Attack Strength?

[Whiskey]

I am just getting back into TOAW and had a quick question re: attack strength.

In the unit report, why and what is the difference between the attack value provided under unit capabilities (top of box) and the sum of anti-armor and anti-personnel strength provided under strengths (right side of box).

Also on the unit report, when dealing with only 1 weapon system, why doesn't the attack strength (right side of box) correspond with the weapon system information provided when you click on the weapon system. I understand that when dealing with more than 1 weapon system the strength is a weighted avg but I can't figure out the difference when dealing with only 1 weapon system.

Any clarification would be greatly appreciated

Cheers

R

 

[Chuck?]

Originally posted by whiskey

In the unit report, why and what is the difference between the attack value provided under unit capabilities (top of box) and the sum of anti-armor and anti-personnel strength provided under strengths (right side of box).

The value under unit capabilities is anti-armor + anti-personnel strength. Also it seems part of the artillery value is added to this total.

Also on the unit report, when dealing with only 1 weapon system, why doesn't the attack strength (right side of box) correspond with the weapon system information provided when you click on the weapon system. I understand that when dealing with more than 1 weapon system the strength is a weighted avg but I can't figure out the difference when dealing with only 1 weapon system.

Unit strength can be changed by other factors such as supply, proficiency, and readiness. Also unit strength can be modified due to the scale of the scenario and how strong the other units are.

 

[Whiskey]

Chuck, TKS for the reply. I can see how the unit strength is diluted with the modifiers you mentioned and that makes complete sense however, comparing the attack strength under unit capabilities with that provided on the right side under the detail of strength doesn't seem to tally up.

The example I am looking at is in Arracourt. Take the German 113th Panzer Brigade, 1/130PZ. Under capabilities, attack is given as 30.

Looking under strength I have anti armor of 22 and anti personnel of 13 with artillery of 0.

Defensive value always seems to reconcile but for some reason the attack is off.

Would love to figure this one out

R

 

[Chuck?]

Not sure why this units is only at 30. It might be due to the unit being at 60% supply.

 

[Whiskey]

It gets even more interesting. If you move forward to turn 3 for the German (play both sides and don't move any units around) you will see the same unit with an attack of 33 under capabilities and anti tank of 25 and anti personnel of 15.

The same descrepancy exists with other units (GER & AMR) in the Arracourt scenario as well.

 

[Chuck?]

I did more experiments. Disbanded the other unit with Panthers and moved the 113th Panzer Brigade, 1/130PZ to a supply point. After several turns the unit was at full supply and has 45/45 Panther tanks. It's stats now are: anti-armor 26, anti-personnel 16, and attack 53.

 

[Bob Cross]

Originally posted by whiskey
I am just getting back into TOAW and had a quick question re: attack strength.

In the unit report, why and what is the difference between the attack value provided under unit capabilities (top of box) and the sum of anti-armor and anti-personnel strength provided under strengths (right side of box).

Also on the unit report, when dealing with only 1 weapon system, why doesn't the attack strength (right side of box) correspond with the weapon system information provided when you click on the weapon system. I understand that when dealing with more than 1 weapon system the strength is a weighted avg but I can't figure out the difference when dealing with only 1 weapon system.

Any clarification would be greatly appreciated

Cheers

R

Last question first. From the help file:

"These strengths are simply the sums of the total strengths in each category for all equipment assigned to the unit, multiplied by the unit's Morale, scaled to fit the game displays. The unit's actual internal strengths, used for all game calculations but not displayed, are much larger numbers. At the low end (displayed unit strengths less than 3) there can be quite a bit of real difference between units that show similar displayed strengths."

"scaled to fit the game displays." In the editor, all strength values are scaled to the largest strength factor in the game, which is arbitrarily set to about 31 or 32. The scale factor doesn't change once the game is started, though.

As to the attack strength, I hadn't noticed that before. But I note that for soft (unarmored) units the attack strength is just the sum of AP & AT strengths (with a little rounding error). Only on armored units is there a difference. Armor factors must be entering the equation in some fashion.

 

[CHorn]

Originally posted by whiskey
Chuck, TKS for the reply. I can see how the unit strength is diluted with the modifiers you mentioned and that makes complete sense however, comparing the attack strength under unit capabilities with that provided on the right side under the detail of strength doesn't seem to tally up.

The example I am looking at is in Arracourt. Take the German 113th Panzer Brigade, 1/130PZ. Under capabilities, attack is given as 30.

Looking under strength I have anti armor of 22 and anti personnel of 13 with artillery of 0.

Defensive value always seems to reconcile but for some reason the attack is off.

Would love to figure this one out

R

Are you sure this scenario doesn't have any 'shock' in it for turn 1? If you start the scenario and then go to German turn 2 without doing anything you'll notice the values have now gone DOWN without any activity at all.

Hope this helps.

 

[Whiskey]

Bob TKS for your reply. It seems that based on your info regarding scaleability the attack strength under capabilities fits the modified values of anti tank and anti personnel into that scale (ie. 31 or 32 being the most that attack strength can get up to in a scenario).

I confirmed this with Desert Storm '91 scenario whereby a unit comprised of M1A1's with an anti armor of 72 and an anti personnel of 8 has an attack value of 32 under capabilities.

TKS all for your replies

R

 

[Whiskey]

I take it back - attack capabilities increase above the 31 - 32 level and does so randomly even if not moving or using the unit. I do believe it does somehow tie in to the scale of the scenario and units involved but I just can't seem to figure out in what way.

The mystery continues - would love to find out what drives this and what effect it has on gameplay/strategy. If no effect, (since I typically go by the anti tank / anti personnel strength anyway) then why is it even displayed.

R

 

[Bob Cross]

Originally posted by whiskey
I take it back - attack capabilities increase above the 31 - 32 level and does so randomly even if not moving or using the unit. I do believe it does somehow tie in to the scale of the scenario and units involved but I just can't seem to figure out in what way.

The mystery continues - would love to find out what drives this and what effect it has on gameplay/strategy. If no effect, (since I typically go by the anti tank / anti personnel strength anyway) then why is it even displayed.

R

Regarding scaling, let me clarify what I meant. On the bottom of the unit 2D icon are two numbers representing its AP and Defense strengths. When in the editor, these strengths are scaled such that no unit will have either of these strengths greater than 32, but such that at least one unit has one of those strengths equal to about 31 or 32. The attack strength (sum of AP & AT) can be higher than 32, and does not figure into the scaling.

Once the game begins, the scale set in the editor doesn't change, so shock, supply, readiness, replacements, and combat/unsupply/pestilence losses can cause the values to stray up or down from that limit.

Note to scenario designers: the scaling I described above is the reason why you don't want to have that one gigantic unit in your scenario. It will cause all the rest of your units to have 1-1 unit strengths. Check out the "Israel 1948" scenario for a bad example of this mistake.