Evil Ed Document - update to current version OF TOAW

[Telumar]

Most of you might know the EvilEd article from the old tdg website (original converted into pdf format available from Silvanski's TOAW Redux site: http://sites.google.com/site/toawredux/ ... ects=0&d=1).

I'd like to update it to TOAW III as some things don't apply anymore and others have changed (i.e. supply points). I already converted the original from html to pdf and added footnotes, but left the initial format etc as it is.

Maybe some of the vets or those still active that contributed to the original document (Ben, Colin, who else? Curt Chambers?) could go through the updated version attached to this post to double-check and/or add corrections. I also can provide an .odt or .doc format of the file via e-mail (cariundel at yahoo de).

The original article contains some event examples/templates. Maybe we can expand this, feel free to post.

[Silvanski]

Good initiative Telu [:)]

[Raindem]

I was sort of the Editor-in-Chief of the original Evil Ed document.  There was no single author.  I took contributions from the TDG members and compiled them into what I thought was a readable format.  Of course, I took a lot of grief for the color code system so if you want to get rid of that most would consider it an improvement. 

I'll take a look at what you have to see if there is anything I might add.  I commend you for undertaking this project.

Curt

[Sertorius1]

Something else you might consider adding is an explaination of the varibles and how to figure them for various situations. For example, the automatic railroad rebuild factor. If I understand correct if the varible is set at one, one rail hex per turn will be rebuilt, supply default is four hexes, changing the number in the event editor to five would make it five hexes, etc. This would be a useful addition, I believe.

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: Raindem

...I took a lot of grief for the color code system so if you want to get rid of that most would consider it an improvement.

Curt

Lol. I was going to act on this:

Maybe some of the vets or those still active that contributed to the original document (Ben, Colin, who else? Curt Chambers?) could go through the updated version attached to this post to double-check and/or add corrections. I also can provide an .odt or .doc format of the file via e-mail (cariundel at yahoo de).

...then I thought about those colors.

[jeanlucbetin]

Nice Job old chap

Der WanderPleaseToReadYou

[Silvanski]

Good job. It's easier to read. Uploaded it on TOAW-Redux

[Telumar]

ORIGINAL: Der_Wanderer

Nice Job old chap

Der WanderPleaseToReadYou

Thanks and welcome back, JL!

[Telumar]

ORIGINAL: Silvanski

Good job. It's easier to read. Uploaded it on TOAW-Redux

Alright, thanks.

[shunwick]

Stefan,

Nice work but I think I ought to point out that Airborne Resupply does work. Jarek is quite right that HQs and Paratroops get extra benefit for airdrops as do glider troops and special forces. There are a number of factors involved but the three most important are the supply stockpile, the amount of unused air transport from the previous turn, and the supply demand in the pocket/hex.

Best wishes,
Steve

[Telumar]

ORIGINAL: shunwick

Stefan,

Nice work but I think I ought to point out that Airborne Resupply does work. Jarek is quite right that HQs and Paratroops get extra benefit for airdrops as do glider troops and special forces. There are a number of factors involved but the three most important are the supply stockpile, the amount of unused air transport from the previous turn, and the supply demand in the pocket/hex.

Best wishes,
Steve

I thought this was a TOAW legend.. do you have a test scenario?

[1_Lzard]

Probably "Arnhem".....it's the only pure AB scenario he's designed........

Too big for me to upload, get it from his site : http://tiberappraisalservices.appraiserxsites.com/TOAW

[sPzAbt653]

That's not me Steve, its the other Steve. Although I tried to get airborne supply to work and didn't feel that it does. I could be wrong, but I rather think it might be the extended supply lines that eventually reach some airborne that aren't actually isolated.

[1_Lzard]

Bugger! Sorry.........sigh!

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

That's not me Steve, its the other Steve. Although I tried to get airborne supply to work and didn't feel that it does. I could be wrong, but I rather think it might be the extended supply lines that eventually reach some airborne that aren't actually isolated.

As I recall, the unit's display will state that it's unsupplied, but if you look at the actual supply level, you will see that it is gaining supply.

I suppose this means that none of your losses would go back in the pool, and you wouldn't receive replacements, but the unit could still function okay in other respects.

[Telumar]

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

That's not me Steve, its the other Steve. Although I tried to get airborne supply to work and didn't feel that it does. I could be wrong, but I rather think it might be the extended supply lines that eventually reach some airborne that aren't actually isolated.

As I recall, the unit's display will state that it's unsupplied, but if you look at the actual supply level, you will see that it is gaining supply.

I suppose this means that none of your losses would go back in the pool, and you wouldn't receive replacements, but the unit could still function okay in other respects.

Nope. Sorry. Attached a very small test scenario. The airborne units lose supply/readiness each turn. On turn 5 they start to lose equipment, too. Despite unused air transport. With new and old supply rules.

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: Telumar

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

That's not me Steve, its the other Steve. Although I tried to get airborne supply to work and didn't feel that it does. I could be wrong, but I rather think it might be the extended supply lines that eventually reach some airborne that aren't actually isolated.

As I recall, the unit's display will state that it's unsupplied, but if you look at the actual supply level, you will see that it is gaining supply.

I suppose this means that none of your losses would go back in the pool, and you wouldn't receive replacements, but the unit could still function okay in other respects.

Nope. Sorry. Attached a very small test scenario. The airborne units lose supply/readiness each turn. On turn 5 they start to lose equipment, too. Despite unused air transport. With new and old supply rules.

Maybe jack the air transport level to some stratospheric level?

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

ORIGINAL: Telumar

ORIGINAL: ColinWright




As I recall, the unit's display will state that it's unsupplied, but if you look at the actual supply level, you will see that it is gaining supply.

I suppose this means that none of your losses would go back in the pool, and you wouldn't receive replacements, but the unit could still function okay in other respects.

Nope. Sorry. Attached a very small test scenario. The airborne units lose supply/readiness each turn. On turn 5 they start to lose equipment, too. Despite unused air transport. With new and old supply rules.

Maybe jack the air transport level to some stratospheric level?

Nope. It would seem that you're right. I tried setting airlift to 50,000 and even stuck in a couple of airfields -- also ran it with both old and new supply. No joy.

[shunwick]

ORIGINAL: 1_Lzard

Bugger! Sorry.........sigh!

Kurt,

It happens to us all at some time.

Best wishes,
Steve

[shunwick]

Hang on guys - I'll look to see if I have still got the test scenario.

A problem that you may be having is if you are using high proficiency troops. Low proficiency troops stabilize their air supply quite quickly because they are suffering radical desertion effects. High proficiency troops do not start dying and deserting as quickly and so their supply demand stays higher for longer.

Essentially, you have to overpower the supply demand. As long as the demand is not being completely met the unit will still lose supply. Low proficiency troops (say 33%) will move from a supply deficiency to stable to supply surplus within four or five turns (by which time they have gone from Division to Battalion size) while higher (85%) proficiency troops will take much longer to become stable.

Sorry, I didn't copy it to the flash drive. I can upload on Tuesday. In the meantime, the easist way to witness Airborne Resuppy is to turn the unit proficiencies down. By the way, Airborne Resupply is notoriously difficult to calculate and it does not follow normal supply rules in that FSDE makes no difference and neither does parking a unit next to an HQ. Plus... if you want large, high proficiency airborne units to get supply without desertion effects you need to throw serious supply at them. Sub dividing units help limit desertion effects... I learnt that from Elmer...

Best wishes,
Steve