You should disband Front HQ's (axis)

[jubjub]

Pro's and con's of fronts:

Pro's:
- Tiny chance they help leader rolls, etc.
- Increase depot capacity
- Increased cooperation between different armies

Con's:
- 20k manpower per
- 800-900 trucks per
- supply consumption
- armies/corps increase supply capacity enough
- increased cost to replace leaders

Seems to me like they're not worth it. I just deleted all of them in one of my games. I'll let you know if I end up regretting it.

[DeletedUser1769703214]

Nice!!!

[K62_]

Pro's:
- Tiny chance they help leader rolls, etc.

Con's:
- 20k manpower per
- 800-900 trucks per

The chance is not that tiny! Let's take a fairly typical German example with Heitz (inf rating 6) reporting to Strauss (inf rating 6) reporting to von Bock (inf rating 7). The chance that both Heitz and Strauss miss an inf roll is 4/10 * 14/20 = 28%. The chance that von Bock makes the roll is 7/40 = 17.5%. So overall von Bock will make a difference of 28% * 17.5% = 4.9% more successful rolls.

4.9% may not seem like much, but with 45 divisions in AGC and each successful inf roll doubling CV in battle, von Bock adds an equivalent of 45 * 4.9% = 2.2 divisions from just his combat rating. This by itself is enough to offset the 24k manpower and 1000 trucks in AGC HQ.

But von Bock will also have similar effects on initiative rolls that make his troops fire better in battle, morale rolls that recover fatigue faster, administrative rolls that add extra MPs etc. (The support squads in AGC HQ also help with admin rolls.) Over the entire campaign his effect will be vastly superior to the extra 24k replacements that will need to be railed in and supplied too.

[jubjub]

Pro's:
- Tiny chance they help leader rolls, etc.

Con's:
- 20k manpower per
- 800-900 trucks per

The chance is not that tiny! Let's take a fairly typical German example with Heitz (inf rating 6) reporting to Strauss (inf rating 6) reporting to von Bock (inf rating 7). The chance that both Heitz and Strauss miss an inf roll is 4/10 * 14/20 = 28%. The chance that von Bock makes the roll is 7/40 = 17.5%. So overall von Bock will make a difference of 28% * 17.5% = 4.9% more successful rolls.

4.9% may not seem like much, but with 45 divisions in AGC and each successful inf roll doubling CV in battle, von Bock adds an equivalent of 45 * 4.9% = 2.2 divisions from just his combat rating. This by itself is enough to offset the 24k manpower and 1000 trucks in AGC HQ.

But von Bock will also have similar effects on initiative rolls that make his troops fire better in battle, morale rolls that recover fatigue faster, administrative rolls that add extra MPs etc. (The support squads in AGC HQ also help with admin rolls.) Over the entire campaign his effect will be vastly superior to the extra 24k replacements that will need to be railed in and supplied too.

Thanks for looking into this and working through some of the math. Did you take into account the distance factor in this calculation?

Another issue is that with the Army Groups gone, I can replace OKH -> Army -> Corps leaders much faster. The corps and army leaders make a much larger difference, and I think it might still be worth it. You will also have more of your better leaders to put in the army HQ's as well.

[jubjub]

I suppose another downside is that they really help Axis allied HQ chain of command...

[K62_]

Thanks for looking into this and working through some of the math. Did you take into account the distance factor in this calculation?

Another issue is that with the Army Groups gone, I can replace OKH -> Army -> Corps leaders much faster. The corps and army leaders make a much larger difference, and I think it might still be worth it. You will also have more of your better leaders to put in the army HQ's as well.

Army groups have no range penalty at 15 hexes and after that accumulate range penalty very mildly. At 18 hexes the chance to pass the roll is 7/41, at 21 hexes 7/42 and so on. In the von Bock example he will effectively act as a skill 6 leader (instead of 7) for units 36 hexes away from AGC HQ. For reference, the distance between Minsk and Vitebsk is 15 hexes and that between Minsk and Vyazma is 33 hexes.

I'm not sure I understand how disbanding AGC helps with replacing corps and army leaders. I did a quick check with Kluge and he has a dismissal cost of 26 APs both before and after disbanding AGC.

[loki100]

The other bit this misses is if you are doing ok, by mid-43 you exceed the army HQ collective command capacity - despite the increase in individual values about then the loss of 2 PzrA hurts. Setting up a corps-army group relationship on the quieter sectors is more efficient than having armies overloaded by more than 2 CC.

By March 44 I had the equivalent of 5 corps reporting direct to one or more AG, in part as I wanted to keep spare slots in each Pzr A in case I needed to reconfigure their allocation on the map

[Stamb]

if i understand it correctly then Admin rating of a HHQ that HQ belongs to affects leader replacement cost.
So it is irrelevant what chain of command is there.

Overall I don't see any reasons to disband army groups as an Axis.

[jubjub]

if i understand it correctly then Admin rating of a HHQ that HQ belongs to affects leader replacement cost.
So it is irrelevant what chain of command is there.

Overall I don't see any reasons to disband army groups as an Axis.

It's the political rating, not admin rating that affects this. Germany starts out with really low political leaders across the spectrum, so replacing corps leaders costs like 11+ AP per and army leaders are like 20+ AP.

In order to efficiently replace leaders, you need to replace OKH, Front commander, army, then finally corps will be sub 10 to replace. Alternatively, you could just have everyone report direct to OKH to replace leaders and then switch them back to their army command.

[Stamb]

I meant to type Political, not Admin obviously. Just brain freeze

There was a discussion about leader replacements, their cost and methods to reduce it.
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 9#p4963429
Below and above of that comment.

[loki100]

practically its a waste spending admin pts on swapping OKH or AG level generals. The axis never get the volume of AP that the Soviets do, and e-Adolf keeps on changing them, so its near endless drain on AP (which are far better used elsewhere) to keep your chosen individuals in those roles