Static Units

[MechFO]

If I understand the manual correctly, the unit trucks end up in the general pool, but trucks from the depot pool will still be needed for supplying the unit if it is more than 3 hexes from the nearest depot.

Is this correct?

Have play testers been stripping out trucks from quiet fronts like it was routinely done on large scale in WITE? The benifit of this seems more limited in WITE2 unless you are in a serious truck shortage crunch as Germans, and for the Russians it seems like a quick way to a collapsed front if caught on the wrong foot.

[loki100]

partly, there is also the rule that if you are within 3 hexes of a depot AND it has all the supply needed, you can use horse transport to access it rather than trucks. The 'AND' is rather important in that sentence.

The other complication is that depots have their own truck allocation, so that can help push supply when the local demand is low level.

More generally, no its not been much used in testing. The issue more often in #2 than #1 is you can have a good global situation (say for trucks) but still really struggle on sections of the map, so merely dumping a block of trucks back into the pool may not really help a sector where you don't have enough trucks to do all the things you want to do.

[TheFerret]

Maybe I missed it in the manual previews - are there ways for the player to influence which depots/sectors are allocated more trucks?

[MechFO]

ORIGINAL: TheFerret

Maybe I missed it in the manual previews - are there ways for the player to influence which depots/sectors are allocated more trucks?

With Depot priority.

[MechFO]

ORIGINAL: loki100

partly, there is also the rule that if you are within 3 hexes of a depot AND it has all the supply needed, you can use horse transport to access it rather than trucks. The 'AND' is rather important in that sentence.

The other complication is that depots have their own truck allocation, so that can help push supply when the local demand is low level.

More generally, no its not been much used in testing. The issue more often in #2 than #1 is you can have a good global situation (say for trucks) but still really struggle on sections of the map, so merely dumping a block of trucks back into the pool may not really help a sector where you don't have enough trucks to do all the things you want to do.

Presumably this refers to it having enough freight for the doubled supply cost? Actually this means you don't want to use static in far out places since those will be exactly where the doubled freight cost excarberates the supply issues.

While this is may sound premature, not having the game yet and all, but this points to something being off with the design, since now statics main use seems mostly as an AP bank for when you need to squeeze out a few extra point. In WITW it was useful to partially circumvent the crushing truck losses from Interdiction, but this doesn't apply here.

Maybe consider buffing static somehow. F.e. dropping the double freight cost, extend the free supply range or giving it drastically lowered attrition. Whatever is easier to code. It the end it should be an attractive proposition in some way.

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: MechFO

ORIGINAL: TheFerret

Maybe I missed it in the manual previews - are there ways for the player to influence which depots/sectors are allocated more trucks?

With Depot priority.

More railyard size (ok that is fixed) and HQ deployment, that increases capacity and pulls in more trucks.

ORIGINAL: MechFO

ORIGINAL: loki100

partly, there is also the rule that if you are within 3 hexes of a depot AND it has all the supply needed, you can use horse transport to access it rather than trucks. The 'AND' is rather important in that sentence.

The other complication is that depots have their own truck allocation, so that can help push supply when the local demand is low level.

More generally, no its not been much used in testing. The issue more often in #2 than #1 is you can have a good global situation (say for trucks) but still really struggle on sections of the map, so merely dumping a block of trucks back into the pool may not really help a sector where you don't have enough trucks to do all the things you want to do.

Presumably this refers to it having enough freight for the doubled supply cost? Actually this means you don't want to use static in far out places since those will be exactly where the doubled freight cost excarberates the supply issues.

While this is may sound premature, not having the game yet and all, but this points to something being off with the design, since now statics main use seems mostly as an AP bank for when you need to squeeze out a few extra point. In WITW it was useful to partially circumvent the crushing truck losses from Interdiction, but this doesn't apply here.

Maybe consider buffing static somehow. F.e. dropping the double freight cost, extend the free supply range or giving it drastically lowered attrition. Whatever is easier to code. It the end it should be an attractive proposition in some way.

No it means what I said [;)], if the depot can meet the need of all the units within 3 hexes and drawing off it then they use horse transport not their trucks. If they need to go further for supply then they have to revert to using their trucks.

I do think you are over-interpreting to be honest. Not sure where you are getting 'double freight cost' from but its a long manual and there are sections I only have a hazy memory of ever writing.

I'd say its very situational but actually unusual - just going by all the test games I've played or read in the last 5 years. I've used it if I really need AP now (but that is pretty unusual given what they are used for). I had one test game as the axis where I set a couple of Pzr divisions to static in Feb 42 simply to shake loose the trucks for a particular purpose and then reactivated them in April.

[Hanny]

ORIGINAL: MechFO

ORIGINAL: loki100

partly, there is also the rule that if you are within 3 hexes of a depot AND it has all the supply needed, you can use horse transport to access it rather than trucks. The 'AND' is rather important in that sentence.

The other complication is that depots have their own truck allocation, so that can help push supply when the local demand is low level.

More generally, no its not been much used in testing. The issue more often in #2 than #1 is you can have a good global situation (say for trucks) but still really struggle on sections of the map, so merely dumping a block of trucks back into the pool may not really help a sector where you don't have enough trucks to do all the things you want to do.

Presumably this refers to it having enough freight for the doubled supply cost? Actually this means you don't want to use static in far out places since those will be exactly where the doubled freight cost excarberates the supply issues.

While this is may sound premature, not having the game yet and all, but this points to something being off with the design, since now statics main use seems mostly as an AP bank for when you need to squeeze out a few extra point. In WITW it was useful to partially circumvent the crushing truck losses from Interdiction, but this doesn't apply here.

Maybe consider buffing static somehow. F.e. dropping the double freight cost, extend the free supply range or giving it drastically lowered attrition. Whatever is easier to code. It the end it should be an attractive proposition in some way.

Without a working example we just trying to understand the manuals explanation.

The wagons consume more freight allowance, I would think i this double freight cost at 3 hex, is the turn around at 60 miles at a forward lift half that of a truck with average speed of 3mph with no incline, and the trucks 22mph expected movement rate, normal circumstances, so I read it as it cost twice as much freight allowance to get it by a wagon over a truck.

[HardLuckYetAgain]

ORIGINAL: loki100

ORIGINAL: MechFO

ORIGINAL: TheFerret

Maybe I missed it in the manual previews - are there ways for the player to influence which depots/sectors are allocated more trucks?

With Depot priority.

More railyard size (ok that is fixed) and HQ deployment, that increases capacity and pulls in more trucks.

ORIGINAL: MechFO

ORIGINAL: loki100

partly, there is also the rule that if you are within 3 hexes of a depot AND it has all the supply needed, you can use horse transport to access it rather than trucks. The 'AND' is rather important in that sentence.

The other complication is that depots have their own truck allocation, so that can help push supply when the local demand is low level.

More generally, no its not been much used in testing. The issue more often in #2 than #1 is you can have a good global situation (say for trucks) but still really struggle on sections of the map, so merely dumping a block of trucks back into the pool may not really help a sector where you don't have enough trucks to do all the things you want to do.

Presumably this refers to it having enough freight for the doubled supply cost? Actually this means you don't want to use static in far out places since those will be exactly where the doubled freight cost excarberates the supply issues.

While this is may sound premature, not having the game yet and all, but this points to something being off with the design, since now statics main use seems mostly as an AP bank for when you need to squeeze out a few extra point. In WITW it was useful to partially circumvent the crushing truck losses from Interdiction, but this doesn't apply here.

Maybe consider buffing static somehow. F.e. dropping the double freight cost, extend the free supply range or giving it drastically lowered attrition. Whatever is easier to code. It the end it should be an attractive proposition in some way.

No it means what I said [;)], if the depot can meet the need of all the units within 3 hexes and drawing off it then they use horse transport not their trucks. If they need to go further for supply then they have to revert to using their trucks.

I do think you are over-interpreting to be honest. Not sure where you are getting 'double freight cost' from but its a long manual and there are sections I only have a hazy memory of ever writing.

I'd say its very situational but actually unusual - just going by all the test games I've played or read in the last 5 years. I've used it if I really need AP now (but that is pretty unusual given what they are used for). I had one test game as the axis where I set a couple of Pzr divisions to static in Feb 42 simply to shake loose the trucks for a particular purpose and then reactivated them in April.

I don't have the rules on this laptop in front of me but the manual does state, from my recollection, that if drawing horse drawn supply that it will cost double for horse drawn supply.

[MechFO]

ORIGINAL: loki100

ORIGINAL: MechFO

ORIGINAL: TheFerret

Maybe I missed it in the manual previews - are there ways for the player to influence which depots/sectors are allocated more trucks?

With Depot priority.

More railyard size (ok that is fixed) and HQ deployment, that increases capacity and pulls in more trucks.

ORIGINAL: MechFO

ORIGINAL: loki100

partly, there is also the rule that if you are within 3 hexes of a depot AND it has all the supply needed, you can use horse transport to access it rather than trucks. The 'AND' is rather important in that sentence.

The other complication is that depots have their own truck allocation, so that can help push supply when the local demand is low level.

More generally, no its not been much used in testing. The issue more often in #2 than #1 is you can have a good global situation (say for trucks) but still really struggle on sections of the map, so merely dumping a block of trucks back into the pool may not really help a sector where you don't have enough trucks to do all the things you want to do.

Presumably this refers to it having enough freight for the doubled supply cost? Actually this means you don't want to use static in far out places since those will be exactly where the doubled freight cost excarberates the supply issues.

While this is may sound premature, not having the game yet and all, but this points to something being off with the design, since now statics main use seems mostly as an AP bank for when you need to squeeze out a few extra point. In WITW it was useful to partially circumvent the crushing truck losses from Interdiction, but this doesn't apply here.

Maybe consider buffing static somehow. F.e. dropping the double freight cost, extend the free supply range or giving it drastically lowered attrition. Whatever is easier to code. It the end it should be an attractive proposition in some way.

No it means what I said [;)], if the depot can meet the need of all the units within 3 hexes and drawing off it then they use horse transport not their trucks. If they need to go further for supply then they have to revert to using their trucks.

I do think you are over-interpreting to be honest. Not sure where you are getting 'double freight cost' from but its a long manual and there are sections I only have a hazy memory of ever writing.

25.5.5. Using Horses for Supply
Axis and Soviet units can receive supply and replacements
from a depot without having to use vehicles up to 3 hexes
from the depot through the use of animal drawn transport.
However, this will cost double the freight being delivered
as the animal drawn transport is assumed to be consuming
fodder (if the unit is isolated, it receives the delivery but
does not pay double freight).

Really not something you want to do in far away places.

[HardLuckYetAgain]

ORIGINAL: MechFO

ORIGINAL: loki100

ORIGINAL: MechFO




With Depot priority.

More railyard size (ok that is fixed) and HQ deployment, that increases capacity and pulls in more trucks.

ORIGINAL: MechFO




Presumably this refers to it having enough freight for the doubled supply cost? Actually this means you don't want to use static in far out places since those will be exactly where the doubled freight cost excarberates the supply issues.

While this is may sound premature, not having the game yet and all, but this points to something being off with the design, since now statics main use seems mostly as an AP bank for when you need to squeeze out a few extra point. In WITW it was useful to partially circumvent the crushing truck losses from Interdiction, but this doesn't apply here.

Maybe consider buffing static somehow. F.e. dropping the double freight cost, extend the free supply range or giving it drastically lowered attrition. Whatever is easier to code. It the end it should be an attractive proposition in some way.

No it means what I said [;)], if the depot can meet the need of all the units within 3 hexes and drawing off it then they use horse transport not their trucks. If they need to go further for supply then they have to revert to using their trucks.

I do think you are over-interpreting to be honest. Not sure where you are getting 'double freight cost' from but its a long manual and there are sections I only have a hazy memory of ever writing.

25.5.5. Using Horses for Supply
Axis and Soviet units can receive supply and replacements
from a depot without having to use vehicles up to 3 hexes
from the depot through the use of animal drawn transport.
However, this will cost double the freight being delivered
as the animal drawn transport is assumed to be consuming
fodder (if the unit is isolated, it receives the delivery but
does not pay double freight).

Really not something you want to do in far away places.

MechFO Thank you!!!

I knew it was in the rules

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: MechFO

...
25.5.5. Using Horses for Supply
Axis and Soviet units can receive supply and replacements
from a depot without having to use vehicles up to 3 hexes
from the depot through the use of animal drawn transport.
However, this will cost double the freight being delivered
as the animal drawn transport is assumed to be consuming
fodder (if the unit is isolated, it receives the delivery but
does not pay double freight).

Really not something you want to do in far away places.

amazing what you can forget [8D]

but, back to the pt above, i think you are over-interpreting. The sort of sector where going static might work could be the Volkhov/Valdai in a normal gain, poss somewhere east of the Volkhov if you've taken Leningrad?

pretty much by definition, there is no active combat so supply consumption (& therefore replacement) is low. Add on you probably have the relevant HQs on a low supply priority - so yes it doubles and you've lost your in unit trucks but just how much freight is really being moved depot-unit in most circumstances?

[Hanny]

ORIGINAL: loki100

ORIGINAL: MechFO

...
25.5.5. Using Horses for Supply
Axis and Soviet units can receive supply and replacements
from a depot without having to use vehicles up to 3 hexes
from the depot through the use of animal drawn transport.
However, this will cost double the freight being delivered
as the animal drawn transport is assumed to be consuming
fodder (if the unit is isolated, it receives the delivery but
does not pay double freight).

Really not something you want to do in far away places.

amazing what you can forget [8D]

but, back to the pt above, i think you are over-interpreting. The sort of sector where going static might work could be the Volkhov/Valdai in a normal gain, poss somewhere east of the Volkhov if you've taken Leningrad?

pretty much by definition, there is no active combat so supply consumption (& therefore replacement) is low. Add on you probably have the relevant HQs on a low supply priority - so yes it doubles and you've lost your in unit trucks but just how much freight is really being moved depot-unit in most circumstances?

That would be every unit not over 100% of supply, each paying double freight to get it by wagon right? Also defenders can draw munition resupply in combat rounds is this freight also double cost?

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: Hanny

...
That would be every unit not over 100% of supply, each paying double freight to get it by wagon right? Also defenders can draw munition resupply in combat rounds is this freight also double cost?

No.

You set the max supply demanded using the HQ priority, on these sort of sectors then that can be #1. So you may only be pulling 6-10 units of supply for a division per week outside of combat.

Now if it becomes an active front with lots of freight demand in terms of ammo and replacements then this rule will really come to hit you ... IF

but if I had that situation then I'd be finding the admin pts to get stuff mobile again [;)]

its like a lot in WiTE2, its situational, what is a great idea in one situation is pretty painful in another.

[MechFO]

ORIGINAL: loki100

ORIGINAL: Hanny

...
That would be every unit not over 100% of supply, each paying double freight to get it by wagon right? Also defenders can draw munition resupply in combat rounds is this freight also double cost?

No.

You set the max supply demanded using the HQ priority, on these sort of sectors then that can be #1. So you may only be pulling 6-10 units of supply for a division per week outside of combat.

Now if it becomes an active front with lots of freight demand in terms of ammo and replacements then this rule will really come to hit you ... IF

but if I had that situation then I'd be finding the admin pts to get stuff mobile again [;)]

its like a lot in WiTE2, its situational, what is a great idea in one situation is pretty painful in another.

Makes sense.

But back to main point, Static seems pretty useless currently with a huge negative and no substantial positive effect, which is a shame.

[HardLuckYetAgain]

ORIGINAL: MechFO

ORIGINAL: loki100

ORIGINAL: Hanny

...
That would be every unit not over 100% of supply, each paying double freight to get it by wagon right? Also defenders can draw munition resupply in combat rounds is this freight also double cost?

No.

You set the max supply demanded using the HQ priority, on these sort of sectors then that can be #1. So you may only be pulling 6-10 units of supply for a division per week outside of combat.

Now if it becomes an active front with lots of freight demand in terms of ammo and replacements then this rule will really come to hit you ... IF

but if I had that situation then I'd be finding the admin pts to get stuff mobile again [;)]

its like a lot in WiTE2, its situational, what is a great idea in one situation is pretty painful in another.

Makes sense.

But back to main point, Static seems pretty useless currently with a huge negative and no substantial positive effect, which is a shame.

Doubling the cost for transporting supply by beast of burden doesn't seem to be right to me. I thought the cost inhibitor is the range factor of 3 hexes. I had to deal with this in one of my AAR in Beta and I ended up just making a depot every darn hex on the rail line to feed the front line that was no more than 3 hexes from the rail depots. Probably overkill but ended up working out when they were attacked later.

[Hanny]

ORIGINAL: loki100

ORIGINAL: Hanny

...
That would be every unit not over 100% of supply, each paying double freight to get it by wagon right? Also defenders can draw munition resupply in combat rounds is this freight also double cost?

No.

You set the max supply demanded using the HQ priority, on these sort of sectors then that can be #1. So you may only be pulling 6-10 units of supply for a division per week outside of combat.

Now if it becomes an active front with lots of freight demand in terms of ammo and replacements then this rule will really come to hit you ... IF

but if I had that situation then I'd be finding the admin pts to get stuff mobile again [;)]

its like a lot in WiTE2, its situational, what is a great idea in one situation is pretty painful in another.

A unit gets supply from the depot by trucks at base cost but wagons *2, when and why do wagons become used instead of trucks and why not both used at range 3 hex?, actual demand still has to pay the freight cost, it’s either base or times 2, so If truck stocks are greater than d mind it’s base cost, does it follow that demand exceeding capacity you drop from truck to wagons, and pay twice freight cost, who pays this cost now? and what effect does this cost mean, is it to the depot that already had dropped to wagons because demand exceeds truck capacity, or does the freight delivered get halved, next if you are at 4 hex and wagons are the mode of supply, what do you get.
Munitions expended in combat phases and stock levels calling for resupply is not base *2 because it’s implasable that the truck capacity is not enough to effect resupply I take it then.

[Hanny]

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

ORIGINAL: MechFO

ORIGINAL: loki100




No.

You set the max supply demanded using the HQ priority, on these sort of sectors then that can be #1. So you may only be pulling 6-10 units of supply for a division per week outside of combat.

Now if it becomes an active front with lots of freight demand in terms of ammo and replacements then this rule will really come to hit you ... IF

but if I had that situation then I'd be finding the admin pts to get stuff mobile again [;)]

its like a lot in WiTE2, its situational, what is a great idea in one situation is pretty painful in another.

Makes sense.

But back to main point, Static seems pretty useless currently with a huge negative and no substantial positive effect, which is a shame.

Doubling the cost for transporting supply by beast of burden doesn't seem to be right to me. I thought the cost inhibitor is the range factor of 3 hexes. I had to deal with this in one of my AAR in Beta and I ended up just making a depot every darn hex on the rail line to feed the front line that was no more than 3 hexes from the rail depots. Probably overkill but ended up working out when they were attacked later.

It’s a game abstraction, both sides did it different, but the game needs one way for both, German Army had lots of trucks at unit level to go get supply’s from depots each day, low numbers of trucks at Depots, the 3 Grosstruppen Regiments of Army and 3 for LW, SU had low truck numbers at unit level and high levels at Corps Depots to move supply to units from the depot.It would make sense for muscle logistics to be a fraction of engine logistics, math wise half is wrong but hey ho, by Dec 41 Germany by truck moved 120 million tons to 6 million tons by muscle.

[Hanny]

ORIGINAL: MechFO

ORIGINAL: loki100

ORIGINAL: Hanny

...
That would be every unit not over 100% of supply, each paying double freight to get it by wagon right? Also defenders can draw munition resupply in combat rounds is this freight also double cost?

No.

You set the max supply demanded using the HQ priority, on these sort of sectors then that can be #1. So you may only be pulling 6-10 units of supply for a division per week outside of combat.

Now if it becomes an active front with lots of freight demand in terms of ammo and replacements then this rule will really come to hit you ... IF

but if I had that situation then I'd be finding the admin pts to get stuff mobile again [;)]

its like a lot in WiTE2, its situational, what is a great idea in one situation is pretty painful in another.

Makes sense.

But back to main point, Static seems pretty useless currently with a huge negative and no substantial positive effect, which is a shame.

Depends, it was done get more trucks for Blau, as Germany lacked them, now if the game is using truck numbers from Askey, he has made the 41 German Army the most motorised Army in Ww2, instead of the 45 USA with 1MTV per 4.2 persons, as he makes forward lift capacity a product of trucks plus not trucks, so motercycle side cars, libel wagons field bakery,field hospitals, staff cars busses for RAD workers etc are all added to forward lift, in his book the 41 Army is 1 MTV to 3 person or so, and has a greater forward lift than existed.

So in game it’s situational as to the number of trucks and their freight capacity, if you have too many trucks your not going to need to make units static, if you don’t have enough you need to make more static, and then move to base*2 freight cost.

[RedLancer]

Hanny

...I've had a long day at work so I'm not too bright and can't answer your post #16 as I'm struggling to follow what you are asking. Sorry.

With regard to your #17 post I agree it is an abstraction. In a perfect world we would have different systems for each side and change things by year but it becomes too complex to balance and compute. In the last week we have refined the map drawing code to reduce memory usage (again) and so close to release. We are at the limit of the balance of the average player's (none of our players are average but I hope you get what I am saying) processing power and patience.

The design is a balance to reflect the use of horses and their cost (noting the stats you have posted elsewhere on how much horses actually eat - I know, I own a couple) and allow a reduction in truck usage if depots are well placed. I'm pretty sure truck usage does cost fuel so you have to factor that saving back in.

With generic trucks the pursuit of perfect logistic maths is debatable as are any comparison to actual truck numbers (and support squads to fill in missing manpower)- what we are trying to do is give a better flavour to the constraints without making the game logistic centric.

[Hanny]

...

...


I’ll try again, when you run out of trucks to move freight from depot, you can still get wagons to a range of 3 hexes, but they cost double freight, does this mean you get half what you expect. otoh the wagon rule tells you it’s a double cost to freight, but you already run out of it, that’s why your using wagons now, so what effect does this double freight have on who?.

Why are you not using both wagons and trucks to range 3 ?, and trucks to any range, so what do you get at range 4 f you have no trucks?.

Loki edited out the answers to your other question, a mod not fit for function.