Page 3 of 3
RE: Assigning/Forming New Support Units question
Posted: Fri Dec 17, 2010 12:03 am
by Davekhps
ORIGINAL: Flaviusx
This is very strange. It shouldn't be doing that with the HQs locked.
The only thing I can think of here, is that the HQ are advancing so fast that the CBs working on rail repair wind up out of their range for HQ RR purposes, and the AI is kicking them up the chain of command until they wind up migrating to the AG level over time.
But even so, that's pretty buggy behavior.
Wasn't that... my tests started with a save game, no more movements.
BTW, perhaps I wasn't clear: what's happening is this (in Road to Leningrad scenario):
Turn 14
1. CBs assigned to AGN are deployed doing their repairs
2. I manually return all those CBs to AGN
3. I either transfer the CBs from the AGN HQ screen (left click and reassign from there) *or* I assign/form the CBs while in the HQ panels for the armies/corps subordinate to AGN. Either way, the CBs end up at the end of the turn listed in the armies/corps screen (with an asterisk as they just transfered that turn)
4. AGN is locked or unlocked, the subordinate armies/corps are locked or unlocked, I try all combinations.
5. Hit next turn.
Turn 15
6. The CBs are deployed... BUT the now-deployed CBs return to having AGN as their parent headquarters, even though they deployed out of the subordinate HQs. Again, locked or unlocked, any combination, this happens.
I also replicated this with moving the AGN CBs to OKH, then working my way down to the armies/corps. Same result. Ditto moving the AGN CBs to AGC then down to 9th Army... same result, only now the CBs are listed as AGC CBs, not 9th Army.
Please note, all other support units WAD-- this only seems to happen with CBs, labor battalions, etc.
Dang peculiar, I say!
RE: Assigning/Forming New Support Units question
Posted: Fri Dec 17, 2010 12:07 am
by Flaviusx
Going to bug this, Dave. Might need a save for this, hold on to yours for a bit. I'll put in a report.
RE: Assigning/Forming New Support Units question
Posted: Fri Dec 17, 2010 12:33 am
by Davekhps
ORIGINAL: Flaviusx
Going to bug this, Dave. Might need a save for this, hold on to yours for a bit. I'll put in a report.
Okay, will do. I'm sure I'm just doing something stupid somewhere, but if not, yeah, this is annoying.
RE: Assigning/Forming New Support Units question
Posted: Fri Dec 17, 2010 5:50 am
by Magnum88
If non-construction support units assigned to HQs only get committed during battles to attached combat units within 5 hexes (15.4), then is there any utility in having them assigned to armies or army groups that do not have combat units directly assigned? It seems the best set-up would be to have the level of support set low for any HQ above corps-level to drive all the support units down to the corps.
RE: Assigning/Forming New Support Units question
Posted: Fri Dec 17, 2010 10:55 am
by ComradeP
The ones assigned to armies and army groups would essentially be rail repair only units, as the chance of them participating in fort construction isn't too great if corps also have their own CB's.
RE: Assigning/Forming New Support Units question
Posted: Fri Dec 17, 2010 1:43 pm
by Magnum88
I was asking about non-construction support units. I have been leaving the assignment on automatic (default appears to be level 3 support for all HQs) and noticed some artillery battalions at various army/army group HQs.
RE: Assigning/Forming New Support Units question
Posted: Fri Dec 17, 2010 2:35 pm
by ComradeP
Ah, sorry, missed the "non-". Combat support units should, in my opinion, ideally be assigned to either Axis divisions/Soviet corps or Axis corps/Soviet army HQ's, not higher.