Originally posted by BrickReid:
It absolutely makes sense. You take your supplies from where you've got them and place them where you need them. It was commonly done by all parties in the war.
Funny, I've never heard of a combat unit getting supply from 2 different chains of command.
AND 2: Generally, yes it would. Until something interrupted one of them.
If this were true, we would have been routinely using multiple HQs for a single combat unit since modern warfare first began.
False argument, never happened. But hypothetically, yes, it would.
I believe "never happened" proves my point.
I think the mod that made it so a unit can only be special supplied 1 time is an unrealistic restriction. (It also creates the need to use the transfer and second supply exploit.)
I see, we take away one exploit of a bug and you switch to another.
Why did Gary not make it possible to for multiple HQs to support a combat unit, if this was just about supply?
It gains you a realistic ability that was used extensively by all armies of the conflict.
And, the use of HQ mules are simply a variation of managing the war's supply system by using ingenuity. Think of them aa not combat HQs anymore, but as Logistical HQs. A legitimate usage in my opinion. The Americans used logistical commands extensively. They had to considering how far they were from the front lines and all the supplies that were required to conduct OPERATIONS.
You may know a lot about supply but you don't seem to realize that multiple major HQ structures don't share combat units. I have never heard of the military, with the need for a clear chain of command and control, co-managing units that you call "realistic". Redundent logistical systems also strike me as grossly inefficient.
I simply must remain in disagreement with your assertion that special supply should be a common weekly routine that involves a bizzare use of headquarters units.
[ September 01, 2001: Message edited by: Ed Cogburn ]</p>
