while in pocket, thoughts arise

[BrianG]

Pockets are not allowing units from different armies to change to another hq in the same pocket:

leading to 2 issues.

Since one now has to destroy the hq to get it out of the pocket, the SU's are destroyed and the pocket is weaker for that. But shouldn't SU units be actually destroyed, not just go poof as in magic poof.

and if you do a destroy hq maneuver, why can't the surviving units be switched to any other hq's which stayed in the pocket. seems more realistic.

Maybe a waste of AP, but if one really wants to hold a pocket it makes sense that if you control those spaces you should be able to make hq-unit reattachment's. Including off loading SU's to other in-pocket hq's before you do the hq destroy.

[eskuche]

SU transferring seems a little too gamey, I think. I wanted to do it with the initial turn 1 pockets for reasons and also noticed it was disabled.
I think the reasoning would be that if the HQs can escape because they are dispersed entities then they also don't have control of SUs when as such. Like wave/particle duality of light... or something.

[morvael]

Quite a lot of work for a few already dead units... That's the only problem, base idea is good.

[BrianG]

Epilogue

The Byransk front was also in the pocket. One can offload SU's to a subordinated Army hq's which is also in the pocket. I did that before destroying the front hq.

Also, this pocket was large and was during mud season. There were at least 10 attacks on the pocket during mud.
Having the hq in the pocket helped: artillery SU did come to the defense.

[joelmar]

My feeling is that realistically SU's should be allowed to be transfered to other HQ's in a pocket. Those guys would be there nevertheless with their equipment even if the higher echelon of their previous HQ was transfered out, and that unit would usually fight back no matter what. Both Soviets and Germans were known to be resilient and combative while encircled.

To me the process is the same as when we merge 2 depleted units.

But I can understand that it might be easier said than done in code.