Starvation impossible

[moses]

Units in the game do not "starve" to any significant extent due to supply. To test this I sent the 4th and 56th divisions to Bonin (just north of Iwo Jima) I also sent a HQ unit there so these units had adequate support. Bonin has little supply to start and once the units were there I burned off all supply by building fortifications/airfields/ports. Then I set the game to continuous play and left to run some errands.

To be clear both divisions had zero supply in their internal pools at start. Everything else in the game was turned off. All TF's disbanded and all aircraft standing down for both sides. I simmed it out to 29 June 42, so it was just under 6 months with zero supply.

After 6 months the 4th Division had 60 squads disabled 387 ready out of TOE strength of 447. 56th Division had 57 squads disabled and 390 ready out of 447 TOE. Other division elements show similar results.

So in 6 months with no supply not a single squad was lost. This strikes me as a real problem

[WiTP_Dude]

What were the fatigue and disruption values at?

[RUPD3658]

Maybe Bonin was where the Skipper and Gilligan landed. I don't think 2 divisions could eat coconuts for 6 months and not lose anyone.

I would be interested to see the experiment repeated without the HQ unit there for support.

A lot of my China stratagy involves bypassing Chinese units and letting them starve. I hope this gets corrected or I am in for a suprize when units in my rear area come back to life.

[moses]

Sadly I didn't record this. I may run it again since its easy to set up. At the start of the test they seemed fine (very little fatigue or disruption since they are just sitting in place) so I wasn't focused on this. Wish I had but then I'll just run it again when I have time.

Doesn't really matter though the problem is the same. You can't just leave two divisions on an island with no supplies for a year and then bring in the supplies and expect them to perk right up.

[moses]

I put the HQ there because I wanted to test supply effects and so I tried to isolate out the effects of lack of support.

[fbastos]

The human body is an excellent source of proteins... or so said Hannibal Leckter...[;)]

[Nikademus]

all you need is Guiness.

[DrewMatrix]

The human body is an excellent source of proteins... or so said Hannibal Leckter...

And

all you need is Guiness

Wait a minute. Unless I am confused Alec Guiness was in that movie about the Bridge. I don't remember Lector eating him in either of the Hannibal movies.

[Nikademus]

If Hannibal had drank more Guiness....he would not have wasted so much time trying to come up with a match for his farva beans. [:'(]

[DrewMatrix]

he would not have wasted so much time trying to come up with a match for his farva beans

Yeah, it's a full meal in itself![:)]

[moses]

To answer WITP Dude--Fatigue was 23 and disruption was 43 for the 4th division and 35/63 for the 56th division. I was able to retrieve this from the autosave.

[von Murrin]

Now just bomb the crap out of them for three days and watch them dwindle. It works against me, so I would imagine it works for me as well.[;)]

[WiTP_Dude]

Seems like fatigue should be a lot higher. Fatigue of 35 is bread and butter for units in the Malaria Zone. This is for units that have plenty of supply. Also, maybe disruption should also increase with zero supply.

The HQ unit is probably helping the fatigue stat. There is probably something wrong with the way they have coded the algorithms here. If there is no supply available, the HQs can't change that fact.

[Nikademus]

in all seriousness. This does sound a little unusual. I'll try running a couple tests this week and see what i get. I did a similar test many months ago only with a small IJN SNLF unit unsupplied at Lunga. After a month it was in pretty bad shape was was losing men and equip as well as suffering disablement

[BlackVoid]

How about assault value?
That is what really matters for ground units, if you want to fly planes you cannot go without supply.

[mongo]

I wonder if the HQ was somehow pulling at least a trickle of supplies to the bases.

I know they are islands, but hey... it's a computer - it can make mistakes [:)]

[von Murrin]

Seriously. Bomb the crap out of them for a couple turns. It's like putting a torp into an IJN BB with 35% sys damage. She may not sink right away, but she'll eventually roll over.[:D]

[MadDawg]

ORIGINAL: von Murrin

Seriously. Bomb the crap out of them for a couple turns. It's like putting a torp into an IJN BB with 35% sys damage. She may not sink right away, but she'll eventually roll over.[:D]

True, but thats not really the point here. It sounds like thereis something odd with the modelling of out of supply units.

Ive had a similar situation on an atoll where US forces have been for about 6 weeks now with no supply yet have fought off two attacks without a problem by a force of equal size.

[moses]

The point is it takes a lot of work to run an enemy force completely out of supplies. First you have to bring the base to zero, then you have to wait a month for the unit stores to run out. Its not a fast process. At the end of this you seem to get nothing.

I started looking at this when as JP player I took allied bases and drove the defenders into the jungle. I own all nearby bases and they have no source of supply. After a very short time these units should have no combat power remaining. But they appear to be doing OK.

[Platoonist]

Hey! They're on an island not in the desert. Maybe some of those boys know how to use a hook and a line. [;)]

Okay...okay. Tongue firmly in cheek on that one.