Manpower and pool

A complete overhaul and re-development of Gary Grigsby's War in the East, with a focus on improvements to historical accuracy, realism, user interface and AI.

Moderator: Joel Billings

Post Reply
JJhill
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2024 12:01 pm

Manpower and pool

Post by JJhill »

Question: If I have a thousand naval infantry squads in the pool, does that mean the pool contains only the equipment (sailor hats, etc.) for a thousand squads, or both the equipment and the personnel for a thousand squads? In other words, is manpower already included in this pool? I assume it isn’t, and that it will instead be drawn from the manpower pool.
User avatar
Wiedrock
Posts: 1956
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2022 7:44 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Manpower and pool

Post by Wiedrock »

Your guess is correct, Equipments and Men are combined only once arriving inside a Division/Unit.
JJhill
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2024 12:01 pm

Re: Manpower and pool

Post by JJhill »

Wiedrock wrote: Thu Nov 06, 2025 8:22 am Your guess is correct, Equipments and Men are combined only once arriving inside a Division/Unit.
Thanks. I’ve been drafting a lot of naval infantry brigades lately, since there were plenty of naval infantry squads available in the pool. However, that might not be the most efficient use of manpower. It seems that manpower is the main bottleneck on the Soviet side. If that’s the case, it would be important to identify which ground elements use manpower most efficiently. Could we assume that manpower is most effective in tanks? Is there any way to evaluate this — for example, in terms of lethality per man?
User avatar
56ajax
Posts: 2293
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 3:43 am
Location: Cairns, Australia

Re: Manpower and pool

Post by 56ajax »

Not sure how lethal a unit is but when it comes to support units eg mortars, artillery, AA etc you can look at how many 'men' per gun, and for that matter trucks. In general build non motorised SUs to save on trucks where possible.
Molotov : This we did not deserve.

Foch : This is not peace. This is a 20 year armistice.

C'est la guerre aérienne
JJhill
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2024 12:01 pm

Re: Manpower and pool

Post by JJhill »

56ajax wrote: Thu Nov 06, 2025 9:59 am Not sure how lethal a unit is but when it comes to support units eg mortars, artillery, AA etc you can look at how many 'men' per gun, and for that matter trucks. In general build non motorised SUs to save on trucks where possible.
True. I use naval infantry brigades because they don’t consume regular rifle squads but naval rifle squads. I’m saving the rifle squads since they’re in high demand elsewhere, especially for infantry divisions/Corps. I’m not sure whether this matters from production point of view, thought.

These naval rifle brigades are positioned on the map and used to fill hexes. Germans can’t occupy every hex because they don’t have enough counters, so there are gaps — for example in the Caucasus — where I push these little naval brigades to carry out sabotage. As a result, the Germans have to cover the front. If I would temporarily motorize them, they might be even better for that, but I haven't dared to do that yet, due to truck shortage.

If I lose them to encirclement, it’s not as damaging as if they were rifle divisions. Another advantage is that they can be moved quickly between HQs as SU to wherever they’re needed. The downside, of course, is that unlike rifle brigades, they can’t be formed into a division.
User avatar
Wiedrock
Posts: 1956
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2022 7:44 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Manpower and pool

Post by Wiedrock »

JJhill wrote: Thu Nov 06, 2025 11:09 am True. I use naval infantry brigades because they don’t consume regular rifle squads but naval rifle squads. I’m saving the rifle squads since they’re in high demand elsewhere, especially for infantry divisions/Corps. I’m not sure whether this matters from production point of view, thought.
Usually if something is produced in the Production screen as "ar:need" (ar=armament points, ch=chassis, af=airframe), this means there is/will never be a shortage of production for that part (there are some rare cases of heavy guns being shown like that but actually not being produced - don't get confused by those few).
JJhill wrote: Thu Nov 06, 2025 8:38 am Could we assume that manpower is most effective in tanks? Is there any way to evaluate this — for example, in terms of lethality per man?
Generally as Ajax hinted, Artillery is the God of War with probably 80%'ish of all casualties inflicted in WW2 (to throw some numbers), so artillery manpower is imo always worth it.

After that comes the Tanks (the ones with bigger/serious guns ~75mm+), but with Soviet Tank formations you will encounter that they are rather small and brittle compared to their Rifle/Infantry equivalents.
After an attack (even a successful one) you often/basically can refit them for 1-2 turns (or more) before using them again.
Tank formations in this game are not like in many other games this "strong entity you always want to use and that always succeeds" but you more need to figure out how to use them to get the best out of them (especially on Soviet side) and learn/know their limits.
But besides this it is as you would expect, using Tanks causes more enemy losses and less own losses. But the worst in this game you can have is an failed attack/defence, that is what makes the "CV dense" Soviet Rifle formations often seem better than the Tank Formations.
User avatar
Q-Ball
Posts: 7537
Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2002 4:43 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois

Re: Manpower and pool

Post by Q-Ball »

It's not a disaster that you built a bunch of Naval Infantry Brigades, but you may later want to disband some for Manpower. As you say they are useful units in 1941/42, and are useful in attack as SU Attachments (they are multi-role)

Rifle Brigades, however, are a better option; they are about the same combat power, and most importantly can become GUARDS. Using them as SU attachment to farm wins, then later combining them to form Guards Divisions then Corps, this is the main building block for Guards Rifle Corps. You should be liberally using Rifle Brigades as SU Attachment on attack, even if you don't need the extra oomph to win; it's about farming wins

You really don't need to pay attention to stockpiles of small arms; the engine will generate the number of rifles and sailor hats you need. You really just need to pay attention to whether you have sufficient numbers of Artillery, AT Guns, Tanks, etc, as you make build decisions with those elements
User avatar
Wiedrock
Posts: 1956
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2022 7:44 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Manpower and pool

Post by Wiedrock »

Q-Ball wrote: Thu Nov 06, 2025 3:18 pm Rifle Brigades, however, are a better option; they are about the same combat power, and most importantly can become GUARDS. Using them as SU attachment to farm wins, then later combining them to form Guards Divisions then Corps, this is the main building block for Guards Rifle Corps. You should be liberally using Rifle Brigades as SU Attachment on attack, even if you don't need the extra oomph to win; it's about farming wins
I wouldn't combine Brigades. Does not hurt to have 100'ish+ available of which 30% are Guards. They are the strongest attachable SU, providing ~1/6th of a Corps each without increasing the stacking penalties. If you are advancing in two areas you will see how quickly 100 are attached and you could need some more to have some refit-rotation going.
JJhill
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2024 12:01 pm

Re: Manpower and pool

Post by JJhill »

Q-Ball wrote: Thu Nov 06, 2025 3:18 pm It's not a disaster that you built a bunch of Naval Infantry Brigades, but you may later want to disband some for Manpower. As you say they are useful units in 1941/42, and are useful in attack as SU Attachments (they are multi-role)

Rifle Brigades, however, are a better option; they are about the same combat power, and most importantly can become GUARDS. Using them as SU attachment to farm wins, then later combining them to form Guards Divisions then Corps, this is the main building block for Guards Rifle Corps. You should be liberally using Rifle Brigades as SU Attachment on attack, even if you don't need the extra oomph to win; it's about farming wins

You really don't need to pay attention to stockpiles of small arms; the engine will generate the number of rifles and sailor hats you need. You really just need to pay attention to whether you have sufficient numbers of Artillery, AT Guns, Tanks, etc, as you make build decisions with those elements
You are correct. It looks like the system keeps on producing excessive naval infantry squads to the pool now when I'm recruiting them. I use airborne brigades to make guard corps in addition to "organic" promotion. Just realized Ski Brigades are probably the smallest on map unit, might be the better option for slowing down the Axis. Night Witches on skis.
User avatar
Q-Ball
Posts: 7537
Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2002 4:43 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois

Re: Manpower and pool

Post by Q-Ball »

If you're playing a human, some players would object to using lots of Airborne Brigades to make Divisions/Corps. It might be considered a bit gamey, even if it is AP-intensive.

The Ski Brigades, IMO, are too small to be useful except in deep snow (when they get multipliers). Not sure what others do with them, but I build some in the fall, use them through winter, then disband.
User avatar
56ajax
Posts: 2293
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 3:43 am
Location: Cairns, Australia

Re: Manpower and pool

Post by 56ajax »

Q-Ball wrote: Fri Nov 07, 2025 2:09 pm If you're playing a human, some players would object to using lots of Airborne Brigades to make Divisions/Corps. It might be considered a bit gamey, even if it is AP-intensive.

The Ski Brigades, IMO, are too small to be useful except in deep snow (when they get multipliers). Not sure what others do with them, but I build some in the fall, use them through winter, then disband.
If you have open TBs then some players send the Ski brigades to the NF where thet have double CV.
Molotov : This we did not deserve.

Foch : This is not peace. This is a 20 year armistice.

C'est la guerre aérienne
Post Reply

Return to “Gary Grigsby's War in the East 2”