JTS Melee Calculations

[LarkinVB]

Hi,

I want to completly understand the melee calculations and modifiers as the manual does not seem to be fully accurate.

While using 'Show Melee Odds' sometimes the attacking/defending force number is modified, sometimes the melee modifier changes.

First and foremost what does the melee modifier like 20/0 or 90/20 mean at all? How is it affecting the calculation?

Lances increase the attacking force by +25% while leaders, A class units or attacking from behind increase the modifier by 20 each.

Does someone know the formula to determine casualties?

Stay safe!

[LarkinVB]

Interesting. Nobody knows how the combats are calculated regarding the modifiers?

[BigDuke66]

It's complicated at best, all is in the manual but you have to put it together to understand.

The modifiers usually mean that there is a bonus/malus. 20/0 means that one side gets 20% bonus while the other nothing.
To fully understand you must realize that some modifier modify the manpower directly, that can be seen when the combat report talks about X men Y men effectively. Other modifiers are then applied onto that already modified manpower value.

As for the casualties. There is a Low Combat Value and a High Combat Value, casualties are randomly determined between them. You can get more average result if using the Optional Rule "Optional Fire Results" and "Optional Melee Result".

[LarkinVB]

Ok, thanks. Sadly it is not all in the manual.

* "When Heavy Cavalry or Cavalry equipped with Lances melee attacks, their strength is increased by 25%."
This factor is used to increase manpower (100 attackers will count as 125)

* "If the attacking units have a Leader with them, then 20% is added to the attacking strength."
This factor does not increase mapower but is noted as 20/0 with no clue how it used in the casualty calculation.

The manual does not talk about the impact of these (70/20 etc) modifiers at all in the example of casualty calculation nor in any other part.

[BigDuke66]

Well the modifiers modify the overall combat value, be in manpower for melee or firepower for fire. These final values then give a high/low range and in between the result is randomly chosen.

For the formula look at the paragraph "Combat Results" in the user manual(p.44 in the Leipzig manual).

[LarkinVB]

Again the formula does not touch the modifier values. It only shows how manpower is affecting the result but some modifiers do not affect manpower.

[BigDuke66]

The examples are usually more simple in the manual but a modifier is still mentioned:

"For example, given a combat value of 400, a modifier of 25%, a Low Combat
Value of 5 and a High Combat Value of 25, the effective combat value would
be 500 (= 400 + 25%).  This would be ½ of the base-line combat value of
1000.  Thus the low casualty value would be 2.5 (= 5 / 2) and the high casualty
value would be 12.5 (= 25 / 2).  The resulting casualty value would be
randomly generated between 2.5 and 12.5 for this combat.  Finally, based on
the fractional part of the casualty value, it is randomly rounded up or down.  
For example, if the casualty value was calculated to be 3.7, then 30% of the
time this is rounded down to 3 and 70% of the time is rounded up to 4."

The combat value in this case could also be a value that was already directly modified. And the noted 25% can be the overall result of smaller modifiers.

[TheGrayMouser]

So, in the past I have asked this on several occasions as well as in the old Squad battle forums, and it does'nt appear anyone really knows ( or wont tell :) )

Also, in addition to what BigDuke posted:
"For example, given a combat value of 400, a modifier of 25%, a Low Combat
Value of 5 and a High Combat Value of 25, the effective combat value would
be 500 (= 400 + 25%). This would be ½ of the base-line combat value of
1000. Thus the low casualty value would be 2.5 (= 5 / 2) and the high casualty
value would be 12.5 (= 25 / 2). The resulting casualty value would be
randomly generated between 2.5 and 12.5 for this combat. Finally, based on
the fractional part of the casualty value, it is randomly rounded up or down.
For example, if the casualty value was calculated to be 3.7, then 30% of the
time this is rounded down to 3 and 70% of the time is rounded up to 4."

the Napoleonic games manual also has this snippet

"Melee Resolution The final resolution of the melee is done using the standard Combat Results. The adjusted defending strength is used to calculate attacker casualties using a Low Combat Value of 40 and a High Combat Value of 160. The adjusted attacking strength is used to calculate defender casualties using a Low Combat Value of 20 and a High Combat Value of 100."

Clearly there are two types of modifiers
A: those that adjust the # of effective men. These would include charging multiples, being disrupted, lacking bayonets etc

B: those that show up as the 20/0 etc modifier which include having a leader stacked in the hex, attacking a flank etc etc...

Anyone plays these games enough quickly recognises that, all other things being equal, the defender has a massive advantage ( just look at the casualty range bands in the above formula)
And after some experience, most players should recognize the single most important thing for melee is the # of Effective men, period...

So if an attacker has 100 effective men, 100/10 =10 ( assuming the game using 1000 as the "Baseline combat Value", t I divided the # of effective men by 10 as 100 is 1/10 of the Baseline combat value)

So now if the attacker inflicts a low of 20 to a high of 100 as per the manual as above, the attacker inflicts the following range of casualties to the defender: 20/10 to 100/10 or 2-10 men The defender inflict between 4-16 (40/10 and 16/10).....

In theory I'm pretty sure this is how it works although there probobly more to it than just that , HOWEVER, there is absolutely no information at ALL on how the second type of modifier ie the 20/0 modifier applies...

I have some guesses, it is possible the secondary type of modifier modifies the Low combat Value or the High Combat value in some way. It is also possible the the Baseline Combat value "floats" ie is not a fixed # and adjusted some how..

So, can someone in the know please explain combat? It is a black box and sometimes I wonder if flank attacks etc really matter or not ( are they even working??) because in the end effective men is the overwhelming and really only OBSERVABLE trait that gives one a good idea that you can win a combat.

BTW, if any one hates the idea that the defender gets such a big bonus with all other things being equal, you can modify a scenario PDT in the weather conditions to give the attacker say a 50% combat bonus for the battles entirety .
You can test this with 100 man versus 100 man combat with NO other modifiers of any sort. The bonus will give either the defedner or attacker roughly equal odds to "win the combat" ( the definition of winning is per the game manual, ie inflicting more casualties than receiving) Without this modifier, an attacker will lose like 80% of the time...

I suspect that whatever variable the PDT line modifies , it is the same variables that the second type of unit bonus modifiers uses, th e20/0 types ie having a leader, attacking on a flank...

[phoenix]

Just looking through this, LarkinVB and TheGrayMouser. You want the attacker in melees to be more favoured? Really? I am always bothered that the thing that seems most unrealistic about the entire series is that there is a strong incentive to melee all the time rather than form a line and fire, yet forming a line and firing was what was mostly done in Napoleonic battles and there was always - naturally - quite a reluctance to roll the brutal melee dice. So I'm always inclined to think that almost anything that encourages people to melee less, as the default attack method, must be ok. Most PBEM games I've played have consisted of both sides marching up and - mostly - heading straight into the melee. Maybe my sample is biased, but that's my experience of the games. I think it accounts for why in the game casualty numbers regularly seem so much higher than historical casualties.

[TheGrayMouser]

Just looking through this, LarkinVB and TheGrayMouser. You want the attacker in melees to be more favoured? Really? I am always bothered that the thing that seems most unrealistic about the entire series is that there is a strong incentive to melee all the time rather than form a line and fire, yet forming a line and firing was what was mostly done in Napoleonic battles and there was always - naturally - quite a reluctance to roll the brutal melee dice. So I'm always inclined to think that almost anything that encourages people to melee less, as the default attack method, must be ok. Most PBEM games I've played have consisted of both sides marching up and - mostly - heading straight into the melee. Maybe my sample is biased, but that's my experience of the games. I think it accounts for why in the game casualty numbers regularly seem so much higher than historical casualties.

So the OP was asking how the modifiers and combat works, and to date no-one has been able to say how it really works...   I did slip in my thoughts on the matter though

I disagree with some of your points,  I feel the current system in the Nap engine encourages/requires large melee stacks to have any chance of success.  Shouldnt there be other mechanisms to achieve what your suggest  ie infantry stopped cold by musketry instead of melee?   The game engine already has one, in the form of op fire or defensive fire.  The sad fact though, is that a line has no chance to "stop" 4 stacked columns that race at it with only one chance to fire, and only at 1 of those  attacking columns.  So that is broken in some way. ( Perhaps if on units disrupts , they all disrupt?
Hmm..)

( In case your not aware all these Tiller tactical games use the same melee combat resolution, be it the Civil war, M&P, EAW)

 In contrast the 7 years war game gets around the problem with very restrictive stacking limits, so basically it unlikley you would ever have two infantry battallions be able to stack together.  Thus fire power rules the day and feels so much more realistic.

BTW I do agree that melee was rare and bayonets almost never killed anyone on pitched battles in the  Nap era, however it makes no sense that in cavalry versus infantry or cavalry vs cavalry the defender should be given such a massive defense bonus.

It also makes no sense in the Ren engine with large 100% only melee units.


I just find the fact that when I have a 300 strength A+++ Cuirassiers with a leader UPHILL melee a leaderless mob of 500 disordered high fatiuged cossacks from the flank, and I lose 65 men to 31, to be frustrating and more on an immersion killer that the POTENTIAL for melee becoming more broadly usefull.   I mostly play AI or hotseat and I self regulate myself to not do things I feel would not have any chance to succeed in realife.  I recognise though that is not possible in MP.

Cheers man!