Wounded and Killed?

[weapon2010]

It seems like in the final results the number of killed is always significantly hire than the number wounded.Shouldn't it be the other way around?

[xian]

I've never quite got a satisfactory answer to your question. In Cmx1 it was certainly true that the killed to wounded ratio was more like 2-3 wounded for each man killed.

I have heard that CMBN simulates those 'exciting' engagements where there is a greater chance of fatalities. Buddy Aid is also a factor and the way players push their units beyond a realistic norm.

But, I'd be interested in a definitive answer too.

[theFightingSeabee]

Yeah xian, if you use buddy aid, the critically wounded have a better chance of not ending up dead. If you just leave your wounded laying around the battlefield, you'll have quite a few of them die. Also, medical aid wasn't all that great in the 1940's, so that may play into the equation.

[Baneman]

I think also the fact that you can't "Exit" shattered units plays a part. On a small map/scenario, the winner usually is able to massacre the opponent in an irrealistic manner.

[noob]

I think also the fact that you can't "Exit" shattered units plays a part. On a small map/scenario, the winner usually is able to massacre the opponent in an irrealistic manner.

That's true, in real life one could run away or retreat in an orderly fashion, so until designers put exit zones for friendly forces into their scenarios the results will always look a little skewed.

[LukeFF]

Also, medical aid wasn't all that great in the 1940's, so that may play into the equation.

It was a lot better than it was in WWI.

[Vanir Ausf B]

It's been mentioned before. I don't know why it is, but it's probably not historical.

[Agua]

Odd. I'm struggling to remember a CMBN scenario where I've had more KIA than wounded.

[c3k]

I'm not saying CMBN has it right...neither am I saying it has it wrong.

The stats posted, above, show the oft-quoted 3:1 ratio of wounded to killed. However, that's theater-wide, due to all causes. Let me repeat that, for emphasis: due to all causes.

What we see when we play CMBN is the very gritty front line. We don't see the mortar stonk hitting the rest area. We don't see the truck drive off the road. We don't see gonorrhea outbreaks (would that count as wounded in action?). In short, we don't see any of the wounding mechanisms which would occur in the rear or in "quiet" sectors.

Is the classic 3:1 ratio applicable to direct fire combat? Or, is that ratio more appropriate when looking at an entire theater for the duration of an operation?

Just a few thoughts.

Ken

[noob]

I'm not saying CMBN has it right...neither am I saying it has it wrong.

The stats posted, above, show the oft-quoted 3:1 ratio of wounded to killed. However, that's theater-wide, due to all causes. Let me repeat that, for emphasis: due to all causes.

What we see when we play CMBN is the very gritty front line. We don't see the mortar stonk hitting the rest area. We don't see the truck drive off the road. We don't see gonorrhea outbreaks (would that count as wounded in action?). In short, we don't see any of the wounding mechanisms which would occur in the rear or in "quiet" sectors.

Is the classic 3:1 ratio applicable to direct fire combat? Or, is that ratio more appropriate when looking at an entire theater for the duration of an operation?

Just a few thoughts.

Ken

Maybe there was a diabolical round that made you go "missing" when hit by it:)

[weapon2010]

From a purley mathmatical outlook the wounded should always outnumber the killled.The human body has a very small area that would cause instant death.The head and midchest area is about 20% of the body leaving about 80% of the body to get hit with non-life threatening wounds such as a bullet graze to the shoulder or shrapnel to the thigh or foot.But these might be represented buy are yellow shaded wounded guys.Lightly wounded and able to fight.

[ASL Veteran]

Maybe there was a diabolical round that made you go "missing" when hit by it:)

I was reading about the Canadians in the Sheldt campaign, and one guy mentions that there was a German soldier running along the top of a dyke. They lined up a mortar shot to try and take him down and it ended up landing directly on the man's head. Needless to say he was obliterated in a puff of red spray.

Just to add to this though, most of your overall casualties are probably being caused by blast and shrapnel effects from artillery and that will account for most of your ratio. Most scenarios don't have a lot of artillery in them, and certainly nobody would want to play a scenario where heavy artillery was going off on top of their troops for an hour .... what fun would that be?

It will also be situation dependent as well to some degree. From my playing, very few of my pixeltruppen drop as 'brown' dead color from the first hit. The majority of my truppen that are hit are 'red' and you have to do buddy aid on them. If you are defending it can be difficult to render buddy aid on your 'red' truppen because you might get pushed out of your position. Another factor - and perhaps a very important one - is that you can't move your wounded pixeltruppen. You can only render aid where they lay. If you were defending and you could evacuate your wounded then you would get a different ratio for sure.

So I think that if you really wanted to evaluate this, don't look at the end game screen and make judgements based on that. Pay close attention in game as to whether your truppen are falling as 'brown' dead or 'red' wounded. Do as much buddy aid as you can to keep your ratio down as well. Keep in mind as well that the AI doesn't really do a great job of performing buddy aid. Most of the time if the AI does buddy aid it's by pure chance because if the AI is advancing it will just leave the wounded behind, and if the AI is defending they won't perform the buddy aid unless someone is already close by. The AI will not move truppen around the battlefield for the purpose of performing buddy aid.

[ASL Veteran]

From a purley mathmatical outlook the wounded should always outnumber the killled.The human body has a very small area that would cause instant death.The head and midchest area is about 20% of the body leaving about 80% of the body to get hit with non-life threatening wounds such as a bullet graze to the shoulder or shrapnel to the thigh or foot.But these might be represented buy are yellow shaded wounded guys.Lightly wounded and able to fight.

Just in case some players don't know this, but Red status is badly wounded in the game. Yellow lightly wounded. Only Brown is dead. If you perform buddy aid on your Red truppen they will be evacuated and count as wounded. If you just let them lay about on the map there is a good chance they will be counted as dead at the conclusion of your game.

[John1966]

Most scenarios don't have a lot of artillery in them, and certainly nobody would want to play a scenario where heavy artillery was going off on top of their troops for an hour .... what fun would that be?

Could be a perfect desciption of School of Hard Knocks.

[Boche]

Could be a perfect desciption of School of Hard Knocks.

dead on! jajajaja

[JonS]

Appendix D of Terry Copp's 'Cinderella Army' includes weekly totals of Exhaustion, WIA, KIA&MIA, and Sick.

From 14Jun44 - 14May45 the ratio of WIA to KIA&MIA is 2.5:1. For the period of just the Normandy campaign (Jun-Jul-Aug) it is 2.3:1. There are two weeks in Normandy when KIA&MIA exceeds WIA. Over the whole period, the weekly ratio varies between 0.5:1 for w/e 28Jun44 and 6.3:1 for w/e 31Jan45.

Including sick and exhaustion the ratio rises to 11.2:1 (3.4:1 for just Normandy). Over the whole period, the weekly ratio varies between 1.2:1 for w/e 28Jun44 and 41.3:1 for w/e 31Jan45.

[Michael Emrys]

From a purley mathmatical outlook the wounded should always outnumber the killled.The human body has a very small area that would cause instant death.The head and midchest area is about 20% of the body leaving about 80% of the body to get hit with non-life threatening wounds such as a bullet graze to the shoulder or shrapnel to the thigh or foot.But these might be represented buy are yellow shaded wounded guys.Lightly wounded and able to fight.

True, but getting hit outside the 20% instant death area is not a guarantee that you will survive. A hit to an arm or a leg that severs that limb will kill unless immediately and effectively treated. A hit anywhere that severs an artery can cause the victim to bleed out unless treated immediately and effectively. Even a light wound that becomes infected has a chance of leading to death. And different soldiers have different reactions to shock. Some soldiers who were only moderately wounded succumbed. Conversely, some other soldiers who were severely wounded pulled through.

The most important factor in determining whether a wounded soldier will survive is how quickly he can be evacuated to a field surgical hospital. This is why survival rates for even gravely injured soldiers have dramatically improved after WW II and the introduction of medevac helicopters.

Michael