Formation Supply Edit Problem

Post discussions and advice on TOAW scenario design here.

Moderators: ralphtricky, JAMiAM

User avatar
Curtis Lemay
Posts: 14679
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 3:12 pm
Location: Houston, TX

RE: Formation Supply Question

Post by Curtis Lemay »

ORIGINAL: ColinWright
ORIGINAL: Dabbs

Okay...sorry... Continuing again with instances where different formations have different supply levels... Would there be any reason why "the best formations" should have a supply distribution proficiency of less than 100% (i.e. fewer support squads than equates to 100% prof)? I'm considering this in the context of using their rating for what the maximum supply the best units can receive under optimal conditions as "The Benchmark" by which all other formations are compared (i.e. - 50, 65, 75, etc.)....a bell-curve representation vs strict grading...

The manual says it makes checks against the supply distribution proficiency **usually** when supplying units, but I have not come across other instances in which checks are made against it. If there are other checks of significance, then I can see why performance would be strictly graded. Otherwise, it appears to me that 80% of 50 and 100% of 40 are the same thing...provided the ratios remain the same.

I think you're right about that -- no reason why the 'best' formation shouldn't be rated at 100% formation supply.

Well, remember that the supply values are integers, so there are numerology-type reasons. For example, if setting the best formation to 100% requires you to set the Force Supply level to 5, then it will be very difficult to set the second-best formation to 73% of the best formation, etc. I prefer to have a reasonable-sized value for Force Supply for this reason, and then work from there.
2. Similarly with ships. As long as a supply line reaches to a port on a given body of water, naval units anywhere on that body of water will receive full supply. Also, naval movement does not reduce supply or readiness. Here, I dunno what happens if full supply isn't available at the port itself -- but I would guess things work the same as with air units.

I'm not sure if a port is required. It's been a while since I looked at it, though.
All of the above applies to ACOW. I don't actually know if it applies to TOAW III, but absent any changes to the relevant parts of the program, I don't see why it shouldn't.

It's the same.
My TOAW web site:

Bob Cross's TOAW Site
ColinWright
Posts: 2604
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2005 6:28 pm

RE: Formation Supply Question

Post by ColinWright »

ORIGINAL: Dabbs

Thanks Colin, good points. It looks worthwhile to experiment with "handicapped HQ's" for air units deserving of such - could be an interesting dynamic.

Supply appears to "step down" an absolute base 25% (with variance relative to terrain, possibly weather) along roads for each multiple of the supply radius. I knew HQ's provided a bonus, but didn't know how much - sensible that they would provide a 25% step-up with a radius of 1...like a mini-mobile supply point. As far as I've been able to assess, all the points you've made apply equally to TOAW III.

There's a 50% bonus for being adjacent to a cooperative HQ, I believe. That wouldn't show on the supply trace, since it would only be available to cooperative units.
I am not Charlie Hebdo
Post Reply

Return to “Scenario Design”