If they are empty the airfield should have almost no personnel so the ammount of supplies it uses up should be negligible in any case.

I have been playing the buldge scenario recently and had some units that I put on static withdrew to the east, once they entered "withdrawing" mode they re mobilized automatically. Not sure if it used any AP's though.

ok I understand thanks.

<r> One of the patch notes for .68 stated that:<br/>
" Units that are considered “in supply” but are in hexes that are considered isolated should not be getting combat penalties, nor should leaders suffer admin roll penalties. These units should also not be shown with red outlines on the map. Fixed ...

I'll play if you want?

That makes sense, thanks.

<r> As per the title, in my current game (Battleground Italy under .68 beta) I cannot seem to reassign my Italian AAA battalions from their current HQ, despite the fact that it is very close to other HQ's and the unit itself been attached for multiple turns.<br/>
<br/>
<IMG src=""><s>[img]</s><e ...

<r> From the manual I was under the impression that a fortified zone could attach up to 3 support units of any type. However in my current game (battleground Italy scenario under .68) on one particular fortified unit I managed to attach 4 units, with the option to attach more. Meanwhile on some of ...

<t> I started an offline test game on the Battleground Italy scenario under the .68 beta patch, after Italy surrendered and railway damage was inflicted no German construction battalions were committed to repair the rails despite them being available and the damaged areas being well within command ...

<r> I just got the first turn completed under the .68 beta back from my opponent and still not a single construction unit has been sent to repair the rails <SM sm="nono.gif">[sm=nono.gif]</SM>. On the subject of question 2, the units are construction/labor battalions, which to my knowledge should be ...

Lol I read the beta patch notes just after I posted this and am installing now.

<t> I'm playing the Battleground Italy scenario as the Axis (server game). Italy surrendered about 4 turns ago and significant rail damage occurred in southern Italy the turn after the surrender happened. I have multiple construction/fortress construction battalions attached to OKW, Army Group C and ...

Thanks, that had me confused there for a bit. Was there a specific reason that lead to the change from the rule as written?

<r> I'm having some trouble understanding how enemy attacks impact movement allowance rule is working. For the test I used the "Rommel Attacks" scenario (both sides set to human) with the game patched to 1.01.37.<br/>
<br/>
I performed a deliberate attack on the stack containing the 2/34th US ...

I patched to 1.01.37 after install, this is the latest patch (apart from the beta)?

Yes, some other guys got dismissed but no mention of rommel

<t> I'm new to witw and started out by playing the small Rommel attacks scenario (as axis). I left the man himself in charge of the Afr 1st Italian Army (as is default), turn 4 was fine but on turn 5 I noticed he had been replaced by some Italian chair warmer. I looked in the event log under the ...

<r> <br/>

<QUOTE><s>[quote]</s>ORIGINAL: chaos45<br/>
<br/>
Also I'm not so sure the new German counter-attack/withdrawl rule is balanced for the early game/long game. As in the early game I think this is just going to allow an even more bloated German super OOB for 1941-1943. I think its a ...

This has turned from stalingrad to bagration almost, he really should have retreated all of his army to the Dnepr after the first disaster and it would have given him time to reform the line.

Interesting that those 3 panzer and 3 panzergren divisions only had ~300 tanks between them, his armor must have been quite under-strength by this stage. Will be an interesting test of his crisis management skills for sure, looks like you might manage to grab the dnepr before the winter now.