Surrounds and evaporations

[DanNeely]

Crosspost from SZO forum.

The 'unsupplied' attribute (visible in the unit report) tells the engine whether or not lost equipment should go to replacements. As has been said, this is set at the start of the turn.

I did some tests on this a while back and the conclusion I got was that toaw did a single hex pocket check and treated them as unsupplied for purposes of evaporation only (but not the normal pre evap combat). There's enough variability in toaw's loss distribution to make them an equivical guide at best though.

Ralph, can you shed any light on this? I'd also be interested in what the criteria for distributing equiptment between the replacementpool and destroyed is as well.

[ralphtricky]

ORIGINAL: DanNeely

Crosspost from SZO forum.

The 'unsupplied' attribute (visible in the unit report) tells the engine whether or not lost equipment should go to replacements. As has been said, this is set at the start of the turn.

I did some tests on this a while back and the conclusion I got was that toaw did a single hex pocket check and treated them as unsupplied for purposes of evaporation only (but not the normal pre evap combat). There's enough variability in toaw's loss distribution to make them an equivical guide at best though.

Ralph, can you shed any light on this? I'd also be interested in what the criteria for distributing equiptment between the replacementpool and destroyed is as well.

It looks like you're right. Unsupplied affects the equipment lost. There's also a chance that equipment will be lost even if supplied. The cupply checks happen at theb eginning of a turn.

[DanNeely]

I know about the turn start one and it's affects. I was asking about a suspected check on surrounded units that were in supply at the start of the turn.

[ralphtricky]

ORIGINAL: DanNeely

I know about the turn start one and it's affects. I was asking about a suspected check on surrounded units that were in supply at the start of the turn.

Yes, there is a flag that is se when supply is checked, and checked when a unit is killed.

[DanNeely]

ORIGINAL: ralphtrick

ORIGINAL: DanNeely

I know about the turn start one and it's affects. I was asking about a suspected check on surrounded units that were in supply at the start of the turn.

Yes, there is a flag that is se when supply is checked, and checked when a unit is killed.

so you're saying if a unit is supplied at turn start it's always treated as supplied for the purpose of evaporation even if it's been encircled during the turn? If so, would an encirclement check be addable?

[*Lava*]

ORIGINAL: DanNeely

so you're saying if a unit is supplied at turn start it's always treated as supplied for the purpose of evaporation even if it's been encircled during the turn? If so, would an encirclement check be addable?

Why?

Just because a unit is surrounded doesn't mean it immediately begins to lose combat potential. It is only if it is isolated over time, or engaged over time will it draw down it's stocks and be increasingly vulnerable to be overrun.

Ray (alias Lava)

[DanNeely]

ORIGINAL: Lava

ORIGINAL: DanNeely

so you're saying if a unit is supplied at turn start it's always treated as supplied for the purpose of evaporation even if it's been encircled during the turn? If so, would an encirclement check be addable?

Why?

Just because a unit is surrounded doesn't mean it immediately begins to lose combat potential. It is only if it is isolated over time, or engaged over time will it draw down it's stocks and be increasingly vulnerable to be overrun.

Ray (alias Lava)

I'm not refering to combat capability. When a supplied unit evaporates the nondestroyed equiptment (the stuff that would've retreated in other circumstances) is placed back in the replacement pool. When an unsupplied unit evaporates the remaining equiptment is destroyed. This is what I'd like to have done when a unit evaporates on the same turn it is encircled. I think it's the current behavior but losses are noisy enough that my test results from a few years back were ambigious.

[*Lava*]

ORIGINAL: DanNeely
When an unsupplied unit evaporates the remaining equiptment is destroyed. This is what I'd like to have done when a unit evaporates on the same turn it is encircled.

Ah, I see.

Misunderstood, sorry.

Ray (alias Lava)

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: DanNeely
so you're saying if a unit is supplied at turn start it's always treated as supplied for the purpose of evaporation even if it's been encircled during the turn? If so, would an encirclement check be addable?

Note that a unit can be encircled by units that, technically, don't actually arrive in the cutoff position until after the unit evaporates. And that's probably the rule rather than the exception. Unless Ralph is going to get really sophisticated in evaluating the timing of encircling units' arrivals, it's probably better to leave it as it is, with some equipment being allowed to return to the pools.

[ralphtricky]

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: DanNeely
so you're saying if a unit is supplied at turn start it's always treated as supplied for the purpose of evaporation even if it's been encircled during the turn? If so, would an encirclement check be addable?

Note that a unit can be encircled by units that, technically, don't actually arrive in the cutoff position until after the unit evaporates. And that's probably the rule rather than the exception. Unless Ralph is going to get really sophisticated in evaluating the timing of encircling units' arrivals, it's probably better to leave it as it is, with some equipment being allowed to return to the pools.

Abstraction can be used to excuse a lot of things[:D]

Watch the the between turn supply checks, and see how long they run, and picture that every time there's a loss due to combat.

Sorry, if you want the equipment destroyed, you're going to have to commit equipment to making sure that nobody escapes, and that's going to take some additional time. I don't find that any more unrealistic than the concept of sneaking up and surrounding another unit and killing everyone or taking them prisoner.

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: ralphtrick

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: DanNeely
so you're saying if a unit is supplied at turn start it's always treated as supplied for the purpose of evaporation even if it's been encircled during the turn? If so, would an encirclement check be addable?

Note that a unit can be encircled by units that, technically, don't actually arrive in the cutoff position until after the unit evaporates. And that's probably the rule rather than the exception. Unless Ralph is going to get really sophisticated in evaluating the timing of encircling units' arrivals, it's probably better to leave it as it is, with some equipment being allowed to return to the pools.

Abstraction can be used to excuse a lot of things[:D]

Watch the the between turn supply checks, and see how long they run, and picture that every time there's a loss due to combat.

Sorry, if you want the equipment destroyed, you're going to have to commit equipment to making sure that nobody escapes, and that's going to take some additional time. I don't find that any more unrealistic than the concept of sneaking up and surrounding another unit and killing everyone or taking them prisoner.

I think you're agreeing with me. In other words, you're going to leave it as it is?

[ralphtricky]

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: ralphtrick

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay



Note that a unit can be encircled by units that, technically, don't actually arrive in the cutoff position until after the unit evaporates. And that's probably the rule rather than the exception. Unless Ralph is going to get really sophisticated in evaluating the timing of encircling units' arrivals, it's probably better to leave it as it is, with some equipment being allowed to return to the pools.

Abstraction can be used to excuse a lot of things[:D]

Watch the the between turn supply checks, and see how long they run, and picture that every time there's a loss due to combat.

Sorry, if you want the equipment destroyed, you're going to have to commit equipment to making sure that nobody escapes, and that's going to take some additional time. I don't find that any more unrealistic than the concept of sneaking up and surrounding another unit and killing everyone or taking them prisoner.

I think you're agreeing with me. In other words, you're going to leave it as it is?

I really can't comment on features for the upcoming release. Matrix has a pretty strict policy on that.

[TAIL GUNNER]

OK, in a Barbarossa game I was recently playing, I had a large group of Soviets surrounded by the Germans....except for one hex which was unpassable flooded marsh....

Does unpassable terrain also prevent evapped and destroyed units from contributing back to the replacement pool if said terrain is used to form the pocket?

Thanks,
ChadG

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: Juggalo

OK, in a Barbarossa game I was recently playing, I had a large group of Soviets surrounded by the Germans....except for one hex which was unpassable flooded marsh....

Does unpassable terrain also prevent evapped and destroyed units from contributing back to the replacement pool if said terrain is used to form the pocket?

Should so long as it blocks supply.

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: golden delicious

ORIGINAL: Juggalo

OK, in a Barbarossa game I was recently playing, I had a large group of Soviets surrounded by the Germans....except for one hex which was unpassable flooded marsh....

Does unpassable terrain also prevent evapped and destroyed units from contributing back to the replacement pool if said terrain is used to form the pocket?

Should so long as it blocks supply.

Depends on the timing, of course. If it was surrounded during the current turn, it will still be supplied and some equipment will probably make it to the pools. If it started the turn surrounded, it will be unsupplied and nothing will escape.