Napoleonic Wargame Club (NWC)
https://www.wargame.ch/board/nwc/

Jena Assessment
https://www.wargame.ch/board/nwc/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=11967		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  Bill Peters [ Mon Jan 16, 2012 9:18 am ]
Post subject:  Jena Assessment
I am in the midst of adjusting victory conditions for the Jena scenarios. If you any of you want to send in game files for the Jena scenarios please do so and remember to add in a password.

Only game files for "shorter" scenarios (60 turns or less) that were completely played to the last turn will be accepted.

For longer scenarios (large map historical and variants) the game should have reached 3/4 of the games turns allotted.
Author:  Colin Knox [ Mon Jan 16, 2012 2:15 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Jena Assessment
Hi Bill
I played the twin battles (Jena and A) scenario multiple times on both sides against some of the clubs best players. The big map version.

I don't have the files anymore but I would conclude the scenario even with perfect play on the allied side could at best produce a minor victory if the French players is a good one.

So on the whole I suspect it needs to have the victory conditions adjusted in the favour or the Prussians a little.

Just my thoughts sorry no evidence handy

regards
Colin
Author:  Todd Schmidgall [ Tue Jan 17, 2012 9:01 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Jena Assessment
HI -
I just wanted to throw my 10 cents in on this subject.
I have only been a member of this club for a very short time. I have however played the games
for years against friends.
My take on the Jena games (particularly the various Six Day scenarios) is that the French have to score far too many points, specifically when one uses the various house rules, ect, that make it all the harder to eliminate units. I have found that playing with 'whatever goes' rules the French have a much better chance of eliminating units thru melee combat, and that is how you score the majority of your points.
The scenarios that allow both teams to get victory points for exiting units makes it that much more of a challenge - the Allies can't simply withdraw early, because the French can do the same eventually, and score more points.
I guess I would say that allowing both sides the ability to exit units makes it better (case in point the main program 'Russians are Coming' where this happens, as opposed to the campaign game 'Here Come the Russians' where it does not.
I love playing with more historical flavor rules, but I don't think the victory point requirements are in line with this style.
Just my thoughts.
Author:  Bill Peters [ Tue Jan 17, 2012 10:45 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Jena Assessment
Todd - The destruction of the enemy has always been the goal of an army but control of key terrain also was paramount too. However, you cannot control the key terrain if your forces is shattered.

However, as has been pointed out many times here units rarely "fought to 50 percent losses" in these battles. And Surrender is very much needed for things like "OUT OF AMMO" status.

The ZOC kills are stupid as units rarely could coordinate their actions. As a matter of fact I would say that multi-hex attacks really should only be for units from the same brigade at the most. And pretty easy to figure too.

Thus the army gets pushed back with some units ending up in the bag. Not entire brigades.
Author:  clifton seeney [ Tue Jan 17, 2012 1:19 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Jena Assessment
When I play it I play the table top rule 30% -40% lost Major victory to some it works to others they want the point system which to me is way out of the way to get make it simple and easy to play and more people would play this game. Now the 30-40 rule is the side with the most most lose 30% and the lesser side most lose 40% simple and easy when that happens game over. Just like Empire rules in table top.
Author:  Todd Schmidgall [ Tue Jan 17, 2012 1:50 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Jena Assessment
Bill, I understand the value of holding terrain, and all of that.
I'm just saying, "Here Come the Russians" requires 10,000 VPs for a French minor victory. There are only 4,000 VPs in objective hexs. All things being 'equal' in talent, or not, how can the French hope to score 10 -20,000 VPs for minor - major victory, unless you have a free for all within basic rules construct. Playing with historical flavor, making it more realistic as I think we both prefer, I believe the VP conditions for the French are way out of wack.
Author:  clifton seeney [ Tue Jan 17, 2012 2:11 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Jena Assessment
Monsieur Todd try the 30% -40% rule an it will work out much better!
Author:  Todd Schmidgall [ Tue Jan 17, 2012 2:20 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Jena Assessment
Yes, we can make up all sorts of 'personal' victory conditions. I just thought this thread was about a general readjustment of victory conditions for the actual game engine.
I love playing with all sorts of historical flavor rules (including the recent post about command & control rules, regarding officers and units within range of receiving orders, etc). I feel if the general requirements were adjusted, it would make the personal rule list agreed to by the players that much smaller and easier.
ps Bill, I have been pondering taking you up on the opponent finder post regarding 'Vandamme reinforced" in Leipzig (not yet closed). The way you seem to prefer to play, with historical/realism flavor is definitely my cup of tea.
Author:  Bill Peters [ Tue Jan 17, 2012 3:30 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Jena Assessment
Well not adjustment of the engine actually. The scenarios, yes. I will work my way through each of these as I find time.
Author:  Bill Peters [ Tue Jan 17, 2012 5:11 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Jena Assessment
Lets dissect one of the large Jena scenarios to see just how difficult this task of balancing a scenario really is:

I chose #00h_1_Six_Days.scn - #00h_1. Six Days in October - Historical as the basis for this check.

Some VP figures to look at:

(numbers are based on the Report feature from Dominik's OB Editor)

French Army - Jena OB:

Infantry 141997 - 17039.64 VPs
Cavalry 28963 - 5792.6 VPs
Artillery 336 - 2016 VPs

Now we must deduct VPs for Mortier's Corps. He had approx. 15,000 men and 16 guns. No cavalry. Thus the French end up with approx.:

Infantry 127,000 - 15240 VPs
Cavalry 28963 - 5792.6 VPs
Artillery 320 - 1920 VPs
Total VPs: 22952

Prussian/Saxon Army:

Infantry 118352 - 14202.24 VPs
Cavalry 45274 - 9054.8 VPs
Artillery 356 - 2136 VPs

(note on Prussian-Saxon artillery - there are 2 gun sections which were never merged into batteries. I plan on doing this for a future OB but will not be doing it for the update as it would involve too much time)

Includes the entire OB to include L'Estocq's command.

Deduct the following amounts for L'Estocq since he is not present:

12 920 infantry, 9 400 cavalry, 44 artillery

New figures for army less L'Estocq are:

Infantry 105432 - 12651.84 VPs
Cavalry 36874 - 7374.8 VPs
Artillery 312 - 1872 VPs
Total VPs: 21897

So both armies are very close in VPs. The French have about 1000 VPs more than the Allies.

Now in most of the Jena games I have been in the Allies ALWAYS lose more cavalry points. Usually something like 1/4 to 1/3 of their total force. Even though they have a nice advantage in cavalry over the French in infantry they are sorely out manned.

However, they have a better artillery arm than the French. Their batteries are more "standard" than the French and even if they lack the range if the French wish to close they will have to weather the storm. However, they have many 2 guns sections (which should have been merged to become batteries according to one club member).

Lets look at this model for one of the LONG scenarios:

Since the Prussians are outnumbered overall lets give them a slight edge on a Draw result. Lets assume that:

French lose:

24,000 infantry - 2880 VPs
9,000 cavalry - 1800 VPs
60 guns - 360 VPs
Total VPs lost = 5040 VPs

Prussians lose:

21,000 infantry - 2520 VPs
12,000 cavalry - 2400 VPs
70 guns - 420 VPs
Total VPs lost - 5340 VPs

A spread of 300 VPs in favor of the French

Now lets look at total amount of forces exited at the end (as there are exit hexes for both sides).

Prussians exit:

16,800 VPs

French exit:

17,912 VPs

Ok - lets see how many VP locations are on the map that we can logically conclude that the French should own by the end of the game:

4000 points of objectives taken if the Allies exit the map.

French have:

4000 - objectives
300 for casaulty differential
1112 for exit differential
Total VPs: 1812

This probably should be viewed as a Draw. So lets begin with that as our basis for new victory levels. Lets try this out:

Major French Defeat: -800
Minor French Defeat: 1600
Minor French Victory: 2400
Major French Victory: 3200

Each level is separated by 800 points. Looking at my casualty chart this amounts to something like a 7000 infantry differential. But put another way that makes more sense:

5000 infantry - 600 VPs
1000 cavalry - 200 VPs

Adjust these numbers down a bit to add in guns and you get the idea.

So lets look at another casaulty count and adjust our numbers accordingly:

Lets call this one the Historical Result:

French lose:

19,000 infantry - 2280 VPs
6,000 cavalry - 1200 VPs
40 guns - 240 VPs
Total VPs lost = 3720 VPs

Prussians lose:

30,000 infantry - 3600 VPs
12,000 cavalry - 2400 VPs
100 guns - 600 VPs
Total VPs lost - 6600 VPs

Differential would be: 2880

4000 for objectives
and more points for men and guns exited.

Looks like something like 4000 is more realistic.

I doubt that the Prussians could do the reverse but lets change the low number as well. New victory levels would be:

Major French Defeat: -1200
Minor French Defeat: 500
Minor French Victory: 2300
Major French Victory: 4000

Now there is approximately a 1700 VP difference between the victory levels. Probably more realistic.
Author:  Todd Schmidgall [ Tue Jan 17, 2012 6:16 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Jena Assessment
Wow! What a sweet spread of numbers.
Right on with the new VP level spread.
tip o my shako to you.
Author:  Bill Peters [ Tue Jan 17, 2012 8:11 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Jena Assessment
And I using the Austerlitz to Leipzig format for VPs:

Infantry is 3 per 25 men.

Cavalry is 5 per 25 troopers.

Artillery is 6 per gun.
Author:  Colin Knox [ Tue Jan 17, 2012 9:50 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Jena Assessment
This is an important point Bill makes.

Cavalry are much more dangerous to infantry in the new games (as they should be)

In for example Waterloo you often lose more points than you gain by a cavalry charge on an unsquared btn.

Not the case at all in the new titles. Charge em in the flank with a large cavalry stack and you might pile up 300 casualties for the loss of 50 which is a good VP haul. (loss of 10 for cav and gain of 36 for infantry = net +26vp)

thanks again for this Bill by the way.
Author:  clifton seeney [ Wed Jan 18, 2012 1:40 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Jena Assessment
Monsieur this is my two cents Scott Bowden's method of 30%-40% in table top is the most simple method then this. You most constantly upgrade this method to have victory level's. I was always trained in the keep it simple method which never needs to be up graded.
Author:  Bill Peters [ Wed Jan 18, 2012 1:34 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Jena Assessment
Cliff - would you explain how Bowden's rule works? I hear you use this format but as far as I know you have never explained it. How does -30% and 40% apply to Major Defeat, Minor Defeat, Minor Victory and Major Victory? I am not following you on that.
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/