casualties figures

[mcganyol]

compare losses / compare inflicted losses on the statistics screen are behave very strange.
last game i invaded fra with germany and it shows 102k men for german losses (this -in theory - includes losses from the invasion of poland also).
for france it shows 155k casualties inflicted.
im pretty sure france didn't fight anyone expect germany (no other country in axis, yet).

how could this be?!? and more importantly which figure is real? did germany lost 102k or way more than 150k overall?

(i have lost a transport with a paratrooper loaded on it to france, maybe that cause the issue? but even then the difference should be around 10k not more than 50k!)

 

[MagooNZ]

Dont the casualty figures exclude all losses in surrender, complete division elimination during retreats to enemy overrun provinces, divisions sunk at sea etc ? Casualty figures are only "in real battle" casualties ?

and what about attrition losses due to low infrastructure or provinces like desert, or weather conditions like blizzard. There is a recent thread that discusses this.

 

[mcganyol]

thx for the reply, but i lost no units due to overrun/surrender i lost str only through "normal fighting" (except the above mentioned 1 para in the transport) and i have way fewer casulaties than france inflicted on me.
if i count the attrition too the difference is even bigger. i repeat, i've lost 102k men (and i didnt start with 0 because of poland), france inflicted 155k (and they started with 0). NOT the other way.
how? (and hundred percent sure there were no other troops than mine (neither exp forces etc))

ps.: i start to have a feeling that paratrooper "bug" somehow related to this, when defending reinforcements turns to attackers.

 

[Commander666]

(i have lost a transport with a paratrooper loaded on it to france, maybe that cause the issue? but even then the difference should be around 10k not more than 50k!)

7th Flieger Division (later renamed 1st) that attacked during Battle of Crete in May 1941 totalled 22,000 men which was full division with 3 regiments. As regards your 1940 circa when you lost division, size was only 2 divisions (~15,000).

However, that still leaves a huge difference as your losses include Poland. Was Italy in the Axis and maybe some of the high French inflicted losses includes Italians?

 

[Pang Bingxun]

Italy would seem the best explanation. But there might be another slight difference between casualties inflicted and suffered losses. The later does include surrender losses. It does not include wounded. For example partisans suffer only 55% of the losses they suffer in strenght and better hospital techs offer even better ratios. The wounded but healed people get back into the manpower pool, this way partisans gain a positive manpowerpool. Maybe you experience some similar. From losses during battle(inflicted casualities from france and its allies) you lost more than 155 k soldiers from your divisions, but you regained more than 53 k in hospital.

PS: The hospital modifier seems not apply to surrender. Therefore AoD sometimes rewards a more cruel use of your limited manpower.

 

[postfux]

Anyone knows if the repair modification given by some techs in any way influence losses?

 

[Pang Bingxun]

No, only icd is affected.

 

[mcganyol]

as i told already no one in the axis except germany (no, not even slovakia), and france is not at war with anyone else.
so it's either the hospital system (i have only great war tough so it's doubtful) or the paratrooper glitch.
i test it and will let you know what is messing up the figures.
and afaik 1 manpower represents 1000 men in aod. So a paratrooper division consist exactly 12,000men (in aod)

 

[Pang Bingxun]

so it's either the hospital system (i have only great war tough so it's doubtful) or the paratrooper glitch.

Even with just one hospital tech the initial losses are 89.57% higher than the permanent losses.

 

[mcganyol]

Even with just one hospital tech the initial losses are 89.57% higher than the permanent losses.

what is the math behind this? how does trickle back modifier generally works?

 

[Pang Bingxun]

45% x (1 + tech modifier) of the lost manpower is regained to the manpowerpool.

 

[Commander666]

That is a surprising statistic since the number of people wounded and surviving because of successful hospitalization would actually include a very high number of amputees, blinded or otherwise; and now totally unfit to go back into any kind of service.

Expressed differently, if there are 189 casualties in a battle at time you have one hospital tech, that will result in 100 deaths and 89 people hospitalized (all of which will return to MP pool).

Trying to find a real life comparison, it seems most battles are actually much less deadly than AoD battles since generally there are about 3-6 times as many wounded as killed. Using D-Day as an example, the Allied casualties figures for June 6th at Normandy have generally been estimated at 10,000, including 2,500 dead (3 wounded, missing or captured for every one dead).

But these R/L figures can change dramatically if analysed differently. For example, The breakdown of US casualties on D-Day was 1,465 dead, 3,184 wounded, 1,928 missing and 26 captured. Of the total US figure, 2,499 casualties were from the US airborne troops (238 of them being deaths). In the first count we get less than 1 killed for every 2 wounded. But - if it is assumed that most of the missing are probably dead - we get more than 1 killed for every 1 wounded. The unknown of the status of the missing can change the statistic by more than 100%.

But when examining the losses for the US airborne they have very few killed with only 1 dead for each 9 missing/captured or living casualty. In fact, this is the opposite of stories regarding airborne loses on D-Day. Perhaps the problem is there is no separate figure for how many US Airborne were missing - a needed statistic which could greatly have increased the surprisingly very low confirmed dead figure.

Anyway, generally the wounded far exceeds the KIA - but AoD does the reverse; and kills 100 for only 89 wounded out of any 189 casualties. But considering how nebulous real life casualty figures can be by not determining the status of the high number of missing in any reports made soon after a battle, and the fact that a lot of people initially counted as wounded actually die later, perhaps AoD is actually operating closer to the truth. (?)

 

[lollibast]

That is a surprising statistic since the number of people wounded and surviving because of successful hospitalization would actually include a very high number of amputees, blinded or otherwise; and now totally unfit to go back into any kind of service.

Anyway, generally the wounded far exceeds the KIA - but AoD does the reverse; and kills 100 for only 89 wounded out of any 189 casualties. But considering how nebulous real life casualty figures can be by not determining the status of the high number of missing in any reports made soon after a battle, and the fact that a lot of people initially counted as wounded actually die later, perhaps AoD is actually operating closer to the truth. (?)

maybe those amputees are counted as "killed" or simply unfit for battle, and are therefore not returned to the manpower pool. so casualties would not be only killed soldiers