Matrix Games Forums

War in the West gets its first update!Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm version 2.08 is now available!Command gets huge update!Order of Battle: Pacific Featured on Weekly Streaming SessionA new fight for Battle Academy!Buzz Aldrin's Space Program Manager is out for Mac!The definitive wargame of the Western Front is out now! War in the West gets teaser trailer and Twitch Stream!New Preview AAR for War in the West!War in the West Manual preview
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

HQ Build Up

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> The War Room >> HQ Build Up Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
HQ Build Up - 8/9/2013 7:23:47 PM   
STEF78


Posts: 882
Joined: 2/19/2012
From: Versailles, France
Status: offline
Fairly unexperimented as SHC, I've suffered the power of HQBU.

I didn't use it as GHC, although I play WITE for almost 2 years, but it's surely an error

Turn 11, my opponent was able to pierce my lines. I thought they were well organised but he used Inf and 2 PzG and had finally 2 Mot with roughly 50 MP able to cause defintive damages behind my lines (reaching Moscow and destroying industry, surrounding Tula etc...)

As SHC, is the only way to fight this tool to flee at least 20 hexes from the railhead? Should I have done a checkerboard behind my lines?

Is the cost for the german in term of trucks significant on a long term?
Post #: 1
RE: HQ Build Up - 8/9/2013 8:24:27 PM   
Bozo_the_Clown


Posts: 500
Joined: 6/25/2013
From: Somewhere else
Status: offline
This is just to illustrate Stef's point. I admit that this was very gamey and would never happen in reality. I diverted one Panzer Corps from AGN very early. His defense was actually amazingly good. For example, on turn 11 I had 23 Held results. But it still wasn't enough. Once there is a three hex hole and you have 2 units with 49 MP left there will be significant damage. In addition I had done another HQ buildup of 5 divisions at the end of turn 11 so even closing the gap would probably not have mattered.
I'm trying to figure out myself how to counter the Axis Panzer push as I enjoy playing the Soviets even more than the Axis. I think the defense has be more flexible. No carpet defense but rather multiple lines with maybe one or to hexes between them.
I would also like to know what the effects of multiple HQ buildups are. At turn 11 I was down to 142k trucks. I do not have enough experience with the game to know what this means long term.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to STEF78)
Post #: 2
RE: HQ Build Up - 8/9/2013 10:11:10 PM   
Disgruntled Veteran


Posts: 547
Joined: 2/19/2012
Status: offline
142k trucks is pretty low for 1941. Once mud hits you may well be chronically low on trucks for some time.In the long run I don't think trucks are a big problem for Germany its only a potential handicap when your constantly overextended in 41. In my current game T18 I did a total of 4 HQBU's and have 155k trucks in the mud turns. Hope that helps.

(in reply to Bozo_the_Clown)
Post #: 3
RE: HQ Build Up - 8/10/2013 4:46:17 PM   
Walloc

 

Posts: 3071
Joined: 10/30/2006
From: Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: STEF78

Fairly unexperimented as SHC, I've suffered the power of HQBU.

I didn't use it as GHC, although I play WITE for almost 2 years, but it's surely an error

Turn 11, my opponent was able to pierce my lines. I thought they were well organised but he used Inf and 2 PzG and had finally 2 Mot with roughly 50 MP able to cause defintive damages behind my lines (reaching Moscow and destroying industry, surrounding Tula etc...)


Always, always, always garrison u major cities/production center.

quote:


As SHC, is the only way to fight this tool to flee at least 20 hexes from the railhead?


Not necesarrily flee, no, but maybe. Depence on the sitasuion. Delay when ever possible as much as possible but retreat before getting surrounded. Its an art more than science to do this "perfectly". Having soft factor fuel on is the first step tho.

quote:


Should I have done a checkerboard behind my lines?


Yes. As the movement scale/logistivs of the game is such that u can move from Smolensk to Moscow in 1 turn/a week with no rection/move from the other side. The only sensible counter to this fact is to layer ur defences.
If u make or are forced too have single line defences, the opposing side can at more or less any time penetrate at any given point and advance 200-300km behind that with no enemy reaction. Apart from a very brief periode in early 41 that was never possible for any of the sides. Not to mention the use of double pincer moves ala Terje's surrounded of the Pripet marshes in a week/turn. Not to take any thing away from Terje or single him out, he is just playing the game as it is.

quote:


Is the cost for the german in term of trucks significant on a long term?


No. I know ur opponent said he had only 142k trucks back but presumably lots more in the damaged poool that will return over time. The cost of doing HQBU in terms of trucks vs the potential benefit is so low that i have never ever heard of any one not doing them cuz the cost was to prohibitive.

Kind regards,

Rasmus

< Message edited by Walloc -- 8/10/2013 4:58:44 PM >

(in reply to STEF78)
Post #: 4
RE: HQ Build Up - 8/10/2013 5:39:20 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6415
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
I can get better than 200k trucks in midsummer 1941 just as a basis for comparison. Ruthlessly disbanding excess airbases and superflous HQs adds up. So does reducing the TOE of various truck hungry and not terribly useful mobile units. Starve that crap until it flips over to tank brigades and rifle divisions. Never refit those things, either, again, until they flip over. They will bleed you dry of trucks and armaments.

But this surplus in trucks melts away going into 1942 and then you are starving for them until lend lease picks up the slack. If you fail to make drastic economies in 1941, that starvation period will be even worse.

You need to defend in depth and keep reserves in the rear to deal with the panzers. No single line no matter how strong is invulnerable in 1941. Note that a defense in depth in not synonymous with a mathematically precise checkerboard array. I consider this fairly mindless myself, as it fails to incorporate terrain features and lines of communication. Work with the lay of the land.

And Moscow must be garrisoned early on and things trained up in the vicinity. That's where you should be parking many of your shells, so they can take in replacements and get their morale up. Attach all this stuff to the Moscow MD. They can contribute by digging forts in and around the city in the meantime. The rail lines mostly run around geographically defensible lines, which is handy.

This is a surprisingly common error made by rookie Soviet players, and I've seen Moscow fall early many times as a result. You got a sharp lesson here in the school of hard knocks, but now know what to do.

So far as running goes, that all depends on the terrain and your unit availability. Mostly it is in the south you will have to run, and concentrate your stuff north of the Pripyet. You don't have room to run up north and the terrain is much more suitable to defense.

The south is mostly a lost cause as of turn 1, but that is a whole different rant.

< Message edited by Flaviusx -- 8/10/2013 6:06:04 PM >


_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Walloc)
Post #: 5
RE: HQ Build Up - 8/11/2013 1:51:23 PM   
Bozo_the_Clown


Posts: 500
Joined: 6/25/2013
From: Somewhere else
Status: offline
quote:

I can get better than 200k trucks in midsummer 1941 just as a basis for comparison. Ruthlessly disbanding excess airbases and superflous HQs adds up. So does reducing the TOE of various truck hungry and not terribly useful mobile units. Starve that crap until it flips over to tank brigades and rifle divisions. Never refit those things, either, again, until they flip over. They will bleed you dry of trucks and armaments.


I like that. I also disband all the HQs and some of the SAD airbases during the first couple of turns. But I always leave the tank and mechanized units the way they are because I tend to counterattack on turn 3 or 4. On the other hand, any attack with Russian tank divisions leads to almost 50% losses in tanks. In a recent game as Soviets I attacked with 1000 tanks in front of Smolensk. I routed two Axis Panzer units because they were stacked in front of three divisions but lost 400+ tanks in the attack. It's fun but is it worth it?

Do you also lower the TOE for tank divisions or just mechanized divisions?

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 6
RE: HQ Build Up - 8/11/2013 5:02:45 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6415
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bozo_the_Clown

quote:

I can get better than 200k trucks in midsummer 1941 just as a basis for comparison. Ruthlessly disbanding excess airbases and superflous HQs adds up. So does reducing the TOE of various truck hungry and not terribly useful mobile units. Starve that crap until it flips over to tank brigades and rifle divisions. Never refit those things, either, again, until they flip over. They will bleed you dry of trucks and armaments.


I like that. I also disband all the HQs and some of the SAD airbases during the first couple of turns. But I always leave the tank and mechanized units the way they are because I tend to counterattack on turn 3 or 4. On the other hand, any attack with Russian tank divisions leads to almost 50% losses in tanks. In a recent game as Soviets I attacked with 1000 tanks in front of Smolensk. I routed two Axis Panzer units because they were stacked in front of three divisions but lost 400+ tanks in the attack. It's fun but is it worth it?

Do you also lower the TOE for tank divisions or just mechanized divisions?


Both. They're all crap. Their effectiveness is all out of proportion to their maintainance requirements. Even the stronger ones -- it's all an illusion. So long as they are hamstrung by an 18 MP ceiling, they are pretty much useless. The can occupy ground and that's about it. The real backbone of the early Red Army is the humble rifle division and the speedy cavalry division. These formations can actually accomplish things. Your efforts therefore should be to get these formations up to speed. Your real mechanized units will simply have to wait for another year or more.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Bozo_the_Clown)
Post #: 7
RE: HQ Build Up - 8/11/2013 7:32:13 PM   
carlkay58

 

Posts: 2437
Joined: 7/25/2010
Status: offline
Bozo - those 400 tanks you lost are mostly older style and design tanks that will breakdown and fail to do anything regardless of what you do. So the majority of the tanks you lose in the summer of 41 are not anything that you will not lose anyways in later reorganizations and movement.

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 8
RE: HQ Build Up - 8/12/2013 11:09:05 AM   
Gabriel B.

 

Posts: 379
Joined: 6/24/2013
Status: offline
At maximum distance from rail head ,a HQBU on a empty corps should cost 110 trucks destroyed and 1100 damaged . (11 admin points)

or I am missing something ?

(in reply to carlkay58)
Post #: 9
RE: HQ Build Up - 8/12/2013 1:41:29 PM   
Red Lancer


Posts: 2028
Joined: 11/16/2005
From: UK
Status: offline
Gabriel
 
I think you might be as there here have been some changes from the original and your example of 11 is a confusing number as it is the example figure in the original manual.  Leo (Apollo 11) updates the manual with each patch so it’s always worth scanning through the electronic version.
 
The Admin Point cost is
 
v1.04.22 - May 19, 2011.  The AP cost of an HQ buildup is now increased by the distance in MPs of the HQ from a railhead divided by 3 (truncated). So for an HQ with 3 attached divisions that is 16 MPs from a supply source, the AP cost would be 5+2+2+2+(16/3) =16 (used to be just 11). This increased AP cost is used to calculate the other buildup penalties described in section (20.6.3) in the manual.
 
In your case that is also 11 (5 +20/3) so I can’t tell if you knew.
 
You are correct that the number of vehicles will be damaged equal to the admin point cost times 100. These vehicles will be moved from the motor pool to the damaged vehicle pool. A number of vehicles will be destroyed equal to the admin point cost times ten plus the number of movement points the HQ unit is from a railhead ((AP*10)+ MPs from rail). These destroyed vehicles will be permanently removed from the motor pool.
 
Which would be 110 & 1100 as you say….
 
But remember:  v1.06.11 - May 10, 2012
 
For each 2 tons of supplies or fuel sent to the HQ, 1 vehicle will be damaged and 1 vehicle will be sent to the HQ. The number of vehicles destroyed remains unchanged.
 
So the damaged numbers will be increased above your example but I can’t say how much as I don’t know how much was delivered..
 
Hope this helps
 
John

_____________________________

John
WitW Test Co-ordinator
WitE & WitW Scenario Designer

(in reply to Gabriel B.)
Post #: 10
RE: HQ Build Up - 8/12/2013 2:18:20 PM   
Gabriel B.

 

Posts: 379
Joined: 6/24/2013
Status: offline
that v1.06.11 - May 10, 2012 is confusing also for me.

For 11 admin points you get 1100 tons of suply and 1100 tons of fuel (more than enough for 4 divisions because I rarely exceed comand limit ).

so that is 2200/2 = 1100 trucks damaged in adition to 1100 ?


< Message edited by Gabriel B. -- 8/12/2013 2:22:51 PM >

(in reply to Red Lancer)
Post #: 11
RE: HQ Build Up - 8/12/2013 3:26:13 PM   
Red Lancer


Posts: 2028
Joined: 11/16/2005
From: UK
Status: offline
Right now I see what you mean as I missed a bit out - in your example you have a Corps HQ with no attached units which confused me a bit as conducting a HQ BU with no units attached is now just a waste of APs.

Under the new rules introduced in 1.06.11 to prevent 'muling' a HQ Build Up the amount of supplies and fuel delivered to a HQ conducting HQ Buildup is now equal to the total needs of all of the on map units attached to the HQ (supplies/fuel already on hand do not alter this calculation).  This replaces the old method of basing supplies/fuel delivered on the AP cost of the buildup. These will then be distributed to bring the units up to 100% of their need with the unused remainder remaining in the HQ.

I take this to mean that:
 
- The HQ Build Up Cost  in APs is based on Units being resupplied and distance.
- The impact on the trucks is based on the AP Cost and the amount supplied.
- But the amount supplied is now based on requirement of the units and not the AP Cost.
 
Clear as mud?  I think I'll have to sandbox this to confirm.

_____________________________

John
WitW Test Co-ordinator
WitE & WitW Scenario Designer

(in reply to Gabriel B.)
Post #: 12
RE: HQ Build Up - 8/12/2013 10:35:32 PM   
Gabriel B.

 

Posts: 379
Joined: 6/24/2013
Status: offline

I think ,this what you get ,when you do not instal updates for over year

I am not sure how this efects gameplay thou , by turn 2 you could do a hq build up , mull the hq foward turn 3, and get the desired efect on turn 4.

Now i will just delay hq build up until turn 3 , and fight for position in turn 2.

(in reply to Red Lancer)
Post #: 13
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> The War Room >> HQ Build Up Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.148