HQBU broken now?

Share your gameplay tips, secret tactics and fabulous strategies with fellow gamers here.

Moderators: Joel Billings, Sabre21

User avatar
morvael
Posts: 11763
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 9:19 am
Location: Poland

RE: HQBU broken now?

Post by morvael »

Yes, unit must have 1 MP or more to take part in build up and get more supplies.

HQ has extra supplies because it didn't get 100% of need during phase 1 (due to cost of path and axis rail modifiers, though even halved prevented the delivery of all the HQ wanted). So they got more in phase 2, but at this point it's too late to send it to units. Only the HQ unit itself and the support units attached to the HQ can tap into these. This is all shown in the numbers of supply wanted, recieved and given.
Oshawott
Posts: 1353
Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2013 12:27 pm

RE: HQBU broken now?

Post by Oshawott »

Yes, unit must have 1 MP or more to take part in build up and get more supplies.

Thanks for the explanation. This rule seems to be totally arbitrary and designed to annoy the player. [:)]

Also, the AP cost doesn't change. You could have four units with 0 MP and spend 30 AP for nothing.
swkuh
Posts: 1034
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 9:10 pm

RE: HQBU broken now?

Post by swkuh »

Maybe HQBUs are "gamey" no matter which coding is played. Sure, some form of special supply feature should be available, but I play w/o it. And happily so. Some units' gains are others' losses.
User avatar
morvael
Posts: 11763
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 9:19 am
Location: Poland

RE: HQBU broken now?

Post by morvael »

ORIGINAL: Oshawott
Yes, unit must have 1 MP or more to take part in build up and get more supplies.

Thanks for the explanation. This rule seems to be totally arbitrary and designed to annoy the player. [:)]

Also, the AP cost doesn't change. You could have four units with 0 MP and spend 30 AP for nothing.

I'll check this as this may be a bug. Actually any rule restriction might be considered as annoying - like having to keep the HQ close to rail or units close to HQ.
Oshawott
Posts: 1353
Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2013 12:27 pm

RE: HQBU broken now?

Post by Oshawott »

That is true but some rules are more arbitrary then others. At least I know now what to avoid.

BTW, I do like the new HQ buildup system very much. It adds a tremendous amount of uncertainty to the game which is good in my opinion.
User avatar
Peltonx
Posts: 5814
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2006 2:24 am
Contact:

RE: HQBU broken now?

Post by Peltonx »

still not sure it woring right will have a changce to test soon in game
Beta Tester WitW & WitE
Oshawott
Posts: 1353
Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2013 12:27 pm

RE: HQBU broken now?

Post by Oshawott »

morvael, I think there is a major problem in the HQ buildup system. The buildup bonus is calculated from the percentage of movement points the unit has left. The basis for this percentage, however, are the actual movement points the unit has left not 50 MP. In the following screenshot the HQ is 27 MP and 17 hexes away from rail head. 20th Panzer has 13 MP left and I simply don't move it. After buildup the supply window shows 100% for HQ Buildup Used and the unit can accumulate 146% fuel. Technically it could build up to 200% but I guess the range to rail head prevents this.

I another game this let to a somewhat bizarre situation that on T2 some of my tanks were cut of by my opponent. On T3 I barely move the units because they are out of fuel, move the HQ closer to rail head and perform an HQ buildup. On T4 the unit that didn't move at all jumps from 0% to 186% fuel even so it only had 3 MP left the previous turn.

Is this a bug or just a design flaw?

Image
Attachments
BuildBonus100.jpg
BuildBonus100.jpg (119.36 KiB) Viewed 66 times
User avatar
morvael
Posts: 11763
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 9:19 am
Location: Poland

RE: HQBU broken now?

Post by morvael »

They had a lot of free time to move the barrels. It's WAD.
darbycmcd
Posts: 400
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 8:47 am

RE: HQBU broken now?

Post by darbycmcd »

Oshawatt, I don't think it is an error. Think about what is being simulated. It is easy to think of HQBU as just a turbo button, but it is supposed to represent furious forward movement of supply to forward depots, which in the context of transport scarcity can only happen between fixed locations (if the supply stays on a truck to follow moving units, the truck can't run back for more supplies...). When you consider that MPs in wargames have a time function, ie how much can a unit 'do' in a given time slice (turn), the system makes more sense. The percent of MP remaining when HQBU happens is the percent of time in the week the unit has left to devote to supply stockpiling....

But I do agree with rrbill, the whole thing is sort of not well implemented. It was conceived, I understand, as a way to prep for large offensives, set piece attacks. It doesn't have any real world analog in maneuver warfare, at least in this time period. It has become a way for German players to continue extremely unrealistic rates of advance. Now maybe that isn't bad from a game balance point of view, I don't think it is terrible to have in the game, but from a realism point of view it is not good.
Denniss
Posts: 8868
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2002 10:00 am
Location: Germany, Hannover (region)

RE: HQBU broken now?

Post by Denniss »

At least the 1.08 implementation is far more realistic than pre-1.08. It's a powerful option, maybe still too powerful.
WitE dev team - (aircraft data)
WitE 1.08+ dev team (data/scenario maintainer)
WitW dev team (aircraft data, partial data/scenario maintainer)
WitE2 dev team (aircraft data)
Oshawott
Posts: 1353
Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2013 12:27 pm

RE: HQBU broken now?

Post by Oshawott »

Now that I understand the HQ Buildup system I must say that I think it's overpowered. This screenshot is from an AI game and I know that this makes it pretty much meaningless. However, taking Moscow on T5 should simply not be possible even against only light resistance.

This is my personal opinion. Others may think differently. I don't want to go back to the old system but some settings have to be changed. Probably the 25 hex setting from railhead.

Image
Attachments
MoscowT5vsAI.jpg
MoscowT5vsAI.jpg (658.06 KiB) Viewed 66 times
User avatar
morvael
Posts: 11763
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 9:19 am
Location: Poland

RE: HQBU broken now?

Post by morvael »

Currently HQBU is simply a way of prioritizing supply, saying "I want more for this corps". Previously it was really a magic wand that teleported supplies, though some of it's restrictions like range to rail or no movement required (but only for HQ) were more strict than now. However, since the AI is very inept at defending in depth and responding to breakthroughs it's hard to penalize HQBU based on games vs AI. IN PBEM games I can't see HQBU being overpowered. Weakness of the AI allows it to shine, but that isn't affecting human vs human games to such degree. There are some restrictions coming in 1.08.01, but not to the efficiency of a single HQBU, rather to ability to stack them:
Added new restrictions to prevent the abuse of the HQ Buildup system: (1) overloaded HQs may not initiate HQBU, (2) HQs may not initiate HQBU on two consecutive turns, (3) units may not take part in HQBU on two consecutive turns, (4) HQs and units that took part in a HQBU during this or previous turn may not be reassigned to a new HQ.

What about that?

HQBU aside, I agree that WitE supply model is lax, but it can't be overhauled (rewritten) in this version of the game. Too much resources at home, unlimited rail capacity and too many Axis trucks give results such as these. HQBU is just a small item at the end of a very long list :)
Oshawott
Posts: 1353
Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2013 12:27 pm

RE: HQBU broken now?

Post by Oshawott »

1-3 wouldn't make any difference to me because I don't do these things. 4 happens occasionally but wouldn't matter much.

Agreed regarding the AI game. But it shows that the current HQ Buildup system is definitely not underpowered and works just fine.
User avatar
morvael
Posts: 11763
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 9:19 am
Location: Poland

RE: HQBU broken now?

Post by morvael »

Captured terrain on the screenshot shows that your troops moved 34km/day. Good speed, but not impossible, provided there is no resistance and fuel tanks are full. It highlights the problem with week-long turns as well, not only logistics. Once a hole is made, defender cannot react faster than after a week of action happened. Against a human player I wouldn't send the panzers that deep with such poor flank protection, it would mean a disaster (it will take a long time until infantry is able to catch up and requires a lot of forces to cover such a long front, supply will also be a problem unless you would do regular HQBUs). Of course against AI it's not an issue.
darbycmcd
Posts: 400
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 8:47 am

RE: HQBU broken now?

Post by darbycmcd »

Morvael, do trucks use fuel and/or supply? I feel that the long range resupply, like 25 hexes, is getting to the point where you would have to spend a really significant additional amount of fuel to get the trucks there and back.
Gabriel B.
Posts: 501
Joined: Mon Jun 24, 2013 9:44 am

RE: HQBU broken now?

Post by Gabriel B. »

200 liters or 10 jarrycans.

User avatar
morvael
Posts: 11763
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 9:19 am
Location: Poland

RE: HQBU broken now?

Post by morvael »

Trucks used in the logistics phase use more fuel, based on MP from rail to HQ. So new HQBU being part of regular resupply (and having doubled truck and fuel usage to account for halving of penalties) is costing you even more trucks and fuel at long range, which is good. The question is whether this value is too low or too high, but any changes at such low level affect the entire game balance and can cause either critical truck shortages or make trucks problems irrelevant. Changes in formulas should go hand in hand with changes to scenarios, but we don't have resources for that so it's better not to change them too much.

Samples:
491 vehicles and 16 fuel to move 311 tons of supplies over 1 hexes (3 MP)
214 vehicles and 24 fuel to move 35 tons of fuel over 9 hexes (30 MP)
53 vehicles and 16 fuel to move 33 tons of supplies over 6 hexes (18 MP)
58 vehicles and 4 fuel to move 54 tons of supplies over 2 hexes (8 MP)
User avatar
Peltonx
Posts: 5814
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2006 2:24 am
Contact:

RE: HQBU broken now?

Post by Peltonx »

ORIGINAL: Oshawott

1-3 wouldn't make any difference to me because I don't do these things. 4 happens occasionally but wouldn't matter much.

Agreed regarding the AI game. But it shows that the current HQ Buildup system is definitely not underpowered and works just fine.

This is nothing new.

Taking Moscow early has been happening from the first week of release vs AI.

I can take it early without using a single HQBU.

WitE is about player skills and AI has none.

Why I like to play 3 games at once.

HQBU was 2x powerfull as it is now and I lost games, because I played players that understood the rulesets and had skills.

There are still a few highly skilled SHC players left Saper being one,

tm.asp?m=3738743


Beta Tester WitW & WitE
Oshawott
Posts: 1353
Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2013 12:27 pm

RE: HQBU broken now?

Post by Oshawott »

Pelton, the title of the thread you created is "HQBU broken now?"

Playing the AI is a great way to figure out if a system works or not because you can stretch it to the limit.

As far as I know the new HQBU system works 100% as designed and is absolutely bug free.
User avatar
morvael
Posts: 11763
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 9:19 am
Location: Poland

RE: HQBU broken now?

Post by morvael »

ORIGINAL: Oshawott
As far as I know the new HQBU system works 100% as designed and is absolutely bug free.

Of that I am sure, but the question is whether it's overpowered or not?
IMHO not, but only in relation to the rest of the logistics system, which is too generous.
Post Reply

Return to “The War Room”