What are Admin Points anyway?

[pompack]

ORIGINAL: Jakerson

ORIGINAL: squatter
So presumably you agree it doesnt make sense to accrue APs over time?

It's support operations that takes longer than two or more weeks to complete. Even if you use AP on week X to finish something dosent mean that HQ is not doing anything on those week that AP are not used. So it makes sence to stockpile points.

agree completely

[Davekhps]

ORIGINAL: pompack

As for the Germans, anyone who thinks that the Germans have too many APs has not tried to manually control SUs or move an Army from one Army Group to another while maintaining decent leaders (for Germans and Finns, maintaining not totally worthless leaders for the minors)

Except, you know, I have, and I did, and I still ended up with 500 AP by mid-1942 as the Axis. [8|]

Again, not complaining, not lobbying for a change... just noting that compared to the Soviets, in 1941 campaign games against the Soviet AI, my personal experience has not found AP to be a limiting factor for the Axis.

To each their own!

[pompack]

ORIGINAL: Davekhps

ORIGINAL: pompack

As for the Germans, anyone who thinks that the Germans have too many APs has not tried to manually control SUs or move an Army from one Army Group to another while maintaining decent leaders (for Germans and Finns, maintaining not totally worthless leaders for the minors)

Except, you know, I have, and I did, and I still ended up with 500 AP by mid-1942 as the Axis. [8|]

Again, not complaining, not lobbying for a change... just noting that compared to the Soviets, in 1941 campaign games against the Soviet AI, my personal experience has not found AP to be a limiting factor for the Axis.

To each their own!

I guess I switch stuff around too much; I'm in late 42 and I try hard to maintain 100 AP in reserve but it is hard to do.

[FredSanford3]

I'm just sort of 'thinking out loud' so to speak here- but what if APs were tied to VP's at some ratio?  If you want to reorganize your army, it's theoretically so you can play more effectively.  More effective play = more VPs (also theoretically), so in principle it's a common basis.  If you play a 'strict historical' game of keeping the same leaders, and the same organization, you get all the victory points you would get given the end of game scoring.  For that matter, maybe there should be optional reinforcements for AP/VP costs available at times, and this would simulate going to Hitler/Stalin and saying "if you give me X additional resources, I can deliver victory more assuredly".  Like say "put the German economy on a full war footing in 1941 for an additional 'cost' of 500 VP's, and you'll get a larger replacement rate for key equipment".  Of course you've now engaged in a form of deficit spending, and you better make those additional resources pay off by allowing you to take/hold more VP locations/kill more enemies.  There's no free lunch.  You could even 'handicap' a game by giving an inexperienced player more VP's to start with, so that he could either (a) convert them to AP's for the tasks AP's are spent on now, (b) spend them them on 'optional' additional units/replacements, or (c) keep them to apply to his score at the end of the game.

[Aurelian]

Tieing APs to VPs would handicap the player who is doing poorly.

Optional reinforcements for an AP/VP cost would also favor the player who is winning. And for the Germans especially would fly in the face of their fighting on three fronts.

Telling Hitler/Stalin that you can deliver victory most assuredly would at best, get you sent to a camp if you fail. At worst, an execution.

You can already apply handicaps in the options screen. Don't really see the need to add VPs into the mix.

[CarnageINC]

As a German player, I never seem to have enough AP's to help me out.  Yeah I micromanage my SU's to the most I can get out of them, yeah I'm rotating commanders out every so often so my uber good ones with high rank don't die as a Corps commander, yeah I'm reorganizing my armies the best way I know how but that's the only way the Germans even stand a chance at getting a draw in the end versus a person.  You Soviet players have your problems, Axis players have theirs, leave it alone and don't mess with something that's really not broken.

[PyleDriver]

Ap's were one of the most tweaked aspects of the game we went through. We feel we brought it to a point where were close to keeping a historical balance, but agian your imputs are heard... As far as an AP / VP marrage, it won't happen, it makes no sence...

[Anonymous]

[Deleted by Admins]

[Muzrub]

I'm playing the '41 campaign and have not noticed any issues with the admin 'point' system as a German player- but I think that is mainly due to the fact I dont really get the system.

I just move about and do whatever I wish, I rarely- in fact I have never changed a commander.
Obviously I sound like a bit of an ignorant git here, but I never noticed the admin points- seriously.

But if someone wishes to explain the system a little more I would appreciate it.

[alfonso]

I like to compare AP to (paper)work done by staff officers. Let's suppose that 1 AP is 5 (dayXstaff officer) work. As such, it should be possible to accumulate them (for instance, making a building might be 20000 man-hours, and so on). When commanders change, memorandums for the arriving commander should be prepared. When creating units, a lot of paperwork has to be done (organizing cadres, recruiting, ...). And when one unit has lost its vehicles, a lot of work (management of fuel allocation, spare parts, reparations) is released.

[squatter]

Fair enough, some good arguments for cumulative APs. I withdraw my suggestion of spend em or lose em!

However, my original point still stands: how on earth does denying a motorised brigade its trucks suddenly provide your general staff with 100s of hours worth of extra admin time! Slapping all your motorised brigades into static mode so you can sack half of your officer class, or whatever, seems gamey to me.

[karonagames]

However, my original point still stands: how on earth does denying a motorised brigade its trucks suddenly provide your general staff with 100s of hours worth of extra admin time!

It doesn't. AP's are an abstract concept and a very clever design feature that works as a multi-purpose resource that fulfils different requirements on both sides that need to be managed differently by both sides. Forcing large sections of the front into static mode also simulates what happened historically.

[Smirfy]

I imagine that AP are used to simulate friction as decribed by Clausewitz at a staff level. Im not sure replacing commanders at the start of a scenario should go without penalty, I also think costs should be rolling ie one or two commanders is okay but 5 or 6 is a purge.

[Jakerson]

ORIGINAL: BigAnorak
It doesn't. AP's are an abstract concept and a very clever design feature that works as a multi-purpose resource that fulfils different requirements on both sides that need to be managed differently by both sides. Forcing large sections of the front into static mode also simulates what happened historically.

More I get to know these AP points more I like them but still you could play more faster and casual games by setting AP points lower.

[Zovs]

Administrative (admin) points represent the ability of a side to modify their command and control structure, to include units and leaders. In addition, administrative points can be used to create new units, though this is largely a Soviet ability as the Axis is limited to creating new fortified zone units.

From the manual.

[squatter]

ORIGINAL: dlazov66

Administrative (admin) points represent the ability of a side to modify their command and control structure, to include units and leaders. In addition, administrative points can be used to create new units, though this is largely a Soviet ability as the Axis is limited to creating new fortified zone units.

From the manual.

Sorry to harp on about it, but that doesnt explain the static mode bounty, which is the only remaining debate here. Reading the manual, and then discovering that you can double your "ability to modify your command structure" by placing a few units into reserve mode actually starts sounding like a bug.

[karonagames]

You have to accept an element of abstraction; units moving into Static mode will require less staff work to administer them, but this cannot be precisely quantified, especially as some sectors remained static for over a year.