2 HQ's at the same base...

[Supervisor]

At the beginning of Campaign 41 the SW Pacific and Asiatic Fleet HQ's are both in Manila.

I too would like to place both a Combined Arms HQ and a Naval HQ at the same base, but I can't figure out how to do it, if it's possible at all. Am I missing something?

-KL

[LargeSlowTarget]

You can't put two HQs into the same base unless you move HQ A via 'Move HQ', change base to HQ B, create a TF in that base with a flagship of corresponding nationality and move HQ B on the TF, then send the TF to the location of HQ A and disband the TF. HQ B will then disembark 'stacked' on HQ A.

B.t.w., I always let Asiatic Fleet stay at Manila and give them leaders with poor agressivness (like Brown or Pye). Those guys are of no use (in PacWar, history is sth else) and the Japanese can have them. Would be nice to have some more expendable HQs for Fletcher and Co. Why can't US admirals be put into land bases? Layton the Brit starts in Trincomalee, and the Japanese have a lot of them for free deployment. And was there really only one Marine Corps general in 41/early 42?

[JBarrett]

If you want a less complicated way of doing it, you can always just go into the editor and change the location from there.

[LargeSlowTarget]

Isn't that cheating? I mean, if you want a less complicated way of wining the game, you can always just go into the editor and change the victory points from there.

[Ed Cogburn]

Originally posted by LargeSlowTarget:
Isn't that cheating? I mean, if you want a less complicated way of wining the game, you can always just go into the editor and change the victory points from there.

This must be a game limitation, so cheating is not an issue. I can't imagine a reason for a one HQ per base limitation, unless it has to do with existing infrastucture, but a base like Perl Harbor or Sydney would easily be able to support more than 2 HQs.

I hope they look at this for WitP. There are several issues about base size and capacity that PAC currently doesn't deal with.

[LargeSlowTarget]

You are right, it is just a game limitation. There are lots of other base limitations which unfortunately cannot be solved by the editor. Nevertheless, my last post may has sounded more picking than it was meant. My apologies.

[bradk]

Go to the base where you want the additional HQ.

Select "Change HQ" and then select the HQ you want to move there. You will get a "Not allowed xyz HQ at base" message.

But in the lower left of the screen the base will show as being under the HQ you tried to move there. While its still showing select move HQ.

All done.

[Istfemer]

Wow, Brad, that's a monster of a necropost! *applauds*
18 years, 8 months and 9 days... A whole generation has been born and come of age since LargeSlowTarget last posted in this thread.
---

[bradk]

Well... the answers were wrong!!! [:)]

Actually I came across this looking at some very old posts trying to figure out what features of 3.2 might not be documented.

[Rich Dionne]

Version 3.2.15 allows multiple HQs to be located at the same base, no longer a need to move the HQ to a TF, then disband the TF with HQ at the same base as another HQ.

[bradk]

What is the procedure in 3.2.15 for moving the HQ? With the original programming it is a two-step process as in post 7.

[Rich Dionne]

Cool, I never knew you could still change the base HQ by ignoring the "NOT ALLOWED" message.

The procedure is the same as the original programming, the only difference is that in 3.2.15, you no longer get the "NOT ALLOWED" message.

[bradk]

ORIGINAL: Rich Dionne

Cool, I never knew you could still change the base HQ by ignoring the "NOT ALLOWED" message.

Question authority!!!!!!!!

[Rich Dionne]

Definitely!!