Latest Opinions on Assault/Defend PBEM Ratio

[seabolt]

He's shameless, isn't he? ;)

Completely shameless.. and he even claims innocence by mentioning that he "only" got a draw when attacking at 1:1. :)

At least he didn't mention that he was playing blindfolded while juggling three small chainsaws ...

-- 30 --

[Narwan]

IMO the 2:1 odds work very well as the default for attack/defend scenario's. On occassion I've set the points higher for the attacker.

I disagree with comments made early that the defence needs to be mobile and more points needed. For ww2 especially that is not the case. The bulk of the defence should be fairly static with a small mobile force for plugging gaps and counterattacking. Far more important is the ability to project force form a distance, ie enough mmg's, hmg's, light and medium mortars and other artillery (light flak guns can work too). Add to that well placed at guns and at-teams and 2:1 odds are often not enough for the attacker.

[seabolt]

project force form a distance

You and I are envisioning much the same setup, I think, with a fairly narrow front with good fields of fire. (Ie, the exact sort of place that a competent defender would choose to make his stand ...) Given realistic smoke-ammo limits for the attacker, there's a lot of murder going to go on before those defenders get spotted.

I suspect that some of the feedback is from people who prefer big maps and lots of Central Europe style clutter in them. As the front expands and the clutter increases, I can easily agree that 2:1 should decline to 1.5:1* or even something approaching 1:1 (though a strict 1:1 ratio really is charity for the defender, barring really unusual circumstances).

I forgot to mention visibility! As visibility decreases, frontline expands, and clutter increases, the attacker's ratio should decline. This is getting to be algrebra.

*Down with the eurocomma! Use full stops for decimals and commas for separators like red-blooded Amercuns! I'd eagerly switch to metric if you guys would quit jamming me up with your math notations.

-- 30 --

[Vesku]

Tons of variables, that's why you never know what the result will be before you play the battle and next game with the exact same setup will end in a different result. You asked for ideal ratio and given no more info I assumed an average battle on a random map, 2,0 to 1,0 is too much even for you Amerguns.

[Jolly Roger]

:whis:
Hi folks.

Guess you´ve forgotten some important facts on the subject of
Assault / Defend ratio.

I agree with Vescu, the ratio should be like this:

Assault / Defend 1,7 : 1,0
Advance / Delay 1,3:1,0

BUT THIS IS VALID FOR MAPS IN A SIZE OF 80x80 (max 100 ) and a turn limit of 25 !! If you play with a limit of 40 -45 turns you can
win even in a ratio of 1:1.

Very important are special restrictions for the creation of minefields.
Those who are interested on this subject may feel free to contact me.

Cheers, Klaus

[seabolt]

Tons of variables, that's why you never know what the result will be before you play the battle and next game with the exact same setup will end in a different result. You asked for ideal ratio and given no more info I assumed an average battle on a random map, 2,0 to 1,0 is too much even for you Amerguns.

The crux of the problem possibly being that everyone has a different concept of what "average" and "random" are here. Just to throw fuel on the fire, I'll propose a formula:

Base attacker ratio is established by dividing defense build points by (map width*10).

Multiply result by (visibility/35) with minimum 0.2 and maximum 1.4.

Establish rough percentage of open (grass, road, brick, etc) hexes in the central portion of the map (visibility) hexes out from the front line. Multiply the result above by (0.5 plus half of the open-hex percentage).

Multiply that result by (30/turns in game) with minimum of 0.5.

Tweak up or down for special circumstances (no defensive air assets, no fortifications allowed, victory hexes really deep or really close to front line, etc).

For instance, a 4,000-pt defense of a 120-hex-wide map with visibility 15 and 60% open space in a 30-turn game would result in a proper ratio of (4000/1200)*(15/35)*(0.5+0.3)*(30/30)=1.14 or 4,570 points.

Meanwhile, a 2,000-pt defense of a 70-hex front with visibility 35 and 70% open space in a 20-turn game would result in a proper ratio of (2,000/700)*(35/35)*(0.5+0.35)*(30/20)=3.6 or 7,200 points. Awfully high, but that's a thickly held front with no flanks, nowhere to hide, and defenders able to open fire well beyond spotting range, with no time for the attacker to bombard and move carefully.

Let the deconstruction begin.

-- 30 --

[Narwan]

Mapsize is not an absolute in this. It's a relative. So saying it only applies to 80x80 maps makes no sense imo. What might matter is the troop density you can put on the map as a defender. But even that doesn't matter too much. It's simply a question of how to defend with the points at hand.

Perhaps the error may be the assumption that you need to defend the whole frontline in a defend scenario. You don't. And neither should you make the mistake of defending only forward of the flags. Defend the flags themselves. Have your defensive lines run among and through the area's the flags are in. You know for a fact that the enemy will be there sooner or later so it's the best spot to put your dug in infantry, at-teams, mg's and at guns. And the best part, it doesn't really matter what direction the enemy comes from! It's probably getting much to game-specific now though.
In my experience of this game (and I do have a fair bit of it) the 2:1 ratio is a minimum. If the attacker is inexperienced you may want to increase his points (even if playing another inexperienced player) as I feel that conducting a succesfull attack is inherently harder than conducting a succesfull defence.

EDIT: this post was a response to Jollyroger but was posted just after Seabolt's

[Greybeard]

Arr.. too many formulas for this old pirate to chew on..

give me a mech battalion with decent support and I'll be happy..

Greybeard

[Narwan]

Very important are special restrictions for the creation of minefields.
Those who are interested on this subject may feel free to contact me.

Cheers, Klaus

Uhh, well yeah if you're going to rob the defender of some of his most useful assets I can understand why you would want to give the attacker more points.

An assault scenario is per defenition an attack on a well dug-in enemy who has reinforced his position with trenches, minefields, obstacles, barbed wire and/or pillboxes and who has cleared away terrain to give his units better fields of fire (now I'm betting most of you don't know the game gives you this ability when defending). That's the whole point of the set-up. If you want a more fluid attack vs defense battle you should play an advance/delay battle and not strip away the defenders advantages.
There should be no restrictions on minefields etc as a general rule. These are bought with points and it takes some skill to get their cost's worth in a 2:1 points game. And there we come to another important point; just as the minefields etc are integral to the whole set-up so is the static nature of the defence. It is NOT a mobility battle. And I suspect that that's where it rubs; many people like to move about their pieces, 'do' things with them. In a defend the most important phase of the game by far is your set-up when you place your units. That means you have to spend time and effort on it. The commander you're playing will surely have put many hours into placing his units. So should you. But how many people do? Again I'm betting most people want to get the deployment over with asap, get thing moving (literally too) and place their units more or less on gut feeling rather than calculation on the map. That's not the way to play a defense.

Final point, I think most people don't really like to play pure defenses because of it's static nature and try to turn the game they play into something more fluid as that suits their style more. My advice, only play defenses if you like to play battles where you move maybe only half a dozen units the first 5 to 10 turns.

Narwan

EDIT:
PS two gentleman agreements can be agreed upon for defenses though; first to limit the amount of VH's that can be mined (like no more than a third) and to limit the hexes that can be cleared for improving fields of fire (at most a few dozen or so).

[Vesku]

Final point, I think most people don't really like to play pure defenses because of it's static nature and try to turn the game they play into something more fluid as that suits their style more. My advice, only play defenses if you like to play battles where you move maybe only half a dozen units the first 5 to 10 turns.

Narwan

I have a cure for that, play a mirror.