Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Understanding Supply

 
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] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command WWII War in Europe >> Understanding Supply Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Understanding Supply - 10/5/2020 9:33:28 PM   
PvtBenjamin

 

Posts: 990
Joined: 5/6/2017
Status: offline
I'm going to make an attempt to clarify the supply rules. If anyone has situations they find supply confusing please describe the issue and add a screenshot showing supply (S key).

Your input is greatly appreciated.

Thanks.


Post #: 1
RE: Understanding Supply - 10/6/2020 3:24:42 PM   
Hubert Cater

 

Posts: 4893
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline
Great idea PvtBenjamin, and here is the latest summary on HQ supply rules and the HQ boosting and linking rules etc., which might be helpful towards the overall supply system picture.

1) HQ units, after amphibiously unloading, start at 10 supply and maintain supply for up to 5 turns with a drop of 2 supply points per turn. This is similar to Special Forces, and allows the HQ to act as a Mulberry for an initial landing until further supply sources are achieved.

2) HQ distribution supply:
a) HQ supply = 0 will have a distribution supply value of 3 (previously it was 5).
b) HQ supply 1 or 2 will have a distribution supply value of 5.
c) HQ supply 3 or 4 will have a distribution supply value of 6 (previously it was 8).
d) HQ supply 5 will have a distribution supply value of 8.
e) HQ supply > 5 will have a distribution supply value of 10.

3) HQ distribution value when an HQ is not at full strength is the following formula:
New Supply Distribution Value = Old Supply Distribution Supply Value * HQ Strength / 10
For example, a 10 strength HQ receiving supply > 5 would have a distribution supply value of 10, as outlined from 2e) above. But if the HQ is now at strength 5, then its distribution value would now be 5, e.g 10 * 5 / 10 = 5

4) Logistics research benefits for HQ distribution supply - if after distribution supply for an HQ is calculated, the distribution value is less than the current logistics value, then the logistics value is applied as the distribution supply value for this HQ.

5) HQ boosting can only be achieved if the first HQ has a supply value >= 3 (previously it was > 0).
a) the HQ to be boosted must have a supply value < 5 and is now automatically increased to a supply value of 5 which caps its distribution supply at 8.
b) this will improve distribution supply for boosted HQs that were at 3 or 4 supply (from 6 to 8), and more importantly, will allow them to 'operate' and 'upgrade' now that they are at 5 supply.
c) between two HQs, the higher rated HQ receives the boost, the lower rated HQ is the parent provider of the boost.
d) source HQs of a supply boost to another HQ are now highlighted with a yellow hex outline, indicating they are the source of the supply boost, when clicking on the recipient HQ.
e) source HQ boost range is dependent on the distribution supply of the source HQ. For example, if it has a distribution supply of 8, then the linked HQ needs to be within a movement distance of 8, e.g. hexes as well as any terrain costs that may be applied

6) LOW SUPPLY HQ boosting can only be achieved if the source HQ has a supply value >= 1 and < 3.
a) the HQ to be boosted must have a supply value < 3 and is now automatically increased to a supply value of 5 which caps its distribution supply at 6.

7) Air units do not receive supply from an HQ unless they are attached.
a) under supplied Air units, due to not being attached to an HQ, will be indicated by a red hatch beneath the applicable Air unit.
b) under supplied Air units, attached to an HQ but not to the most optimal supply giving HQ, will be indicated by a purple hatch beneath the applicable Air unit.

8) Unit attrition losses due to low supply:
a) units at 0 supply, HQs excluded, not adjacent to a friendly supply hex will suffer desertion losses, 1 strength point. If they are reduced to 0 strength then the unit is considered lost.
b) units at 0 supply may suffer desertion losses if they are adjacent to at least 2 front line ZoC enemy units that have a minimum strength and supply >= 5. They will then have a 50% chance of 1 strength point loss per adjacent unit, up to 2 strength points. If they are reduced to 0 strength then the unit surrenders.
c) units at 1 supply may suffer desertion losses if they are adjacent to at least 2 front line ZoC enemy units that have a minimum strength and supply >= 5. They will then have a 20% chance of 1 strength point loss per adjacent unit, up to 2 strength points. If they are reduced to 0 strength then the unit surrenders.

9) Unit morale losses due to low supply:
a) units at 0 supply will have their morale, after recalculation, further reduced by 50%.
b) units at 1 supply will have their morale, after recalculation, further reduced by 25%.

Hubert

< Message edited by Hubert Cater -- 12/8/2020 8:43:57 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to PvtBenjamin)
Post #: 2
RE: Understanding Supply - 10/22/2020 12:05:49 AM   
canuckgamer

 

Posts: 552
Joined: 6/23/2004
Status: offline
I'm still a little foggy on HQ boosting. Let's say the 1st HQ has a supply value of 3. Reading 3(a) it indicates that the boosted HQ is increased to a supply value of 5 which is higher than the first HQ. This doesn't make sense to me or am I misunderstanding what happens?

(in reply to Hubert Cater)
Post #: 3
RE: Understanding Supply - 10/22/2020 5:21:37 PM   
Sugar

 

Posts: 904
Joined: 3/16/2017
Status: offline
The sense is within the sentence: your combat units will receive more supply than without chaining. Be thankfull and praise the Lord.



(in reply to canuckgamer)
Post #: 4
RE: Understanding Supply - 10/26/2020 12:59:08 AM   
mdsmall

 

Posts: 431
Joined: 4/28/2020
From: Vancouver, BC
Status: offline
Hi- it is great that you are taking this on. I have tried writing out the supply connection rules in a table format as a contribution to this effort. But before I post that, let me ask a couple of niggling questions that still puzzle me.

- I think the town of Valetta on Malta retaisn a supply value of 5, even after its two ports are blockaded by Axis naval units. Valetta is a Secondary Supply Center. How is it that it is not considered cutoff from a friendly Capital, Industrial Center or Primary Supply source, and thus should only have a supply value of 3?

- Section 7.13.3 in the Manual says that occupied Industrial Centers that "aren't connected to a friendly Major Capital, Industrial Center or Primary Supply center will have a maximum strength of 3". Does connection mean connected by rail (as specified in the previous bullet in this section)? Or does it mean connected over any friendly controlled land hexes? If it is the latter, why is there a need for this very specific rule, since all resources (except ports) that are cutoff by enemy controlled land hexes have a maximum supply strength of 3?

Grateful for advice.

(in reply to PvtBenjamin)
Post #: 5
RE: Understanding Supply - 10/26/2020 12:01:45 PM   
BillRunacre

 

Posts: 4511
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline
It's existence as a Secondary Supply Center means it has supply up to 5 when cut off, as per section 5.13.1. General Notes on Supply.

Though the paragraph above the one you've quoted from 7.13.3 also covers this:

"Occupied Capitals, Primary or Secondary Supply Centers that aren’t connected by rail to a friendly Major’s Capital, Industrial Center or Primary Supply Center will have a maximum strength of 5".


_____________________________

Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/FurySoftware

We're also on Facebook! https://www.facebook.com/FurySoftware/

(in reply to mdsmall)
Post #: 6
RE: Understanding Supply - 10/26/2020 12:34:40 PM   
mdsmall

 

Posts: 431
Joined: 4/28/2020
From: Vancouver, BC
Status: offline
Bill - OK, got that re Secondary Supply sources. Can you answer my second question about how to interpret the meaning of "connection" as it applies to occupied Industrial Centers? My guess is that this bullet should be read to mean "connected by rail", like the bullet above it in section 7.13.3. If so, what is the reason for treating occupied Industrial Centers differently from occupied Capitals, Primary and Secondary Supply Centers?

Separately, does anyone know if it is possible to past a table into this Forum software? I tried to paste a simple table made in Word to a draft post and found all the table formating was stripped out, defeating the purpose of laying out the information this way.

Cheers,

Michael


(in reply to BillRunacre)
Post #: 7
RE: Understanding Supply - 10/27/2020 11:19:20 AM   
BillRunacre

 

Posts: 4511
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline
I think it might be that 7.13.3 should have included Industrial Centers in the first paragraph, and just been referring to any other resource type in the second paragraph (i.e. not listed in the first paragraph).

As to tables, I don't know if it's possible, but perhaps adding an image will be the way to do it?

_____________________________

Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/FurySoftware

We're also on Facebook! https://www.facebook.com/FurySoftware/

(in reply to mdsmall)
Post #: 8
RE: Understanding Supply - 10/27/2020 12:04:52 PM   
mdsmall

 

Posts: 431
Joined: 4/28/2020
From: Vancouver, BC
Status: offline
Hi Bill - that makes sense. I assume then that the game engine is not going to treat occupied Industrial Centers differently than occupied Major Capitals or Primary Supply centers, if they are not connected by rail back to friendly supply of supply.

I have a couple of further supply questions, which I will post separately in this thread.

(in reply to BillRunacre)
Post #: 9
RE: Understanding Supply - 10/27/2020 12:21:52 PM   
mdsmall

 

Posts: 431
Joined: 4/28/2020
From: Vancouver, BC
Status: offline
Re French supply sources

I notice that Paris is not a Major Capital, whereas Rome is. In fact, France has no Major Cities at all, whereas Italy has two - both Rome and Milan. This means that France is on a par with Poland as the only Major Power to have no Major City, Major Capital or Major Port. Why is that? Surely, the population size, political significance and industrial importance of Paris in 1939 would justify it being designated a Major Capital.


(in reply to BillRunacre)
Post #: 10
RE: Understanding Supply - 10/27/2020 12:29:05 PM   
mdsmall

 

Posts: 431
Joined: 4/28/2020
From: Vancouver, BC
Status: offline
Re supply from Settlements

The Manual seems to be contradictory on whether Settlements are a source of supply.

Section 5.13.1 says "Oil, Mine and Settlement resource types do not provide supply to any units".

Section 7.13.1 says that Settlements will have a supply value of 5 if they are connected by rail to a friendly Major's Capital, Industrial Center or Primary Supply Center.

Which is correct?

(in reply to mdsmall)
Post #: 11
RE: Understanding Supply - 10/27/2020 6:05:52 PM   
Hubert Cater

 

Posts: 4893
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline
Hi mdsmall,

Settlements do provide supply to units, probably an update that was just missed from correction/amendment in the Manual for Section 5.13.1

Hubert

_____________________________


(in reply to mdsmall)
Post #: 12
RE: Understanding Supply - 10/28/2020 9:54:23 AM   
BillRunacre

 

Posts: 4511
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mdsmall

Re French supply sources

I notice that Paris is not a Major Capital, whereas Rome is. In fact, France has no Major Cities at all, whereas Italy has two - both Rome and Milan. This means that France is on a par with Poland as the only Major Power to have no Major City, Major Capital or Major Port. Why is that? Surely, the population size, political significance and industrial importance of Paris in 1939 would justify it being designated a Major Capital.



Italy's cities are thus to represent the economic importance of the north, it wasn't my policy when designing this game to give every Major a Major Capital or other Major resource types, it was on an "as needed" basis.

That isn't my policy any more (this game was designed 4-6 years ago) but changing it now would require further re-balancing so it would only be done if France needs beefing up.

< Message edited by BillRunacre -- 10/28/2020 9:56:38 AM >


_____________________________

Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/FurySoftware

We're also on Facebook! https://www.facebook.com/FurySoftware/

(in reply to mdsmall)
Post #: 13
RE: Understanding Supply - 12/2/2020 6:03:57 AM   
mdsmall

 

Posts: 431
Joined: 4/28/2020
From: Vancouver, BC
Status: offline
Hi - I have been reviewing this thread and have a few more questions of clarification to ask

1) The rules governing the Occupational Efficiency of occupied resources are not spelled out in the Manual. In most cases, it looks like the maximum supply value of occupied urban resources drops by 2. Thus, occupied Major Capitals or Major Cities are reduced to 10, Cities and Fortified Towns to 8 and Towns and Settlements to 6, provided they have a rail connection back to a friendly Major Capital, Industrial Center or Primary Supply Center.

However, in the USSR, its seems there is a greater penalty: Axis occupied cities and fortified towns have a maximum supply of 6 and towns and settlements have a maximum of 5.
Is there a different rule that applies to the USSR? If so, what is it and does it apply to other places on the board?

2) Do the same reductions in Occupational Efficiency apply to occupied ports? It looks that way: ports that would normally have a level of 10 have a level of 8 when occupied, except in the USSR where they seem to have a port level of 6. However, occupied 5 level ports (e.g in North Africa) keep their level at 5. Is this correct?

3) It seems that if the friendly city or town adjacent to a 10 level port can not trace a rail line to a friendly Major Capital, Industrial Center or Primary Supply Source, the port level drops to 5, in tandem with the supply level of the city or town. However, once a rail connection is established, the ports go back to level 10. Is this correct? (This seems to be the case for the Canadian ports until the USA enters the war, or for the ports in Leningrad when they are cut-off from a rail connection to the rest of the USSR). What exactly is the rule governing this drop in port level?

Michael

(in reply to PvtBenjamin)
Post #: 14
RE: Understanding Supply - 12/2/2020 9:06:34 AM   
BillRunacre

 

Posts: 4511
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline
Hi Michael

1) Occupational Efficiency is a setting in the Editor that can vary from country to country, and represents the % efficiency of their resources when they are under enemy occupation. So if this is set to 80% then all resources' maximum strength will be 80% of what they would have been when connected by rail to a friendly Major's Capital/Industrial Center/Primary Supply Center.

2) Yes they do.

3) That's right, and it's the rule requiring full strength (e.g. 10 for a city) connected by rail to a friendly Major's Capital/Industrial Center/Primary Supply Center.

_____________________________

Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/FurySoftware

We're also on Facebook! https://www.facebook.com/FurySoftware/

(in reply to mdsmall)
Post #: 15
RE: Understanding Supply - 12/3/2020 5:37:27 PM   
mdsmall

 

Posts: 431
Joined: 4/28/2020
From: Vancouver, BC
Status: offline
Hi Bill - I am almost finished producing my own redraft of the current supply rules which I will post on this Forum shortly for others to comment. But I would like to check a couple more things with you first.

1) Scorched Earth: can you spell out what the rules are for determining Scorched Earth? I have read the patch note for V. 18 covering Scorched Earth and to be frank, I don't understand what it means. There seems to be a random variable within a set range in determining what the Scorched Earth impact will be. Is this true? Also, does the Scorched Earth factor apply to ports as well as to urban resources?

2) Industrial Centers and Primary Supply Centers: Rule 7.12.2 says that Industrial Centers "act as a primary supply source". I take this to mean that if an urban resource can trace a supply line by rail line to an Industrial Center that it will be at maximum strength (as per section 7.14)? Is that correct? If so, then why are the town and port of St. John's, Newfoundland, both only at level of 5 throughout the game, given that St. John's is designated as an Industrial Center?

3) Attrition: I was just testing out game mechanics using a hotseat scenario and encountered the following situation. There were two adjacent Soviet units, both at zero supply, just north of Leningrad which had been occupied by the Axis. One unit, sitting on an open hex, suffered from attrition losses every turn. The other, sitting on a woods and fortification hex, never suffered from any attrition over six turns of play. Both units were adjacent to three Axis units, each of which had supply levels of 5 or higher. Any idea why one of these Soviet units would have suffered attrition and not the other one?

Many thanks in advance,

Michael

(in reply to BillRunacre)
Post #: 16
RE: Understanding Supply - 12/4/2020 12:55:49 PM   
BillRunacre

 

Posts: 4511
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline
Hi Michael

1) Yes, it does affect ports too, all resources in fact, and you're understanding is correct as the resource will have a % of its strength reduced when it changes hands, within the parameters set in the Editor.

2) Only resources that can trace a route via rail to a friendly Major's Capital/Industrial/Primary can be at full strength. St. John's cannot, and therefore its maximum strength is 5. But it being an Industrial Center allows new Canadian units to be deployed there, should you wish to.

3) That is an interesting question as from what you've described I would have expected both to have suffered.

_____________________________

Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/FurySoftware

We're also on Facebook! https://www.facebook.com/FurySoftware/

(in reply to mdsmall)
Post #: 17
RE: Understanding Supply - 12/4/2020 3:33:28 PM   
Hubert Cater

 

Posts: 4893
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline
Hi Mdsmall,

For #3 I quickly tried to re-create the situation you described, one Soviet in an open hex, the other on a forest with a fortification, both surrounded by 3 Axis units, and both units suffered attrition on my end from my test, see below:



Now I don't know if this matches your example exactly as I just went off of the description, and it could be something else I'm missing without seeing your exact setup, but I did confirm that this worked on the current release version as well as the latest development version I have on my end.

_____________________________


(in reply to BillRunacre)
Post #: 18
RE: Understanding Supply - 12/5/2020 2:49:25 AM   
mdsmall

 

Posts: 431
Joined: 4/28/2020
From: Vancouver, BC
Status: offline
Hubert - thanks for testing this. I repeated my HotSeat experiment a second time and after a few turns I found that the Soviet unit at zero supply on hex 205, 50 started to suffer from attrition. So, assumed the result I reported earlier was the result an odd run of chance.

However, after doing more HotSeat tests to study other supply effects, it seems that attrition kicks in if a unit is at zero supply regardless of whether is adjacent to two enemy units or not, or if those units are at supply level 5 or not. Also, once attrition starts, units seem to suffer from attrition loss every turn until the unit is lost, even when adjacent enemy units move away. This is not what I expected based on the explanation in Section 7.28.2 in the Game Manual. Have the attrition settings been changed in a patch since the Manual was published?

Michael

(in reply to Hubert Cater)
Post #: 19
RE: Understanding Supply - 12/5/2020 3:32:56 AM   
mdsmall

 

Posts: 431
Joined: 4/28/2020
From: Vancouver, BC
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

2) Only resources that can trace a route via rail to a friendly Major's Capital/Industrial/Primary can be at full strength. St. John's cannot, and therefore its maximum strength is 5. But it being an Industrial Center allows new Canadian units to be deployed there, should you wish to.



Hi Bill - I have been thinking through the implications of your reply above in terms of the mechanics of the overall game. It does not exactly square with section 7.12.2 in the Manual on Industrial Centers which says "These act as a primary supply source providing supply up to their maximum strength value according their Resource type (usually 10) even if they are cutoff from the Capital". St. John's, since it is located on an island, is always cut-off from both its (minor) Capital in Ottawa or the nearest Major Capitals in London or Washington. Yet it is obviously is not serving as a primary source of supply. I wondered if this was because St. John's is an Industrial Center that belongs to a Minor power.

So, using Hotseat with the Case Blue campaign, I tested out cutting off from supply the only other Industrial Center belonging to a Minor that I could find on the map - Kalamata in southern Greece. In this campaign, Kalamata is an Axis occupied town connected by rail to Athens (its minor Capital) and back to Berlin and has a supply level of 6. I found that if I landed British units on the isthmus of Corinth (hex 191, 108) and cut the rail line this had no effect on its supply, which remained at 6 (and did not drop to 5 as I expected). This is not what happens when other Axis occupied towns are cut-off from a rail connection back to Berlin. So, I guessed this was due to it being an Industrial Center which was serving as its own primary source of supply. However, I was surprised to see that if British units also occupied all the land hexes on the mainland of Greece north of Kalamata, cutting off all overland routes back to Berlin, it drops to supply level 3 (consistent with the last bullet under the supply connection rules under 7.14).

Also, playing around with this scenario, I found that if I cut-off Athens (a city which is a minor Capital) both by rail and by land from the rest of the Axis, it still maintained its supply level of 8. Unlike Kalamata, its supply does not drop to 3 when cut-off by land. Even placing a naval unit against its port has no effect on its supply level. To double-check this result, I then used amphibious invasion to land a British unit in Denmark on hex 167, 68 cutting off the only land connection from occupied Copenhagen back to the rest of the Axis. Same thing - its supply level remained at 8 and did not change, even though it has no land connection at all to a friendly Major's Capital, Industrial Center or Primary Supply Source.

So, can you explain in terms of the rules why Kalamata retains a supply level of 6, even when its rail line is cut back to Berlin, while St. John's stays at 5. And can you explain why these two minor Capitals, even though both were completely cut-off by land, remain at their original supply levels for an occupied city, namely 8? The reason why I am keen to understand these specific cases is to fully understand how the supply connection rules work in practice.

Michael



< Message edited by mdsmall -- 12/5/2020 4:10:03 AM >

(in reply to BillRunacre)
Post #: 20
RE: Understanding Supply - 12/5/2020 5:42:22 AM   
mdsmall

 

Posts: 431
Joined: 4/28/2020
From: Vancouver, BC
Status: offline
Bill - please bear with me for one more supply question. How do the new HQ Supply Distribution Values, which you listed at the top of this thread, square with the Minimum Supply Values for HQs, as explained in section 7.25.6 of the Game Manual? If the latter take precedence over the former, any HQ at zero supply which has a strength of 7 or higher will have a minimum supply value that is higher than the new HQ Supply Distribution Value of 3. The same is true for partial strength HQs at supply levels 1, 2 or 3. Can you clarify how these two different rules now work together?

Michael

(in reply to mdsmall)
Post #: 21
RE: Understanding Supply - 12/5/2020 8:00:03 PM   
Hubert Cater

 

Posts: 4893
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mdsmall

Hubert - thanks for testing this. I repeated my HotSeat experiment a second time and after a few turns I found that the Soviet unit at zero supply on hex 205, 50 started to suffer from attrition. So, assumed the result I reported earlier was the result an odd run of chance.

However, after doing more HotSeat tests to study other supply effects, it seems that attrition kicks in if a unit is at zero supply regardless of whether is adjacent to two enemy units or not, or if those units are at supply level 5 or not. Also, once attrition starts, units seem to suffer from attrition loss every turn until the unit is lost, even when adjacent enemy units move away. This is not what I expected based on the explanation in Section 7.28.2 in the Game Manual. Have the attrition settings been changed in a patch since the Manual was published?

Michael


Yes and I've updated the second post at the top of this thread, look at number 6) for a more detailed explanation.

1) Essentially units out on their own at zero supply will suffer attrition regardless of adjacent enemy units, but only if not adjacent to a friendly supply hex. This is just to give the unit a chance to get back into supply, e.g. it is out of supply, but not way out on the map somewhere out of supply.

2) Those that are not out on their own somewhere on the map, but adjacent to enemy units, and at zero supply, can suffer attrition losses, but only if adjacent to an enemy front line ZoC unit such as an Army, and at a rate of a 50% chance of 1 strength point loss per adjacent unit up to 2 units, e.g. you need at least 2 units but only up to 2 units will have an effect or in other words at most 2 strength points.

My guess as to why some of your units did not suffer a strength point loss was that it wasn't adjacent to enough front line ZoC units or it didn't get any hits at the 50% chance. If this is the case the regular 0 supply attrition rule should have taken at least 1 strength point, but perhaps the Soviet unit was adjacent to a friendly supply hex.


_____________________________


(in reply to mdsmall)
Post #: 22
RE: Understanding Supply - 12/5/2020 8:05:39 PM   
Hubert Cater

 

Posts: 4893
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mdsmall

Bill - please bear with me for one more supply question. How do the new HQ Supply Distribution Values, which you listed at the top of this thread, square with the Minimum Supply Values for HQs, as explained in section 7.25.6 of the Game Manual? If the latter take precedence over the former, any HQ at zero supply which has a strength of 7 or higher will have a minimum supply value that is higher than the new HQ Supply Distribution Value of 3. The same is true for partial strength HQs at supply levels 1, 2 or 3. Can you clarify how these two different rules now work together?

Michael


For this one I would also just take what is currently written above in Post #2 as gospel here as to the current supply rules and how it works with HQs. I've added a Logistics section, 5), that covers some additional minimum distribution value information for HQs as well.


_____________________________


(in reply to mdsmall)
Post #: 23
RE: Understanding Supply - 12/5/2020 9:51:33 PM   
Hubert Cater

 

Posts: 4893
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mdsmall

Hi Bill - I have been thinking through the implications of your reply above in terms of the mechanics of the overall game. It does not exactly square with section 7.12.2 in the Manual on Industrial Centers which says "These act as a primary supply source providing supply up to their maximum strength value according their Resource type (usually 10) even if they are cutoff from the Capital". St. John's, since it is located on an island, is always cut-off from both its (minor) Capital in Ottawa or the nearest Major Capitals in London or Washington. Yet it is obviously is not serving as a primary source of supply. I wondered if this was because St. John's is an Industrial Center that belongs to a Minor power.



Yes, it is because it belongs to a Minor power. Another way to consider this is that Primary and Industrial for Majors provide maximum supply, usually 10, but for Minors, when they are disconnected from a Major Primary supply source, they pretty much act as a typical Major power Secondary source of supply does, e.g. it maxes out at the usual 5.

It is the same reason why Canada, even though it has a Primary supply source in Ottawa, maxes out at 5 until the US joins and it is then connected to Washington D.C.

This is why Ottawa jumps to 10 once the US joins, because the connection now to Washington D.C. takes precedence for supply, but also why St. John's remains at 5 as it still disconnected. Because it is disconnected, and because it is a Minor Industrial source, that gives it its max value of 5, e.g. otherwise it would be considered fully disconnected and drop to 3 instead.

quote:


So, using Hotseat with the Case Blue campaign, I tested out cutting off from supply the only other Industrial Center belonging to a Minor that I could find on the map - Kalamata in southern Greece. In this campaign, Kalamata is an Axis occupied town connected by rail to Athens (its minor Capital) and back to Berlin and has a supply level of 6. I found that if I landed British units on the isthmus of Corinth (hex 191, 108) and cut the rail line this had no effect on its supply, which remained at 6 (and did not drop to 5 as I expected). This is not what happens when other Axis occupied towns are cut-off from a rail connection back to Berlin. So, I guessed this was due to it being an Industrial Center which was serving as its own primary source of supply. However, I was surprised to see that if British units also occupied all the land hexes on the mainland of Greece north of Kalamata, cutting off all overland routes back to Berlin, it drops to supply level 3 (consistent with the last bullet under the supply connection rules under 7.14).

Also, playing around with this scenario, I found that if I cut-off Athens (a city which is a minor Capital) both by rail and by land from the rest of the Axis, it still maintained its supply level of 8. Unlike Kalamata, its supply does not drop to 3 when cut-off by land. Even placing a naval unit against its port has no effect on its supply level. To double-check this result, I then used amphibious invasion to land a British unit in Denmark on hex 167, 68 cutting off the only land connection from occupied Copenhagen back to the rest of the Axis. Same thing - its supply level remained at 8 and did not change, even though it has no land connection at all to a friendly Major's Capital, Industrial Center or Primary Supply Source.

So, can you explain in terms of the rules why Kalamata retains a supply level of 6, even when its rail line is cut back to Berlin, while St. John's stays at 5. And can you explain why these two minor Capitals, even though both were completely cut-off by land, remain at their original supply levels for an occupied city, namely 8? The reason why I am keen to understand these specific cases is to fully understand how the supply connection rules work in practice.


I'd have to see screen shots to better understand and possibly explain these as it gets a bit tricky with occupied resources and whether it is a fully occupied and surrendered location, e.g. Greece is surrendered, or just partially occupied and so on. This is also because of the occupational efficiency factor that is applied to any occupied and surrendered locations and whether it is fully connected by rail to Berlin which would take precedence as the Major supply source, and/or whether there is a territorial connection as well, e.g. connected by friendly path of hexes but not necessarily via rail.

Hubert


< Message edited by Hubert Cater -- 12/5/2020 9:52:32 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to mdsmall)
Post #: 24
RE: Understanding Supply - 12/5/2020 10:11:07 PM   
mdsmall

 

Posts: 431
Joined: 4/28/2020
From: Vancouver, BC
Status: offline
Hi Hubert - ok,that all makes sense now. Thanks for updating and elaborating on the info at the top of the thread. You are right that the one Soviet unit that was not suffering attrition every turn was adjacent to a hex which had 1 supply point (from an HQ), so the automatic attrition rule did not apply.

I get how Logistics tech raises the Minimum Supply Value of HQs. However, I am still puzzled by how the rule in 7.25.6 on HQs Minimum Supply Values relate to the rules on HQ boosting. Section 7.25.6 says that a 10 strength HQ in zero supply would have a Minimum Supply Value of 5. If that is the case, then two full strength HQs in a chain would never have a Final Supply Distribution Value of less than 8, regardless of their initial supply values. Is that correct?

< Message edited by mdsmall -- 12/5/2020 10:19:50 PM >

(in reply to Hubert Cater)
Post #: 25
RE: Understanding Supply - 12/5/2020 11:23:10 PM   
mdsmall

 

Posts: 431
Joined: 4/28/2020
From: Vancouver, BC
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Hubert Cater

quote:

ORIGINAL: mdsmall

Also, playing around with this scenario, I found that if I cut-off Athens (a city which is a minor Capital) both by rail and by land from the rest of the Axis, it still maintained its supply level of 8. Unlike Kalamata, its supply does not drop to 3 when cut-off by land. Even placing a naval unit against its port has no effect on its supply level. To double-check this result, I then used amphibious invasion to land a British unit in Denmark on hex 167, 68 cutting off the only land connection from occupied Copenhagen back to the rest of the Axis. Same thing - its supply level remained at 8 and did not change, even though it has no land connection at all to a friendly Major's Capital, Industrial Center or Primary Supply Source.

So, can you explain in terms of the rules why Kalamata retains a supply level of 6, even when its rail line is cut back to Berlin, while St. John's stays at 5. And can you explain why these two minor Capitals, even though both were completely cut-off by land, remain at their original supply levels for an occupied city, namely 8? The reason why I am keen to understand these specific cases is to fully understand how the supply connection rules work in practice.



I'd have to see screen shots to better understand and possibly explain these as it gets a bit tricky with occupied resources and whether it is a fully occupied and surrendered location, e.g. Greece is surrendered, or just partially occupied and so on. This is also because of the occupational efficiency factor that is applied to any occupied and surrendered locations and whether it is fully connected by rail to Berlin which would take precedence as the Major supply source, and/or whether there is a territorial connection as well, e.g. connected by friendly path of hexes but not necessarily via rail.

Hubert



Hi Hubert - ok, I understand the situation with St. John's, although I think it will require an amendment to the rules to explain the special case of supply connections for Primary Supply Centers and Industrial Centers of Minor Powers.

I am still very puzzled by the other cases I cited above of Kalamata (an occupied Industrial Center) and Athens and Copenhagen (both occupied Minor Capitals). I don't think occupational efficiency has any bearing on what I am observing - all these centers are showing the right supply levels taking occupational efficiency for their respective countries into account. What is puzzling is that they do not drop in supply when cut-off by enemy invasions as the rules would lead me to expect. In the case of Kalamata, if cut-off by rail from Berlin, it stays at 6, when I think it should drop to 5. If cut-off entirely by land, then it drops to 3, as it should. In the case of Athens and Copenhagen, they do not drop in supply value at all, even when they are completely cut-off by land from Berlin (which is easy to do, as both have only one hex land connections to the rest of Europe).

Since I am working from the Case Blue campaign, both Greece and Denmark have surrendered and are completely occupied. However, I have also tried testing this out in the Soviet Union, which of course has not surrendered. If I take Stalingrad (a Major City which is also an Industrial Center) with Axis units and then cut-it off with Soviet units, it behaves like Kalamata - i.e. it keeps its occupied supply level of 7 even when its rail connections are cut, but drops to 3 when fully surrounded by Soviet units. In contrast a regular occupied Soviet city like Kharkov drops to 5 when its rail connections to Berlin are cut and then 3 when fully surrounded. So an occupied Industrial Center has some additional staying power in terms of supply, but not as much as a friendly Major's Industrial Center which keeps its full supply level even when completely surrounded. What really puzzles me are the cut-off Minor Capitals I described above.

I am sorry but I don't know how to take a screen shot on a PC and then paste into a post on this Forum. (I have tried various times on the PC laptop I borrow to play Strategic Command and I can't make it work. If you can give me step by step advice, I will be happy to try again). But if you test it out yourself, using Allied units and amphibious movement to cut-off these resources in Greece and Denmark, you will see what I am talking about. I have repeated the test a couple of times and the results do not change.

Grateful if you or Bill could clarify what is going on here.

Cheers,

Michael




< Message edited by mdsmall -- 12/6/2020 12:31:28 AM >

(in reply to Hubert Cater)
Post #: 26
RE: Understanding Supply - 12/6/2020 4:58:33 PM   
Hubert Cater

 

Posts: 4893
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mdsmall

Hi Hubert - ok,that all makes sense now. Thanks for updating and elaborating on the info at the top of the thread. You are right that the one Soviet unit that was not suffering attrition every turn was adjacent to a hex which had 1 supply point (from an HQ), so the automatic attrition rule did not apply.

I get how Logistics tech raises the Minimum Supply Value of HQs. However, I am still puzzled by how the rule in 7.25.6 on HQs Minimum Supply Values relate to the rules on HQ boosting. Section 7.25.6 says that a 10 strength HQ in zero supply would have a Minimum Supply Value of 5. If that is the case, then two full strength HQs in a chain would never have a Final Supply Distribution Value of less than 8, regardless of their initial supply values. Is that correct?


As mentioned the Manual may not be as up to date as the latest notes linked to above. For example, if you look at the following from my post above, minimum distribution supply value for an HQ that is at 0 supply is now 3 instead of 5.

e.g.:

2) HQ distribution supply:
a) HQ supply = 0 will have a distribution supply value of 3 (previously it was 5).

For the second part on chaining/linking, what is key to remember here is that HQ 'supply' and HQ 'distribution supply' are two different things.

Therefore, an HQ that is at 0 supply cannot boost another HQ, e.g. even if its distribution supply is at 3 (previously 5). It is the supply value that the HQ is at that matters when considering a possible boost to another HQ.

This part is covered here:

3) HQ boosting can only be achieved if the first HQ has a supply value > 0.

Hope this makes sense,
Hubert


_____________________________


(in reply to mdsmall)
Post #: 27
RE: Understanding Supply - 12/6/2020 6:12:59 PM   
mdsmall

 

Posts: 431
Joined: 4/28/2020
From: Vancouver, BC
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Hubert Cater

As mentioned the Manual may not be as up to date as the latest notes linked to above. For example, if you look at the following from my post above, minimum distribution supply value for an HQ that is at 0 supply is now 3 instead of 5.

e.g.:

2) HQ distribution supply:
a) HQ supply = 0 will have a distribution supply value of 3 (previously it was 5).

For the second part on chaining/linking, what is key to remember here is that HQ 'supply' and HQ 'distribution supply' are two different things.

Therefore, an HQ that is at 0 supply cannot boost another HQ, e.g. even if its distribution supply is at 3 (previously 5). It is the supply value that the HQ is at that matters when considering a possible boost to another HQ.

This part is covered here:

3) HQ boosting can only be achieved if the first HQ has a supply value > 0.

Hope this makes sense,
Hubert



Hi Hubert - This does makes sense as far as chaining HQs goes. What I am trying to understand is how they apply to section 7.25.6 in the Manual which covers the "Minimum Supply Value" of HQs at below full strength. If I take those rules as still valid and combine them with the revised rules on supply distribution that you have spelled out at the top of this thread, what I come up with is that there are a number of circumstances where HQs can have a higher Minimum Supply Value than their Distribution Supply Value.

For example, this would happen if a HQ with a strength of 10 is receiving zero supply. In this case, it would have a Minimum Supply Value of 5 (which would apply only to itself) and a Distribution Supply Value of 3 (which it could provide to other units). Or, when a HQ with a strength of 7 is receiving a supply of 2. Its Minimum Supply Value would be 6 (according to the table in the Manual) but its Distribution Supply Value would be 5.

Logistics Tech applies to raising the minimum Distribution Supply of HQs. So, if a 10 strength HQ receiving zero supply has a Logistic Tech of 5, its Minimum Supply Value will be 5 (as per the case above) but its Distribution Supply Value will also be 5, due to the benefit of Logistics Tech.

Is my understanding of how to apply these rules as spelled out here correct?

Michael


< Message edited by mdsmall -- 12/6/2020 6:23:22 PM >

(in reply to Hubert Cater)
Post #: 28
RE: Understanding Supply - 12/7/2020 2:29:56 AM   
Hubert Cater

 

Posts: 4893
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mdsmall

Hi Hubert - This does makes sense as far as chaining HQs goes. What I am trying to understand is how they apply to section 7.25.6 in the Manual which covers the "Minimum Supply Value" of HQs at below full strength. If I take those rules as still valid and combine them with the revised rules on supply distribution that you have spelled out at the top of this thread, what I come up with is that there are a number of circumstances where HQs can have a higher Minimum Supply Value than their Distribution Supply Value.

For example, this would happen if a HQ with a strength of 10 is receiving zero supply. In this case, it would have a Minimum Supply Value of 5 (which would apply only to itself) and a Distribution Supply Value of 3 (which it could provide to other units). Or, when a HQ with a strength of 7 is receiving a supply of 2. Its Minimum Supply Value would be 6 (according to the table in the Manual) but its Distribution Supply Value would be 5.



I added another section to my notes above, section 8. I think the confusion with respect to the table in section 7.25.6 is that it should read 'Distribution Supply'. It also was just a quick look up table to the following formula:

New Supply Distribution Value = Old Supply Distribution Supply Value * HQ Strength / 10

This formula here still applies, but the values in that table would now change according to the new 'distribution' supply values outlines above in my second post, then factored with this formula relative to the HQ strength.

So to clarify using your example here, an HQ with a strength of 10 receiving zero supply, receives zero supply but would have a 'distribution' supply value of 3, as based on the rule above in section 2a).

Hopefully this makes sense?

quote:


Logistics Tech applies to raising the minimum Distribution Supply of HQs. So, if a 10 strength HQ receiving zero supply has a Logistic Tech of 5, its Minimum Supply Value will be 5 (as per the case above) but its Distribution Supply Value will also be 5, due to the benefit of Logistics Tech.


Not quite, it just means that no matter what the distribution level for an HQ would have been calculated to be, as based on the formulas outlined in my post #2 in this thread, if it were below 5, but the Logistics Level is at 5, then the distribution value for an HQ would then be 5.

Essentially the current Logistics level guarantees a minimum level of distribution for an HQ, e.g. if the regular formula puts the distribution level below the logistics level.


< Message edited by Hubert Cater -- 12/7/2020 2:32:13 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to mdsmall)
Post #: 29
RE: Understanding Supply - 12/7/2020 2:49:34 AM   
mdsmall

 

Posts: 431
Joined: 4/28/2020
From: Vancouver, BC
Status: offline

[/quote]

I added another section to my notes above, section 8. I think the confusion with respect to the table in section 7.25.6 is that it should read 'Distribution Supply'. It also was just a quick look up table to the following formula:

New Supply Distribution Value = Old Supply Distribution Supply Value * HQ Strength / 10

This formula here still applies, but the values in that table would now change according to the new 'distribution' supply values outlines above in my second post, then factored with this formula relative to the HQ strength.

So to clarify using your example here, an HQ with a strength of 10 receiving zero supply, receives zero supply but would have a 'distribution' supply value of 3, as based on the rule above in section 2a).

Hopefully this makes sense?

[/quote]

Hi Hubert - ok, all that makes sense now. The simple formula you have provided above is a big improvement over the complexity of section 7.25.6 in the Manual, so happy to scratch all that and take your note above as gospel. Also, the role Logistics Tech plays in guaranteeing a minimum Distribution Supply makes sense too.

I am grateful for your patience in sorting this out for me (and the patience of anyone else still following this thread). Now, if you can clarify the other tangle of issues I have posted regarding the supply levels for cut-off Minor Capitals and captured Industrial Centers, it would be great!

Cheers,

Michael

(in reply to Hubert Cater)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command WWII War in Europe >> Understanding Supply Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>
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

0.358