supply - esp for mech units

[SMK-at-work]

I've jsut been reading some summaries of Osprey's campaign series 167 - Moscow 1941, and it struck me that there's a major shortcoming in supply in TOAW. I know we've touched on it before, but here goes again....

Mech units without fuel do not move. Period. In TOAW they lose a little movement rate, but hey still keep going forever pretty much, as long as they can get a skerrick* of supply.

So, for example, Panzer unitis in FITE/Barbarossa never have to halt to await fuel as 4th Pz did at Orel (apparently it carried about 200km worth of fuel for every vehicle it had) - in TOAW you have a choice of continuing in the red, or halting to try to improve your supply state.

In "real life" this unit had no such choice.

Can I suggest something for the next patch - that mechanised units have their movement even more limited when they get to a low supply state?

* - Skerrick - little used unit of supply that is just a smidgen more than nothing.

[Silvanski]

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work
* - Skerrick - little used unit of supply that is just a smidgen more than nothing.

or as in motor racing, a splash'n dash [;)]

yes it makes sense,
for example, in Gary Grigsby's "War in Russia", normal -fully supplied- movement in clear terrain for panzers is 6 hexes, as they move they eat up their supply and the movement rate drops off ... if they don't get supply they come to a full stop, besides becoming quite vulnerable to counter attacks... they have to wait till the infantry coming behind them has cleared railroad hexes to allow the supply rate per hex to go up....
if they're too far ahead or cut off they can only be supplied by air (OK in June 41 when the Luftwaffe has air superiority), but that's barely enough to move -at the best- two hexes... but that kind of supply is another matter and doesn't apply to TOAW... only pointing out how it's done in a different game system

[golden delicious]

It gets worse. In real life, a truck with half a tank of petrol can still drive as fast as if it had a full tank. Not three-quarters as fast as in TOAW.

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work

I've jsut been reading some summaries of Osprey's campaign series 167 - Moscow 1941, and it struck me that there's a major shortcoming in supply in TOAW. I know we've touched on it before, but here goes again....

Mech units without fuel do not move. Period. In TOAW they lose a little movement rate, but hey still keep going forever pretty much, as long as they can get a skerrick* of supply.

So, for example, Panzer unitis in FITE/Barbarossa never have to halt to await fuel as 4th Pz did at Orel (apparently it carried about 200km worth of fuel for every vehicle it had) - in TOAW you have a choice of continuing in the red, or halting to try to improve your supply state.

In "real life" this unit had no such choice.

Can I suggest something for the next patch - that mechanised units have their movement even more limited when they get to a low supply state?

* - Skerrick - little used unit of supply that is just a smidgen more than nothing.

I've had almost this same discussion about combat supply elsewhere. Movement supply is a little different but many of the same points apply.

First, note that an unsupplied unit is subject to loss of vehicles. This models vehicles being abandoned for lack of fuel. If, on the other hand, it is supplied, then it has a supply line and is receiving some fuel continuously. Now, part of the problem is that supply lines can be of infinite length in TOAW. The distribution part of the equation does need some more refinement.

Second, players assume that a 1% supply state means that the unit literally has only 1% of its original supply stockpile left. There is no basis for this. Supply is abstracted in TOAW and what the 1% state means can only be deduced from how the game treats that state. It clearly does not treat it as in such a depleted state, so it must mean something else. I would suggest that it represents the state at which the unit has reached maximum fuel conservation. In other words, the unit would only be expending as much fuel as it was continously receiving via its supply line, and not further depleting its reserves.

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: golden delicious

It gets worse. In real life, a truck with half a tank of petrol can still drive as fast as if it had a full tank. Not three-quarters as fast as in TOAW.

Duty cycle. If full supplied units can run 24/7 (or whatever), then at 1% perhaps only half that.

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

I've had almost this same discussion about combat supply elsewhere.

A discussion where you found your own views widely opposed, as I recall.

Second, players assume that a 1% supply state means that the unit literally has only 1% of its original supply stockpile left. There is no basis for this. Supply is abstracted in TOAW and what the 1% state means can only be deduced from how the game treats that state. It clearly does not treat it as in such a depleted state, so it must mean something else. I would suggest that it represents the state at which the unit has reached maximum fuel conservation. In other words, the unit would only be expending as much fuel as it was continously receiving via its supply line, and not further depleting its reserves.

Clearly, though, this theory falls down in practice. In TOAW, units which are at the end of very tenuous supply lines can keep on roaring ahead at a very respectable speed. Your arguments are even less applicable here than with artillery fire; firing half as many shells will probably yield more than half as much effect, but burning half as much fuel will definitely not get you more than half the way there. The fact is that motorised forces historically did grind to a juddering halt when they outran their fuel supplies, and this was a major factor in a number of campaigns. TOAW's inability to reflect this fact is a significant problem.

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
Duty cycle. If full supplied units can run 24/7 (or whatever), then at 1% perhaps only half that.

...for about 500 yards. Then they stop.

[Monkeys Brain]

Interesting. But you only touched one problemo [;)]

Can we mention some more?
Acording to the book "War without Garlands" by Kershawm, Germans used 2000 different vehicle types. Some 40% of Wehrmacht forces were equped with captured French motorised vehicles at the start of Barbarossa. Germans soon began to experience immense troubles with trucks etc... and logistical nightmare. In FiTE you don't have such problems LOL

Beside that we can speak about uselless Soviet tanks that were issued no AP rounds on the first day of Barbarossa in some units [:D] and TOAW will treat them equally well hehe.

And we can speak about that Russian mech div. that simply got bogged in the marches and they had to leave the tanks (don't know if whole division was lost that way, don't have full information on that).

Hmmmmmm... TOAW is just not perfect but maybe some things can be improved. That fuel thing is maybe easier to implement.

EDIT: I am not saying that things I have said are in fact big problems but for example those trucks were big problems and I think that in FiTE for example cautious German player will end up with no real problem with trucks in December 1941. And we know that they broke down, just as tanks which needed tank engines for Moscow offensive or their tracks were teared etc... there is no column "repairing" as there is available, lost, on hand columns.


Mario

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: Monkeys Brain

Interesting. But you only touched one problemo [;)]

Can we mention some more?
Acording to the book "War without Garlands" by Kershawm, Germans used 2000 different vehicle types. Some 40% of Wehrmacht forces were equped with captured French motorised vehicles at the start of Barbarossa. Germans soon began to experience immense troubles with trucks etc... and logistical nightmare. In FiTE you don't have such problems LOL

I don't think the way TOAW works at the moment has too much of a problem with this. Vehicles are sent to the pool as a unit moves, and certainly vehicles which are in a poor state of repair would move more slowly- but might at least still go.

Beside that we can speak about uselless Soviet tanks that were issued no AP rounds on the first day of Barbarossa in some units [:D] and TOAW will treat them equally well hehe.

This sounds like a matter of unit supply.

EDIT: I am not saying that things I have said are in fact big problems but for example those trucks were big problems and I think that in FiTE for example cautious German player will end up with no real problem with trucks in December 1941. And we know that they broke down, just as tanks which needed tank engines for Moscow offensive or their tracks were teared etc... there is no column "repairing" as there is available, lost, on hand columns.

Well, German problems in Russia were rather unusual. A designer might introduce a unit with 0/99999 trucks, which would appear as engines begin to freeze and draw off trucks from the on-hand pool and prevent them returning to units. This unit would then be disbanded in the spring as conditions improve.

[Monkeys Brain]

Well, German problems in Russia were rather unusual. A designer might introduce a unit with 0/99999 trucks, which would appear as engines begin to freeze and draw off trucks from the on-hand pool and prevent them returning to units. This unit would then be disbanded in the spring as conditions improve.

Yes, nice solution and at the same time German get's boost in horse team (introduction of Russian panje carts).
But then there would be problems as before Operation Blau at least those units in AG S were given much more trucks...
But again replacement editor is also very rudimentary and crude at the moment with it's high, very high, low, very low... priorities.


Mario

[SMK-at-work]

Interesting points all
 
As noted - some units did actually run out of fuel to teh extent that they had to stop moving.
 
For lack of ammo types - I suspect the low quality of Sov units helps simulate that in Barbarossa era scenarios.
 
While for multiplicity of equipment types I'd be happy to see a "reliability rating" introduced along with everything else - so "Medium trucks" in the German army in 1941-452 might have a low rating reflecting the reported troubles.....

[Zort]

Well doesn't the amount of supply a unit gets also depend on what the turn length represents. So in 3 days/one turn they can get supplies but if 1 day/1 turn then maybe not. If I remember correctly the germans in 41 would when a tank broke down take the fuel and leave it behind, always pushing forward. They had to wait at times for their fuel trucks to catch up but didn't they usually have fuel almost every day. I don't have all the data that you guys have but based on how fast the germans did move forward in the early days they seemed to have fuel even though they would be "out of supply" in the game.

Not saying the model in TOAW doesn't need some tweeking though. Not to beat a dead horse anymore but hopefully a simple solution can be done. I know most wargamers don't want to fight a logistics game and that is what most large front games are really, who can get the most ammo/fuel to the front lines firstest and fastest.

[SMK-at-work]

Good point about length of a turn Zort - that hadn't occured to me.  however there are numerous examples of units running out of fuel - even entire armies - such as the Afrika Corps - having insufficient fuel to continue - although presumably you are right in that they did have SOME fuel.
 
there's an interesting article on strategic oil/fuel issues at http://www.mikeantonucci.com/bloodforoil.htm

[ralphtricky]

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
First, note that an unsupplied unit is subject to loss of vehicles. This models vehicles being abandoned for lack of fuel. If, on the other hand, it is supplied, then it has a supply line and is receiving some fuel continuously. Now, part of the problem is that supply lines can be of infinite length in TOAW. The distribution part of the equation does need some more refinement.

The good news is that with today's faster processors, we should be able to refine that.

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work

While for multiplicity of equipment types I'd be happy to see a "reliability rating" introduced along with everything else - so "Medium trucks" in the German army in 1941-452 might have a low rating reflecting the reported troubles.....

The lack of this characteristic obscures the problems with things like the Panther. Which wins: the Sherman which made it to the battlefield or the Panther which broke down twenty miles away?

[Monkeys Brain]

Some interesting things:

Although many things has been changed from 4.1 version to 5.0 some are rather strange (later about that)...
Things that have changed on the German side is that many things got replacement rate scaled down or changed quantities etc...
So some equipment will be used very faster on offensive and some slower.
One of the things people usually use as probing attacks or dreaded supply drain attacks are recce Aufklar units for example. Most used vehicle there is Sdkfz 234-8 http://www.corazzati.it/sdkfz231rad8_fotobn.jpg
there is 1008 at the start and you get only 3 per turn. In version 4.1 there was rate of 25!!
I have noticed that I am losing too many of these...
But I compared DNO scenario with FiTE and saw that FiTE also have lot's of wheeled and tracked vehicles some with machine guns and some with 20 mm guns... Rather interesting design but I doubt that is is entirely historically accurate.

There is Sdkfz 251/1 in FiTE there is more than 5000 of these APC's and in DnO some 1670... Do anyone know numbers at the start of Barbarossa and production numbers through the war?
Some things also are different than DnO like 88 flak guns etc...


Mario

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: Monkeys Brain
There is Sdkfz 251/1 in FiTE there is more than 5000 of these APC's and in DnO some 1670... Do anyone know numbers at the start of Barbarossa and production numbers through the war?

Here's a useful summary;

http://www.feldgrau.com/afvstats.html

As you can see even DNO's number is a bit on the large side (perhaps 1200 SdKfz 250s and 251s had been built by June 1941). In fact only one or two companies in most panzer divisions used the SdKfz 251. As I recall in DNO, each panzer division has one entire regiment using the panzergrenadier icon, but I don't know if this means they use halftracks.

The numbers of reconaissance vehicles look pretty bad too. Only around 200 8-wheeled SdKfz 238 produced prior to Barbarossa, with a total of perhaps 800 wheeled vehicles with 20mm cannon, and about as many again with lighter armament. This of course does not consider losses in action or through wear, nor that many of these vehicles would have been in training units, particularly the older and more obscure ones.

It's difficult to get figures for 88s from production as the vast majority of these would have remained in their primary role in Germany.

[Monkeys Brain]

ORIGINAL: golden delicious

ORIGINAL: Monkeys Brain
There is Sdkfz 251/1 in FiTE there is more than 5000 of these APC's and in DnO some 1670... Do anyone know numbers at the start of Barbarossa and production numbers through the war?

Here's a useful summary;

http://www.feldgrau.com/afvstats.html

As you can see even DNO's number is a bit on the large side (perhaps 1200 SdKfz 250s and 251s had been built by June 1941). In fact only one or two companies in most panzer divisions used the SdKfz 251. As I recall in DNO, each panzer division has one entire regiment using the panzergrenadier icon, but I don't know if this means they use halftracks.

The numbers of reconaissance vehicles look pretty bad too. Only around 200 8-wheeled SdKfz 238 produced prior to Barbarossa, with a total of perhaps 800 wheeled vehicles with 20mm cannon, and about as many again with lighter armament. This of course does not consider losses in action or through wear, nor that many of these vehicles would have been in training units, particularly the older and more obscure ones.

It's difficult to get figures for 88s from production as the vast majority of these would have remained in their primary role in Germany.

Thanks Ben, very useful information on that chart! [&o]

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: golden delicious
A discussion where you found your own views widely opposed, as I recall.

Your recall is faulty. Better check again.

Clearly, though, this theory falls down in practice. In TOAW, units which are at the end of very tenuous supply lines can keep on roaring ahead at a very respectable speed.

This is really the problem. TOAW doesn't actually have "very tenuous" supply lines. Unsupplied units are very debilitated. But supplied units, even at the lowest possible level, are not. Again, the problem is mostly on the distribution end.

Your arguments are even less applicable here than with artillery fire; firing half as many shells will probably yield more than half as much effect, but burning half as much fuel will definitely not get you more than half the way there.

There's some truth to that. But the issue is clouded by other factors:

1. Supply is not differentiated between fuel, ammo, & etc. Ammo dominates the tonage figures. So, in an abstract sense, a unit with 1% supply may still be near full fuel stockpiles. The PC doesn't know that it got to 1% by movement or combat.

2. Units expend fuel for other things than movement - supply distribution in particular.

3. Foot units and Motorized units are handled by the same movement supply rule. (And foot units should expend fuel - see item #2 above).

The fact is that motorised forces historically did grind to a juddering halt when they outran their fuel supplies, and this was a major factor in a number of campaigns. TOAW's inability to reflect this fact is a significant problem.

But TOAW is reflecting it! Unsupplied units abandon vehicles as they "run out of fuel". And even supplied units without full supply move at lower MP rates, reflecting grinding to a halt, waiting for more fuel, and only then moving some more.

[Veers]

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: golden delicious
The fact is that motorised forces historically did grind to a juddering halt when they outran their fuel supplies, and this was a major factor in a number of campaigns. TOAW's inability to reflect this fact is a significant problem.

But TOAW is reflecting it! Unsupplied units abandon vehicles as they "run out of fuel". And even supplied units without full supply move at lower MP rates, reflecting grinding to a halt, waiting for more fuel, and only then moving some more.

The problem is that they do not grind to a halt. They go from a sprint to a jog, when thye're at 1% supply.