Armour Effectiveness Modifier

Lien Leposh · 02-17-2009, 08:30 PM,

The text below is copied directly from the manual and its got me puzzled. See at bottom.

The fire modifier for the two cases are shown below where the hard attack value is H and an armored unit defense value is D.

• Case 1. If H < D, then the modifier is H / D.
• Case 2. If H > D, then the modifier is 1 / Square Root (H / D).

For example, suppose a unit with a hard attack value of 4 fires on an armored unit with a defense value of 8. Then an armor effectiveness modifier of 1/2 is applied to the fire value. Also, if a unit with a hard attack value of 8 fires on an armored unit with a defense value of 2, then an armor effectiveness modifier of 1/SquareRoot(4) = 1/2 is applied to the fire value. In the first example, the modifier represents the effect of non-penetration by the firing unit. In the second example, the modifier represents the fact that once penetration is achieved, then fire values do not increase linearly. That is to say, if you are firing a large caliber anti-tank gun at a weaker target and you get a hit then you don’t get two kills. This would be like a big AT gun killing two halftracks with a single shot.

How is the modifier applied? As it stands in the above examples my logic has it that the weak units have a modifier of 1/2 and the strong unit have a modifier of 1/2.
Take an example of 10 Shermans (average gun and average armour) vs 10 King Tigers (Thick armour and BIG guns) with all other factors being equal. Common sense tells you that King Tiger wins.
However my logic tells me that according to the above calculations the King Tiger would do better if its Gun was equal to the armour of the sherman as the ratio would be nearer 1 and there would be a modifier of 1, and not a fraction of 1.
Yes I can see the argument of not killing 2 birds with one stone, but over the course of 2 hours fighting I will be flinging lots of stones and I would expect my big stones to be more effective than my opponants small ones.

So, how is the modifier actually applied ?
My thoughts are that if H>D then why isnt the modifier just "square root (H/D)" given my argument above?
Or have I missed something?

Thanks

**Ricky B** · 02-18-2009, 01:32 AM,

There are many other factors utilized in determing the results of fire combat, and so an attack as in the second example, with an HA of 8 against a defense of 2, will have a huge advantage over an attack of HA 2 against defense 2. So I think all this adjustment is doing is reducing the huge advantage in the first case, but it will still be better than an attack with HA-defense. You would have a 400% attack in one case, modified by 1/2, and a 100% attack unmodified in the other case.

Try this out with on map results off, so you can see all the numbers used - it doesn't mean a lot to me because so many numbers impact the results, but it should give a feel for how things are implemented.

Rick

Dog Soldier · 02-18-2009, 04:28 AM,

Operational combat in this game series takes into account many tactical issues not directly modeled as they would be in a tactical game with shorter turn time lengths.

The units that fire at each other are not firing at full ROF for two full hours. Heck, most units in WW2 would be out of ammunition in a single turn. So do not expect just because you have two hours and are carrying big stones they will always be effective. Most of the time they will, but once in a while you will be scratching your head and wondering what the ...just happened? Like a real commander. Acquiring the target, waiting for the target to appear, maneuver within the hex, laying smoke, weather etc, all are compensated for in gray area of the game's algorithms. Do not get to caught up in trying to determine the best mathematical resolution to a given situation.

The ten Shermans can destroy several of the Tigers before taking return fire if they surprise them with rear and side shots as the Tigers run around wondering where the shooting is coming from. An extreme example to be sure.

But the point is use sound judgment. Maybe send in an artillery barrage on those Tigers before shooting the Shermans. It might cause the Tigers to button up or panic, (disrupt). On the other hand the Tigers could be manned by some really cool customers, and well....bad day to be in a Sherman/75. Both results are possible in this game system. As RickyB mentions above, there are many factors. In combat, anything can happen once contact is made. The beauty of the game engine, is that is does not always provide consistent results. Otherwise this would just be a mathematical exercise and not a game simulation of operational combat.

Dog Soldier.

Liebchen · 02-18-2009, 05:47 PM,

You haven't played Combat Mission, I'm guessing. With two square kilometers to maneuver in, 10 Shermans could do some damage to those Tigers. They'd have to split up and dash to the flanks. Tigers had slow turrets, while Shermans has stabilized guns. It wouldn't be unheard of for the Shermans to do equal damage to the Tigers before one side or the other disengaged.

Lien Leposh · 02-19-2009, 09:47 PM,

Liebchen Wrote:You haven't played Combat Mission, I'm guessing. With two square kilometers to maneuver in, 10 Shermans could do some damage to those Tigers. They'd have to split up and dash to the flanks. Tigers had slow turrets, while Shermans has stabilized guns. It wouldn't be unheard of for the Shermans to do equal damage to the Tigers before one side or the other disengaged.

I have played it loads (CMBB) as it happens, and I think its excellent. However, I think you've taken my example a little too literally.
I recognise that fact that loads of other factors are involved in the game as well as real life combat.
I was just a little perplexed at the equation thats all and wanted some clarification for my own piece of mind.

**Ricky B** · 02-20-2009, 01:30 AM,

So is your question at least partly answered yet? You got everything I know - and I don't worry about too much more, just knowing that it works is enough for me. You have a group of T34s going up against Panthers is Kursk, and regardless of the formulas, the T34s will die like flies and barely hurt the Panthers unless they massively outnumber them, at least in the stock game.

If it didn't clarify things as much as you want, continue to ask away.

Rick

Dog Soldier · 02-20-2009, 03:27 AM,

Ricky B Wrote:You have a group of T34s going up against Panthers is Kursk, and regardless of the formulas, the T34s will die like flies and barely hurt the Panthers unless they massively outnumber them, at least in the stock game.
Rick

True, unless after three days of continuous use the Panthers are now 150+ fatigue and you assault them with lots of fresh reserve T-34s. Assaults are what were used most at Kursk. The fight was close range in the undulating hills and very deadly.

Dog Soldier

James Ward · 02-20-2009, 04:35 AM,

Dog Soldier Wrote:True, unless after three days of continuous use the Panthers are now 150+ fatigue and you assault them with lots of fresh reserve T-34s. Assaults are what were used most at Kursk. The fight was close range in the undulating hills and very deadly.

Dog Soldier

I'm ain't assaulting no 90 vehicle Panther unit no matter how tired it is! :)

Liquid_Sky · 02-20-2009, 06:12 AM,

Actually...your missing a piece of the math..

Take a 10 guns at 52 strength. Power is 520.
Take 10 other guns at 29 strength. Power is 290.

If both are shooting at 25 defense....

You get a final value of 360 for the 52 strength guns...
and you get a value 269 for the strength 29 guns....

so the math says that the 52 strength guns are still better then the 29 strength guns...just not in a the simple ratio you are thinking of...

If you like try out an extreme example...like 10 guns strength 6 shooting at a defense of 6. Value 60.

10 guns strength 78 firing at same target...value: 216.

Even though the strength 78 guns are basically quartered while the strength 6 guns get there full firepower, I would still rather be shooting the Hard attack 78's :)