Matrix Games Forums

If a unit could not move out of the pocket or move to a rail link connected to a National Supply source, then how could the disbanded men and equipment make it out of the pocket to the pool? Oh and they have no supply while they are moving to leave the pocket to the pool. This IMO is a major bug or oversight.

Well we can consider the case in France in 1944. when large portion of German units run away from southwest France by themselves without any organization. Normally there is no game mechanic to mimic this case. I believe. Yes They lost almost all their equipment but they were reorganized to divisions once they reach to front line. This reserve saved the day for the Germans in 1944 September.

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns

ORIGINAL: CapAndGown
to simply require all but fort units to be sitting on a such a rail hex in order to disband.

I disagree, the unit should be able to trace a rail route to a national supply source, simply sitting on a rail isn't enough. If the rail isn't connected to the national pools disbanding should be prohibited. Then ignore the rail hex requirement and simply check that the unit can reach a rail route within x number of hexes. X being perhaps equal to or less than half the units available movement at turn start.

Jim

You do not disagree with me. You agree with what I said. Read the post again. I say a unit should be able to reach the rail net or be sitting on a hex of the rail net. Obviously I do not consider hexes with no connection to the functioning rail net (i.e. trace a path to the national supply source) to be valid. I was supporting Beethoven's point, not opposing it.

ORIGINAL: guctony

Well we can consider the case in France in 1944. when large portion of German units run away from southwest France by themselves without any organization. Normally there is no game mechanic to mimic this case. I believe. Yes They lost almost all their equipment but they were reorganized to divisions once they reach to front line. This reserve saved the day for the Germans in 1944 September.

Having said that one way to discourage Disbanding can be adding additional VP cost to disbanding until a certain date or disbanding only brings manpower and a low percentage of equipment back to Pools up to a certain date.

Limiting disband to a horizontal map hex lines is another option also.

Worst case a House rule will fix it. We cant expect everything to be handled by Game engine.

ORIGINAL: guctony

ORIGINAL: guctony

Well we can consider the case in France in 1944. when large portion of German units run away from southwest France by themselves without any organization. Normally there is no game mechanic to mimic this case. I believe. Yes They lost almost all their equipment but they were reorganized to divisions once they reach to front line. This reserve saved the day for the Germans in 1944 September.

Having said that one way to discourage Disbanding can be adding additional VP cost to disbanding until a certain date or disbanding only brings manpower and a low percentage of equipment back to Pools up to a certain date.

Limiting disband to a horizontal map hex lines is another option also.

Worst case a House rule will fix it. We cant expect everything to be handled by Game engine.

It worked fine in WitE 1. From 18.5.1 of the updated WitE 1 manual: "Units can only disband if they have enough movement points remaining to move to a rail hex that is connected to the supply grid, and if they are not within three hexes of an enemy unit."

ORIGINAL: CapAndGown

ORIGINAL: guctony

ORIGINAL: guctony

Well we can consider the case in France in 1944. when large portion of German units run away from southwest France by themselves without any organization. Normally there is no game mechanic to mimic this case. I believe. Yes They lost almost all their equipment but they were reorganized to divisions once they reach to front line. This reserve saved the day for the Germans in 1944 September.

Having said that one way to discourage Disbanding can be adding additional VP cost to disbanding until a certain date or disbanding only brings manpower and a low percentage of equipment back to Pools up to a certain date.

Limiting disband to a horizontal map hex lines is another option also.

Worst case a House rule will fix it. We cant expect everything to be handled by Game engine.

It worked fine in WitE 1. From 18.5.1 of the updated WitE 1 manual: "Units can only disband if they have enough movement points remaining to move to a rail hex that is connected to the supply grid, and if they are not within three hexes of an enemy unit."

Well that's a fix but not really addressing the issue at hand. That is units inside an Envelope without any rail connection. Its not logical to assume Units will disband in an envelope with full TOE.

ORIGINAL: guctony

ORIGINAL: CapAndGown

ORIGINAL: guctony



Having said that one way to discourage Disbanding can be adding additional VP cost to disbanding until a certain date or disbanding only brings manpower and a low percentage of equipment back to Pools up to a certain date.

Limiting disband to a horizontal map hex lines is another option also.

Worst case a House rule will fix it. We cant expect everything to be handled by Game engine.

It worked fine in WitE 1. From 18.5.1 of the updated WitE 1 manual: "Units can only disband if they have enough movement points remaining to move to a rail hex that is connected to the supply grid, and if they are not within three hexes of an enemy unit."

Well that's a fix but not really addressing the issue at hand. That is units inside an Envelope without any rail connection. Its not logical to assume Units will disband in an envelope with full TOE.

It is precisely the issue at hand, which is saving the manpower and equipment of pocketed units by disbanding them.

I don't know much about #2 yet, but can I suggest 2 possible solutions which I assume would be very easy to implement:

1 an isolated unit cannot disband or
2 a unit that has moved cannot disband that turn

Isolated units cannot disband. In that screenshot the pocket was never closed. Question is if they should be able to disband if units dont have rail connection to supply network. Also those units around Bialystok have access to functional rail and depots, just not to the entire network. This is probably the reason that disband is allowed.
Also disbanded units will not come back so doubt it is worth losing permanently 20 counters, Soviets will miss them in late 41. Of course can be rebuild manually but all AP will be spend just for that.

Tx Bobo, and GL vs HLYA - someone has to beat him

ORIGINAL: CapAndGown

....

It is precisely the issue at hand, which is saving the manpower and equipment of pocketed units by disbanding them.

its not that simple, there is an additional part to the process. Those disbands never come back, so the disbanded rifle divisions are not automatically rebuilt.

So you end up lacking unit shells to host that resource and need to invest in AP to recreate them. its not till fairly late in 1942 that the Soviets end up pretty much ignoring the AP constraint. So this will get the manpower back into units ok in say August 1941 but will leave the Soviets weaker in late 1941.

ORIGINAL: sillyflower

Tx Bobo, and GL vs HLYA - someone has to beat him

Thanks will try to do my best.

ORIGINAL: loki100

ORIGINAL: CapAndGown

....

It is precisely the issue at hand, which is saving the manpower and equipment of pocketed units by disbanding them.

its not that simple, there is an additional part to the process. Those disbands never come back, so the disbanded rifle divisions are not automatically rebuilt.

So you end up lacking unit shells to host that resource and need to invest in AP to recreate them. its not till fairly late in 1942 that the Soviets end up pretty much ignoring the AP constraint. So this will get the manpower back into units ok in say August 1941 but will leave the Soviets weaker in late 1941.

So I guess this answers my earlier question?

- You might as well go ahead and disband any corps level HQs, since they will disappear anyways. (At least until the 1 AP cost is re-introduced to disband.)
- But better move, relocate and even let the Germans dislocate, or encircle and destroy the Army HQs, since they might be rebuilt and later turned into other better HQs.

As far as I can tell the Bialystok corps HQs are destined for disbandment, and no upgrades from the Commanders Report.

ORIGINAL: juv95hrn


....

So I guess this answers my earlier question?

- You might as well go ahead and disband any corps level HQs, since they will disappear anyways. (At least until the 1 AP cost is re-introduced to disband.)
....

given how the upgrade/conversion process really works that is an assumption far beyond anything I'd make. For various reasons they aren't treated as transfers so till you really know the conversion sequence (& I lack the patience to ever write it down), my advice would be not to - unless you fancy playing with a lot of missing command capacity.

you can probably see which convert in the editor

Oh boy. Thats a tough one then.

When move plus relocate wont reach safety, your choice is to then let German panzers steal fuel from those straggling HQs bouncing them around when you keep them and that doesn´t sound great either.

EDIT:

"30.10.5. HQs
From T6, the at-start rifle and mechanized corps HQs start
to either disband or convert to army level HQs. The cavalry
corps HQs remain available till the end of 1941 and can be
useful for extending command ranges or simply improving
the capacity of rear area depots.
Remember you do not pay administrative points for
changing the command structure of HQs so keep your
armies and fronts logically ordered. Equally, if you are used
to WiTE1 be aware at the start a lot of Soviet HQs start
with a very low TOE and it takes quite a while to come up
to 100%. So your commanders will be less effective and its
worth retaining the handful of pre-war mobilised HQs for
your best commanders and most critical sectors.
In early 1942, you will gain a number of Reserve HQs.
Most of these will later on become normal Combined or
Tank Armies so do not disband them. Even if you assign no
units to them they can be very useful."

they don't get much, most of what you lose is simply destroyed so I'd not worry about that dynamic