On Replacements increase/decrease

[TheJSFFenix]

Can someone explain to me how increasing/decreasing of replacements works?

I know that there is a stockpile of equipment that is on hand that can be handed out to units, and it comes at a certain rate per turn, so if replacements get decreased or increased by event, does that mean the rate is affected or the on hand pile? The evil ed doc that I have from the toaw beachhead says that the way it works is that it multiplies the replacements but that temporary replacements reductions are tricky for some reason that I don't quite understand (something about OPART randomly rounding up and down?)

Be careful with temporary replacement reduction (turn #x 50%, turn #(x+y) 200%). OPART rounds odd
rates up and down at random. (Jarek)

However this info was written for TOAW 3, so I wonder if there is anything I have to know for TOAW 4? Also, the way I see it often done with replacements is that people make units that are later disbanded so that the equipment gets dumped in a pile to distribute (France 1944 starts disbanding brigades worth of equipment for the Germans later in the scenario instead of giving them a +replacements event and Soviet Union 1941 also does that with Lend Lease stuff), so which one of those two methods is better if I say, want to have one side start getting a replacements edge past a certain point in the scenario for initiative shifting (not literal initiative, I mean the advantage) and stuff?

Also what is exactly this warning about temporary replacements reduction and why is this tricky again?

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: TheJSFFenix

Can someone explain to me how increasing/decreasing of replacements works?

I know that there is a stockpile of equipment that is on hand that can be handed out to units, and it comes at a certain rate per turn, so if replacements get decreased or increased by event, does that mean the rate is affected or the on hand pile? The evil ed doc that I have from the toaw beachhead says that the way it works is that it multiplies the replacements but that temporary replacements reductions are tricky for some reason that I don't quite understand (something about OPART randomly rounding up and down?)

Be careful with temporary replacement reduction (turn #x 50%, turn #(x+y) 200%). OPART rounds odd
rates up and down at random. (Jarek)

However this info was written for TOAW 3, so I wonder if there is anything I have to know for TOAW 4? Also, the way I see it often done with replacements is that people make units that are later disbanded so that the equipment gets dumped in a pile to distribute (France 1944 starts disbanding brigades worth of equipment for the Germans later in the scenario instead of giving them a +replacements event and Soviet Union 1941 also does that with Lend Lease stuff), so which one of those two methods is better if I say, want to have one side start getting a replacements edge past a certain point in the scenario for initiative shifting (not literal initiative, I mean the advantage) and stuff?

Also what is exactly this warning about temporary replacements reduction and why is this tricky again?

Replacements are integers. That is what causes the issue: Suppose the intial rate is 3. That gets halved to either 1 or 2. Then it gets doubled back to either 2 or 4 - never 3.

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: TheJSFFenix

Also, the way I see it often done with replacements is that people make units that are later disbanded so that the equipment gets dumped in a pile to distribute (France 1944 starts disbanding brigades worth of equipment for the Germans later in the scenario instead of giving them a +replacements event and Soviet Union 1941 also does that with Lend Lease stuff), so which one of those two methods is better if I say, want to have one side start getting a replacements edge past a certain point in the scenario for initiative shifting (not literal initiative, I mean the advantage) and stuff?

The use of disbands to boost replacements is useful primarily for a couple of possible reasons:
1) to give a player an increase for a specific equipment type or types. E.g. if you want the production rate of various weapons to remain the same, but to get an increase in manpower by adding rifle squads, or vice versa
2) to ensure that the quantity of a particular replacement is static when the replacement rate is unknown. For example, in an East Front scenario you might have events to flex up and down the rate for Soviet equipment production, but lend-lease equipment might be static.

[governato]

As Golden Delicious suggested, I also like a mixed approach!

- Standard replacement change in unison and are simple to code in. It is also the way disabled equipment is returned to the pool. The CONS is that spikes in individual equipment production can't be modeled and that if the rates go up and down it takes a bit of math to keep track of say how many tanks are actually being produced.

- Disbandments are a great addition especially for long/large scenarios and give a great amount of flexibility. I used them

-to model the large Russian infantry levies in Summer 41 (while weapons productions was falling) and tied them to the major population centers. For example the Red Army has to retake the Ukraine by late 1944 or it will not be able to access a large number of infantry troops.


- Disbandments can be associated with TO and events to give the players the chance to change production emphasis mid game. For example the Axis can chose a TO where heavy tanks will never come into play and a large number of PzKwIV will be produced instead, while the Red Army can field less planes and increase supply for ground units.