How Would You Define 'Distrupted' ?

[MisterMark]

Obviously there is an academic definition for 'disrupted', but how would one look at it in military terms in real life as well as the scope of PzC?

For instance we can all probably agree that in real life and within game, a 'broken' unit has no more will to fight and has lost combat effectiveness due to some combination of lack of leadership, man power, ammo and/or morale.  And in PzC that is evident and mathematically reflected by the reduction of the values of those specific variables.  

It's also evident that a disrupted unit loses some part of it's combat effectiveness but in terms of relating that condition to real life, what exactly does that mean?  Does it mean that vital communications have been cut?  Does it mean that a majority of the men in the unit become temporarily panicked/shocked or fatigued?  Does it mean there is a fundamental logistics issue?  Bottom line what is the real world combat equivalent to 'disrupted' that relates to the game?  

I have a hard time getting my head around it when in PzC you can have an almost full strength unit that becomes disrupted but has no hits on morale and/or fatigue and that is fully supplied.  And the consequences of being disrupted are quite dramatic...  attack values cut in half, no ability to assault or dig in as well as a host of other game mechanics that I don't fully understand just yet.

Please don't misunderstand me... I'm not suggesting that the status of disruption is a fundamental problem for the play-ability of PzC.  But it is a pretty pivotal game mechanic that the tactics and strategies of the game are hinged on.  I just want to understand it more and find a way to relate it to real world combat in order to deepen the immersiveness and appreciation of the game.

Very interested to hear others thoughts on this.

-Mark

[Liebchen]

Obviously there is an academic definition for 'disrupted', but how would one look at it in military terms in real life as well as the scope of PzC?

For instance we can all probably agree that in real life and within game, a 'broken' unit has no more will to fight and has lost combat effectiveness due to some combination of lack of leadership, man power, ammo and/or morale.  And in PzC that is evident and mathematically reflected by the reduction of the values of those specific variables.  

It's also evident that a disrupted unit loses some part of it's combat effectiveness but in terms of relating that condition to real life, what exactly does that mean?  Does it mean that vital communications have been cut?  Does it mean that a majority of the men in the unit become temporarily panicked/shocked or fatigued?  Does it mean there is a fundamental logistics issue?  Bottom line what is the real world combat equivalent to 'disrupted' that relates to the game?  

I have a hard time getting my head around it when in PzC you can have an almost full strength unit that becomes disrupted but has no hits on morale and/or fatigue and that is fully supplied.  And the consequences of being disrupted are quite dramatic...  attack values cut in half, no ability to assault or dig in as well as a host of other game mechanics that I don't fully understand just yet.

Please don't misunderstand me... I'm not suggesting that the status of disruption is a fundamental problem for the play-ability of PzC.  But it is a pretty pivotal game mechanic that the tactics and strategies of the game are hinged on.  I just want to understand it more and find a way to relate it to real world combat in order to deepen the immersiveness and appreciation of the game.

Very interested to hear others thoughts on this.

-Mark

Well, if I ever see a '1 Man/D' result, I assume that the CO got hit, or the radioman along with his radio.

I see 'disruption' as a combination of being pinned down, communications break down, loss of psychological momentum to keep at it. NCO gets hit: do the troops keep it together, do they understand what they need to do? Can the next in charge reestablish comms with the LT or HQ?

Injuries can also potentially bog a unit down. They might get involved in tying off stumps and getting the stretchers and stretcher bearers set up for the slog back to the advanced aid station. 

There are all sorts of interpretations for what might cause a unit to lose cohesion and/or focus.

[zovs66]

Its defined on page 57 of the manual.

A unit that is Disrupted represents a unit has been made less combat effective because it has been exposed to very heavy fire. This represents the fact that control of the formation has been reduced, thus reducing fire effect of the unit as a whole. The men are still firing but more at the target of their choice. If the unit is composed of tanks, then many of the crew commanders have "buttoned up". Disrupted units have 1/2 fire value.

To get into a disrupted state a unit has to fail its morale check.

[MisterMark]

Its defined on page 57 of the manual.

A unit that is Disrupted represents a unit has been made less combat effective because it has been exposed to very heavy fire. This represents the fact that control of the formation has been reduced, thus reducing fire effect of the unit as a whole. The men are still firing but more at the target of their choice. If the unit is composed of tanks, then many of the crew commanders have "buttoned up". Disrupted units have 1/2 fire value.

To get into a disrupted state a unit has to fail its morale check.

Understood Zovs... and thanks for your take on it Liebchen.  Yeah gotta have a somewhat believable story to tell yourself when a unit goes disrupted from only a single casualty :)

-Mark

[Ricky B]

Lower morale formations can be considered a barely ordered rabble that the first shots could cause panic and disorganized as the men don't know what to do anyway. So the men hear shots and stop responding to orders.

[MisterMark]

Obviously there is an academic definition for 'disrupted', but how would one look at it in military terms in real life as well as the scope of PzC?

For instance we can all probably agree that in real life and within game, a 'broken' unit has no more will to fight and has lost combat effectiveness due to some combination of lack of leadership, man power, ammo and/or morale.  And in PzC that is evident and mathematically reflected by the reduction of the values of those specific variables.  

It's also evident that a disrupted unit loses some part of it's combat effectiveness but in terms of relating that condition to real life, what exactly does that mean?  Does it mean that vital communications have been cut?  Does it mean that a majority of the men in the unit become temporarily panicked/shocked or fatigued?  Does it mean there is a fundamental logistics issue?  Bottom line what is the real world combat equivalent to 'disrupted' that relates to the game?  

I have a hard time getting my head around it when in PzC you can have an almost full strength unit that becomes disrupted but has no hits on morale and/or fatigue and that is fully supplied.  And the consequences of being disrupted are quite dramatic...  attack values cut in half, no ability to assault or dig in as well as a host of other game mechanics that I don't fully understand just yet.

Please don't misunderstand me... I'm not suggesting that the status of disruption is a fundamental problem for the play-ability of PzC.  But it is a pretty pivotal game mechanic that the tactics and strategies of the game are hinged on.  I just want to understand it more and find a way to relate it to real world combat in order to deepen the immersiveness and appreciation of the game.

Very interested to hear others thoughts on this.

-Mark

Well, if I ever see a '1 Man/D' result, I assume that the CO got hit, or the radioman along with his radio.

I see 'disruption' as a combination of being pinned down, communications break down, loss of psychological momentum to keep at it. NCO gets hit: do the troops keep it together, do they understand what they need to do? Can the next in charge reestablish comms with the LT or HQ?

Injuries can also potentially bog a unit down. They might get involved in tying off stumps and getting the stretchers and stretcher bearers set up for the slog back to the advanced aid station. 

There are all sorts of interpretations for what might cause a unit to lose cohesion and/or focus.

I still had some additional thoughts on all this... 

I do still find it odd that when 'fog of war' is enabled your own army can still detect when an enemy unit is disrupted (even from a single casualty) but not have any idea of what an enemy unit's moral or fatigue state is.

You would think that in real life, units engaged in combat would start to get a sense of the quality, fatigue and moral state of the opposing unit, especially if the engagement lasts a period of time. Unfortunately, PzC doesn't have a method of accounting for that subtly. However, as simple as it is, the fog of war mechanic on how big or small a unit is by only displaying the numeric place value seems to work and feels 'right'. Maybe WDS will eventually find a way to implement some sort of progressive spotting/intel regarding the other factors? For example, the longer two opposing units are engaged, the more can be revealed about fatigue and moral?

Anyway, if we go by what the manual says about disruption, it's more or less a result of a unit taking on overwhelming or surprising fire which results in a loss of command/control and in the case of tanks, limited visibility from commanders 'buttoning up'... and is reflected by the attack value being cut EXACTLY in half. Which makes some sense but you would think it might not be quite that finite. Would be interesting if that particular negative effect of disruption was somewhat randomized and scaled by some combination of the units moral and fatigue state.

Obviously there are limits to any war game and PcZ isn't necessarily an operational combat simulator, but the more I think about it, 'Disrupted' is really a crude game mechanic that still lends it's self to some shortcomings. None the less, I don't consider it a deal breaker at all but maybe it's something that can be refined over time to make a great gaming platform even better.


-Mark

[Liebchen]

Obviously there is an academic definition for 'disrupted', but how would one look at it in military terms in real life as well as the scope of PzC?

For instance we can all probably agree that in real life and within game, a 'broken' unit has no more will to fight and has lost combat effectiveness due to some combination of lack of leadership, man power, ammo and/or morale.  And in PzC that is evident and mathematically reflected by the reduction of the values of those specific variables.  

It's also evident that a disrupted unit loses some part of it's combat effectiveness but in terms of relating that condition to real life, what exactly does that mean?  Does it mean that vital communications have been cut?  Does it mean that a majority of the men in the unit become temporarily panicked/shocked or fatigued?  Does it mean there is a fundamental logistics issue?  Bottom line what is the real world combat equivalent to 'disrupted' that relates to the game?  

I have a hard time getting my head around it when in PzC you can have an almost full strength unit that becomes disrupted but has no hits on morale and/or fatigue and that is fully supplied.  And the consequences of being disrupted are quite dramatic...  attack values cut in half, no ability to assault or dig in as well as a host of other game mechanics that I don't fully understand just yet.

Please don't misunderstand me... I'm not suggesting that the status of disruption is a fundamental problem for the play-ability of PzC.  But it is a pretty pivotal game mechanic that the tactics and strategies of the game are hinged on.  I just want to understand it more and find a way to relate it to real world combat in order to deepen the immersiveness and appreciation of the game.

Very interested to hear others thoughts on this.

-Mark

Well, if I ever see a '1 Man/D' result, I assume that the CO got hit, or the radioman along with his radio.

I see 'disruption' as a combination of being pinned down, communications break down, loss of psychological momentum to keep at it. NCO gets hit: do the troops keep it together, do they understand what they need to do? Can the next in charge reestablish comms with the LT or HQ?

Injuries can also potentially bog a unit down. They might get involved in tying off stumps and getting the stretchers and stretcher bearers set up for the slog back to the advanced aid station. 

There are all sorts of interpretations for what might cause a unit to lose cohesion and/or focus.

I still had some additional thoughts on all this... 

I do still find it odd that when 'fog of war' is enabled your own army can still detect when an enemy unit is disrupted (even from a single casualty) but not have any idea of what an enemy unit's moral or fatigue state is.

You would think that in real life, units engaged in combat would start to get a sense of the quality, fatigue and moral state of the opposing unit, especially if the engagement lasts a period of time. Unfortunately, PzC doesn't have a method of accounting for that subtly. However, as simple as it is, the fog of war mechanic on how big or small a unit is by only displaying the numeric place value seems to work and feels 'right'. Maybe WDS will eventually find a way to implement some sort of progressive spotting/intel regarding the other factors? For example, the longer two opposing units are engaged, the more can be revealed about fatigue and moral?

Anyway, if we go by what the manual says about disruption, it's more or less a result of a unit taking on overwhelming or surprising fire which results in a loss of command/control and in the case of tanks, limited visibility from commanders 'buttoning up'... and is reflected by the attack value being cut EXACTLY in half. Which makes some sense but you would think it might not be quite that finite. Would be interesting if that particular negative effect of disruption was somewhat randomized and scaled by some combination of the units moral and fatigue state.

Obviously there are limits to any war game and PcZ isn't necessarily an operational combat simulator, but the more I think about it, 'Disrupted' is really a crude game mechanic that still lends it's self to some shortcomings. None the less, I don't consider it a deal breaker at all but maybe it's something that can be refined over time to make a great gaming platform even better.


-Mark

You are ready to play with the Delayed Disruption Reporting Option Rule!

Using that rule, you have to gauge the level of effectiveness of the enemy units by looking at the effects of their firepower, at least until next turn.

[MisterMark]

Obviously there is an academic definition for 'disrupted', but how would one look at it in military terms in real life as well as the scope of PzC?

For instance we can all probably agree that in real life and within game, a 'broken' unit has no more will to fight and has lost combat effectiveness due to some combination of lack of leadership, man power, ammo and/or morale.  And in PzC that is evident and mathematically reflected by the reduction of the values of those specific variables.  

It's also evident that a disrupted unit loses some part of it's combat effectiveness but in terms of relating that condition to real life, what exactly does that mean?  Does it mean that vital communications have been cut?  Does it mean that a majority of the men in the unit become temporarily panicked/shocked or fatigued?  Does it mean there is a fundamental logistics issue?  Bottom line what is the real world combat equivalent to 'disrupted' that relates to the game?  

I have a hard time getting my head around it when in PzC you can have an almost full strength unit that becomes disrupted but has no hits on morale and/or fatigue and that is fully supplied.  And the consequences of being disrupted are quite dramatic...  attack values cut in half, no ability to assault or dig in as well as a host of other game mechanics that I don't fully understand just yet.

Please don't misunderstand me... I'm not suggesting that the status of disruption is a fundamental problem for the play-ability of PzC.  But it is a pretty pivotal game mechanic that the tactics and strategies of the game are hinged on.  I just want to understand it more and find a way to relate it to real world combat in order to deepen the immersiveness and appreciation of the game.

Very interested to hear others thoughts on this.

-Mark

Well, if I ever see a '1 Man/D' result, I assume that the CO got hit, or the radioman along with his radio.

I see 'disruption' as a combination of being pinned down, communications break down, loss of psychological momentum to keep at it. NCO gets hit: do the troops keep it together, do they understand what they need to do? Can the next in charge reestablish comms with the LT or HQ?

Injuries can also potentially bog a unit down. They might get involved in tying off stumps and getting the stretchers and stretcher bearers set up for the slog back to the advanced aid station. 

There are all sorts of interpretations for what might cause a unit to lose cohesion and/or focus.

I still had some additional thoughts on all this... 

I do still find it odd that when 'fog of war' is enabled your own army can still detect when an enemy unit is disrupted (even from a single casualty) but not have any idea of what an enemy unit's moral or fatigue state is.

You would think that in real life, units engaged in combat would start to get a sense of the quality, fatigue and moral state of the opposing unit, especially if the engagement lasts a period of time. Unfortunately, PzC doesn't have a method of accounting for that subtly. However, as simple as it is, the fog of war mechanic on how big or small a unit is by only displaying the numeric place value seems to work and feels 'right'. Maybe WDS will eventually find a way to implement some sort of progressive spotting/intel regarding the other factors? For example, the longer two opposing units are engaged, the more can be revealed about fatigue and moral?

Anyway, if we go by what the manual says about disruption, it's more or less a result of a unit taking on overwhelming or surprising fire which results in a loss of command/control and in the case of tanks, limited visibility from commanders 'buttoning up'... and is reflected by the attack value being cut EXACTLY in half. Which makes some sense but you would think it might not be quite that finite. Would be interesting if that particular negative effect of disruption was somewhat randomized and scaled by some combination of the units moral and fatigue state.

Obviously there are limits to any war game and PcZ isn't necessarily an operational combat simulator, but the more I think about it, 'Disrupted' is really a crude game mechanic that still lends it's self to some shortcomings. None the less, I don't consider it a deal breaker at all but maybe it's something that can be refined over time to make a great gaming platform even better.


-Mark

You are ready to play with the Delayed Disruption Reporting Option Rule!

Using that rule, you have to gauge the level of effectiveness of the enemy units by looking at the effects of their firepower, at least until next turn.

Well damn.... you got me there!  I forgot about that optional rule!!!   

That def increases the difficulty level and seems like a appropriate option to have the fullest 'fog of war effects' in play.    

Curious, do many PzC veterans around here play with that optional rule on?

-Mark

[Ricky B]

I definitely like the rule. I don't use it in every game but have probably played 10 or so games with it.

[MisterMark]

I definitely like the rule. I  don't use it in every game but have probably played 10 or so games with it.

Nice... given what people say about how poor the AI is in longer scenarios, I'm going to probably engage that rule next time I square off against the computer.  

I wonder how the AI determines if it's going to assault or not when that rule is in effect?  The rule will make it harder for me but I'm thinking it might also hinder the AI as well.

Thoughts?

-Mark