lets waste our armies

[Jamitar]

never find what im looking or on this forum so let me write my own problems:
this one is related to the combat situation. i am prussia, and I frst start invading russia and i reach quite far exending from lower ukraine to kiew (kiev?) till st petersbourgh of course ou cant possibly imagin succes will go without the usual glitch series. my poor army who is besieging kiew is ordered to fight an all out attack. okay even a 1million army who chargs a 50 000 soldier wall ends up loosings tons by mowin down. but I still win. second day same attack with 4000 men or so and kill them all. and then the problem the sam fight against 6000 soldiers repeats itself fur the resting 13 days. its not only nnoying because cant capture it. its how unfair advantage the AI always end up getting. he may lose all his soldiers to mine and get them back , but no hope for me, naturally. my numbers will keep going down till I retreat or stay only for siege (its going to take a lot of years for a tiny army to use up a big cites supplies) ugh im still imagining the AI mocking me with a big grin.how unfair. well I end up winning the war and then the austro-prussian war starts same thing happens at wien (vienna?) im actually hoping that changes are going to take place to repair those bugs, and im not talking about the fact that you cant find your v and remplaced it with w ( or maybe thats how those contries wrote their cities I dont know, and compared to my other problem, hardly care)

otherwise this game is very good except from glitches and longs turns

thanks( if someone is stil reading)

[yellow ribbon]

hello jamitar,

what you are describing confirms my problems which i had mentioned here a couple of times and in different threads in the last 8 weeks

i do have enough experience with the game AACW to know that the combat system mechanism in PON is somewhat altered, leading to higher losses in field battles...
however, if i want, after a couple of games with PON, i am able to have similar results in tactical campaigns as i would have it in older games from AGEOD

***

the problem with the system of sieges has been reported from me too. in generally i do accept the system, but there seems to be three major issues.

compared to AACW you inflict nearly no damaged to larger armies by besieging them, the messages of "you inflicted x-hits" are rare and normally (whether you use a apache raider or a heavy corps with engineers and all possible siege guns does not matter) not higher than 5 or 10 hits.
Enemy can totally recover over time, if the army is large enough to "replace the fallen men at the wall"
it works effectively only in case of small garrisons lower than 20 points
larger armies recover close to instantly, if not whole stack surrendered

next is, even if you have more than 10, 20 or even 30 breaches, there is still a defensive bonus by trenches and city up to more than 250 points (after they had enough time to dug in)

third is, i played the GC American Civil War five times now and always had the foe besieged, an army of 70000 men is in the game able to feed itself by a 2-point city without depot and total blocked harbor for more than one or even two years.
smaller armies of militia hold their stand even longer, being the last city and the last force the enemy had.

only way now is to accept very high losses or to spend that much time with a siege.
national moral will decrease but will be boost by ten thousands of prisoners and eventually gains of strategic cities.
the total loss of national moral, in my case, in long sieges is lower than the loss of national moral from major military defeats...

[Sir Garnet]

Having besieged and assaulted taken many Russian forts and cities (though also taking some by siege alone), some of these taken repeatedly, the most important key to winning without prohibitive losses is having lots and lots of artillery, especially the siege pieces, and attacking if possible on a clear day in open terrain. The defenses are quickly breached and the massive artillery superiority can be devastating in the ranged combat, softening them up for the assault. Defenders lacking artillery or large numbers of course fall easily.

[yellow ribbon]

"and attacking if possible on a clear day in open terrain. The defenses are quickly breached and the massive artillery superiority can be devastating in the ranged combat, softening them up for the assault. Defenders lacking artillery or large numbers of course fall easily"


absolutely right
what does unfortunately NOT work in sieges and deep woods!

and siege is the main point here!


***************

Sir Garnet, as I wrote in different posts:

i too have been able too cut the supply of troops and starve them to death in the open field, what in case of supply wagons and open anchorage also needed over one year for an army of ten thousands of men

this is not comparable to AACW where always a shuffling of supply wagons to the depot and back was necessary...

i tried it very often under laboratory atmosphere:

sometimes a force surrenders within few turns (like a totally sealed Vicksburg, or it is destroyed while breaking the structure (like in the Texas Depot at the border.

in case of very long sieges, in all of MY games with different patches, effects are ALWAYS like Jamitar and i described it.

jamitar is NOT experiencing something new, its an commonly known problem (BUT NOT A BUG!) and discussed in many (german, dutch and english speaking) forums in the net.

PS:

Kiew (englische Transkription Kiev, ukrainisch Київ/Kyjiw [ˈkɪjiu̯]; russisch Киев/Kijew [ˈkʲijɪf]

[Jamitar]

haha- at last ive got a correct answer, unlike some few bigger games.

by the way if its not a bug its still an irealistic situations. in all out attack, 1milion men who kill 4000 wont just stupidly waitoutside for newt wave.they rush in and kil every remplacement thats left dont they?if it could be applied to the game? (just imagine hitler waiting in front of london with his tanks and plans for them to attack in suicide groups of 4000 regular men armed with bayonets.. actually id be more imagining him rush in head irst for the prize with the reste of his stunned army still waiting for order to charge) anyway in this situation if its not infinite, I guess its not so bad

[yellow ribbon]

jamitar, i cannot speak for the Devs, nor for everyone.

i just can say that sometimes the game is pretty accurate in numbers of losses, but as soon we deal with huge stacks or besieging a city and loosing patience and attack in an all-men-against-the-wall it is ridiculous...

thereby i confirm what you are describing, as soon there are more than one battle in a province in one turn, huge enemy stacks recover close to instantly or surrender... randomly anything between it.
if there were 28 elements running at day 2, they would not be able to fight again day 5...

I managed all field battles in the american civil war with less than 150.000 men lost, while 300.000 men against 100.000 fortified troops in a city without fort killed me 1/3 o my army and forcing the rest to retreat to the neighbor province.

i also struggle with the VERY long period an enemy stack of more than 600 combat points can sustain on one or two supply-wagons plus open anchorage...

and i do know very well that this and the high number of losses in few, but not all battles and sieges are discussed in plenty forums.
from the answers i derive that combat system was altered to lead to higher losses, compared to i.e. AACW

but it was intended that this system is different, thus we cannot call it a bug, the system works... we can just feel, its working in mysterious ways and for some of us, more than once in undesired ways.

for i know it is not broken, i write my reports with the note, that this is not something to discuss it any longer, but to keep it in mind.
once i got explanations that there would be to many variables and open questions, than one would be able to call it a bug, i tested it again and again and always came to the same (my own) conclusions...