Replacements with Short Turns?

[76mm]

I'm playing around with the editor for a scenario with short (6 hour) turns.

With 6 hour turns, a replacement rate of 1% per turn seems entirely too high--4% per day!

I've tried entering figures less than 1%--say 0.25%--but they do not seem to work; at least the replacement editor shows "0", and when I open the cell again, it is blank rather than containing 0.25%.

Is it possible to enter replacement rates of less than 1%? If not it seems like an oversight, because it makes scenarios with turns of less than one day rather unrealistic with respect to replacements.

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: 76mm

I'm playing around with the editor for a scenario with short (6 hour) turns.

With 6 hour turns, a replacement rate of 1% per turn seems entirely too high--4% per day!

I've tried entering figures less than 1%--say 0.25%--but they do not seem to work; at least the replacement editor shows "0", and when I open the cell again, it is blank rather than containing 0.25%.

Is it possible to enter replacement rates of less than 1%? If not it seems like an oversight, because it makes scenarios with turns of less than one day rather unrealistic with respect to replacements.

You can edit the tracks directly, without using the 1% or 2% options. But, even there, the rate value is an integer and so can't go lower than 1 per turn. You can limit when each track starts and ends, though, so that total replacements received over the course of the scenario are under your command. But you can't start and stop and then start again, etc.

To do that, you would have to use disbandment units: Units that just are intended to arrive on certain turns and be disbanded into the pools by event. You can have one (per side) for each turn, and thereby control precisely what arrives each turn.

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
To do that, you would have to use disbandment units: Units that just are intended to arrive on certain turns and be disbanded into the pools by event. You can have one (per side) for each turn, and thereby control precisely what arrives each turn.

OK, so if I set replacements to zero and disband special "replacement pool" units, the equipment from those disbanded units would take the place of replacements and flow into units using their assigned replacement priorities?

And I guess to use this approach I would need to create dozens of these replacement pool units (one per turn?) and they would need to include every type of equipment in the game (for which I desire replacements)?

Finally, do the replacement pool units need to be on-map, or can they be "reinforcements" which never arrive, etc.?

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: 76mm

OK, so if I set replacements to zero and disband special "replacement pool" units, the equipment from those disbanded units would take the place of replacements and flow into units using their assigned replacement priorities?

Yes. There is a small difference in how they affect the loss penalty: Normal replacements don't count as losses when they arrive and lower the loss penalty when they are put into units. The disbandments will count as losses. Those penalties will then be zeroed out when they are put into units.

And I guess to use this approach I would need to create dozens of these replacement pool units (one per turn?) and they would need to include every type of equipment in the game (for which I desire replacements)?

Yes, except that some types of equipment can't be combined in the same unit (air/sea/ground, for example).

Finally, do the replacement pool units need to be on-map, or can they be "reinforcements" which never arrive, etc.?

I don't see why they need to actually arrive, but, when I've done it (Soviet Union 1941 series) I set them to arrive. So I can't actually say for sure.

[76mm]

Just tried to post this response and received an error, frustrating...

Anyway, thanks for the info above, helpful. One last question (couldn't find the answer in the manual): what happens when the replacement rate is set to 1%, but there are only, say, 10 items of such equipment in the game, so that 0.1 units of the equipment is replaced every turn? Does the 0.1 accumulate, is there an independent probability calculation every turn, or is the 0.1 simply written off?

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: 76mm

Just tried to post this response and received an error, frustrating...

Anyway, thanks for the info above, helpful. One last question (couldn't find the answer in the manual): what happens when the replacement rate is set to 1%, but there are only, say, 10 items of such equipment in the game, so that 0.1 units of the equipment is replaced every turn? Does the 0.1 accumulate, is there an independent probability calculation every turn, or is the 0.1 simply written off?

I don't know. Try it and see for yourself.

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
Try it and see for yourself.

At your suggestion, I did so. And as far as I can tell, the replacement system does not work at all as described in the manual, and I don't really know how it works...

I set up a simple scenario, each side with two units, one with a max of 5 elements, one with a max of 10. I assigned these units 4 and 9 elements, respectively. I then went to the replacement editor and assigned a 1% replacement rating, with a "normal" replacement priority, which I understand means that even if replacements are available, they only have a 60% chance of receiving replacements. All units were fully-supplied.

So when I played the scenario, all units on both sides were topped up to full strength within 1 or at most 2 turns after the first turn, despite the fact that there should have only been a 1% replacement rate per turn, and then only a 60% chance of receiving replacements. This happened in three repeats of the game before I stopped.

Based on what I've seen so far, something seems very wrong with replacements. See the attached scenario file (called Naval Test, although this scenario has nothing to do with naval...). Could someone either explain what I'm doing wrong, or how in fact the replacement system works?

[larryfulkerson]

I'd like to hear the answer to that question myself. I just declared it "fair" for both sides and never looked into it.
I need this info to be a better player.

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: 76mm

At your suggestion, I did so. And as far as I can tell, the replacement system does not work at all as described in the manual, and I don't really know how it works...

I set up a simple scenario, each side with two units, one with a max of 5 elements, one with a max of 10. I assigned these units 4 and 9 elements, respectively. I then went to the replacement editor and assigned a 1% replacement rating, ...

And that set the replacement rate to "1" for both elements. So, it rounds up. Now you know the answer to your earlier question.

with a "normal" replacement priority, which I understand means that even if replacements are available, they only have a 60% chance of receiving replacements.

That is a misunderstanding. Here is the statement from the manual:

"Replacement priorities affect the likelihood and
amounts of Replacements for units if there isn’t
enough replacement equipment to fill all requests."

So, a Very High Priority unit has x5 the chance of getting a replacement than a very low priority one - IF there is a shortage of replacements.

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
And that set the replacement rate to "1" for both elements. So, it rounds up. Now you know the answer to your earlier question.

OK, so rare and presumably powerful units--heavy bombers, heavy artillery, etc--of which there might be only a handful in a scenario and which should presumably be difficult to replace, will be replaced every turn... Hopefully scenario designers are aware of this and are setting replacements to 0 for all such units.

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
That is a misunderstanding. Here is the statement from the manual:

Thanks for clarifying that, indeed I misread it.

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: 76mm

OK, so rare and presumably powerful units--heavy bombers, heavy artillery, etc--of which there might be only a handful in a scenario and which should presumably be difficult to replace, will be replaced every turn... Hopefully scenario designers are aware of this and are setting replacements to 0 for all such units.

Personally, I've never used the 1% or 2% options and I can't imagine ever doing so. What a piece of crap that would be.
Designers should research the historical replacement rates for each equipment item and set them manually in the Replacement Editor.

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
Designers should research the historical replacement rates for each equipment item and set them manually in the Replacement Editor.

OK, but I'm not talking about the default options, but I thought that we've just clarified that the replacement rate can't go below 1% (other than to zero), even in the Replacement Editor, correct?

So you're talking about using disbanded replacement pool units to achieve the "correct" replacement rate?

One last question: when using these disbanding replacement pool units, are all of the replacements from the disbanded unit immediately sucked up by units needing replacements (as in the very next turn), or do they tend to trickle out over a few turns?

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: 76mm

OK, but I'm not talking about the default options, but I thought that we've just clarified that the replacement rate can't go below 1% (other than to zero), even in the Replacement Editor, correct?

It must be an integer value. So "1" is the lowest non-zero value, not 1%.

So you're talking about using disbanded replacement pool units to achieve the "correct" replacement rate?

No. You have control of the start and end dates as well. That's how I usually handle it.

One last question: when using these disbanding replacement pool units, are all of the replacements from the disbanded unit immediately sucked up by units needing replacements (as in the very next turn), or do they tend to trickle out over a few turns?

Somebody did a detailed study once (I think it was General Staff). It's around on the III forum, if you want to look for it.

[sPzAbt653]

I had that one saved:
http://www.gr-8.biz/toaw/rr/replacement ... ution.html

Personally, I've never used the 1% or 2% options and I can't imagine ever doing so. What a piece of crap that would be.

Totally agree, and I would add that I wouldn't spend any time analyzing it, either.

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
It must be an integer value. So "1" is the lowest non-zero value, not 1%.

Sorry, but I don't understand your response. I thought that the "1" entered into the "Rate" column in the Replacement Editor represents 1%. Are you suggesting that it represents something else, for instance one equipment element?

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653
I had that one saved:
http://www.gr-8.biz/toaw/rr/replacement ... ution.html

Thanks, I will take a look.

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653
Totally agree, and I would add that I wouldn't spend any time analyzing it, either.

OK, but I'm just trying to understand how replacements work...I don't think that I've proposed or discussed using any of the defaults, I've been discussing using the Replacements Editor...

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: 76mm

Sorry, but I don't understand your response. I thought that the "1" entered into the "Rate" column in the Replacement Editor represents 1%. Are you suggesting that it represents something else, for instance one equipment element?

The latter.

[Szilard]

FWIW, at this scale & depending on the number of turns, maybe the best modelling is to have no replacements and adjust the initial "on hand" pools and replacement priorities to give something reasonable.

Eg: I don't find the image of fresh replacement troops trudging up to the line every 12 hours very believable. If the game is short enough, I think it's reasonable to assume commanders would have to fight just with what's close at at hand.

If the game is longer, maybe model via disbanding replacement bolus units every however-many turns.

[r6kunz]

ORIGINAL: Szilard

FWIW, at this scale & depending on the number of turns, maybe the best modelling is to have no replacements and adjust the initial "on hand" pools and replacement priorities to give something reasonable.

Eg: I don't find the image of fresh replacement troops trudging up to the line every 12 hours very believable. If the game is short enough, I think it's reasonable to assume commanders would have to fight just with what's close at at hand.

If the game is longer, maybe model via disbanding replacement bolus units every however-many turns.

Thanks for your observations.

Keep in mind that losses include lost, stragglers, disorganized, wounded return to duty, etc. Not just troops from the replacement depot. A good designer might look at historic data and adjust the replacements accordingly.

For example, Dupuy, Trevor N. Hitler’s Last Gamble: the Battle of the Bulge December 1944- January 1945 gives almost weekly troops and AFV strength of Allied and German divisions. I find setting AFV replacement in Ardennes 1944 to 0 replicates the final AFV tallies...

Similar data in Glantz, David M., “Barbarossa Derailed. Volume 1 gives detailed AFV strength.