Recommend
7 
 Thumb up
 Hide
10 Posts

Fatal Alliances: The Great War» Forums » General

Subject: Some statistics after a completed game rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Jon Lindbekk
Norway
Sem
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
I recently finished my "The lamps are going out" campaign of FA3, ending in May/June 1919 with a Central Powers victory. The military authorities have now publicised the official losses of their respective countries. Corps (including HQs and Territorials) and divisions of all types are only listed as "Corps" and "divs", and all types of aircraft (including Zeppelins and balloons) listed as "Aircraft"

Ge: 96 Corps, 10 divs, 10 Aircraft, 4 Pilots, 21 SCS, 7 SCS damaged, 8 Subs, 11 Subs damaged, 4 Cps


Cw: 43 Corps, 11 Divs, 4 Aircraft, 2 Pilots, 17 SCS, 10 SCS damaged, 1 Sub, 66 Cps


Fr: 51 Corps, 13 Divs, 3 aircraft, 2 SCS, 2 SCS damaged, 5 Cps, 2 Fort


It: 26 Corps, 7 Divs, 3 aircraft, 1 Pil, 2 SCS, 3 SCS damaged


A/H: 45 Corps, 16 Divs, 3 Aircraft, 1 Pil, 4 SCS, 4 SCS damaged, 2 Subs,
3 Subs damaged, 2 Fort


Ru: 103 Corps, 22 Divs, 5 Aircraft, 1 Pil, 1 SCS damaged, 1 Sub damaged


OE: 36 Corps, 6 Divs, 1 SCS damaged


Us: 18 Corps, 1 Div, 3 Aircraft, 8 SCS damaged, 1 Sub damaged, 25 Cps


Ja: 3 Corps


I have been reading a bit about actual losses in WW1, and using Germany as an example for how to make out what actual losses might have been like in this game. The typical German corps was made up of about 45 000 men. A division was made up of roughly 15 000 men. A corps that is lost in FA3 does not represent a sudden loss of 45 000 soldiers, but I think it still is a fairly accurate representation of actual losses. During a turn, some corps will have been involved in combat, but not been lost. In the real war, all units involved in battle would have suffered losses. So the losses of counters can be seen as the sum of the losses of ALL units during that entire turn.

In the actual WW1, the German army suffered 7 652 662 losses. This number includes KIAs, MIAs, WIAs and POWs. A total of 2 037 000 German soldiers were killed, about 27% of total losses.

In "The lamps are going out", Germany then lost a total of 96 corps and 10 divisons. This breaks down to a total loss of 4 490 000 soldiers. 27% of that is 1 167 400.

These numbers are quite a bit lower than actual German losses in WW1, but in my game, Germany defeated France in mid-1916, and the resulting 2 year truce in the West is the explanation for the lower casualty rate. No Somme, Verdun or Paschendaele, and no Spring offensive. German losses (and Cw/Fr) would have been much higher if the Western front had been active throughout the entire game.

I also stumbeled across some other interseting facts. In September 1914, the German army suffered its worst losses of the entire war. And what can I say, the Sept/Oct 1914 turn was also the turn with the worst losses for Germany in my game, with an ongoing offensive in France against tougher resistance, and fierce defensive and offensive actions in the east, pretty historical. Only the May/June 1919 turn saw losses at the same rate as Sept/Oct 1914.

The war at sea was also intense in this game. As indicated, both Germany and Britain lost a LOT of surface ships, but there were only two major engagements in the North Sea. The rest were lost across the Atlantic, the Caribbean or in the Indian Ocean. Britain often took warships as losses in Sub battles whenever they could, and several German raiders were sunk in distant waters.

The Allies lost a total of 96 (66 of them British/Norwegian/Danish/Greek) Convoy points during the game, the exact same number of Cps the Cw starts with in 1914. This breaks down to 12 000 000 tons of shipping, about the same loss rate as in WW1 (the Allies lost about 13 000 000 tons, but close enough), but over six more months of war.

So, to sum it up: I think these calculations give a fairly accurate impression of what the losses would have been if this session was WW1.

FA3 is a very well designed game to recreate WW1. The game mechanics work very well, losses seem to mirror actual loss rates, the naval war is far more important and intense than in any other Ww1 game, and there is still plenty of room to go totally ahistorical (Japan ending up with Tanganyika as a colony and Persia as a protectorate, for instance).


I already miss the time spent playing this game, and will definetly return to it!
9 
 Thumb up
1.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim F
United Kingdom
Birmingham
West Midlands
flag msg tools
You know with Hitler? the more I learn about that guy, the more I don't care for him
badge
contrarian
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb

Thanks for posting your adventures!
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Doug DeMoss
United States
Stillwater
Minnesota
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Lost units aren't necessarily going to track with actual casualties. You sometimes have combats where one side takes no losses. That most definitely does not mean nobody was killed or hurt, it just means it didn't rise to the level of being noticeable in game terms.

Also consider that practically speaking, a corps in the field at the beginning of the war might well be still there at the end, but with decidedly lower manpower on hand.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Wendell
United States
Yellow Springs
Ohio
flag msg tools
Si non potes reperire Berolini in tabula, ludens essetis non WIF.
badge
Hey, get your stinking cursor off my face! I got nukes, you know.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks Jon, fascinating numbers!

I once kept track of losses for an entire The Great War in Europe: Deluxe Edition campaign game, so I recognize madness I mean genius when I see it!
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Terry Lewis
United States
Oregon
flag msg tools
badge
"But first, the children ought to be fed." -- Virginia Held (1980) from "Property, Profits, and Economic Justice"
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Well done, Jon!
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Terry Lewis
United States
Oregon
flag msg tools
badge
"But first, the children ought to be fed." -- Virginia Held (1980) from "Property, Profits, and Economic Justice"
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
wifwendell wrote:
Thanks Jon, fascinating numbers!

I once kept track of losses for an entire The Great War in Europe: Deluxe Edition campaign game, so I recognize madness I mean genius when I see it!
Did you ever post your stats, Wendell?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Wendell
United States
Yellow Springs
Ohio
flag msg tools
Si non potes reperire Berolini in tabula, ludens essetis non WIF.
badge
Hey, get your stinking cursor off my face! I got nukes, you know.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
TCLCATSPAW8MCHS wrote:
wifwendell wrote:
Thanks Jon, fascinating numbers!

I once kept track of losses for an entire The Great War in Europe: Deluxe Edition campaign game, so I recognize madness I mean genius when I see it!
Did you ever post your stats, Wendell?
I certainly did!

A Modest Proposal for the Great War in Europe (Feel Free to Criticize!)

And some further details here: Allies Grind Germans Down.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jon Lindbekk
Norway
Sem
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
demoss1 wrote:
Lost units aren't necessarily going to track with actual casualties. You sometimes have combats where one side takes no losses. That most definitely does not mean nobody was killed or hurt, it just means it didn't rise to the level of being noticeable in game terms.

Also consider that practically speaking, a corps in the field at the beginning of the war might well be still there at the end, but with decidedly lower manpower on hand.
You are absolutely right. The reasoning behind my calculations is that over a 30-turn game, total counter losses could give an impression of what the losses of soldiers might have been. I consider a corps lost in FA3 as a unit that has to be withdrawn from the front because of heavy losses. Other counters that remain after combat, maybe even not flipped, would still have suffered some casualties during a two month period. So the counters that are lost during a turn represent the total casualties during that period, not just to the counters that are removed.

I started by reading up on the actual losses of WW1. Then I calculated based on the numbers above, and the result just made sense. The game lasted 6-7 months longer than WW1, but Germany had a two year period of not having to fight in the west. I consider that German losses of some 1,1-1,2 million soldiers in a war fought out as my game to be plausible.

4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jon Lindbekk
Norway
Sem
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
wifwendell wrote:
Thanks Jon, fascinating numbers!

I once kept track of losses for an entire The Great War in Europe: Deluxe Edition campaign game, so I recognize madness I mean genius when I see it!
I've read that one Enjoyed it!

You don't do this kind of math and calculations unless you are a bit madninja

But it was so much more fun to do than catching up with work or shuffle snow outsidewhistle
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jason Johns
United States
Unspecified
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
demoss1 wrote:
Lost units aren't necessarily going to track with actual casualties. You sometimes have combats where one side takes no losses. That most definitely does not mean nobody was killed or hurt, it just means it didn't rise to the level of being noticeable in game terms.

Also consider that practically speaking, a corps in the field at the beginning of the war might well be still there at the end, but with decidedly lower manpower on hand.
Ture, but I think the interesting stat here would be, is if the ratio of German losses to Russian losses to British losses, etc were similar in his game vs real life.

Anyway, cool stats. Thanks for posting.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls