AI Performance

Discussion in 'Command Ops Series' started by BigDuke66, May 28, 2015.

  1. BigDuke66

    BigDuke66 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2014
    Messages:
    65
    Likes Received:
    5
    Hi
    So far the patch 5.0.12 runs stable for me and almost everything works like it should, so now ore complicated things could/should come on the table.
    I was doing the Greyhound Dash scenario and I got the impression that the AI doesn't really properly rest its units. Of course the FOW gives me surely not the exact fatigue values but I had seen units like this again and again and not only in my advance but the AI advances with these himself.
    Seeing a pitiful small TD platoon come up just to get shoot up and then even surrender looks rather silly, and I guess part of it is fatigue because such units had always shown high fatigue values.
    Also I see the AI doing a lot stuff in the night, that's maybe a nice idea if your troops are rested and you want to surprise the enemy but if they are just exhausted it's a crazy idea and should only be done in breakout operations and not to simply advance on an objective.

    So how is the AI experience for the other players?
    Cheers
     
  2. GoodGuy

    GoodGuy Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2015
    Messages:
    218
    Likes Received:
    24
    To be honest, not good. Both level of fatigue and rest policy have caused problems since they were introduced (BFTB?).

    So, for me it's the other way around, as basically, at nightfall, it feels like all units that carried out attacks, that had defended perimeters, or that had contact with the enemy during the day, cannot move anymore, and there is no chance to make such units move. Even units with a level of 48% fatigue will either not move at all, or move some 200 meters before falling "asleep" again, sometimes some sub-unit seems to have a way higher fatigue level, but detaching the "zzz"-guys won't solve the problem.
    While it's understandable that foot units have to rest, it's absolutely unrealistic with wheeled and armored units.
    I've brought this up in the COTA forums already, back then, when the stock version had some light problems with levels of fatigue. The demo of BFTB i played featured a completely new fatigue policy (as far as I could tell), and it seems to be either the same or even worse with CO2, to be honest.
    For instance, every German tank unit's vehicle had an assistant driver (sometimes fully trained, sometimes halfway trained), who could take over and operate the vehicle in a sufficient manner, when the main driver needed some rest. British forces had the same policy, afaik, and the US Army probably introduced similar measures, at the time.

    With the current fatigue policy an Axis or Allied tank unit will stop dead right in the open, once it has hit a certain fatigue level. Tanks were some of the most precious units in WW II, and usually were not - except for situations where they ran out of fuel (but where it was still attempted to move them to somewhat safer or favourable positions) - left in the open to get plastered by tactical bombers, defensive AT fire or enemy tanks. If a tank had enough fuel, the driver position could ALWAYS be filled with a soldier that wouldn't fall asleep on the steering "wheel". IIRC, the radio operator served as assistant driver, sometimes the loader would do it, and even in some instances, crews had 2 assistant drivers (radio op. and loader).

    A little historical excursion:
    Especially in 1939 and 1940, millions of Pervitin (brand name, basically Methamphetamine) pills were taken by German soldiers. Patented in 1937 and introduced to the German market in 1938, it was marketed as drug to enhance the patient's performance, to increase the ability to concentrate/focus and to fight axiety, and it was even put into candies, truffles and chocolates. Pralines with Pervitin were known as or nicknamed "Hausfrauenschokolade" (housewife's chocolate). Pervitin pills were then issued to soldiers, drivers of vehicles and pilots, when the war started, basically with the same aims (to keep them focused/awake).

    NCOs sleeping on a carriage (on the move) around 1940:

    1940-sleeping-soldiers.jpg

    Military surgeons found Pervitin to be the ideal tool to keep soldiers motivated and awake, despite the possibility of getting harsh side-effects (which ranged from dizziness, psychoses to cardiac failures, in addition to the apparent danger to get addicted).

    Pervitindose.jpg

    Some authors refer to the drug as a pharmaceutical weapon in Germany's arsenal.
    They were later nicknamed "Stuka-pills", "Göring-pills" or "Panzerschokolade" (Tank chocolate), where the latter consisted of chocolate pieces that were blended with certain amounts of Pervitin. A Pervitin-free version was Scho-ka-kola, 2 round chocolate disks cut like pizza pieces (8 pieces) and put in round tin boxes, which contained a high amount of caffeine and which was issued to many soldiers early in the war (it became a luxury item later in the war), but also dubbed "Fliegerschokolade" (Aviator chocolate), as it was part of Luftwaffe rations, usually.

    Especially pilots took these pills (or ate the Pervitin-chocolate) to stay awake, especially during the long flights for bombing runs in England (starting from bases in Norway) during the Battle of Britain, but also in every other theater, crews of tank units took them during the sickle push/cut towards Dunkirk that unhinged vital parts of the French forces and the BEF in 1940, as well as foot soldiers, during that campaign. The usage (and also the drug's abuse) hit such high levels, that between April and June 1940 the Wehrmacht had ordered (and received) 35 Million Pervitin pills.
    British newspapers reported about a German "magic bullet" used by the Germans, which referred to Pervitin, somewhere around 1940, IIRC.
    Post-war accounts state that the pills were handed out like candy, between 1939-1940.

    In mid-1941, the Reichsopiumgesetz (Reich's opium law) installed a prescription requirement, but the drug was still issued at the front, just on a (somewhat) more controlled level. At this point, huge amounts of soldiers had gotten addicted already, and then urged their families, in letters, to send them Pervitin (which they did), in cases where the units' surgeons denied to prescribe or hand out the drug. So soldiers still had access to the German "Wunderpille", one way or another.
    Pervetin was used throughout the war by all German military branches, and the use even experienced some kind of renaissance during the Battle of the Bulge (see below). Scientists and psychatrists studying Hitler's medical files came (1980) to the conclusion that he got addicted to Pervetin in 1943. The Germans saw it as medicine, not as a drug, at the time, despites its side effects.

    *********
    Back to historical march performances and procedures:

    In Russia, during the retreat from the Mius river - for example, German Inf units dug in, slept in shifts for 4 hrs, then worked on the trenches or foxholes again, slept for another 4 hrs, and defended the perimeter, all of that during the day, when the Russians chased hard, and then they marched at night, as that was the only time/condition where they could disengage and sneak away. They then marched pretty much the whole night, and dug in at first daylight, again, for days, sometimes for a week or even more. I've found this policy in numerous war diaries covering German retreats, and it was used on all fronts.

    For foot units, military planners worked with the following numbers during peacetime:
    An infantry group would be able to perform daily marches of 22.5 kilometers, and would have to get a full rest day on the 3rd or 4th day. In wartime, 50 kilometers were possible very well (note: forced march !). Within a 48 hrs frame, the highest performance was considered to reach 100 kilometers (Cavalry units), and 70 kilometers with foot units, with the performance of foot units significantly decreasing on the 3rd day, but where these foot units were still fit for action and fit for short marches even on the 4th day.

    German veterans, who had participated in the French campaign in 1940, reported that even march performances of 80-100 kilometers (48 hrs) were reached, as their superiors kept kicking their asses, but at least 80 km sounds believable, since most of them reported that the shoes of many soldiers had started to disintegrate on the 3rd or 4th day.

    I do know that Dave has a different opinion here (he expressed a different one in the COTA forums, at least), but the experiences he collected in an Australian artillery unit, or the experiences of other users who served in the military, do not match the historical performances of German and Allied foot units, even if his (or their) unit(s) consisted of tough nuts all the way. ( no offense, of course :) )

    In 1944, right before the Ardennes offensive, quite some local (means Coy level) commanders were offered the delivery of large amounts of Pervitin, so that they could hand them out right before the pushes started. Some commanders ordered their soldiers to take them, others just offered the pills and let their troops decide what to do, still others either denied to issue them or didn't think the pills could up their soldiers' perfomances/morale. US veterans, though, reported about some German units that kept storming/coming fearlessly in some sectors and wondered about some "weird" glance in their eyes. There are a dozen German TV documentaries covering the use of Pervetin in WW II, and military historians backed up the findings in there, some of them expressed that the high level of military use of Pervitin was surprising to them.

    When the Daily Mail (UK) picked up the findings in 2011 and 2013, they put it a bit harsh in their headlines (well it's a tabloid paper, after all :)): "Junkies in jackboots", or "Nazis on Narcotics: How Hitler's henchmen stayed alert", but almost all of the details presented in the article are correct.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...men-stayed-alert-war-taking-CRYSTAL-METH.html

    That said, keeping in mind that this kind of doping occured millions of times on the German side, and considering that even "clean" soldiers were able to cover extreme distances within 48 hrs (often just with one or another 4 hrs -break), the current fatigue system in the game does not reflect historical performances and procedures, and it also kills the fun (user experience), as not even 2-4 hrs of rest would enable them to move a bit again.
     
    #2 GoodGuy, May 28, 2015
    Last edited: May 28, 2015
    Velkan likes this.
  3. EdJaws

    EdJaws Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2015
    Messages:
    76
    Likes Received:
    2
    I had the same problem with getting units to move until Daz set me on the right path; set rest to none if you need a unit to move.
     
  4. GoodGuy

    GoodGuy Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2015
    Messages:
    218
    Likes Received:
    24
    All of my statements above refer to the game's state when "no rest by default" is enabled.
    Hehe, I'm playing Panther Games installments for some 11 years now. If the option "no rest by default" is present either in the game options (as global switch), or (alternatively) in a unit's task window ("rest: none"), you can bet that I enable it. The option "none" means that they still rest (across the board), but with a higher threshold (somewhere between 80-86% in my experience). If "no rest by default" is not checked in the game options, all units (hence all orders) will default to "normal" rest behavior, which has a way lower threshold.

    So if you try to kick a unit's ass at say a fatigue level of 83% or 86%, you will end up waiting for the cock to crow on the dunghill to make 'em move, or for the first daylight the next morning, to make them interrupt their zzz-time, and there's a high chance that you will end up watching the lazy bastards rest for most of the next day, too, in case they had to defend their position and/or if they got routed the other night.

    Thank you though, there may be still some users who don't know that option.
     
    #4 GoodGuy, May 28, 2015
    Last edited: May 28, 2015
  5. Dave 'Arjuna' O'Connor

    Dave 'Arjuna' O'Connor Panther Games Designer

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2014
    Messages:
    2,924
    Likes Received:
    275
    Let me clarify how the "no rest by default" option works. You can find this option in the options screen accessible from the Menu button on the toolbar at the bottom of the screen. All it does is change the default setting for Rest on the Task Edit dialog from Normal to None. It does nothing more. If your task has a rest setting of 'none' then it will not reschedule a reassessment based on fatigue as night falls. Moreover if during a subsequent general reassessment it will only have a 10% chance of 'trying to rest'. However, there is code that will prevent it from trying if it has already tried with the last stdReassessDuration. Now for a Bn this is every four hours. So at best there is a 20% chance over the course of an eight hour night. For a long 12 hour night during winter that climbs to 30%.

    As GoodGuy says I do have different views on this matter. Basically as a simulation it needs to cater for the main possibilities while still giving some chance for the exceptional possibilities. I think we do that on this issue. I don't doubt that some units were doped. I don't doubt that they were able to force march large distances and operate almost continuously for limited periods of time. But this IMO is the exceptional. No unit, even doped to the eyeballs can sustain such behaviour for more than a few days. And to simulate that you can order them not to rest but just as in real life ordering units and getting them to do as you want are not always the same thing. Eventually, no amount of cajoling is going to get exhausted bodies moving. That is just a physical fact.

    Is there scope for tweaking the current fatigue/recovery system? Yes there is, as always with AI. Put up a proposed algorithm and I'll consider it.
     
  6. *budd*

    *budd* Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2014
    Messages:
    218
    Likes Received:
    7
    What i've noticed is that recovering takes a long time, whats the formula for recovering from fatigue? Maybe its just my perception. Sometimes i see the "unit has completed it rest order" what's the recovery rate and does the message kick in when fatigue is zero. A lot of times when i notice a raised fatigue level i'll set them to rest for 2 hours [if not engaged] and the fatigue level doesn't seem to drop much.
     
  7. GoodGuy

    GoodGuy Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2015
    Messages:
    218
    Likes Received:
    24
    And I wouldn't expect anything more.

    I am not sure whether these rather low chances are actually present. If I detach say a Coy that has a fatigue level of say 86%, the unit will not move again after 4 hrs, and not even after 6 hrs, during the night. I've seen 48% units (which must have had quite some rest, obviously) denying to move during the night. I don't even know if there's a function in the code that considers night times, but that's what I see on the battlefield. No workie at night, workie during the day. So, I am either unable to understand the whole assessment process, or something doesn't work as expected, or it works as intended but just doesn't appear to be realistic.

    Some of the estimations circulating say a quarter to a half of the German Army, between 1939 and mid 1941 was doped, and that a somewhat lower amount was still doped after the Germans had tried to lower the use (which failed). Check the link to the Daily Mail article I added above. Masses used (and abused) the drug, not just "some", Dave. :)

    I think you misunderstood what I tried to explain back then and you might misinterpret what I try to explain here. I am not talking about a continious march without rest over the course of say 24-48 hrs, but about forced marches over the course of say 48 hrs with periods of rest (~4 hrs, as the historical procedure) every 8 or 10 hrs. Historically, this enabled foot units to march at day AND night, which allowed for covering total legs of up to around 70-80 kilometers (few small units managed to reach 80-100 kilometers) within 48 hrs. This, of course, only for the first 48 hrs, because the daily performance decreased drastically on the third day, until only short distances could be covered on the 4th day.

    Not exceptional for the FIRST 2.5 days. But we agree where you say "not for more than a few days".

    See, we actually agree, and we agree since COTA, you just interpret(ed) my request as wish to get forced march abilities that last for a week, or something.
    Your current programming (or policy) makes it really hard to even sustain more than 1 day, once a unit has had several engagements or covered a certain distance. This leads to a situation, where a unit cannot even cover a distance of say 20 grid squares (= 20 kilometers) within 48 hrs, a distance that could be even covered within ONE day and without a forced march, historically.

    The modern German Army's (Bundeswehr) "Einzelkämpfer" (translates to "lone wolf") badge/training includes a final 3-day-mission where the participants have to cover 70 kilometers. That's like 23.33 kilometers (calculatory) per day, and that's like lazy and party business, compared to what German and Russian foot units had to cover during WW2's forced marches.

    Threatened to be courtmartialed (which - in the German Army - meant either a death penalty or an employment in a penal battalion), or - on the East front - told to be left for the Russians, made quite some bodies moving, especially if the "body"was in a SS-unit, where the Russians had a "slight" tendency to just shoot them, insteading of taking them prisoners, and German soldiers knew that. But even Army grunts feared Russian captivity. And if that didn't work, the pills did work. Pls read the article I linked in my previous post.

    In France (1940), the German foot Inf units desperately trying to keep up with the spearheading armor formations, just dropped "dead" in the ditches next to the roads, when they were allowed to rest after those 8-12 hrs-marches. After 4 hrs of sleep, they picked up the forced march again. Same with German units withdrawing to blocking positions in Russia, with the difference that these units had to take turns with the resting, as they also had to defend the resting areas and dig rudimentary trenches and foxholes, when the Russians were chasing them.

    Ok.
    My suggestion:
    • Give the players a new option, something along the lines reading "forced march", which can be checked in the movement section, or embed it as (invisible) part of the current "normal" and "fastest" speed functions in the EDIT TASK window, if the task addresses a foot unit.
    • The algorythm could then allow for a 8-10 hrs forced march performed by a FRESH foot unit, and then initiate a 4 hrs rest without exceptions, in order to allow for another forced march after that rest period, but you should allow the player (or the player AI) to move it 1 or 2 times max. (you have to put a restriction, so that players can't abuse the feature) during that rest period (temporarily interruping the rest process) to a covered or more favorable position within a perimeter of say 500 or 1000 meters, and then allow movement again, once the rest period is over. In contested/unsafe territory, it is assumed/abstracted that every soldier digs his own foxhole before taking a nap, while in save territories troops can just get to rest right away, whereever they stop.
    • When the first "round" is completed, the next 4hrs rest has to be started a bit earlier (say after 6-8 hrs of forced marching).
    • You apply that function continiously over the course of the first 48 hrs (of an initially fresh unit), but you make sure that you enable the unit to cover a realistic distance of around 70-80 Kilometers during these first 48 hrs.
    • If a unit is being chased (well, means if enemy units keep pushing behind a player unit that is trying to move away), so that it gets in touch with enemy units multiple times during the rest periods, then assume/abstract that say half of the unit is resting, but the other half (or a smaller trench group) busy with creating sandbag-barriers, or primitive trenches, or whatever, then let the algorythm lower the level of recovery by say 25-50%, as there will be troops with only 2 or 3 hrs of sleep, or enable units to dig in + defend during the day (taking turns digging/defending and sleeping), if they keep getting "disturbed" by attacking/chasing enemy units, and enable them to disengage/withdraw under the screen of night. The latter procedure can be found in war diaries and hundreds of veteran accounts covering general procedures on the East Front and in Italy.
    • Once the unit hits the 3rd day, daily march performance decreases drastically, until only short marches can be performed on the 4th day. Without a full day (8-12 hrs) of rest, such unit will then not be able to cover medium or long distances anymore, but it will still be able to defend or fight within short distances.
    Currently, even units that had rested for 8-12 hrs are reluctant to get back to business. I doubt that troops needed to sleep 16 or 18 hrs to regain their strengths.
     
    #7 GoodGuy, May 28, 2015
    Last edited: May 28, 2015
  8. Dave 'Arjuna' O'Connor

    Dave 'Arjuna' O'Connor Panther Games Designer

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2014
    Messages:
    2,924
    Likes Received:
    275
    Re 10% chance. That relates to the probability of starting a rest not of continuing or finishing the rest. So maybe the real issue is not so much when or if they rest but for how long they actually rest. I think that's a worth a look in the first instance.
     
  9. GoodGuy

    GoodGuy Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2015
    Messages:
    218
    Likes Received:
    24
    Yes Sir. The underlined part reflects what I gathered from your initial explanation in your previous post, already.

    Yes. The recovery rate (speed?) is too low, at least, as a historical frame of 4 hrs (within a forced march) does not lead to a realistic recovery of mobility.

    I would like to ask you to re-read my last post (if you have the time) to gather the sections/sentences I added (sorry, I edited while you were reading, again, I guess) and I'd like to ask you to provide some feedback regarding my suggestion for an algorythm (I edited that too). And maybe other users can provide feedback, too.
     
    #9 GoodGuy, May 28, 2015
    Last edited: May 28, 2015
  10. BigDuke66

    BigDuke66 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2014
    Messages:
    65
    Likes Received:
    5
    Maybe we could think about a threshold on the fatigue bar, a threshold that would start to lower if the units take specific actions like forced marches or operating with a high fatigue over a longer time, by that the unit would at first be capable of doing more but later on(maybe like GoodGuy suggests kicking in on the 3rd day) would simply suffer to the fact that you overused it.
    Maybe that threshold could also be considered as a form of combat fatigue that takes longer to kick in but also longer to recover because it's not physical fatigue.

    So far my fatigue experience is that the units work good as long as you care for them, rest them when it's time to rest, not only by rest task but simply by setting the rest on the current task to max or if the enemy shows up set it again to none, that works also at night.

    My fatigue problem is that the AI doesn't seem to handle it like the player or like it's necessary, or maybe I get the wrong impression of how exhausted the Allied forces and its reinforcements are when arriving on map, still if they run out of steam there is no need(or at least seldom) to continue any offensive actions with a tunnel view that only focuses on the objective, on the defense I would understand operating with high fatigue units if the AI would try to reposition them or get a unit to block an important road or bridge but I saw a lot small forces or single units simply trying to reach the objective offensively no matter what their own values were, what was up against them or how the overall strategic situation was, these troops put themselves on a cheese grater and were wiped out sooner or later by me.

    I think what could be missing is some form of strategic assessment and here I wonder if the AI considers anything that can be seen in the various overlays(control for example) and to compare that with its own forces for a task, that of the enemy in the vicinity and the objectives and that especially on the offensive.
    Defensively it seems to work better as in the Greyhound Dash scenario victory locations seem to be properly covered by the AI.
     
    GoodGuy likes this.
  11. Daz

    Daz Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2014
    Messages:
    861
    Likes Received:
    118
    Has anyone actually set up a test to see how far the infantry can march unhindered by all the other variables like combat, close proximity to enemy units, artillery and air interdiction, weather, terrain, day/night?
    I wouldn't be surprised if they can march realistic "historical" distances without the interference of all these variables that make them fatigue at an accelerated rate.

    Its not just the distances that fatigue your units, its combat primarily.
    I also take the accelerated fatigue during combat to not just simulate the physical and mental exertion of combat, but also the necessary administration required to patch up a unit after.

    This has the desired effect of not allowing them to march unrealistic distances until they have managed to do some admin, get some hot food down their necks, and polish their boots ;)

    I haven't found the fatigue levels to be that unrealistic, or over problematic, if its managed properly.
    Having said that I haven't done any testing to find out what the units are actually capable of.

    Remember units also have a Fitness statistic in their stats as well, which also effects their capabilities to recover fatigue.
     
  12. GoodGuy

    GoodGuy Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2015
    Messages:
    218
    Likes Received:
    24
    Sure thing.
    Until around mid-1943, the Germans had to perform various retreats and mount consequent counter-attacks, and territory that had been lost could be either retaken completely, or vital parts retaken, in many instances. Starting around the end of the 2nd battle at the Mius river, the Germans were forced to start to manage a long line of retreats (partially over large distances, the Russians had pushed as deep as 600 km into occupied territory, in 1944), and - in a way - had learned to master those, to some extent, where Hitler had actually allowed to do so. Retreats in France were often disordered and badly managed, but in Russia, when the Russians were chasing hard, the Germans had to do both: defend + fight and withdraw, constantly, and even down to a level where units had to be disbanded as Bns had been decimated to Coy-sized, sometimes even platoon-sized formations, where then such troops were used to fill gaps in other units, or sent to Germany to use them as spine for the build-up of new units. Sometimes such units were not disbanded, but marked as "useless" or as "unit without military value" by the HighCommand. Model and Manstein had marked a couple of regiments and a few divisions with the latter assessment prior to the Ardennes offensive, btw, but Hitler had insisted to commit these units.

    Especially on the Eastern Front, it was a constant loop of digging in/searching for cover, defending and disengaging/retreating orderly at night and marching to the next blocking position. If the Russians were chasing hard, these had to be forced marches. There are numerous entries in war diaries and thousands of veteran accounts detailing that kind of exhausting business. If reserves were available, such units were pulled out once they had reached German main lines/main defensive positions, but if there were no reserves, such units could just hope for borrowed sub-units, for troops returning from the hospitals and reporting combat-readiness, or for (scarce) reinforcements, and proceed with their business, meanwhile, by taking a spot within the defensive line.
    During quite some battles in August and September 1943 (and more than often during the remainder of the war), reinforcements just dripped in, so that quite some Coys just received 5 troops here, 12 there and 2 there, if you look at unit diaries.

    With the Russians chasing and pushing for days or even weeks, German units did not have that luxury. After quite some battles or series of major engagements, there were often no real lulls, as complete defensive lines had been either unhinged or shredded, so that the Russians kept pushing (with less verve, but still pushing, true to the Russian "Deep Thrust" doctrine), and the Germans withdrawing. If these were fighting withdrawals, they were costly for the Germans and costly chases for the Russians, but also meant that German units north and south of a Russian push had to force march to avoid getting surrounded, if they were unable to contain the push (or its trail). Sometimes such units were ordered to fight til the last bullet by Hitler, but some Generals just retreated and force marched to save their men and claimed that they didn't receive the order, or plainly ignored the order, resulting in more and more Generals being sacked or put into the Führer Reserve, where the latter had been created to act as waiting loop for officers with no assignment, initially, but which then (with more losses on the field) had been used to park recalcitrant officers or officers that were accused of military incompetence. For this Reserve, the Army determined the place of employment, so it was rather a domiciliary arrest.

    No doubts about that.
    Just to get back (for a second) to what I outlined in one of my previous posts: In 2002, Werner Pieper published a collection of articles, scientific assessments, army tests, medical publications etc. produced between 1928 - 1945, under the title "Nazis on speed". Even though the Nazi regime disapproved the use of drugs by (civilian) citizens and party cadres (the general attitude was : someone who harmed his body, say by drinking, taking drugs or smoking, harmed public welfare, they even created propaganda posters and pamphlets with lines like "Members of the nation, remember your biological service", stressing to maintain a health level that would ensure a proper birthrate, hehe), but they didn't have a problem with handing out medical "boosters" to their troops.
    Pieper displays that in 1944 the head of the medical-scientific department (G 2) subordinated to the Navy's central office, Fleet surgeon Dr. Grunske, recommended, in an article for the Army's medical magazine "Wehrhygiene" (translating to defense hygiene, means all matters dealing with military medical procedures or findings), that for "nightly forced marches", watch duties on warships, and as agent to keep the pilot alert during air(borne) operations, low amounts of Pervetin, while for messenger services (by foot) in hot regions (Africa) he found chewing of kath plants would be more useful. Pieper also remarks that the Allies copied the German procedures and started to hand out speed to their troops, too. Since I don't own Pieper's book (I've read excerpts), I am just not sure whether the Allies had started to do it during WW II already, or only when the Corean war started.

    That said, the Germans had the means to substitute a real rest period, where they could get some" hot food down their necks, and polish their boots", with a medical agent. Speed suppresses the sensation of hunger, too, btw. Of course, you can maintain such a level for a few days only, the "clean" performance of 2 days, with drastic perf. decrease on the 3rd and 4th day, are realistic guidance values, imho. If commanders handed out Pervitin, they probably would have gotten an extra full day of forced march out of it, on either the 3rd or 4th day, most likely, before physical and mental (depression, etc, = side effects) exhaustion would require a full day of rest.
     
    #12 GoodGuy, May 29, 2015
    Last edited: May 29, 2015
  13. BigDuke66

    BigDuke66 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2014
    Messages:
    65
    Likes Received:
    5
    No one disagrees with these facts but I doubt that is reason enough to generally change the fatigue calculation/behavior not even when limiting this to only German units.
    Rather one must think if some additional "Boost" option could be added for units that are marked as capable of it in the scenario editor, that boost should be enabled by the player and changed the calculation of fatigue and maybe also fitness to keep the unit longer on an high performance level.
     
    #13 BigDuke66, May 29, 2015
    Last edited: May 30, 2015
    GoodGuy likes this.
  14. Dave 'Arjuna' O'Connor

    Dave 'Arjuna' O'Connor Panther Games Designer

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2014
    Messages:
    2,924
    Likes Received:
    275
    Daz is on the right path. Tests need to be done starting with a force moving unhindered. Run it several times changing the various unit characteristics like fitness and see what effect that has. For each change you make you need to run several tests to get an average effect. Once you have it for unimpeded movement then start adding in different elements - eg moving through other friendlies, being fired at, retreating and attacking.
     
  15. GoodGuy

    GoodGuy Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2015
    Messages:
    218
    Likes Received:
    24
    Don't get me wrong. I'm a not trying to advocate an "Extrawurst" (= german term for a special way/treatment, ie. an extra ability) for the Germans.

    EDIT : I'm also not trying to advocate a state that goes back to HTTR, where the player could ship around the fatigue levels in a gamey fashion and maintain marches (and consequent attacks) over the course of several days (even on the large Arnheim map). I do advocate a middle thingy, though, where units are still able to relocate even after devensive or offensive jobs (to get back to the FUP/safety) and where they are then able (after a proper period of rest, say 4-6 hrs) to march to a different FUP or resting area, or where units without ANY enemy conctact (and favorable weather conditions) are able to come up with high performances (force march).

    Actually, that's exactly what I was thinking about, since my first post in this thread, but I didn't dare to suggest that, hehe, because Dave has a tendency to say that such features are too detailed or can be abstracted etc. pp.
    Still, either that should be added, or unit recovery has to be revised.
    For example, a Luftwaffen-Felddivision (not to be confused with German paras fighting on the ground) with only basic training, incomplete establishment and no experience, and which was thrown into the frontline, would not have such a button. US paras, mountain divisions and either well trained (in England) or experienced US Inf Divisions (Normandy, Italy) would get such an option. Example: The 15. Luftwaffen-Felddivision that was part of XXIX. Korps (see Taganrog-thread) managed to escape from the pocket, and reached Melitopol, but had to be disbanded after the fighting at Melitopol, due to the very high losses and due to the very high amount of stragglers. They appeared to be too slow/too unexperienced to survive a fighting withdrawal, and had suffered much inside the pocket, already.
     
    #15 GoodGuy, May 30, 2015
    Last edited: May 30, 2015
  16. Daz

    Daz Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2014
    Messages:
    861
    Likes Received:
    118
    Yeah I don't think this is something you can just keep dipping into and adjusting on a whim, or even with all the knowledge which Good Guy has on the subject (which is an incredibly interesting read, thank you mate).

    It needs to have some test figures to back it up in order to plug in the correct kind of data.
    The problem with this is its incredibly variable with a huge amount of conditions to apply to that formula.

    Also you would have to factor in attrition for the different speeds of movement.
    From my military service experience, on a force march, you can lose half your Coy from either lagging behind or completely bailing out.
     
  17. Daz

    Daz Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2014
    Messages:
    861
    Likes Received:
    118
    Here is a good example of some very fit well supplied men, and a realistic distance they are able to cover in combat conditions.

    The most famous yomp of recent times was during the 1982 Falklands War. After disembarking from ships at San Carlos on East Falkland, on 21 May 1982, Royal Marines and members of the Parachute Regiment yomped (and tabbed) with their equipment across the islands, covering 56 miles (90 km) in three days carrying 80-pound (36 kg) loads.

    So on average about 30km a day.
     
  18. GoodGuy

    GoodGuy Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2015
    Messages:
    218
    Likes Received:
    24
    Well, I'd volunteer there, but that's something where more than 2 hands are needed, and then it will take some coordination. But in case we as Users can collect evidence that something ain't right, further investigations should be carried out by the Panther bunnies ;).

    Or you end up with a level of 90% footsore soldiers, a level which the commander of the 336. Inf Div (who I quoted in the Taganrog thread) was complaining about in his report to XXIX. Korps, after his unit had managed to escape from the pocket. :p
     
    #18 GoodGuy, May 30, 2015
    Last edited: May 30, 2015
  19. GoodGuy

    GoodGuy Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2015
    Messages:
    218
    Likes Received:
    24
    You do have to keep in mind that the Falkland islands' 2 main islands feature some hills, where Mount Usborne is the highest one on the eastern main island, and the Paras tried to ship around Mount Usborne and the other hills, so these were indirect routes, but still included some hilly areas. Also, the weather was so shitty (wet and cold), that it took them longer than expected.
    3rd Paras and 45th Commandos took the northern route (and shipped around the main hills north of Mt. Usborne, but still had to cross some 3 or 4 hills), the 2nd Paras were with the Gurkhas and took the southern route and then headed east towards Fitzroy and then Stanley, but all of these southern moves were insertions by air. There were some great performances (not across the board btw,), some units needed airlifts to be able to stick to the schedule, other units didn't even start to march, as there was no opposition (the Argentinian units had bunkered down in Darwin and Stanley, except for a defensive position on or north of Mt Usborne), but the Brits were low on choppers, especially after the Atlantic Conveyor (carrying the Chinooks) was sunk, so airlifts were somewhat rare and focused on Darwin and the mountain north of Mt. Usborne, near Top Malo, where Argentinian special forces were located.

    So, I do not think that these moves/performances qualify to serve as average example, as the northern group had to force march, but decided to take an indirect route. One reason for that decision could have been the fact, that Argentinians (40) retreating from San Carlos had picked that northern route to a Bay/Fjord, where they were picked up by a chopper (probably unnoticed by the Paras initially), so that the Paras kept pushing towards the supposedly retreating troops.

    EDIT: 70 kilometers over the course of 48 hrs (calculatory average of 35 km a day) is what I've gathered from German sources so far. Under favourable weather and road conditions, of course.

    A little sidenote covering a curiosity of WW II's medical tests: Concentration camp inmates were given an experimental drug codenamed D-IX (based on cocaine), and they then carried 45lbs over a distance of 70 miles, without rest *shudder*:depressed:.
     
    #19 GoodGuy, May 30, 2015
    Last edited: May 30, 2015
  20. Daz

    Daz Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2014
    Messages:
    861
    Likes Received:
    118
    I just did a very quick Test using the Beda Fomm map.
    An Italian Infantry Coy, 9 Compagnia, III Btg 86 Reggimento, travelled 43 Km starting off at 30% fatigue, with No Rest set for its orders primarily over open terrain, with a 67% foot movement modifier.
    It travelled through the night in light rain.

    It gave out at 88% fatigue where it was forced into rest in situ.
    The fitness stat for the unit was 38%, which is quite low.

    I have to goto work now, so will see how long it takes to recover when I get back.
     

Share This Page