Page 1 of 1

Reinforcement Deployment (or not)

Posted: Thu Dec 31, 2015 2:36 pm
by scout1
Is the reinforcement deployment merely a roll of the dice (yes or no) ?

If so, is there a means of influencing the odd's ?

RE: Reinforcement Deployment (or not)

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2016 8:11 am
by Falke
Yes and Yes. The Location of the HQ affects the percentage Chance. In a City you have the highest Chance , then if on railroad and lowest when on other terrain

RE: Reinforcement Deployment (or not)

Posted: Sat Jan 02, 2016 4:35 am
by lancer
Hi Scott,

Falke is correct. 40% base chance, doubled in cities, halved when off the transport grid. Impossible when in a swamp.

Cheers,
Cameron

RE: Reinforcement Deployment (or not)

Posted: Sat Jan 02, 2016 1:24 pm
by James Ward
ORIGINAL: lancer

Hi Scott,

Falke is correct. 40% base chance, doubled in cities, halved when off the transport grid. Impossible when in a swamp.

Cheers,
Cameron

Is it based on where the HQ is at the moment or where the HQ was originally placed?

RE: Reinforcement Deployment (or not)

Posted: Sat Jan 02, 2016 2:42 pm
by willgamer
ORIGINAL: James Ward

ORIGINAL: lancer

Hi Scott,

Falke is correct. 40% base chance, doubled in cities, halved when off the transport grid. Impossible when in a swamp.

Cheers,
Cameron

Is it based on where the HQ is at the moment or where the HQ was originally placed?

Replacements are received as the turn begins. So it's where the HQ was left at the end of the previous turn.

RE: Reinforcement Deployment (or not)

Posted: Sat Feb 27, 2016 1:41 pm
by Jonathan Pollard
If a Soviet army HQ is destroyed right after it's deployed before any of its divisions have a chance to arrive there, are its divisions permanently gone? I deliberately placed an HQ in a risky location thinking that its divisions would simply be able to deploy elsewhere if destroyed, but maybe I'm wrong.

RE: Reinforcement Deployment (or not)

Posted: Mon Feb 29, 2016 12:56 am
by lancer
Hi Jonathon,

If you lose the HQ any reinforcements are automatically reassigned to the next (following turn onwards) arriving HQ on that Front.

Cheers,
Cameron


RE: Reinforcement Deployment (or not)

Posted: Mon Feb 29, 2016 2:02 am
by Jonathan Pollard
From what you wrote, if the very first arriving HQ (21st Army) is destroyed before its divisions arrive, its divisions should appear with the next arriving HQ (20th Army). I did a test by setting up a head-to-head game in which I destroyed the 21st Army HQ before any of its divisions had a chance to arrive. I then deployed the 20th Army HQ and ran many turns afterwards, but only 10 divisions showed up for 20th Army, which I assume are the divisions it usually gets. I'm using version 1.02.

RE: Reinforcement Deployment (or not)

Posted: Mon Feb 29, 2016 8:22 am
by lancer
Hi Jonathan,

Checked the code and that's pretty much how it works.

However it looks for the next HQ arriving at least +1 round later but it's looking from the round number of the reinforcement division that's affected, not it's HQ.

So in your example the 21st Army HQ arrives on round 3. It's divisions start arriving on round 4. If it's destroyed they'll start looking for the next HQ on round 5, or later.

The 20th Army HQ arrives on round 4 so it wouldn't make the cut. Probably the 16th (or 19th Army) HQ arriving on round 5 would be it.

One further refinement is that once a division has been reassigned it's arrival probability (normally 40%, adjusted by terrain of HQ) is set to 100% as it's considered to have been awaiting deployment long enough already.

Hope that makes sense.

Cheers,
Cameron


RE: Reinforcement Deployment (or not)

Posted: Mon Feb 29, 2016 10:14 am
by Jonathan Pollard
You're right, I still had the autosave from my test and after I deployed 16th army the divisions appeared there. I think it would be a good idea to include this information in the manual errata, I could not find it either in the manual or the current errata.

RE: Reinforcement Deployment (or not)

Posted: Mon Feb 29, 2016 11:37 pm
by lancer
Hi Jonathon,

Will do.

Cheers,
Cameron