HQ Buildup under 1.08

[wac29]

It seems to me the HQ buildup rules under 1.08 will result in much stronger german 41 offensives because:

The 25 hex rule vs. 20MP. This is especially significant in the center for turns 3-6 because of all the rivers and in the north for turns 6-12 because of the forests. This will result in buildups much further, hex-wise, from the railheads than before.

Being able to move the HQ on the turn of buildup. This eliminates the elaborate positioning of HQ's the turn before the buildup and of calculating the 20MP range. It will also enable buildups turn after turn vs. before was every other turn with the same HQ. The small penalty of getting slightly less supply because of using up a percentage of your movement points is overwhelmed, to me, by the flexibility of being able to move it at all on the buildup turn.

Re-assigning units to different HQs to save AP still works. For example, 2 corps of 3 mobile units each. Reassign the three units in the second corps to the first. Do the buildup with all six assigned to the first corps. AP cost is about 32 vs. 2 buildups of about 25 each =50. Because of the lower AP reassignment cost it will cost 6-12 AP to reassign roundtrip, resulting in a savings of 8-12 AP net.


I think you will see German players doing buildups multiple turns in a row on the same units and this will be quite difficult for the Red Army in 1941 to stop. Plus, with the lower AP reassignment costs for units and leaders there should be more AP available for buildups.

[morvael]

When the change was made for the first time during internal beta, the protection to MP reduction from failed leader admin/initiative rolls was also based on the buildup percentage (so at 50% you only got 50% of the 0.8*MP reduction) and the supply bonus was the only source of extra supply (there was no constant part) and the AP cost was higher. But it turned out that HQBU in this form was completely useless. I'm not a HQBU expert so I trusted what the other said. Gradually the limits on HQBU were retracted and this is what we have now. Please discuss this with one of the more HQBU-knowledgeable testers.

edit: I would be happy to block reassignment of units that did a HQBU (on the turn they did it and on the next). Would that be enough?

[wac29]

I am not being critical of the changes you made, just trying to envision from experience how players will use the new rules. We will see how the games play out in the forums but I know getting ~50MP two or three turns in a row for the same units in the summer of 1941 can be devastating. We may see more blowout 1941 German wins.

In my testing with the overloaded corps of six units, so 12CP, all six units were about 48-49MP the turn after the buildup (passed the leader checks), every time I tested it (3 times) I don't recall the leader but it was AGC.

I think not allowing buildups for HQ's that have had perhaps more than one unit assigned to it that turn would eliminate the reassigning AP trick. Units are reassigned every turn here and there for different reasons so it would be good to have the ability to assign one unit and still buildup. Not sure how you would program that...

The simplest way might be overload HQ's cannot do buildups since that is what you do with the AP trick in essence. In this case what if you do the buildup and then attempt to assign additional units? I have not tested that....

[wac29]

What do other people think about the 25 hex and moving HQ rules?

[morvael]

Currently in HQBU leader tests are automatically passed, as in 1.07.

I agree overload should stop buildup as well. But the restriction to reassign will also be important, because it will impact strength in combat a lot if you fight under overloaded corps.

[morvael]

Units assigned after buildup is done are not doing a buildup themselves for free, so it's safe.

edit: in any case I would only block changing the assignment of combat units that did a HQBU to another HQ, not by blocking assignment of more units to a HQ that did a HQBU.

[mktours]

I tend to agree with wac29.
I don't understand why 1.08 make so much changes, most of which have never been required by players in the forum, so why bother to change them? I feel overwhelmed by the change log and didn't read a single line of the PDF, nor play a single minute of 1.08..

[timmyab]

ORIGINAL: wac29

What do other people think about the 25 hex and moving HQ rules?

Well I suspect it's going to be too strong.
We'll see once Pelton posts the results from his 1.08 games. I should think he's having a field day with 1.08.
I'd like to scrap HQ buildup completely. I'd prefer something like a 'priority' button on HQs which would allow for extra supplies in incremental steps, say 10% per click at a cost in APs with a maximum percentage allowed per turn related to distance from rail head.

[wac29]

I am glad to know the rule about leaders automatically passing the test after buildup.

It is good units can't be attached after the buildup and get it for free.

It will be interesting seeing how the attachment restriction gets worked out. I vote for no buildups for overloaded HQ's. It seems to be the simplest way. If people are operating their mobile HQs overloaded, which they wouldn't if they did the math on how bad it is to their leader rolls, they need to change the way they play or not get buildups for those HQs.

I do think the other two things in my original post are more significant to game balance though.

[mktours]

HQ build up is already too powerful in the old version, in my game with Saper222, he did many HQ build up, and much to my surprise, he seemed didn't have vehicle shortage.
Before I played with him, I didn't realize that GHC didn't have Vehicle shortage no matter how many HQ build up it made. I only made 3-4 HQ build up in my GHC games (though none of my GHC games past T15).

[Denniss]

HQ buildup was perverted/misused by some players + the additional supplies/fuel were created out of thin air or taken from locations all over the map.
This rework should prevent misuse + player should see increased vehicle usage for buildup.
As with many other changes in 1.08 this needs a wider audience for testing and finetuning.

[wac29]

Denniss,

I agree that it needs a wider audience and testing but disagree about this rework preventing misuse. How do you see it preventing misuse?
What I am suggesting is it will likely encourage more buildups because the conditions to do them are less restrictive than 1.07.

[heliodorus04]

Remember that the tradeoff for moving any HQ/unit that will later build up in the turn is that the amount of re-supply you take is inversely related to how much you move. The more you move (on the turn you build up) the less payoff you get for buildup. Thus, you're better off doing what you did before: don't move on the turn you use buildup.

I agree it's powerful, but it was before too. There remain several critical things Soviet players must do:
1) Defend cities that have resources. Don't lose the factories in Kharkov, Stalino, Tula, Dnepopetrovsk etc. because you did not garrison them well enough.

2) Know your rail supply routes, especially in the area east of the Pripyets to Kursk. You can get a whole lot of units cut off if you find yourself using the Kursk western rail line as your only source of supply.

3) Know how ZOC impacts movement.

4) Never ever let the German cut off Leningrad the easy way (isolating all 3 ports across Lake Ladoga). It takes very few troops to ensure HQBU cannot accomplish this.

[Northern Star]

I suggest you to wait a bit before making other changes... the HQBU costs so many APs that it will be impossible in my opinion to make so many HQBU in few turns.
In my last Road to Moscow pbem I didn't manage to do a single HQBU in 9 turns. Now we'll see... I doubt it will work against heavily reinforced lines. Remember it only gives you more MP and not more strength.

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: wac29

It seems to me the HQ buildup rules under 1.08 will result in much stronger german 41 offensives because:

The 25 hex rule vs. 20MP. This is especially significant in the center for turns 3-6 because of all the rivers and in the north for turns 6-12 because of the forests. This will result in buildups much further, hex-wise, from the railheads than before.

Being able to move the HQ on the turn of buildup. This eliminates the elaborate positioning of HQ's the turn before the buildup and of calculating the 20MP range. It will also enable buildups turn after turn vs. before was every other turn with the same HQ. The small penalty of getting slightly less supply because of using up a percentage of your movement points is overwhelmed, to me, by the flexibility of being able to move it at all on the buildup turn.

Re-assigning units to different HQs to save AP still works. For example, 2 corps of 3 mobile units each. Reassign the three units in the second corps to the first. Do the buildup with all six assigned to the first corps. AP cost is about 32 vs. 2 buildups of about 25 each =50. Because of the lower AP reassignment cost it will cost 6-12 AP to reassign roundtrip, resulting in a savings of 8-12 AP net.


I think you will see German players doing buildups multiple turns in a row on the same units and this will be quite difficult for the Red Army in 1941 to stop. Plus, with the lower AP reassignment costs for units and leaders there should be more AP available for buildups.

Not sure WTH you are but your full of you know what.

Data is what counts not some one I have never seen do sht on the field of play.

I am playing what I consider the best SHC player still playing, a very good SHC player and one I consider ok to good.

The results so far are what I kinda thought going in Saper has a WOS built on turn 5 50+ stacks at landbridge and 20-30 south of Leningrad and south his standard blob of counter attacking.

So far going by my game vs Saper SHC is still WAY WAY over powered
vs one of the others I think I will win or draw
and the 3rd draw or lose.

Play the game vs people(known on forums) that have some skills then post the DATA.

Just throwing sht against the wall is just that.

Post results.

Thanks for posting bro, but play then bitch.

I have a long long history of both.

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: timmyab

ORIGINAL: wac29

What do other people think about the 25 hex and moving HQ rules?

Well I suspect it's going to be too strong.
We'll see once Pelton posts the results from his 1.08 games. I should think he's having a field day with 1.08.
I'd like to scrap HQ buildup completely. I'd prefer something like a 'priority' button on HQs which would allow for extra supplies in incremental steps, say 10% per click at a cost in APs with a maximum percentage allowed per turn related to distance from rail head.

20 hex limit would be fine with me.

Dude we had way way better HQBU back in the day and it was completely usless vs Bomazz, Flav, MT, Saper, Katza, TDV, Hoooper
none of these Players ever lost a single game as SHC and Most never lost Leningrad.

The problem is we have allot of very unskilled SHC players.

HQBU vs highly skilled SHC is completely usless after turn 4, but without it not a single highly skill GHC player vs a highly skill SHC would ever get across the rivers and would lose the game by early 44.

The current ruleset so heavly favors SHC its not funny.

Sure vs average to poor SHC I can smoke MP and vs the Good one get a draw.

vs the best SHC players its not even fun to play.

Play GHC vs Saper then post the data.

1.08 helps GHC for sure, but still falls short I believe, but I will not know until the games play out.

I will be posting the AAR;s from all 3 as soon as we get past turn 8.

Data data data is what matters - good data. Don't be a newbie whining.

I picked 3 skilled players at all 3 skill levels Great/ good and average.

Why waste my time playing poor players? OK Ok it is fun as hell, but not going to help balance game

[Peltonx]

wac29

When you can have 50 CV stacks by turn 5 talk to me. level 2 fort in lt woods.

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: Northern Star

I suggest you to wait a bit before making other changes... the HQBU costs so many APs that it will be impossible in my opinion to make so many HQBU in few turns.
In my last Road to Moscow pbem I didn't manage to do a single HQBU in 9 turns. Now we'll see... I doubt it will work against heavily reinforced lines. Remember it only gives you more MP and not more strength.

You can do about 2 per turn.

The logistics model is allot different people.

Play the game.

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: mktours

HQ build up is already too powerful in the old version, in my game with Saper222, he did many HQ build up, and much to my surprise, he seemed didn't have vehicle shortage.
Before I played with him, I didn't realize that GHC didn't have Vehicle shortage no matter how many HQ build up it made. I only made 3-4 HQ build up in my GHC games (though none of my GHC games past T15).

Saper was using the port HQBU exploit and a few others.

He was doing them 30 hexes past Rail heads, Saper is king of fuel exploits for sure.

I think we have with MT's help nerfed all of them

If saper does the HQBU's like he use to he be down on trucks before winter and he would get as real ass kicking during the 41/42 winter.

Saper is a good SHC player, but as GHC I think all his toys have been taken away [8D]

[timmyab]

ORIGINAL: Pelton
Don't be a newbie whining.

Lol, I'm not whining, I prefer to play the Axis side anyway. I have a suspicion that the Axis side will be too strong in 41 and 42, that's all. Only time will tell if I'm right or not.