casualty defaults with heavy weapons

[lansoar]

I have noted in Winsp that the most typical kill result for weapons that are classified as heavy INF and/or AT when subjected to enemy fire/op fire are to suffer kill results of "3 casualties" when the right trigger is achieved. Admittedly it used to irritate the hell out of me...especially in cases where the units were dug in. Examples would include MMG/HMG units and AT/Howitzer units. I eventually concluded that it had a certain logic in that the crew of these units are close positioned.....and in some cases might have little to limited protection. Problem i had with it is that you could ultimately count on the event happening. fire enough rounds....you will get that classic 3 casualties in one fire phase impact and it makes up for all the prior results that include none to 1 casualties per fire round.

My question is, is this a variable factor employed when these units are subjected to enemy fire? I only have noted it in the most recent versions.

[scorpio_rocks]

Seems to be pretty variable for me...

[lansoar]

I observe it in every scenario, custom or generated....numerous times per scenario. That's not variable. That's a pattern.

[Dion]

lansoar, please forgive me, but I do not understand, "when the right trigger is achieved", means.

If I understand the rest of your post correctly, I agree with you, I feel it's a matter of the protection that the target provides. But I also feel that total casualty counts are random, because, like you say, 0, 1, or 3 casualties are likely per turn, so with multiple turns any total would be possible.

[lansoar]

lansoar, please forgive me, but I do not understand, "when the right trigger is achieved", means.

If I understand the rest of your post correctly, I agree with you, I feel it's a matter of the protection that the target provides. But I also feel that total casualty counts are random, because, like you say, 0, 1, or 3 casualties are likely per turn, so with multiple turns any total would be possible.

Hi,

thanks for your response. I referred to a "trigger" as a type of die role result with modifiers. I am well familiarized with Grigsby game code from the viewpoint of working with programmers who modified it. However i am not a coder so i understand my interpretations may not sync with those who touched the actual code. Those that did would sometimes chuckle at me over correspondence because they knew how many random number generators there were. Its the beauty of it really.

I was trying to adequately describe a pattern i would see in every scenario where, very frequently....there was this universal 3 casualties result with specific units, like MMG/HMG and AT/How units. Not with every fire sequence. I wish to make that clear. Yes, i see plenty of 1 casualty results with these units. However i also see a frequent result of '3' casualties with these units....every scenario, every time.....multiple times. Rifle types see such events very very rarely and usually in situations of extremes.....such as, large differences in EXP, combined with status such as "dug in" or in clear vs covered terrain, and morale state. Such expansive results (3 to 3+) are extremely rare with regular soft targets (usually ground pounder rifle type units)

This is not the case with the MMG/HMG/AT/How units. they can be entrenched...aka dug in....not particularly suppressed. hell i see the "3" happen alot with the first shot. its a pattern as i say and i'm just curious. I can see how it might be intentional....after all there's a big difference between say a Rifle Squad dug in.....spread out in a 50m hex vs. say an AT gun where the crew of 7ish or more.....is concentrated.

So i'm not saying its "wrong", i'm just curious because there are times when its questionable in terms of resilience because as a person who's been a tester/developer, i'm sensitive to patterns that allow players to game a system. Its the worst enemy and one very hard to combat.

overall though. Winsp wins every time. I only rarely visit SP:WAW from Matrix as a nostalgic thing. Some aspects of it are great but ultimately the engine they used as the basis just left soft targets too soft...even at 250% toughness.