Equipment lost during retreat

[KiwiNoob]

Would be nice to see a mechanic added where a very small amount of a divisions equipment would be captured by attacking countries during any retreat. The formula of the % captured could be something to the effect of:

(0.5 + ((org / max_org) * 2.5))

Basically a unit which pulled back right away (still has 100% org) would have 0.5% of it's equipment captured while a unit that waited until it was totally broken (0% org) would lose 3% of it's equipment. (number could be easily tweaked)

I think this would be a nice way to add captured equipment into the game in a meaningful way and would create a benefit for earlier planned withdrawals vs waiting until divisions were broken.

Plus it's hopefully quite simple to implement.


Edit: The rule when multiple divisions are defending could be that equipment is only lost by divisions still in the province at the moment the last defending division retreats. This way if units are able to get out before the battle is lost they suffer no equipment loss.

If it's possible you could also put how far out of a province a division has already moved into the formula so that divisions that are already 50% out of the province when the last defending unit retreats will have the amount of lost equipment halved.

Edit: Several people have also mentioned (rightly so) that divisions that are overrun or surrounded and 'captured' should also have a portion of their equipment captured.

Edit: The amount of equipment captured does not have to equal the amount of equipment lost by the retreating division(s). As people point out - lots of it was rendered unusable as the retreated. It could simply be that 50% (example only) of the equipment lost is 'captured'.

 

[Frosted Vert]

It makes sense to me. The Russians left so many guns behind during Barbarossa that the Germans turned them into a standard type - Pak 36(r). In the game as is, the Soviets would have to capitulate to have access to this equipment and Beutepanzer.

 

[Ctanr]

i think the amount should also differ between the equipment type, because its easier to retreat with stuff that drives on its own like tanks and trucks than taking with you heavy stuff like artillery, so the winner should capture a higher percentage of the artillery than from the trucks

 

[Mannstien]

It makes sense to me. The Russians left so many guns behind during Barbarossa that the Germans turned them into a standard type - Pak 36(r). In the game as is, the Soviets would have to capitulate to have access to this equipment and Beutepanzer.

Wow, didn't realize they had captured roughly 1,300 of them in 41', no wonder they put a modernization program into effect .

 

[Frosted Vert]

Not having to produce 1300 additional anti-tank or field guns makes a big difference for a German player. During the opening phases of Barbarossa the Germans captured 900 to 1100 T -26, 300-500 BT, more than 40 T-28 and more than 45 tanks T-34 and KV. This is all without capturing Moscow. Captured equipment saw combat on all fronts.

A-13 during Barbarossa (U.K Never surrendered to Germany, but they still captured these)

Sherman on the Ostfront (Ditto the USA)

T-34 in France.

 

[KiwiNoob]

i think the amount should also differ between the equipment type, because its easier to retreat with stuff that drives on its own like tanks and trucks than taking with you heavy stuff like artillery, so the winner should capture a higher percentage of the artillery than from the trucks

Nooooooo. Its the captured tanks I want most

 

[Nicolas I]

At first they wanted to include captured equipment, but IIRC they said later it would have to wait because they were lacking time.

...We dont have captured equipment yet, but its something we want to add. We'll see.

Last time I asked, So we may still hope for further developments of the game that will include refitting old equipment and maybe captured equipment as well ?, I got this answer:

very likely yea

 

[seeter]

guys there is a difference between a fast retreat and a tactical retreat. and mosty its a tactical retreat where u are slowly pushing back to reorganize. i think losing equipment is a good idea but wrong here. u could add equipment loss from a division that got encircled or from death soldiers from divisions that are retreating. but not from retreating with full organization. this is noesense. why should u retreat with full organization also i dont think that this is how it will work with that engine.
is it retreating if u have 2 divisions on attack and u pull one back to attack somewhere else?

 

[KiwiNoob]

guys there is a difference between a fast retreat and a tactical retreat. and mosty its a tactical retreat where u are slowly pushing back to reorganize. i think losing equipment is a good idea but wrong here. u could add equipment loss from a division that got encircled or from death soldiers from divisions that are retreating. but not from retreating with full organization. this is noesense. why should u retreat with full organization also i dont think that this is how it will work with that engine.
is it retreating if u have 2 divisions on attack and u pull one back to attack somewhere else?

Any sort of a retreat - even the planned ones usually left something behind.

I do agree with the second part of your post. The lost equipment should only occur to units still in the province when the last defender begins the retreat.

I'll update to OP.

 

[Sleight of Hand]

This is generally a very good idea, and it'd be interesting to see it. Perhaps it will be added in a patch at some point.

 

[Nicolas I]

This is generally a very good idea, and it'd be interesting to see it. Perhaps it will be added in a patch at some point.

Not perhaps. Very likely is the last official known answer by Podcat. (unless addressed in WWW?).

See post #7.

 

[potski]

"Very likely" in Oct 2015. They already delivered on that promise, and added captured equipment when a country surrenders.

 

[Sharp163]

This is a nice idea, but wasn't always 100% prevalent. For example, when the British had to evacuate from Dunkirk, they shot all their horses and destroyed most of their tanks so the Germans wouldn't capture them. Perhaps there should only be a chance to capture equipment, instead of it always happening?

However, that's not to say that capturing enemy equipment never occurred because, of course, it was very very common in the war.

A few good examples...

First, Operation Jubilee (basically a small-scale practice run for D-Day). The Germans captured lots of American equipment, and were particularly interested in our Jeeps. (Upon running tests on them, the Germans determined that the Jeeps were rugged and incredible machines, but consumed far too much oil to be of German use).

Second good example I can think of is after Operation Torch, when the Germans discovered the American invention the Bazooka, and quickly fabricated their own knockoff, the Panzerschreck (with of course the improvements of a small blast shield and the epic name of "Tank's Bane").

Finally, the Germans captured a few British "bouncing bombs" during the course of the war (read more about those here), but could not create their own knockoffs because they couldn't figure out how to make them bounce (the secret was the backspin )

 

[Art1985]

I think equipment capture % should depend on national unity (morale) of the retreating army (or surrounded army), if national unity is too low soldiers will be less willing to risk their lives saving (destroying) equipment.

 

[Sharp163]

I think equipment capture % should depend on national unity (morale) of the retreating army (or surrounded army), if national unity is too low soldiers will be less willing to risk their lives saving (destroying) equipment.

I think that it should depend on the organization level of the unit in question (logically)

 

[Frosted Vert]

"Very likely" in Oct 2015. They already delivered on that promise, and added captured equipment when a country surrenders.

Noted, but the USSR never surrendered to Germany, yet Russian equipment from Rifles to Tanks could be found wherever the Germans fought.

 

[Sharp163]

Noted, but the USSR never surrendered to Germany, yet Russian equipment from Rifles to Tanks could be found wherever the Germans fought.

Indeed, it would be a true shame if a Russian dropped his rifle while retreating, because then his whole unit would lose their shared gun

 

[Nicolas I]

Indeed, it would be a true shame if a Russian dropped his rifle while retreating, because then his whole unit would lose their shared gun

How the numbers of "infantry equipment" are calculated, now all the nations have this 1 for 10 ratio.

 

[Art1985]

I think that it should depend on the organization level of the unit in question (logically)

How will you count this if unit retreats? If it retreats then it's organisation always will be 0.
Disorganized unit soldiers can have will not to let equipment to fall in enemy hands if national unity is high and people are ready to sacrifice for their nation.

 

[Nicolas I]

"Very likely" in Oct 2015. They already delivered on that promise, and added captured equipment when a country surrenders.

That's a beginning, but that's not the same at all as equipment captured on the field after battles that you can quickly use. This is what people want.

For what you are talking about we must wait months/years to get equipment, if we ever win. I wonder if you get that kind of captured equipment when a country offers conditional surrender ?