Hold at all costs!

[Lord KhaZimir]

Why wasn't it possible in Hoi2 to ask troops to fight untill they are obliterated or to retreat at contact. Like the mission screen for fleets/air units with the casualties (or org lost) tolerancy slider ?

Will it be possible in Hoi3 to give loss tolerancy like in Operational Art Of War,
where three tiny boxes on the right of the counter show the level ?

Sacrifying some units to delay enemy advance could have some short term
benefits. Cavalry units or commando divisions could retreat if attacked to
keep their offensive firepower for other purposes. These are just examples.

 

[ok2useLane]

Yikes! Brutal.

 

[Oddb@ll]

War is brutal my friend, especially the savage ostfront!

 

[bosman]

I think it would be managed by land doctrines.

 

[hansnery]

I agree with bosman.

 

[unmerged(131989)]

Yeah I think doctrines would cover this too (like Japanese 'ferocity' in battle, or how British units 'stayed back' during the Dunkirk evacuations, etc...).

 

[Zwiback]

Guess such things would also depend on your units moral and a countries culture if units would fight to the end which they more or less do now since units retreat (if I not wrong) now only when they have virtually no combat power left.

Since culture is not in (and would also lead to a huge flamefest) I guess this would be displayed just fine by an units xp making them a tougher opponent.

 

[UsF]

I think it could be a combat-event, but Counterattack seems to be what you are looking for. It is a short time benefit and I do not believe that a disorganized overrun unit would give you any real benefit. Sure maybe for a few hours, but that could all be covered with the event system.

 

[Delta107]

Sometimes you order your units to fight to death, but they will desert.

 

[Elecwaves]

Agreeing with Delta107 here. Although less jokingly. It is very difficult to have men hold ground till the death. The Soviet Union was able to do it in some cases with their policies stipulating death for retreat (I believe there were still cases of units breaking and retreating anyways, even after the order.) And as for being a game mechanic, I think the whole idea of breaking an enemy, is that you've pushed them beyond the ability to fight, into a disorganized mess of demoralized men. Athough I do agree with the retreat after x time or at x str/org

 

[unmerged(45464)]

There are plenty of cases where the Germans and the Japanese fought if not until death then at least to the very last minute. At the end of the war German doctrine said that every city was a fortress that had to be defended to the last man. Japan is probably an even better example since most would rather commit suicide than flee or be captured if they were ordered to stay and fight. However It could be done with the doctrine tech tree hopefully.

 

[Myth]

To be honest that sort of thing is already largely possible. German fortress cities generally got encircled. Successful attack means divisions wiped out. For all you know and care, they stood to the last man. Same with the Japanese, except they're on islands rather than surrounded by the enemy. Still nowhere to retreat though.

 

[unmerged(52507)]

Agreed Myth. Particularly large numbers of Japs killed themselves, which hardly contributed to the defence of an island.

 

[unmerged(61331)]

There are plenty of cases where the Germans and the Japanese fought if not until death then at least to the very last minute. At the end of the war German doctrine said that every city was a fortress that had to be defended to the last man. Japan is probably an even better example since most would rather commit suicide than flee or be captured if they were ordered to stay and fight. However It could be done with the doctrine tech tree hopefully.

But the Japanese army broke and collapsed in a few days in Operation August Storm, as did vast swaths of the German Army. The Japanese Army also fell back under heavy pressure in the Dutch East Indies, in New Guinea, China and Burma, and held plenty of retreats in the Phillipines.
They held out until the death on many small Islands simply because retreat was impossible, they had no place to go. Any other time the Japanese, Germans and Soviets behaved the same as any army at a strategic level.

 

[petester]

Isn't that what the morale component is supposed to simulate? ie, by having a unit with higher org & morale, that unit can fight longer in combat than a similar sized unit? Thus implying it is willing to take more casualties before being overrun?

 

[unmerged(131989)]

Perhaps if ever such a command was order then there would have to be some sort of 'folding front' circumstance, or something?? Some high level of desperation?? Maybe national unity/dissent would take a hit as well??

 

[wcwraymond]

Palisadoes is right.

In Eastern Asian cultures fighting to death seems a more honourable act then in Western. Westerners may say "fighting to death is anti-humanity" etc, but we even won't say this: sacrificing for the country seems a much more important act then hiding at home with family.

So, many things should be taken into account. cultures, and whether it is authoritian or democratic dissent etc.

 

[Will Lucky]

Palisadoes is right.

In Eastern Asian cultures fighting to death seems a more honourable act then in Western. Westerners may say "fighting to death is anti-humanity" etc, but we even won't say this: sacrificing for the country seems a much more important act then hiding at home with family.

So, many things should be taken into account. cultures, and whether it is authoritian or democratic dissent etc.

Hmm well then in that case a Western society may suffer a dissent hit or the forces in that region suffer a Moral hit while in Eastern societies the exact opposite happens but you of course suffer heavy losses.

 

[Acheron]

Generally, holding at all costs is a bad idea. The troops end up dead, without having held even at the cost of their lives.
Apparently the Wehrmacht was quite good at retreating, then counterattacking the enemy weakened from his own attack.

"Hold at all costs" could be made into a manual event that gives units a slight increase to their defensive values but a not-so-slight increase in casualties they sustain.

 

[King]

perhaps we can have units shatter in combat if they lose too many men?