacent, take fire, give fire, retreat.) fire for the moving unit in this situation should be calculated BEFORE deducting casualty losses caused by the initial defender "volley".

Historically troops with shoddy morale or poor training have been known to run from enemy troops without firing a shot. I believe the staying power of an infantry unit under these circumstances is in part related to their morale and experience ratings. If we're talking about realism than I don't think we should assume that every 14 year old volkssturm should be capable of putting into practice whatever meager training he recieved in a combat situation.

Furthermore, while you are correct in your observations about infantry combat in Steel Panthers, what you're suggesting is largely outside the scope of the game. Infantry combat may be murderous, but its as murderous for them as it is for you. Proper usage of infantry tactics at the platoon level and above makes up for the lack of control at the squad level and below. Covering fire from other members of the platoon or the weapons platoon is there to provide a defense against other forces being brought to bear as one squad engages another or a similar objective (tank, MG, emplaced position, etc). You don't want to put yourself in a situation where you're smacking up against emplaced enemy infantry anyways. There are quite a few historical examples of such encounters leading to the near decimation of the advancing force. Ambushes work well for a reason.

Unless things have changed, stationary and unsuppressed infantry in my experience in-game have a habit of trading fire with minimal casualties and its only when the unit becomes suppressed (representing panic, loss of C&C, etc) or the unit is moving fast (also creating a possible sense of confusion and a drop in C&C) do casualties rise. Even at 50m most infantry disengage quickly rather than sit there and be chopped up, and if you're trying to stick it out rather than pulling back to the equally effective 100m range and what is likely associated cover you will likely be in a bad way quick. Furthermore if you're tasking individual squads with the destruction of individual squads in a 1 for 1 rather than using superior tactics, equipment, and/or numbers you're really not appreciating the scope of the game.

Lastly, one has to realize the scope of the game. Enemy infantry units must are destroyed much in the way vehicles are. When they have reached a critical point or their crew has been exhausted its over. It requires a certain increased level of lethality in order to work as a game, which it is first and foremost.

[DRG]

This is an old thread and the issues discussed are out of date.

The routines for adjacent hex combat were revised in the patch. There is far more chance an infantry unit will return fire after first contact and battle it out with an adjacent enemy unit than in the release version.

Don

[Irinami]

Anyone still having problems should note that Z-fire/area fire will only hit hexes your unit could see if it weren't for smoke/trees. Buildings are barriers, as are hills/terrain. Find an enemy (by getting chewed up, yes), then light him up with area fire from the rest of the Platoon. Move them to 2 hexes away. Then, the next turn, move your assaulting squad adjacent. Just move 1 hex. You should then have a good chance to mangle them. Also, using FO's to fire mortars ends up with pretty good area accuracy. Finally, if still having trouble, just drop the Searching rating. At the scale of the game, I think a 65% would be more realistic, but that might just be me.