AI LCUs and Supply

[Aerosol2207]

I have read here that AI troops do not suffer a penalty for being out of supply or at least to the same degree as a human player's LCUs will suffer.

In my game, playing as the allies, I have held onto Rangoon despite a large IJA presence there (~40-50k troops). I managed to deliver an attack on Pegu in behind the enemy's front and have cut off the large besieging force in Rangoon. Is there any point in waiting at this stage for lack of supply to take its toll, or given that they are AI troops, is the only way to do this to commence the bloody deliberate assaults now?

[Platoonist]

Is there any point in waiting at this stage for lack of supply to take its toll, or given that they are AI troops, is the only way to do this to commence the bloody deliberate assaults now?

I still think there is a supply malus even for isolated AI troops, but maybe not as severe as for human-controlled. I can't help but wonder if difficulty level is involved with this. However, probably best to start the assault if you want them out of the way of your advance or off your supply lines in the near future. There will come a point where their numbers are going to be so diminished that if they retreat off into the bush they could then be slowly bombed into non-existence (if you wish).

[PaxMondo]

I have read here that AI troops do not suffer a penalty for being out of supply or at least to the same degree as a human player's LCUs will suffer.

Not aware of this, nor have I ever seen it, and I strongly suspect it is NOT accurate.

What is known is that at higher difficulty levels (Hard/Very Hard), the AI can move supply around easier than the human player. The rationale of this is to offset the human player ability to use Air Transport, Sub Transport, and Fast Transport which the AI cannot do. However, because it is a "work-around", it isn't perfect. It effectively allows supply to troops that are surrounded that the HUM player could NOT do. However, many AI players feel this is actually MORE realistic. GER was never able to completely sever supply into St Petersburg during that siege.

Anyway, it is what it is.

[Platoonist]

It effectively allows supply to troops that are surrounded that the HUM player could NOT do. However, many AI players feel this is actually MORE realistic.

During the war the Japanese were able to keep many of their by-passed island garrisons supplied at a bare subsistence level by using a mosquito fleet of ships not actually represented in the game. Luggers, native craft, coasters, sailing barks, junks, motor launches, sampans, even rafts. Mostly cheap wooden craft that didn't draw too much attention to themselves, moved at night and could hole up in creeks and inlets in the daylight hours under camo netting. Historically, Japanese barges were even able to maintain a tenuous supply link to barren, isolated Iwo Jima in the teeth of murderous air opposition. The Allies found they could easily bruise and bleed such primitive lifelines but rarely could shut them down completely due to their basic, minimal attributes. So, yeah not always being able to routinely cut off an isolated garrison from some supply doesn't seem out of line with reality.

[GetAssista]

On levels up to Hard you can get AI troops to zero supply and it gets progressively bigger malus to defensive capabilities. Driving suply to zero is necessary for big sieges in tough places.

On Very Hard AI always has supply in his LCUs no matter logistics

[RangerJoe]

Bypassed Japanese troops also fished and collected other food from the ocean. They also had gardens or tried to have them, Marine pilots would use Napalm on them when found. In fact, before the actual Japanese surrender, there was at least one small garrison that waved a white flag and surrendered to a passing PT Boat.