Fix the TB replacement system!

[ShaggyHiK]

ORIGINAL: xhoel

@Denniss: I think such a system would be a bit too complicated and maybe hard to implement. It would be easier and maybe less difficult to simply "reserve" a n% of manpower and equipment for the Eastern Front, while leaving the system of TB priority as it is.

The % would than change as the war progresses, basically being a lot higher in 1941 and 1942 and then dropping as the Italian campaign and the Western Europe campaign get rolling.

For 1945 (since this was my example), that percentage should be at least 50%, if not more. The current 15% has nothing to do with the historical realities and no player will want to play a campaign where their hands are tied behind their back because of such design issues.

I agree that 15% of the total replenishment coming to the Eastern Front is a problem.
But I am also forced to say that with an increase in replenishments on the Eastern Front, the question will inevitably arise that the Soviet army cannot inflict losses on the German army similar to historical losses.

[Karri]

The core of the issue is that all TB units are basically in "depot supply". They will always get freight, and thus also replacements. Eastern Front units are in depot supply only if they are sitting on a depot that is getting freight, and preferably on refit as well. This is what causes the issue.

[malyhin1517]

ORIGINAL: Beethoven1

ORIGINAL: Stamb

What about making a slider where player can define in percentage how many men goes to a TB and to a map.

The result of this would be that Soviet players would set the slider for theater box reinforcements to 0% in 1941, at least for a while. This would mean that as of turn 3-4 or so, in the 1941 campaign, every on-map Soviet division would be a super strong 100% TOE unit, helping to bog down Germany more quickly.

Also, when around turn 10 or so Soviets start to get the 30somethin morale replacement divisions that replace the divisions destroyed in the turn 1 pockets, Soviet players would just set those units to 0% TOE, or whatever is the minimum, if it is lower than the current 50% minimum TOE.

So any change in this direction would really mostly be a Soviet buff in effect.

And Soviets don't need a buff.

There's just this one main exception of the late war scenario that xhoel is in.

Now, when playing as Russians in 1941, units on the map may not receive replenishment at all, all replenishment goes to other theaters and to the reserve. In the best case, only soldiers get on the map, but without guns and tanks.

[malyhin1517]

ORIGINAL: Karri

The core of the issue is that all TB units are basically in "depot supply". They will always get freight, and thus also replacements. Eastern Front units are in depot supply only if they are sitting on a depot that is getting freight, and preferably on refit as well. This is what causes the issue.

There is a unit in my game that received 100% soldiers and not a single gun during the refit in the warehouse! It's been 4 weeks and he still hasn't received a single gun! The only way to get cannons and tanks in a unit is to send it to the reserve or to another theater! It is not normal!

[malyhin1517]

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

This is WAD. The system may be crude, but we've done things for a reason to prevent players from exploiting the TBs. You are at the point where Germany is beginning to be overrun in the west, so it's reasonable for there to be a large commitment of forces there. Adding more controls on the TBs will likely end up with adverse consequences. If this were War in Europe, you could decide where the men went to, but it's not, and this scenario is set up so as to not allow the WE to take Berlin before the end of the scenario. Given that, any additional controls would lead the player to rob from the west even more than they already can.

I agree with it! But the game should not give 100% of replenishment only to other theaters! If the units on the theaters are constantly in refit, then the units on the map in the refit should receive replenishment along with them! Or you need to define the minimum % replenishment for units on the map. I also like the figure of 50% replenishment to the card, and the rest to other theaters.

[Stamb]

ORIGINAL: Karri

The core of the issue is that all TB units are basically in "depot supply". They will always get freight, and thus also replacements. Eastern Front units are in depot supply only if they are sitting on a depot that is getting freight, and preferably on refit as well. This is what causes the issue.

Freight yes, replacements - no. I have units in Soviet Garrison that are < 100% toe but are not getting a single man. Not critical as they are at 96% or 98% but still.

[ShaggyHiK]

I confirm the problem described by Malyhin, however, when playing for the USSR, this is not as critical as when playing for Germany.

[malyhin1517]

ORIGINAL: ShaggyHiK

I confirm the problem described by Malyhin, however, when playing for the USSR, this is not as critical as when playing for Germany.

This is equally critical for both parties! Only for the Russians this problem occurs earlier in 1941, and for the Germans later in 1944.

[malyhin1517]

The fact is that the Russians have a very large number of units arriving in the reserve every turn and they simply suck out all the replenishment completely every turn! The Germans have new units appear much less frequently.

[ShaggyHiK]

I advise at the moment to make more active use of the TB reserve for German players, constantly rotating beaten divisions through it for quality replacements.
Because it seems to me that if there will be changes in this vein, then not soon, if at all.

As a Soviet player, I don't want to lose cannons in divisions early on. According to this, divisions consisting to a greater extent of infantry are more economically advantageous for me than divisions with a large number of guns.

I am not saying that it will be beneficial not to have guns in the army, but only that if there is a choice to lose a division of 10k people and 50 guns, it is more profitable than a division of 14k people and 180 guns.

[malyhin1517]

ORIGINAL: ShaggyHiK
As a Soviet player, I don't want to lose cannons in divisions early on. According to this, divisions consisting to a greater extent of infantry are more economically advantageous for me than divisions with a large number of guns.

I am not saying that it will be beneficial not to have guns in the army, but only that if there is a choice to lose a division of 10k people and 50 guns, it is more profitable than a division of 14k people and 180 guns.

My game already has a front line and almost no environments. But I have to send troops for guns to the reserve. In addition, a number of new units (militia divisions, naval rifle brigades, some tank divisions) arrive on the map without guns and tanks, and I also have to send them to the reserve! During the war, often new divisions were sent to the front without guns, but they received weapons after arriving at the front after being unloaded from the trains. Now this is not happening.

[xhoel]

ORIGINAL: ShaggyHiK

But I am also forced to say that with an increase in replenishments on the Eastern Front, the question will inevitably arise that the Soviet army cannot inflict losses on the German army similar to historical losses.

But that is not true though. Combat and losses in the Axis TBs are minimal in the span of 1941-late 1943, so this will not affect the size of the troops in the east. It will have an impact by late 1944 and 1945 after the Allies have landed in France but I dont see an issue with that.

The Soviets are doing fine with the losses they inflict as far as I have seen, what data are you using that shows otherwise?

@maly: I think that may have more to do with what equipment you have available. In the early war the Soviets have a severe lack of guns so that may be causing problems. Plus the bug that caused shell units to fill up automatically has been fixed, so the Soviets should have a lot more manpower and equipment to use for their field armies now.

@Stamb: I dont think I have ever seen a unit go to exactly 100% TOE even after being on refit. A unit that has more than 90% of its TOE is considered full strength in my eyes.

[ShaggyHiK]

ORIGINAL: xhoel
But that is not true though. Combat and losses in the Axis TBs are minimal in the span of 1941-late 1943, so this will not affect the size of the troops in the east. It will have an impact by late 1944 and 1945 after the Allies have landed in France but I dont see an issue with that.

I said that the Soviet army is not able to inflict losses on the German army.
From the beginning of the game, starting already from the first move, with such a change, the German army on MAP(East) will tend to increase its numbers, which historically has not happened. Simply because the German army bears 80-90% of its losses in the phase of logistical losses.
That is, a drawdown in the size of the German army on MAP will not follow, which will become a serious strengthening of the German army in the winter of 41-42, especially in 42-43, when the Soviet player is trying with all his might to turn the tide of the company.

That is, again, if this change happens without any changes to the combat system, we will get the most passive Soviet game until 43. Not trying to hold on to industry, city, or victory points. The Soviet player will only carry out attacks in those cases in which he has a high chance of winning.
It will be absolutely not interesting for the Soviet player, for the observers AAR of the game.

[Jango32]

Until 1943 there are only three Axis TBs where combat can occur: Finland, North Africa and the garrison. The one in Finland will have low intensity from November/December 1941 onward, whereas with the other two it's more dynamic, but mostly with relatively extended periods of lulls in the combat.


In all of these TBs the majority of forces are Axis allies, with very few German units. So I am unsure what impact xhoel's suggestions would have for on-map replacements until late 1942/1943, when Africa will heat up and fall along with most of the Italian forces, leading to invasions of Italy. It's only from then on that German units will become more common (and eventually the majority) in combat TBs.

[ShaggyHiK]

In general, I question the possibility of the Soviet player to really win under the rules of VP. The speed of the return of vast territories in 43-44 years, with the inability to encircle the German army, is doubtful in my opinion. Especially if the front line turned out to be even further east relative to the historical one in 41-42.
Of course, I am not an active player in 43-44 years, I started the scenarios for review, but did not play them properly. According to my subjective assessments, if you start in the winter of 42-43 from Stalingrad, provided that the German player has been playing from the age of 41 without a scenario and does not get surrounded, getting to Berlin by May 45 is not a realistic idea.

[Beethoven1]

ORIGINAL: ShaggyHiK

That is, a drawdown in the size of the German army on MAP will not follow, which will become a serious strengthening of the German army in the winter of 41-42

This is incorrect. German reinforcements are limited by freight, not by manpower until the freight penalty gets lifted in early 1942. Just look at the graph of manpower pool in any game and you will see Germany has plenty of manpower, it just doesn't go into units due to lack of freight. So changing how the theater boxes work would not affect the strength of on-map German units until the freight penalty is lifted, unless it also would somehow magically give the Axis extra free freight.

[malyhin1517]

ORIGINAL: xhoel
@maly: I think that may have more to do with what equipment you have available. In the early war the Soviets have a severe lack of guns so that may be causing problems. Plus the bug that caused shell units to fill up automatically has been fixed, so the Soviets should have a lot more manpower and equipment to use for their field armies now.

A small part of the soldiers gets on the map, but the guns and tanks completely go to the reserve and theaters. There are a lot of weak units and they completely take away their military equipment and most of the soldiers. I don't understand why, in this case, new units without guns and tanks, such as militia divisions and naval rifle brigades, arrive on the map. I'm just wasting my time and I have to send them back to the reserve.

[xhoel]

ORIGINAL: ShaggyHiK

I said that the Soviet army is not able to inflict losses on the German army.

Wrong.

ORIGINAL: ShaggyHiK
From the beginning of the game, starting already from the first move, with such a change, the German army on MAP(East) will tend to increase its numbers, which historically has not happened. Simply because the German army bears 80-90% of its losses in the phase of logistical losses.

That is, a drawdown in the size of the German army on MAP will not follow, which will become a serious strengthening of the German army in the winter of 41-42, especially in 42-43, when the Soviet player is trying with all his might to turn the tide of the company.

Not true as I already explained to you. In the span of 1941-1943 the change to the replacement system will not affect the size of the German Army in the East as the replacements are already going to the Ostfront. Your presumptions are just wrong and unfounded on anything.

Please stop with your extremely biased takes and actually engage the arguments that are being presented. In every single thread you complain about how bad the Soviets have it and present arguments that are completely subjective and that barely have anything to do with reality. Its just so tiring.

[malyhin1517]

ORIGINAL: xhoel
In the span of 1941-1943 the change to the replacement system will not affect the size of the German Army in the East as the replacements are already going to the Ostfront.

Indeed, Germany at the beginning of the war does not receive many new units and enough reinforcements come to the map if there is a good supply. Germany will have a problem when they end up in the same situation at the end of the war as the Russians are at the beginning of the war! When a dozen new units enter the reserve each turn, they may not have enough production of military equipment for the troops on the map and they will be left without reinforcements. Russians find themselves in this situation at the beginning of the war. The problem is that the troops in the refit on the map receive reinforcements after the troops in the reserve and in other theaters. This is profoundly wrong!

[xhoel]

@maly: This has been changed and now rebuild units arriving in the reserve arrive at TOE set to 0. So you can change it when you like, but it allows the Soviets to use their manpower and equipment for the field army.

The other issue that you mentioned is the same one that I have. That TBs and Reserve are prioritized. That is what we are trying to change.