Limited Stacking

[JWE]

Ok, another reason for going with AB's Extended Map for Babes is there is a neat and nifty set of magic map data that allows the different hex types to be defined in terms of stacking limits. Lots of way cool stuff, with way cool multipliers, that sets hex stacking limits anywhere from 300,000 'combat' troops, for a clear hex, to 20,000 in jungle-rough.

Only works with AB's Extended Map. Have lots of data. Looks sweet. Will offer as an alternative map data set on the Babes site.

@ JeffK, if you download the new map data set, and run Nik's Guad Scen, it should work ok, since Nik's map is truncated. This should be a good test for you. Very interested as to what you think.

[herwin]

I like it. [:)]

[JWE]

There’s a base stack limit for each hex type; lots of troops allowed in an Urban hex, fewer in Clear, fewer still in Forest and Desert, all the way down to Swamp, Sand Desert, Rough Jungle, and Tropical Mountain. Then there’s modifiers; hey, there’s always modifiers, right?

The whole idea of stacking limits is to reduce the number of troops in a hex that can be adequately supplied in that type of terrain. So your basic supply routes in and through the hex will generally accommodate more troops.

There are benefit multipliers for the presence of rivers (Small, Large, Navigable); roads (Track, Secondary, Main); railways (Minor, Major). So an Urban hex with a main road and a major railway can support quite a few troops. 90 miles away, in raw Jungle-Rough terrain, it is significantly different. There’s 48 elements in the matrix.

No more Mega-Stacks. Operations need to be conducted along carefully chosen routes. Enemy bases, with their supply dumps, will be a harder nut to crack if attacking from the ‘blue’. Supply build-up and supply lines become a paramount consideration when planning and conducting operations.
Thing is that stacking limits don’t really limit stacking; one can stack all they want. What the limits do is define how many troops can be adequately supplied there, and imposes supply penalties for overages. One might be willing to accept an increased rate of supply consumption, if they have large local stockpiles. Likewise, one might be willing to accept the disruption and fatigue hits, from lack of adequate supply, in the interest of operational imperatives. Just think Bataan.

Anyway, should be fun for grogs. Only works with AB’s Extended Map. Short Scens, like Nik’s Guad 004 will work just fine because it just picks out a window; and the window doesn’t include any of the Andrew/Babes map changes, so just grab the Stack Limit data file from the website and try it out. If you are doing a campaign game, you will need to capture the Extended Map before you use the Stack Limit data file.

[Nikademus]

Does one have to use a third party program like WitPTracker to "see" the stack limit?

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: JWE

There’s 48 elements in the matrix.

Geez, Johnny, that's more dimensions than String Theory! [X(]

(I know you said 'elements' not 'dimensions', but misquoting a little allows a great quip.)

No more Mega-Stacks. Operations need to be conducted along carefully chosen routes. Enemy bases, with their supply dumps, will be a harder nut to crack if attacking from the ‘blue’. Supply build-up and supply lines become a paramount consideration when planning and conducting operations.
Thing is that stacking limits don’t really limit stacking; one can stack all they want. What the limits do is define how many troops can be adequately supplied there, and imposes supply penalties for overages. One might be willing to accept an increased rate of supply consumption, if they have large local stockpiles. Likewise, one might be willing to accept the disruption and fatigue hits, from lack of adequate supply, in the interest of operational imperatives. Just think Bataan.

Sounds well done - I think I'll have to troll for an Imperial opponent when it all gets the green flag.

[Alfred]

JWE,

In the OP, you placed "'combat" within quotation marks. Was that meant to exclude the support troops. Seems somewhat counter intuitive because the stock island stacking limits include both combat and non-combat troops in the mix. Including all the boots in the limit further reduces the size of the spear point, just like real life.

Overall it sounds very good. It strikes me as being the single most significant improvement made to the land combat engine and would reduce by at least 75% the regular complaints made about land combat (albeit probably introduce another 25% of complaints that continental bases would now be too hard to capture).[;)]

I do hope that once play experience shows no ill effects, this change is ported over to the stock map. Based on what Andrew Brown has previously said, a port over doesn't seem to be an insurmountable task.

Alfred

[JeffroK]

ORIGINAL: JWE

Ok, another reason for going with AB's Extended Map for Babes is there is a neat and nifty set of magic map data that allows the different hex types to be defined in terms of stacking limits. Lots of way cool stuff, with way cool multipliers, that sets hex stacking limits anywhere from 300,000 'combat' troops, for a clear hex, to 20,000 in jungle-rough.

Only works with AB's Extended Map. Have lots of data. Looks sweet. Will offer as an alternative map data set on the Babes site.

@ JeffK, if you download the new map data set, and run Nik's Guad Scen, it should work ok, since Nik's map is truncated. This should be a good test for you. Very interested as to what you think.

OK, do I need to be patched up??

[ny59giants]

Great news!! The elimination or reduction in the use of "Death Star" ground stacks is great news.

[Andrew Brown]

So far there is only a map data file, with the stacking limits inbuilt, for the map I made which is meant to be compatible with the original Da Big Babes map. I need to create one for my extended map, and I will do so as soon as time permits (real life is intervening for now...)

Andrew

[JeffroK]

Rather than Bataan, I see this as putting up the historical barrier between Burma and India.
Currently the penalty is time, IMHO it takes far too long to move between Imphal & Mandalay, but you can move an LCU Deathstar through the jungle and smash your way through.
 
If this works as planned, you can move smaller forces through the jungles, but have to co-ordinated a number of "columns" to move efficiently OR spend masses of supplies to move an LCU Deathstar through and keep supplied at the other end.
 
I'm not sure if JWE has done this bit, does ownership of a base within the hex help or are both sides handled evenly??

[JeffroK]

because I'm a card carrying Luddite it took a while to get it all in place, I need a 10 year old to teach me a bit more.

It looks good, in the Gcanal scenario I compared Brisbane and Noumea, Brissy had about twice the force but well under its cap and needed about 4500 supply .
Noumea had about 10% over its cap and wanted over 8000 supply  (Both had minimal aircraft)

There wasnt a rise in disruption or fatigue, maybe in a longer movement and battle it would show.

I'm about the start a DBBScen28 game so I'll see how it goes.

PS   I have a few questions on the ratings for bases, PH only allows 20k??  WAD with the right numbers or affected by the 7/12 attack damaging infrastructure.

[Andrew Brown]

ORIGINAL: JeffK
PS   I have a few questions on the ratings for bases, PH only allows 20k??  WAD with the right numbers or affected by the 7/12 attack damaging infrastructure.

I don't have a copy of the data with me at present, so I can't check, but this looks to show a weakness in the formulas I used to derive the stacking values. Infrastructure, such as roads and railways, boosts the allowed value, but single hex islands, such as Oahu, that were "developed" with good roads, do not get roads in the map data, and therefore do not get appropriate stacking limit bonuses (using my current formula).

There are a couple of possible approaches to fix that up:

1) Add "stub" roads and/or railways to the map data for "developed" single hex islands. This would be scenario-independent, but is a bit of a kludge. Adding such data should not affect gameplay.

2) Take account of bases when determining a stacking limit value. This would be read from the scenario data, and so would be scenario-specific. Building up bases would not change the stacking limits, which is a shortcoming, but not a fatal one, I think.

3) Manually adjust some values for hexes such as PH. Again this is sort of scenario-specific.

Thinking about how to approach this...

Andrew

[JeffroK]

Andrew,
 
I think for bases its almost a case by case situation, can it be part of the "location data" (lots of work) or does it have to be a pwhex based solution(lots more work)

[Andy Mac]

Just so everyone is aware the AI will not cope with this change wiithout a total re write it took a long time to get the AI atoll garrisons ok and no work at all has been done to ensure that the AI will adjust to this.

So the AI will either have to be totally exepmt from this new stacking, someone will need to re wrtite and test the AI scripts or this mod is PBEM only (which is fine)

I am fine with the change as it applies to mods and as optional chrome its fantastic but this should not be applied to the core game via an exe change as it will screw up the v AI games.

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

ORIGINAL: JeffK
PS   I have a few questions on the ratings for bases, PH only allows 20k??  WAD with the right numbers or affected by the 7/12 attack damaging infrastructure.

I don't have a copy of the data with me at present, so I can't check, but this looks to show a weakness in the formulas I used to derive the stacking values. Infrastructure, such as roads and railways, boosts the allowed value, but single hex islands, such as Oahu, that were "developed" with good roads, do not get roads in the map data, and therefore do not get appropriate stacking limit bonuses (using my current formula).

There are a couple of possible approaches to fix that up:

1) Add "stub" roads and/or railways to the map data for "developed" single hex islands. This would be scenario-independent, but is a bit of a kludge. Adding such data should not affect gameplay.

2) Take account of bases when determining a stacking limit value. This would be read from the scenario data, and so would be scenario-specific. Building up bases would not change the stacking limits, which is a shortcoming, but not a fatal one, I think.

3) Manually adjust some values for hexes such as PH. Again this is sort of scenario-specific.

Thinking about how to approach this...

Andrew

Stubs would probably work best.

[herwin]

Does this help with the problem in Burma where it seems the Allied player can replicate Slim's dry season 1944-45 offensive during the monsoon season of 1942? I assume it also helps in China.

[Smeulders]

ORIGINAL: herwin

Does this help with the problem in Burma where it seems the Allied player can replicate Slim's dry season 1944-45 offensive during the monsoon season of 1942? I assume it also helps in China.

These complaints keep popping up, but has anyone actually ever managed to do a large Burma invasion after the introduction of supply movement caps ? All the examples I know from the AAR forum are old games, started before the supply movement restrictions were patched in.

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Smeulders

ORIGINAL: herwin

Does this help with the problem in Burma where it seems the Allied player can replicate Slim's dry season 1944-45 offensive during the monsoon season of 1942? I assume it also helps in China.

These complaints keep popping up, but has anyone actually ever managed to do a large Burma invasion after the introduction of supply movement caps ? All the examples I know from the AAR forum are old games, started before the supply movement restrictions were patched in.

The last upgrade of the beta for us was 14 August 2011.

[JWE]

ORIGINAL: JeffK
I think for bases its almost a case by case situation, can it be part of the "location data" (lots of work) or does it have to be a pwhex based solution(lots more work)

Have a good start on fixing up the file for the extended map areas. Should be finished today. Hopefully it will be much like Andrew's, but should be good enough for govt work till AB's official file comes out. Andrew and I are coordinating as best we can.

Also think bases are best tweaked on a case by case. Stubs will work, and perhaps are necessary, to get the multipliers set up right, but certain bases will nevertheless need the base limits (BL) set manually. Lots of work, but still.

This would also give an opportunity to address AndyMac's AI concerns. Do islands also on a case by case, at least the small ones (atolls). Believe the medium and large islands will mostly fall into the same range as what they have currently. AB has a list of small islands, so it shouldn't be that hard.

Anyway, still very much a work in process. Appreciate the comments on details. Would like to hear how this functions within the game mechanics.

[beppi]

Generic stacking limits for every hex sound quite interesting but wouldn't the current game engine create further problems resulting out of that limits. If the limits are quite low for my point of view that could lead to various problems during the combat. If you have a 30k limit in a rough jungle hex, and a i put there 30k troops let them stay 3 months to build the open forts to lvl 4 or 5. How would it be possible to win a fight there with x3 modifiers and the forts. Even without the forts it would be close to impossible force a retreat there. Next problems would be bases with to low stacking limits. Already close to impossible to fight bases with lvl 9 forts in difficult terrain and if the limits are to low -> defender stacks to the limit, attacker has a problem. Last "problem" i would see are errors during and movement problems during gameplay. I have a two or three hexes with a 30k limit next to each other and now i lose a fight and my units are forced to retreat in a lower limit hex. The supply usage could jump to astronomical levels and you have no chance to do anything as your units need a few turns to move out of the hex. Or if a force a stack of units to retreat into an other stack, which now results in a massive overstack penalty. You could burn massive amounts of supply only in one turn, technically draining an entire area of all supply. Other problem would be movement of troops. What happens if i move some moving units to an other hex and they pass an already occupied hex ?

For me stacking limits on isolated islands work very well. You cannot drain supply from other hexes, you cannot force units to retreat to other hexes with different stacking limits and for the attacker, the most important thing is that you can quite easily can kill off all supply just by isolating the island.

Sounds nice and would be a quite interesting for using during a campaign. I currently experience some problems with both sides have 6000+ AV in two or three groups circling each other, one side trying to block as much as possible and the other side trying to cut the enemy off. But if both sides are careful that is almost impossible, and direct combat in non open hex is close to impossible too between such large stacks.