Army group HQ's

[Mist]

What happens if an army group HQ has low OP's? Does the game act in the same way like with an army HQ but in larger scale? Where is better to place lvl-9 commander?

[Ed Cogburn]

Originally posted by Mist:
What happens if an army group HQ has low OP's? Does the game act in the same way like with an army HQ but in larger scale?

Don't know for sure. I think it just means that the Army HQs which belong to that Army Group HQ will not be able to "borrow" Ops points from their superior if they themselves are low on points.

Where is better to place lvl-9 commander?

Gary's suggestion is in the manual, page 44, section V - Tactics, subsection A. Basically, your best leaders should be on the front line.

[Mist]

Originally posted by Ed Cogburn:
Gary's suggestion is in the manual, page 44, section V - Tactics, subsection A. Basically, your best leaders should be on the front line.

So, why it is stated in the manual, that you should prevent incompetents from getting into supreme HQ?

[Ed Cogburn]

Originally posted by Mist:

So, why it is stated in the manual, that you should prevent incompetents from getting into supreme HQ?

Because the leaders of higher level HQs will sometimes have an influence on combat. For the Soviets who have a lot of poor leaders, its best to put them in rear echelon HQs and let your pool consist mainly of 5, 6 or 7 rated leaders. so you don't get a bad leader into an HQ, if the game forces a change.


[This message has been edited by Ed Cogburn (edited November 29, 2000).]

[K.J.001]

I am sorry for raising an already discussed issue.

I am wondering about how frequently does a higher-level HQ assume command of the combat situation? In my new game with Possum 6, OKH or the regional HQ seem to do so quite frequently, as often as two thirds of the time. If this is the case, I may have to reorganize and instead assign my highest rated generals to the regional rather than frontline HQs.

As a ‘born-again’ WIR player, I would be more than delighted to hear about the observations of the more experienced WIR players regarding the abovementioned.

[Mist]

Originally posted by K.J.001
I am sorry for raising an already discussed issue.

I am wondering about how frequently does a higher-level HQ assume command of the combat situation? In my new game with Possum 6, OKH or the regional HQ seem to do so quite frequently, as often as two thirds of the time. If this is the case, I may have to reorganize and instead assign my highest rated generals to the regional rather than frontline HQs.

As a born-again WIR player, I would be more than delighted to hear about the observations of the more experienced WIR players regarding the abovementioned.

Hello K.J.001
There are no hard data AFAIK. Your own subjective observations are the only knowledge you can use. May be someone can add real chances. But this is not of the big matter anyway. You can't win the game simply by placing best commanders in the right HQs.

AND by allowing players to change leaders of HQs as often as they would like, WiR behaves very unhistorically. IMHO, the player controlled change of leaders should be totally or partially forbidden.

Good luck!;)

[K.J.001]

Originally posted by Mist
Hello K.J.001
There are no hard data AFAIK. Your own subjective observations are the only knowledge you can use. May be someone can add real chances. But this is not of the big matter anyway. You can't win the game simply by placing best commanders in the right HQs.

AND by allowing players to change leaders of HQs as often as they would like, WiR behaves very unhistorically. IMHO, the player controlled change of leaders should be totally or partially forbidden.

Good luck!;)

Luck? I certainly need plenty of luck in my very first Possum 6 game. After reaching the hex just west of Smolensk on 27 July 1941, due to my overstretched supply lines, I am still west of the Rzhez-Vyazma line before the 17 August turn trying to encircle as many Soviet units as possible. This may be more difficult than the official version because of the many railroads on the Possum map. In the North, my panzers have finally been stopped dead in their tracks, literally, southwest of Novgorod as I attempt to encircle the many Soviet units south of Leningrad. The marshes between Leningrad and Moscow are making rapid advances quite difficult. Although I hate to make frontal assaults, I probably have to take heavy casualties among my panzers to blast a hole through the Soviet units straddling the railroad south of Leningrad. Meanwhile, the other half of the pincer movement southwest of Leningrad is making steady progress.

Hmmm ... changing commanders is probably ahistorical. At the same time, there are only so many rules that we could follow before the game becomes overly deterministic. Still, you have a very valid point about the *constant* changing of commanders. In the meantime, until I have reached a higher level of proficiency like many of you at the forum, I shall simply stick to the informal House and Possum Rules, including the Finnish one. Right now, I am more concerned about the possiblity of a war of attrition that I cannot possibly win in Possum 6. Hence, I need every advantage that I could gather, including superior leadership and tactics.

Have anyone conducted a test on the frequency of the higher-level HQs assuming command of the battle situations?

[RickyB]

The only number I have seen, and it is going back a couple of years, is that for event checks for the south front, there was a 30% chance that Hitler would take command of the front for the event check (which has a leadership check as part of it). I would guess that having higher HQs step in happens about the same, or 30% of the time.

[K.J.001]

30 per cent is not that common. So, I shall stick to my current leadership assignments.

Thanks!