Matrix Games Forums

How do these small units racing behind enemy lines cut supply and basically encircle the enemy? I get that they can break rail lines, but shouldn't there be some force size/movement point(s) factor in converting hexes?

Security/MP units "superpower" could have a conversion modifier to justify keeping them in the rear where they were intended to be.

(Warning - Rant) "As Rear Security Divisions [Sicherungs] were not well equipped like front line troops, some of the divisions started out as infantry divisions but once they were assigned to rear security, their heavy weapons were sent off to be used by front line troops." and yet it seems they are hell-bent on leading the Operation Barbarossa drive on Leningrad...

Example - there are 80 miles between two regiments but now the Southwest Front is brought to it's knees; Screen shot taken from one of Larry's interesting AARs

I don't think vLGF would have changed this setup, but as the Sicherungs Div's were historically assigned to the rear areas they are withdrawn from the scenario. There are some that remain as front line units because they did historically.

Thanks for explaining how you designed the Sicherungs in your scenarios. Also, I used a recent screenshot that exemplified TOAW4 encirclement. It was not intended as a commentary on LGF's play - I use units that way too.

My point is, in TOAW how can small units race far behind and that be considered cutting off supply? The screenshot was used because it highlights the game's mechanics in action; a regiment drove 100 kilometers behind a much larger force and therefore that Front's supply troops stop doing their thing.

Taking it to the extreme, a divided battalion unit that is now just a company can cut off an entire Group/Army/Front 100 miles away. That's why I bring up hex conversion and possibly hex conversion should be related to a scenario's main unit size/scale. The Sichrungs were used as an example of a unit that should probably have more weight in converting hexes.

I'll be more than okay with an explanation of why the way it works now is suitable.

Hex ownership is irrelevant to supply (except that rail supply cannot move through enemy controlled hexes). Supply is only blocked by enemy units and empty hexes with enemy ZOCs. As such, in your screenshot, Kiev is in supply (actually if I recall correctly Kiev actually has a supply point so it's in supply even if you do block those hexes with ZOCs).

If you don't think a unit should be able to convert a hex (or, more importantly, have a ZOC) simply omit it from the scenario, or bundle it into another unit. If you think a subdivided unit would fail this threshold, make the unit non-divisible by assigning the section unit size.

golden delicious wrote: Sun May 08, 2022 6:21 pm Hex ownership is irrelevant to supply (except that rail supply cannot move through enemy controlled hexes). Supply is only blocked by enemy units and empty hexes with enemy ZOCs.

Now I understand. Thank you.

Also, I'm going to try the section unit size adjustment

Cpl GAC wrote: Sun May 08, 2022 12:19 pm Taking it to the extreme, a divided battalion unit that is now just a company can cut off an entire Group/Army/Front 100 miles away.

Think it should be noted that the D21 AAR in your example is being played against a Soviet PO and the PO is incapable of responding rationally to enemy units in the backfield. In a PBM game I seriously doubt that such a D21 Axis maneuver has ever been successful at the 100 miles scale.

My thought is not that this is a TOAW problem, but more of a design problem where the TOAW PO is being asked to perform combat operations on a scale it was never intended to handle. The PO just can’t make the kind of decisions needed to protect the logistics tail.

I haven’t looked, but in the AAR archives should be some Eastern Front AARs where the players are both people. I think you’ll find small units are not being successfully pushed 100 miles behind the enemy front.

Regards, RhinoBones