Disbanding units that are about to be encircled - exploit?

[Beethoven1]

On the first Soviet turn of the Grand campaign, I noticed that it is possible to disband at least 1 or 2 of the units that are in the Bialystok/Minsk pocket. The 7th Tank Division in the screenshot attached can be disbanded. It seems this would save an extra 420 tanks from certain doom, including 120 T-34s and 46 KVs.

However, the manual says on Page 250, "Units can only disband if they have enough movement points remaining to move to a rail hex that is connected to the supply grid, and if they are not within three hexes of an enemy unit." But the screenshot shows that the unit can't move to any such rail hex, as far as I can see.

I assume this is not intended/is an exploit? I will not do it for now because it seems unrealistic. I would say the same is true for the fortified regions as well, which can all be disbanded, if those return to the national pool (maybe it would make sense if somehow they would just become partisans, but I assume that is not the case?)

[Beethoven1]

Looking at it a bit more, I think it is simply letting you disband any division that is not within 3 hexes of an enemy unit (this applies to quite a few other divisions also), but it is not checking if it can move to a rail hex connected to the supply grid. So this lets you disband units that have no realistic way to escape encirclement, as long as they are not within 3 hexes of the enemy.

[Searry]

I'd say the AP is worth more than those tanks.

[Beethoven1]

ORIGINAL: Searry

I'd say the AP is worth more than those tanks.

They can be disbanded for 0 AP cost.

[Searry]

ORIGINAL: Beethoven1

ORIGINAL: Searry

I'd say the AP is worth more than those tanks.

They can be disbanded for 0 AP cost.

Definitely exploity then. I forgot about this change.

[Joel Billings]

The unit is not isolated at the point at which your are about to disband it, so it is legal. I agree it's kind of sketchy given the size of the now opened pocket, but the rules that block are being within 3 hexes of an enemy unit and being isolated.

[Beethoven1]

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

The unit is not isolated at the point at which your are about to disband it, so it is legal. I agree it's kind of sketchy given the size of the now opened pocket, but the rules that block are being within 3 hexes of an enemy unit and being isolated.

My original post was actually understating the issue. It is apparently possible to save essentially the entire pocket by disbanding it. This is because even if a unit does not start more than 3 hexes away from a German unit, if you simply move it 3 units away (into the middle area of the pocket), then it can be disbanded. This despite the fact that there is no rail link out of the partly-formed-pocket and the unit doesn't have enough movement points to move to a rail hex that is linked to the rest of Soviet territory.

I tried this and it was possible to disband every single division except for 1 tank division that didn't have. That is saving many hundreds of thousands of men (and equipment) that historically and realistically would mostly have been captured.

Maybe what the German AI did on the first turn in my game is atypical or something, but if this is usual then a Soviet player who knows to click the "disband" button can basically avoid all manpower/equipment losses from the Bialystok/Minsk pocket, at least if I am understanding correctly the effects of "disband."

Here is a screenshot after I disbanded everything that could be disbanded (I could also have disbanded the HQ, but I got confused by the "relocate unit" option).

[Joel Billings]

The key is not letting the pocket bet opened up again. We've been working on a better first turn AI script that is more secure with this major pocket. We've found some things with the script replay that was making it underperform. Some times it will run fine and make a pocket that is secure, but other times it will fail. Of course there's no guarantee with a script because there is some variability in the first turn combat resolution, but we think we can do better. We hope to get the fix out within a few weeks. In the meantime, if you're just learning against the AI, if you want to make it more difficult on yourself, you can choose not to disband in a case like this. Thanks for the info.

[Joel Billings]

BTW, what level of difficulty is this game set to?

[CapAndGown]

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

The key is not letting the pocket bet opened up again. We've been working on a better first turn AI script that is more secure with this major pocket. We've found some things with the script replay that was making it underperform. Some times it will run fine and make a pocket that is secure, but other times it will fail. Of course there's no guarantee with a script because there is some variability in the first turn combat resolution, but we think we can do better. We hope to get the fix out within a few weeks. In the meantime, if you're just learning against the AI, if you want to make it more difficult on yourself, you can choose not to disband in a case like this. Thanks for the info.

Thank you for your response, but I do not feel that simply making a better AI script is an adequate solution. That would obviously not apply to a human v human match. As Beethoven says, the unit should be able to move to a hex that is connected the friendly rail net. Perhaps a simpler solution would be to simply require all but fort units to be sitting on a such a rail hex in order to disband.

[Beethoven1]

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

BTW, what level of difficulty is this game set to?

I gave the AI 110% on everything, and me (Soviets) normal 100% on everything.

Also I didn't try to open up the pocket or anything, this was just how it was at the start of the turn. The AI just cut the rail links, but left a 2 hex gap near the Neman river so that the pocket was not completely "closed." That should not have really made a difference over the longer term since you don't have the movement points to escape in any case, but you can get around that by just disbanding everything. I definitely won't do that because I don't want to disrupt the balance for my first game, but I can see the potential for this to get exploited in multiplayer games with overly min-maxy players.

[Beethoven1]

ORIGINAL: CapAndGown

Thank you for your response, but I do not feel that simply making a better AI script is an adequate solution. That would obviously not apply to a human v human match. As Beethoven says, the unit should be able to move to a hex that is connected the friendly rail net. Perhaps a simpler solution would be to simply require all by fort units to be sitting on a such a rail hex in order to disband.

Yeah, I agree with this. It would be fine (or at least less unbalanced) if you could disband when the rail lines are not cut, but if the rail lines ARE cut, then disbanding to magically escape when you can't move out normally is an exploit.

Basically the check that would be needed is the same sort of check as was used to determine if a factory could be evacuated in WITE 1 - if the rail route out is cut (or in an enemy ZOC), then IMO you should not be able to disband.

IMO the real concern though is probably for multiplayer games. In a single player game I can just police myself and refrain from disbanding, in a multiplayer game (which I would eventually like to try), then I would only want to play if either this were changed or if there were a friendly house rule agreed with my opponent against doing this.

[FriedrichII]

Do you think the AI could also exploit this and get out of the pocket?

[timmyab]

Probably needs some kind of extra condition before a unit can disband. Such as must be on or within so many hexes of a rail connected depot....and 3 hexes from nearest enemy. Also depot should be connected to a national supply source, not a port.

[Infierno]

ORIGINAL: CapAndGown

Perhaps a simpler solution would be to simply require all but fort units to be sitting on a such a rail hex in order to disband.

This seems like a harsh countermeasure to a niche problem to me. Agreed though that they need to be at least near a rail connected to supply.

[juv95hrn]

Disbanding now cost no AP, but the manual says each disband should cost one. Apparently the manual is correct, and the game is bugged, so the disbanding would come at a price.

Then you would get useful manpower, but it has to go into new units that need to train, and the tanks are mostly bad. Its not as bad as experienced divisions being able to teleport out (or like SUs in WITE1). Even with this, it would be better if the script always closed this pocket, but I doubt it will ruin the campaign considering an average of 3 million Soviet losses the first year, right?


One another note though....

What would be best to do with the HQs in a situation similar to this. Good to know for later in the war. Especially for a head-to-head game.

- Should you move them as far as possible then Relocate them to a safe location, eating relocation attrition potentially many times?

or

- Should you move them as far as possible and let German spearheads displace them for you, eating probably only one dislocation attrition?

or

- Should you disband them as well?

Support units can still teleport to STAVKA, if I understand it correctly, as long as a non-ZOC gap exists, no matter how isolated they might be.

Thanks!

[CapAndGown]

ORIGINAL: Infierno

ORIGINAL: CapAndGown

Perhaps a simpler solution would be to simply require all but fort units to be sitting on a such a rail hex in order to disband.

This seems like a harsh countermeasure to a niche problem to me. Agreed though that they need to be at least near a rail connected to supply.

Hardly a niche problem. I don't know how many times I have seen pockets broken in my H2H games in WitE. For instance: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=4892000

[Sammy5IsAlive]

This looks like a bug to me - going of the screenshots all of the rail lines into the pocket have been cut so you are being allowed to disband when the rules say this shouldn't be possible. If you still have the save file it might be interesting to see a slightly more zoomed out view with the rail damage view applied so we can see where the game thinks the working Soviet rail is?

[Jim D Burns]

ORIGINAL: CapAndGown
to simply require all but fort units to be sitting on a such a rail hex in order to disband.

I disagree, the unit should be able to trace a rail route to a national supply source, simply sitting on a rail isn't enough. If the rail isn't connected to the national pools disbanding should be prohibited. Then ignore the rail hex requirement and simply check that the unit can reach a rail route within x number of hexes. X being perhaps equal to or less than half the units available movement at turn start.

Jim

[Zemke]

If a unit could not move out of the pocket or move to a rail link connected to a National Supply source, then how could the disbanded men and equipment make it out of the pocket to the pool? Oh and they have no supply while they are moving to leave the pocket to the pool. This IMO is a major bug or oversight.