BUG? can't be WAD - MG and Mortar prod

[Joel Billings]

I looked at your save. You have an armaments shortage, and also have a shortage in manpower (you have 30k German manpower in the active pool after your replacement phase and 0 armaments). I see what you mean about the 36 Motorized Division that seems to have built up some solid TOE levels previously, but are short on MGs and AT guns (they have mortars). They are adjacent to the enemy this turn so I don't know what happend on the turn they were refitting, but it's possible that they ended up short of manpower or armaments on the refit turn and that's why they didn't get fully replaced. You have MGs in the pool, however they are in the transit pool (200-300 of them). When I filtered to the Active Pool, there were 0 MGs in the pool. So there you have it. No armaments and no weapons in the pool, so you don't get them. You may be having too much of a demand for these MGs so they aren't keeping up with the demand given the armaments shortage. You do have plenty of MGs that are attached to the various rifle/pioneer squads so your division has hundreds of MGs and is not totas lacking as you might think.
Now if you set your Max TOE levels of some of your HQ's/airbases/construction units, you could pull some manpower out of these non-combat units and free up the manpower to go into your combat units. You may want to do that as although you are not totally out of manpower in the pool, you are very close.

[Baelfiin]

Here are the numbers that I see from the turns I was keeping track. Am I looking in the wrong place or is there a filter that I am missing? Also any idea why there was a 7 point jump in morale on the January 7th turn? **** EDIT **** Ok i see now that there is a way to filter to just german production.

So now there should be a way to prioritize easy to produce weapons of which there is a shortage (MG's) over hard stuff which there is a surplus (bombers)

[kirkgregerson]

Joel,

I thought when you lower the TOE on units it will only prevent it from gaining more over that %. Do units with say 100% TOE in manpower get drained at some rate down to a hard set 50% TOE setting?

I can send a save of my turn, where to? Have 60k+ armaments and should have manpower too, but only during that turn. Still think the priority for mg replacement is too low. Should be gaining those mgs as more of a priority with manpower?

Thanks.

[kirkgregerson]

Actually I think part of the issue is that my units around 7/42 started swapping out the old MG for the new MG. Not sure what the difference is yet. Will look at the editor. But you can see from screen shot that there's 15k of the old mgs in the pool now (11/42). Would love to still use the old MGs too. [:'(]

Think it's just a question of manpower?


** Also, will there ever be a patch to fix the negative pool values (red highlight)?

[Joel Billings]

I'm not sure about the negative pool values. I thought this was fixed at least once already. Please post this in a new thread, ideally with a save. Thanks.

[Joel Billings]

The replacement system is extremely complex and not as easy as just saying let's boost priority of MGs.

As for making more MGs and less aircraft, remember that aircraft and AFVs are built. Unless you have a supply shortage, which is unlikely, their production is not impacting the production (or lack thereof) of the MGs.

[Lieste]

Weren't the Germans using MG08, MG15 and MG08/15 weapons in infantry formations because of shortages of 'new' MG34/MG42... so having MG34 sitting idle while units starve seems unlikely...

Which I don't think matters too much, all these guns are basically the "same" as the Maxim (although the MG15 and MG08/15 are a little more portable than the MMG configuration) - WW1 proved them more than capable of killing... The same for ancient sFH, sFH02 and sFH13 guns and similar substitutions of 'museum pieces' mostly they work fine, if a little heavy and only suitable for horse drawn transport (all that is usually available anyway).

[Joel Billings]

Forgot to say that setting TOE will not immediately cause the manpower to leave the units, but they will leave eventually as losses are taken. It will take longer for HQ's and airbases to lose the manpower since they will not be taking front line attrition. You raise a good point that it is not something that will immediately give you lots of manpower for combat replacements, so it's something you should do long before you really need it. An alternative is to disband some of the airbases and HQ's that are no longer needed (probably more airbases than HQ's for the Germans).

[jaw]

ORIGINAL: Lieste

Weren't the Germans using MG08, MG15 and MG08/15 weapons in infantry formations because of shortages of 'new' MG34/MG42... so having MG34 sitting idle while units starve seems unlikely...

Which I don't think matters too much, all these guns are basically the "same" as the Maxim (although the MG15 and MG08/15 are a little more portable than the MMG configuration) - WW1 proved them more than capable of killing... The same for ancient sFH, sFH02 and sFH13 guns and similar substitutions of 'museum pieces' mostly they work fine, if a little heavy and only suitable for horse drawn transport (all that is usually available anyway).

The weapon names are in the game mostly for "color" with rather minor differences between them in specifications. Production cost is based on the type of machine gun (light, medium, heavy) and is the same for all MGs of that type. Therefore a shortage of MGs is a shortage of MGs, it doesn't matter what actual weapon we are talking about.

[jzardos]

I not liking the way the older model MGs are swapped out in 42 as it seems to leave a low TOE% of MGs in units which takes a while to build up with the new MGs.

To me this makes no sense to have 15k old MGs in the prod pool while units on the front are screaming for MGs to fill their ranks. The MG is a basic and core piece of equipment and something is wrong if units are not able to replenish the TOE of MGs in 1 month (refitting behind the lines) when either the armaments and/or MGs are in the pool?

Just like abulbulian and kirkgregerson, I'm really seeing across ALL my units in mid-late 42 a lack of MG TOE% that has been consistent for almost 3 months now. Very unhappy that these MGs are not being manned from the pool and send to my units.

Correct me if I'm wrong

[davetheroad]

Swopping out MG34's for new MG42's ? Should not happen

The MG42 is not a replacement equipment for the MG34, just a cheaper to produce alternative.
I presume they fire the same bullets!

I doubt divisions would be asked to hand in their MG34's and it is more likely that
they would be quite happy to get a replacement 34 or 42.

You can count the german MG production as just that, machine guns as i think there were
no different models for heavy MG etc just a mount difference.

MG 34 production continued to rise throughout the war.

[jaw]

ORIGINAL: davetheroad

Swopping out MG34's for new MG42's ? Should not happen

The MG42 is not a replacement equipment for the MG34, just a cheaper to produce alternative.
I presume they fire the same bullets!

I doubt divisions would be asked to hand in their MG34's and it is more likely that
they would be quite happy to get a replacement 34 or 42.

You can count the german MG production as just that, machine guns as i think there were
no different models for heavy MG etc just a mount difference.

MG 34 production continued to rise throughout the war.

Not quite technically correct, the MG42 had a much higher cyclic rate of fire than the MG34 and was cheaper due to how it was made (more stamped parts). Because its ROF was so high it was not suitable (probably due to overheating problems) for use in the fixed mounts of tanks or aircraft hence the continued need for the MG34. As a standalone crew served weapon or a squad automatic weapon the MG42 was unsurpassed and the most feared weapon by Allied/Soviet infantry. It is the basis of all modern machine guns.

That said, I did make a change last night to remove the upgrade path of the MG34 to MG42 in an effort to keep the MG34 in service longer. TOEs will still call for the MG42 at the appropriate time but removal of the upgrade path may slow how fast MG34s get swapped out for MG42s. Production of the MG34 also extends to the end of the game (it always did) so combined with no upgrade you may see MG34s being used longer. Unfortunately I believe you will have to start a new game to see if the change has any effect.