Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Static Units

 
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 2 >> Static Units Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Static Units - 3/23/2021 4:12:03 PM   
MechFO

 

Posts: 656
Joined: 6/1/2007
Status: offline
If I understand the manual correctly, the unit trucks end up in the general pool, but trucks from the depot pool will still be needed for supplying the unit if it is more than 3 hexes from the nearest depot.

Is this correct?

Have play testers been stripping out trucks from quiet fronts like it was routinely done on large scale in WITE? The benifit of this seems more limited in WITE2 unless you are in a serious truck shortage crunch as Germans, and for the Russians it seems like a quick way to a collapsed front if caught on the wrong foot.
Post #: 1
RE: Static Units - 3/23/2021 4:37:57 PM   
loki100


Posts: 10710
Joined: 10/20/2012
From: Utlima Thule
Status: online
partly, there is also the rule that if you are within 3 hexes of a depot AND it has all the supply needed, you can use horse transport to access it rather than trucks. The 'AND' is rather important in that sentence.

The other complication is that depots have their own truck allocation, so that can help push supply when the local demand is low level.

More generally, no its not been much used in testing. The issue more often in #2 than #1 is you can have a good global situation (say for trucks) but still really struggle on sections of the map, so merely dumping a block of trucks back into the pool may not really help a sector where you don't have enough trucks to do all the things you want to do.

_____________________________


(in reply to MechFO)
Post #: 2
RE: Static Units - 3/23/2021 6:10:59 PM   
TheFerret

 

Posts: 64
Joined: 3/9/2021
Status: offline
Maybe I missed it in the manual previews - are there ways for the player to influence which depots/sectors are allocated more trucks?

(in reply to loki100)
Post #: 3
RE: Static Units - 3/23/2021 6:12:41 PM   
MechFO

 

Posts: 656
Joined: 6/1/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheFerret

Maybe I missed it in the manual previews - are there ways for the player to influence which depots/sectors are allocated more trucks?


With Depot priority.

(in reply to TheFerret)
Post #: 4
RE: Static Units - 3/23/2021 6:23:48 PM   
MechFO

 

Posts: 656
Joined: 6/1/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100

partly, there is also the rule that if you are within 3 hexes of a depot AND it has all the supply needed, you can use horse transport to access it rather than trucks. The 'AND' is rather important in that sentence.

The other complication is that depots have their own truck allocation, so that can help push supply when the local demand is low level.

More generally, no its not been much used in testing. The issue more often in #2 than #1 is you can have a good global situation (say for trucks) but still really struggle on sections of the map, so merely dumping a block of trucks back into the pool may not really help a sector where you don't have enough trucks to do all the things you want to do.


Presumably this refers to it having enough freight for the doubled supply cost? Actually this means you don't want to use static in far out places since those will be exactly where the doubled freight cost excarberates the supply issues.

While this is may sound premature, not having the game yet and all, but this points to something being off with the design, since now statics main use seems mostly as an AP bank for when you need to squeeze out a few extra point. In WITW it was useful to partially circumvent the crushing truck losses from Interdiction, but this doesn't apply here.

Maybe consider buffing static somehow. F.e. dropping the double freight cost, extend the free supply range or giving it drastically lowered attrition. Whatever is easier to code. It the end it should be an attractive proposition in some way.

(in reply to loki100)
Post #: 5
RE: Static Units - 3/23/2021 6:39:57 PM   
loki100


Posts: 10710
Joined: 10/20/2012
From: Utlima Thule
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheFerret

Maybe I missed it in the manual previews - are there ways for the player to influence which depots/sectors are allocated more trucks?


With Depot priority.


More railyard size (ok that is fixed) and HQ deployment, that increases capacity and pulls in more trucks.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO


quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100

partly, there is also the rule that if you are within 3 hexes of a depot AND it has all the supply needed, you can use horse transport to access it rather than trucks. The 'AND' is rather important in that sentence.

The other complication is that depots have their own truck allocation, so that can help push supply when the local demand is low level.

More generally, no its not been much used in testing. The issue more often in #2 than #1 is you can have a good global situation (say for trucks) but still really struggle on sections of the map, so merely dumping a block of trucks back into the pool may not really help a sector where you don't have enough trucks to do all the things you want to do.


Presumably this refers to it having enough freight for the doubled supply cost? Actually this means you don't want to use static in far out places since those will be exactly where the doubled freight cost excarberates the supply issues.

While this is may sound premature, not having the game yet and all, but this points to something being off with the design, since now statics main use seems mostly as an AP bank for when you need to squeeze out a few extra point. In WITW it was useful to partially circumvent the crushing truck losses from Interdiction, but this doesn't apply here.

Maybe consider buffing static somehow. F.e. dropping the double freight cost, extend the free supply range or giving it drastically lowered attrition. Whatever is easier to code. It the end it should be an attractive proposition in some way.



No it means what I said , if the depot can meet the need of all the units within 3 hexes and drawing off it then they use horse transport not their trucks. If they need to go further for supply then they have to revert to using their trucks.

I do think you are over-interpreting to be honest. Not sure where you are getting 'double freight cost' from but its a long manual and there are sections I only have a hazy memory of ever writing.

I'd say its very situational but actually unusual - just going by all the test games I've played or read in the last 5 years. I've used it if I really need AP now (but that is pretty unusual given what they are used for). I had one test game as the axis where I set a couple of Pzr divisions to static in Feb 42 simply to shake loose the trucks for a particular purpose and then reactivated them in April.

_____________________________


(in reply to MechFO)
Post #: 6
RE: Static Units - 3/23/2021 6:47:01 PM   
Hanny


Posts: 422
Joined: 7/5/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO


quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100

partly, there is also the rule that if you are within 3 hexes of a depot AND it has all the supply needed, you can use horse transport to access it rather than trucks. The 'AND' is rather important in that sentence.

The other complication is that depots have their own truck allocation, so that can help push supply when the local demand is low level.

More generally, no its not been much used in testing. The issue more often in #2 than #1 is you can have a good global situation (say for trucks) but still really struggle on sections of the map, so merely dumping a block of trucks back into the pool may not really help a sector where you don't have enough trucks to do all the things you want to do.


Presumably this refers to it having enough freight for the doubled supply cost? Actually this means you don't want to use static in far out places since those will be exactly where the doubled freight cost excarberates the supply issues.

While this is may sound premature, not having the game yet and all, but this points to something being off with the design, since now statics main use seems mostly as an AP bank for when you need to squeeze out a few extra point. In WITW it was useful to partially circumvent the crushing truck losses from Interdiction, but this doesn't apply here.

Maybe consider buffing static somehow. F.e. dropping the double freight cost, extend the free supply range or giving it drastically lowered attrition. Whatever is easier to code. It the end it should be an attractive proposition in some way.

Without a working example we just trying to understand the manuals explanation.

The wagons consume more freight allowance, I would think i this double freight cost at 3 hex, is the turn around at 60 miles at a forward lift half that of a truck with average speed of 3mph with no incline, and the trucks 22mph expected movement rate, normal circumstances, so I read it as it cost twice as much freight allowance to get it by a wagon over a truck.


_____________________________

To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.

(in reply to MechFO)
Post #: 7
RE: Static Units - 3/23/2021 6:52:22 PM   
HardLuckYetAgain


Posts: 6796
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100


quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheFerret

Maybe I missed it in the manual previews - are there ways for the player to influence which depots/sectors are allocated more trucks?


With Depot priority.


More railyard size (ok that is fixed) and HQ deployment, that increases capacity and pulls in more trucks.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO


quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100

partly, there is also the rule that if you are within 3 hexes of a depot AND it has all the supply needed, you can use horse transport to access it rather than trucks. The 'AND' is rather important in that sentence.

The other complication is that depots have their own truck allocation, so that can help push supply when the local demand is low level.

More generally, no its not been much used in testing. The issue more often in #2 than #1 is you can have a good global situation (say for trucks) but still really struggle on sections of the map, so merely dumping a block of trucks back into the pool may not really help a sector where you don't have enough trucks to do all the things you want to do.


Presumably this refers to it having enough freight for the doubled supply cost? Actually this means you don't want to use static in far out places since those will be exactly where the doubled freight cost excarberates the supply issues.

While this is may sound premature, not having the game yet and all, but this points to something being off with the design, since now statics main use seems mostly as an AP bank for when you need to squeeze out a few extra point. In WITW it was useful to partially circumvent the crushing truck losses from Interdiction, but this doesn't apply here.

Maybe consider buffing static somehow. F.e. dropping the double freight cost, extend the free supply range or giving it drastically lowered attrition. Whatever is easier to code. It the end it should be an attractive proposition in some way.



No it means what I said , if the depot can meet the need of all the units within 3 hexes and drawing off it then they use horse transport not their trucks. If they need to go further for supply then they have to revert to using their trucks.

I do think you are over-interpreting to be honest. Not sure where you are getting 'double freight cost' from but its a long manual and there are sections I only have a hazy memory of ever writing.

I'd say its very situational but actually unusual - just going by all the test games I've played or read in the last 5 years. I've used it if I really need AP now (but that is pretty unusual given what they are used for). I had one test game as the axis where I set a couple of Pzr divisions to static in Feb 42 simply to shake loose the trucks for a particular purpose and then reactivated them in April.


I don't have the rules on this laptop in front of me but the manual does state, from my recollection, that if drawing horse drawn supply that it will cost double for horse drawn supply.

(in reply to loki100)
Post #: 8
RE: Static Units - 3/23/2021 6:55:07 PM   
MechFO

 

Posts: 656
Joined: 6/1/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100


quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheFerret

Maybe I missed it in the manual previews - are there ways for the player to influence which depots/sectors are allocated more trucks?


With Depot priority.


More railyard size (ok that is fixed) and HQ deployment, that increases capacity and pulls in more trucks.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO


quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100

partly, there is also the rule that if you are within 3 hexes of a depot AND it has all the supply needed, you can use horse transport to access it rather than trucks. The 'AND' is rather important in that sentence.

The other complication is that depots have their own truck allocation, so that can help push supply when the local demand is low level.

More generally, no its not been much used in testing. The issue more often in #2 than #1 is you can have a good global situation (say for trucks) but still really struggle on sections of the map, so merely dumping a block of trucks back into the pool may not really help a sector where you don't have enough trucks to do all the things you want to do.


Presumably this refers to it having enough freight for the doubled supply cost? Actually this means you don't want to use static in far out places since those will be exactly where the doubled freight cost excarberates the supply issues.

While this is may sound premature, not having the game yet and all, but this points to something being off with the design, since now statics main use seems mostly as an AP bank for when you need to squeeze out a few extra point. In WITW it was useful to partially circumvent the crushing truck losses from Interdiction, but this doesn't apply here.

Maybe consider buffing static somehow. F.e. dropping the double freight cost, extend the free supply range or giving it drastically lowered attrition. Whatever is easier to code. It the end it should be an attractive proposition in some way.



No it means what I said , if the depot can meet the need of all the units within 3 hexes and drawing off it then they use horse transport not their trucks. If they need to go further for supply then they have to revert to using their trucks.

I do think you are over-interpreting to be honest. Not sure where you are getting 'double freight cost' from but its a long manual and there are sections I only have a hazy memory of ever writing.


25.5.5. Using Horses for Supply
Axis and Soviet units can receive supply and replacements
from a depot without having to use vehicles up to 3 hexes
from the depot through the use of animal drawn transport.
However, this will cost double the freight being delivered
as the animal drawn transport is assumed to be consuming
fodder (if the unit is isolated, it receives the delivery but
does not pay double freight).


Really not something you want to do in far away places.




< Message edited by MechFO -- 3/23/2021 6:58:04 PM >

(in reply to loki100)
Post #: 9
RE: Static Units - 3/23/2021 7:03:05 PM   
HardLuckYetAgain


Posts: 6796
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO

quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100


quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheFerret

Maybe I missed it in the manual previews - are there ways for the player to influence which depots/sectors are allocated more trucks?


With Depot priority.


More railyard size (ok that is fixed) and HQ deployment, that increases capacity and pulls in more trucks.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO


quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100

partly, there is also the rule that if you are within 3 hexes of a depot AND it has all the supply needed, you can use horse transport to access it rather than trucks. The 'AND' is rather important in that sentence.

The other complication is that depots have their own truck allocation, so that can help push supply when the local demand is low level.

More generally, no its not been much used in testing. The issue more often in #2 than #1 is you can have a good global situation (say for trucks) but still really struggle on sections of the map, so merely dumping a block of trucks back into the pool may not really help a sector where you don't have enough trucks to do all the things you want to do.


Presumably this refers to it having enough freight for the doubled supply cost? Actually this means you don't want to use static in far out places since those will be exactly where the doubled freight cost excarberates the supply issues.

While this is may sound premature, not having the game yet and all, but this points to something being off with the design, since now statics main use seems mostly as an AP bank for when you need to squeeze out a few extra point. In WITW it was useful to partially circumvent the crushing truck losses from Interdiction, but this doesn't apply here.

Maybe consider buffing static somehow. F.e. dropping the double freight cost, extend the free supply range or giving it drastically lowered attrition. Whatever is easier to code. It the end it should be an attractive proposition in some way.



No it means what I said , if the depot can meet the need of all the units within 3 hexes and drawing off it then they use horse transport not their trucks. If they need to go further for supply then they have to revert to using their trucks.

I do think you are over-interpreting to be honest. Not sure where you are getting 'double freight cost' from but its a long manual and there are sections I only have a hazy memory of ever writing.


25.5.5. Using Horses for Supply
Axis and Soviet units can receive supply and replacements
from a depot without having to use vehicles up to 3 hexes
from the depot through the use of animal drawn transport.
However, this will cost double the freight being delivered
as the animal drawn transport is assumed to be consuming
fodder (if the unit is isolated, it receives the delivery but
does not pay double freight).


Really not something you want to do in far away places.






MechFO Thank you!!!

I knew it was in the rules :)

(in reply to MechFO)
Post #: 10
RE: Static Units - 3/23/2021 7:13:25 PM   
loki100


Posts: 10710
Joined: 10/20/2012
From: Utlima Thule
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO

...
25.5.5. Using Horses for Supply
Axis and Soviet units can receive supply and replacements
from a depot without having to use vehicles up to 3 hexes
from the depot through the use of animal drawn transport.
However, this will cost double the freight being delivered
as the animal drawn transport is assumed to be consuming
fodder (if the unit is isolated, it receives the delivery but
does not pay double freight).


Really not something you want to do in far away places.





amazing what you can forget

but, back to the pt above, i think you are over-interpreting. The sort of sector where going static might work could be the Volkhov/Valdai in a normal gain, poss somewhere east of the Volkhov if you've taken Leningrad?

pretty much by definition, there is no active combat so supply consumption (& therefore replacement) is low. Add on you probably have the relevant HQs on a low supply priority - so yes it doubles and you've lost your in unit trucks but just how much freight is really being moved depot-unit in most circumstances?

_____________________________


(in reply to MechFO)
Post #: 11
RE: Static Units - 3/23/2021 7:22:53 PM   
Hanny


Posts: 422
Joined: 7/5/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100


quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO

...
25.5.5. Using Horses for Supply
Axis and Soviet units can receive supply and replacements
from a depot without having to use vehicles up to 3 hexes
from the depot through the use of animal drawn transport.
However, this will cost double the freight being delivered
as the animal drawn transport is assumed to be consuming
fodder (if the unit is isolated, it receives the delivery but
does not pay double freight).


Really not something you want to do in far away places.





amazing what you can forget

but, back to the pt above, i think you are over-interpreting. The sort of sector where going static might work could be the Volkhov/Valdai in a normal gain, poss somewhere east of the Volkhov if you've taken Leningrad?

pretty much by definition, there is no active combat so supply consumption (& therefore replacement) is low. Add on you probably have the relevant HQs on a low supply priority - so yes it doubles and you've lost your in unit trucks but just how much freight is really being moved depot-unit in most circumstances?

That would be every unit not over 100% of supply, each paying double freight to get it by wagon right? Also defenders can draw munition resupply in combat rounds is this freight also double cost?

< Message edited by Hanny -- 3/23/2021 7:24:58 PM >


_____________________________

To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.

(in reply to loki100)
Post #: 12
RE: Static Units - 3/23/2021 7:34:33 PM   
loki100


Posts: 10710
Joined: 10/20/2012
From: Utlima Thule
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hanny

...
That would be every unit not over 100% of supply, each paying double freight to get it by wagon right? Also defenders can draw munition resupply in combat rounds is this freight also double cost?


No.

You set the max supply demanded using the HQ priority, on these sort of sectors then that can be #1. So you may only be pulling 6-10 units of supply for a division per week outside of combat.

Now if it becomes an active front with lots of freight demand in terms of ammo and replacements then this rule will really come to hit you ... IF

but if I had that situation then I'd be finding the admin pts to get stuff mobile again

its like a lot in WiTE2, its situational, what is a great idea in one situation is pretty painful in another.

_____________________________


(in reply to Hanny)
Post #: 13
RE: Static Units - 3/23/2021 7:40:40 PM   
MechFO

 

Posts: 656
Joined: 6/1/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hanny

...
That would be every unit not over 100% of supply, each paying double freight to get it by wagon right? Also defenders can draw munition resupply in combat rounds is this freight also double cost?


No.

You set the max supply demanded using the HQ priority, on these sort of sectors then that can be #1. So you may only be pulling 6-10 units of supply for a division per week outside of combat.

Now if it becomes an active front with lots of freight demand in terms of ammo and replacements then this rule will really come to hit you ... IF

but if I had that situation then I'd be finding the admin pts to get stuff mobile again

its like a lot in WiTE2, its situational, what is a great idea in one situation is pretty painful in another.


Makes sense.

But back to main point, Static seems pretty useless currently with a huge negative and no substantial positive effect, which is a shame.

(in reply to loki100)
Post #: 14
RE: Static Units - 3/23/2021 7:52:16 PM   
HardLuckYetAgain


Posts: 6796
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO


quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hanny

...
That would be every unit not over 100% of supply, each paying double freight to get it by wagon right? Also defenders can draw munition resupply in combat rounds is this freight also double cost?


No.

You set the max supply demanded using the HQ priority, on these sort of sectors then that can be #1. So you may only be pulling 6-10 units of supply for a division per week outside of combat.

Now if it becomes an active front with lots of freight demand in terms of ammo and replacements then this rule will really come to hit you ... IF

but if I had that situation then I'd be finding the admin pts to get stuff mobile again

its like a lot in WiTE2, its situational, what is a great idea in one situation is pretty painful in another.


Makes sense.

But back to main point, Static seems pretty useless currently with a huge negative and no substantial positive effect, which is a shame.


Doubling the cost for transporting supply by beast of burden doesn't seem to be right to me. I thought the cost inhibitor is the range factor of 3 hexes. I had to deal with this in one of my AAR in Beta and I ended up just making a depot every darn hex on the rail line to feed the front line that was no more than 3 hexes from the rail depots. Probably overkill but ended up working out when they were attacked later.

(in reply to MechFO)
Post #: 15
RE: Static Units - 3/23/2021 8:08:01 PM   
Hanny


Posts: 422
Joined: 7/5/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hanny

...
That would be every unit not over 100% of supply, each paying double freight to get it by wagon right? Also defenders can draw munition resupply in combat rounds is this freight also double cost?


No.

You set the max supply demanded using the HQ priority, on these sort of sectors then that can be #1. So you may only be pulling 6-10 units of supply for a division per week outside of combat.

Now if it becomes an active front with lots of freight demand in terms of ammo and replacements then this rule will really come to hit you ... IF

but if I had that situation then I'd be finding the admin pts to get stuff mobile again

its like a lot in WiTE2, its situational, what is a great idea in one situation is pretty painful in another.


A unit gets supply from the depot by trucks at base cost but wagons *2, when and why do wagons become used instead of trucks and why not both used at range 3 hex?, actual demand still has to pay the freight cost, itís either base or times 2, so If truck stocks are greater than d mind itís base cost, does it follow that demand exceeding capacity you drop from truck to wagons, and pay twice freight cost, who pays this cost now? and what effect does this cost mean, is it to the depot that already had dropped to wagons because demand exceeds truck capacity, or does the freight delivered get halved, next if you are at 4 hex and wagons are the mode of supply, what do you get.
Munitions expended in combat phases and stock levels calling for resupply is not base *2 because itís implasable that the truck capacity is not enough to effect resupply I take it then.





< Message edited by Hanny -- 3/23/2021 8:09:40 PM >


_____________________________

To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.

(in reply to loki100)
Post #: 16
RE: Static Units - 3/23/2021 8:17:54 PM   
Hanny


Posts: 422
Joined: 7/5/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain


quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO


quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hanny

...
That would be every unit not over 100% of supply, each paying double freight to get it by wagon right? Also defenders can draw munition resupply in combat rounds is this freight also double cost?


No.

You set the max supply demanded using the HQ priority, on these sort of sectors then that can be #1. So you may only be pulling 6-10 units of supply for a division per week outside of combat.

Now if it becomes an active front with lots of freight demand in terms of ammo and replacements then this rule will really come to hit you ... IF

but if I had that situation then I'd be finding the admin pts to get stuff mobile again

its like a lot in WiTE2, its situational, what is a great idea in one situation is pretty painful in another.


Makes sense.

But back to main point, Static seems pretty useless currently with a huge negative and no substantial positive effect, which is a shame.


Doubling the cost for transporting supply by beast of burden doesn't seem to be right to me. I thought the cost inhibitor is the range factor of 3 hexes. I had to deal with this in one of my AAR in Beta and I ended up just making a depot every darn hex on the rail line to feed the front line that was no more than 3 hexes from the rail depots. Probably overkill but ended up working out when they were attacked later.


Itís a game abstraction, both sides did it different, but the game needs one way for both, German Army had lots of trucks at unit level to go get supplyís from depots each day, low numbers of trucks at Depots, the 3 Grosstruppen Regiments of Army and 3 for LW, SU had low truck numbers at unit level and high levels at Corps Depots to move supply to units from the depot.It would make sense for muscle logistics to be a fraction of engine logistics, math wise half is wrong but hey ho, by Dec 41 Germany by truck moved 120 million tons to 6 million tons by muscle.


_____________________________

To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)
Post #: 17
RE: Static Units - 3/23/2021 8:29:56 PM   
Hanny


Posts: 422
Joined: 7/5/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO


quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hanny

...
That would be every unit not over 100% of supply, each paying double freight to get it by wagon right? Also defenders can draw munition resupply in combat rounds is this freight also double cost?


No.

You set the max supply demanded using the HQ priority, on these sort of sectors then that can be #1. So you may only be pulling 6-10 units of supply for a division per week outside of combat.

Now if it becomes an active front with lots of freight demand in terms of ammo and replacements then this rule will really come to hit you ... IF

but if I had that situation then I'd be finding the admin pts to get stuff mobile again

its like a lot in WiTE2, its situational, what is a great idea in one situation is pretty painful in another.


Makes sense.

But back to main point, Static seems pretty useless currently with a huge negative and no substantial positive effect, which is a shame.

Depends, it was done get more trucks for Blau, as Germany lacked them, now if the game is using truck numbers from Askey, he has made the 41 German Army the most motorised Army in Ww2, instead of the 45 USA with 1MTV per 4.2 persons, as he makes forward lift capacity a product of trucks plus not trucks, so motercycle side cars, libel wagons field bakery,field hospitals, staff cars busses for RAD workers etc are all added to forward lift, in his book the 41 Army is 1 MTV to 3 person or so, and has a greater forward lift than existed.

So in game itís situational as to the number of trucks and their freight capacity, if you have too many trucks your not going to need to make units static, if you donít have enough you need to make more static, and then move to base*2 freight cost.


_____________________________

To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.

(in reply to MechFO)
Post #: 18
RE: Static Units - 3/23/2021 8:47:19 PM   
RedLancer


Posts: 4312
Joined: 11/16/2005
From: UK
Status: offline
Hanny

...I've had a long day at work so I'm not too bright and can't answer your post #16 as I'm struggling to follow what you are asking. Sorry.

With regard to your #17 post I agree it is an abstraction. In a perfect world we would have different systems for each side and change things by year but it becomes too complex to balance and compute. In the last week we have refined the map drawing code to reduce memory usage (again) and so close to release. We are at the limit of the balance of the average player's (none of our players are average but I hope you get what I am saying) processing power and patience.

The design is a balance to reflect the use of horses and their cost (noting the stats you have posted elsewhere on how much horses actually eat - I know, I own a couple) and allow a reduction in truck usage if depots are well placed. I'm pretty sure truck usage does cost fuel so you have to factor that saving back in.

With generic trucks the pursuit of perfect logistic maths is debatable as are any comparison to actual truck numbers (and support squads to fill in missing manpower)- what we are trying to do is give a better flavour to the constraints without making the game logistic centric.

_____________________________

John
WitE2 Asst Producer
WitE & WitW Dev

(in reply to Hanny)
Post #: 19
RE: Static Units - 3/24/2021 9:56:45 AM   
loki100


Posts: 10710
Joined: 10/20/2012
From: Utlima Thule
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO

...

Makes sense.

But back to main point, Static seems pretty useless currently with a huge negative and no substantial positive effect, which is a shame.


well, my reading is there are 4 main situational variants:

a) low intensity combat, poor supply
b) high intensity combat, poor supply (going to be tricky but is feasible)
c) low intensity combat, good supply
d) high intensity combat, good supply

If you put the 3 hex rule (with its implications) over that, you get some feel for where placing units to static might be worth it if you either want to release the trucks or really need a sudden dump of admin pts.

Clearly, you wouldn't by choice be using static mode in b or d?. C would be a huge gamble but might work in the wider context of a given game, d is clearly not a good idea.

So, in practice, the various rules come together to suggest use the static mode in situation a if you need the secondary bonus. If you never need that bonus then don't bother anywhere.

Both sides really struggle for admin pts across 1941 but that is meaningless here as you can't set to static during 1941. The Soviets steadily gain AP dumps from late 41 throughout 42. By the summer you usually have all you really need. Equally by the end of the first winter, the German AP demand starts to drop. You have the bulk of your depot system in place, you probably aren't going to be expanding many airfields, you still have some need to engage in leader swaps.

So its there as a tool, but yes, its not likely to be a major part of gameplay. To be honest, I never used it in WiTE1 that much, especially once I understood the trade-offs and the way you also needed a certain level of in-hex fortifications etc.

< Message edited by loki100 -- 3/24/2021 10:03:05 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to MechFO)
Post #: 20
RE: Static Units - 3/24/2021 12:38:32 PM   
guctony


Posts: 669
Joined: 6/27/2009
Status: offline
I am assuming Static is a good trade of for German Player who wants to go defensive early in 1941 winter. Or for at least for the creation of fall back defensive line in 1941 winter. Germany doesn't have supply shortage. It will lack Trucks in the short term and fuel in the long run. Any method to save Trucks and Fuel especially in first winter is welcomed I guess. This rule also push German player to be more careful and forward planning. in terms of where to create its winter 1941 defense line for the north and central Army groups 1942-43 general defense line. If German player keep north and center line static with well established depot line it might save up 1.000.000 trucks in 2 years. That one 1 million truck corresponds to at least x4 fuel consumption. Apart from 10% fort build bonus which can give you level 4 forts in 1943 summer. 10% bonus is accelerating Fort buildup in every 11 turns 100% from level 1 to 2 and 15 to 25 turns from level 3 to 4 with full commitment. Sure this calculation depends on Soviet player activity in north for 1942 and 43 but If he want to disrupt this build up he has to divert his/her forces from south. even if you have level 4 forts every 3 hexes and have some river coverage you can delay soviet advance 3 to 6 months when they decide to engage northern sector.

Yes I know blizzard is going to disrupt ferry and cost of ferry. But Horse carts are infinite but Truck and Fuel is finite. And all above is related to my WITE experience so the end result can be very different in WITE2. But with my latest computer opponent with 120 morale bonus still in 1943 summer I had 4 million plus Trucks by this way. Now this was quite critical for me as I like use infantry motorization regularly. But I guess WITE2 operational Road movement function will make this less necessary. Of all the new functions in WITE2 the operational movement is my most favorite. You can create crazy amount of operational options with this method. This will probably enable German Fire Brigade tactics with Panzer units and corps. Like they did in real life. Now it might be possible to deal with one breach at a time with soviet Spearheads if Soviets focus on enveloping Germans in shorter distance spearheads. Like you reach soviet Breach engage and counter attack not seal it but disrupt enough to slow down, Disengage and re-locate panzer corp to next breach in the next turn start. As you keep your CPP and some MP you might still able to counter attack. In WITE that doesn't work that well as you get a lot of fatigue and operational losses once you relocate mobile units. This operational movement will become very helpfull if we get a Cidatel scenario. As my usual tactic is to bring additional Panzer units to make breach possible in southern sector.

As a Side note implementing operational movement will change WITW play out completely.



_____________________________

"Unless a nation's life faces peril, war is murder."
"Sovereignty is not given, it is taken."
"After having lost their lives on this land they have become our sons as well."
Mustafa Kemal

(in reply to loki100)
Post #: 21
RE: Static Units - 3/24/2021 1:14:17 PM   
Hanny


Posts: 422
Joined: 7/5/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: RedLancer

Hanny

...I've had a long day at work so I'm not too bright and can't answer your post #16 as I'm struggling to follow what you are asking. Sorry.

With regard to your #17 post I agree it is an abstraction. In a perfect world we would have different systems for each side and change things by year but it becomes too complex to balance and compute. In the last week we have refined the map drawing code to reduce memory usage (again) and so close to release. We are at the limit of the balance of the average player's (none of our players are average but I hope you get what I am saying) processing power and patience.

The design is a balance to reflect the use of horses and their cost (noting the stats you have posted elsewhere on how much horses actually eat - I know, I own a couple) and allow a reduction in truck usage if depots are well placed. I'm pretty sure truck usage does cost fuel so you have to factor that saving back in.

With generic trucks the pursuit of perfect logistic maths is debatable as are any comparison to actual truck numbers (and support squads to fill in missing manpower)- what we are trying to do is give a better flavour to the constraints without making the game logistic centric.

I will tray again as nothing is practical in war unless it is logistical feasible to supply it.

We have the Qm reports for end of year, 120 million tons by truck moved, we have truck inventory numbers, so half a years truck freight moved per day, is 120 m tons/ 182 days, at an average number of trucks of 195k a month, is 3.3 tons a day a truck, which is well below itís theoretical capacity of 220 mph to deliver its cargo weight, which is x tons to 220 miles one round trip, and 10 round trips of 22 miles, of x times 10, so we know the average truck lift was a long one. By the same token no one is going to send a wagon of on a 60 mile round trip unless it has no other choice, itís much more likely they were 1 day trips.

Truck single round trip consumes its fuel tank but does not reduce freight carried, a wagon otoh has to lose the 10lbs a day grain per horse, plus fodder, fodder in volume is greater than its weight cost for transportation, a bale of straw is bulky beyond its weight, so a wagon losses freight forward lift capacity as it consumes some of its carrying capacity in delivering its load, in game manual this is costed as double freight cost, but no one has been able to explain what that means, it uses. 3 hex ranges, so we know itís a 60 mile round trip, which is a three day event for the wagon, so x number of horses times x lbs of grain times 3 is lost freight capacity as the game details fodder as the cause of the double freight loss, the difference between truck forward lift freight capacity, and wagon is massive, not x2 cost for wagon.So, we know the logistics in the East was operating near the max end of capacity, hence the logistical problems and only by taking trucks from 2/3 of the Army could it get operational movement capacity for 42.

Thematicly the game abstraction works as long as the player faces the same in game issues, regardless of how itís calculated, if no one needs to make static units as Germany then clearly the abstraction is not working.

< Message edited by Hanny -- 3/24/2021 2:01:16 PM >


_____________________________

To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.

(in reply to RedLancer)
Post #: 22
RE: Static Units - 3/24/2021 1:58:15 PM   
Sammy5IsAlive

 

Posts: 483
Joined: 8/4/2014
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100

quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO

...

Makes sense.

But back to main point, Static seems pretty useless currently with a huge negative and no substantial positive effect, which is a shame.


well, my reading is there are 4 main situational variants:

a) low intensity combat, poor supply
b) high intensity combat, poor supply (going to be tricky but is feasible)
c) low intensity combat, good supply
d) high intensity combat, good supply

If you put the 3 hex rule (with its implications) over that, you get some feel for where placing units to static might be worth it if you either want to release the trucks or really need a sudden dump of admin pts.

Clearly, you wouldn't by choice be using static mode in b or d?. C would be a huge gamble but might work in the wider context of a given game, d is clearly not a good idea.

So, in practice, the various rules come together to suggest use the static mode in situation a if you need the secondary bonus. If you never need that bonus then don't bother anywhere.

Both sides really struggle for admin pts across 1941 but that is meaningless here as you can't set to static during 1941. The Soviets steadily gain AP dumps from late 41 throughout 42. By the summer you usually have all you really need. Equally by the end of the first winter, the German AP demand starts to drop. You have the bulk of your depot system in place, you probably aren't going to be expanding many airfields, you still have some need to engage in leader swaps.

So its there as a tool, but yes, its not likely to be a major part of gameplay. To be honest, I never used it in WiTE1 that much, especially once I understood the trade-offs and the way you also needed a certain level of in-hex fortifications etc.


Have many players been using temporary motorization in testing? I remember either you or GR (can't remember which way round it was) having that hardcore NZ division motorized to good effect in WITW. Given that motorization has a heavy short term cost in APs and trucks and using static status releases both of these maybe that is one good use for it.

(in reply to loki100)
Post #: 23
RE: Static Units - 3/24/2021 2:49:00 PM   
loki100


Posts: 10710
Joined: 10/20/2012
From: Utlima Thule
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sammy5IsAlive


quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100

quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO

...

Makes sense.

But back to main point, Static seems pretty useless currently with a huge negative and no substantial positive effect, which is a shame.


well, my reading is there are 4 main situational variants:

a) low intensity combat, poor supply
b) high intensity combat, poor supply (going to be tricky but is feasible)
c) low intensity combat, good supply
d) high intensity combat, good supply

If you put the 3 hex rule (with its implications) over that, you get some feel for where placing units to static might be worth it if you either want to release the trucks or really need a sudden dump of admin pts.

Clearly, you wouldn't by choice be using static mode in b or d?. C would be a huge gamble but might work in the wider context of a given game, d is clearly not a good idea.

So, in practice, the various rules come together to suggest use the static mode in situation a if you need the secondary bonus. If you never need that bonus then don't bother anywhere.

Both sides really struggle for admin pts across 1941 but that is meaningless here as you can't set to static during 1941. The Soviets steadily gain AP dumps from late 41 throughout 42. By the summer you usually have all you really need. Equally by the end of the first winter, the German AP demand starts to drop. You have the bulk of your depot system in place, you probably aren't going to be expanding many airfields, you still have some need to engage in leader swaps.

So its there as a tool, but yes, its not likely to be a major part of gameplay. To be honest, I never used it in WiTE1 that much, especially once I understood the trade-offs and the way you also needed a certain level of in-hex fortifications etc.


Have many players been using temporary motorization in testing? I remember either you or GR (can't remember which way round it was) having that hardcore NZ division motorized to good effect in WITW. Given that motorization has a heavy short term cost in APs and trucks and using static status releases both of these maybe that is one good use for it.



I've done a little but think its less value than in WiTW. Both sides really have more demands on their trucks than in WiTW whereas I'd now say it should be standard play for the Allies in WiTW to have a couple of divisions permanantly motorised and maybe another on/off. You can afford the truck/ap hit and the degree of strategic uncertainty you generate is substantial.

Its also a bit situational, usually by late 41 the Soviets should be truck rich but we all know that is a bit of an illusion simply as you are at a low point in army size. And the reality of late 41 is do the Soviets gain from an extra motorised RD here or there? I do think its worth the Soviets doing this in Vistula-Berlin (or the equivalent in a campaign) as you are not too badly off for trucks and again it can add a nice degree of uncertainty into axis decision making.

_____________________________


(in reply to Sammy5IsAlive)
Post #: 24
RE: Static Units - 3/24/2021 3:07:54 PM   
RedLancer


Posts: 4312
Joined: 11/16/2005
From: UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Hanny


I will tray again as nothing is practical in war unless it is logistical feasible to supply it.

We have the Qm reports for end of year, 120 million tons by truck moved, we have truck inventory numbers, so half a years truck freight moved per day, is 120 m tons/ 182 days, at an average number of trucks of 195k a month, is 3.3 tons a day a truck, which is well below itís theoretical capacity of 220 mph to deliver its cargo weight, which is x tons to 220 miles one round trip, and 10 round trips of 22 miles, of x times 10, so we know the average truck lift was a long one. By the same token no one is going to send a wagon of on a 60 mile round trip unless it has no other choice, itís much more likely they were 1 day trips.

Truck single round trip consumes its fuel tank but does not reduce freight carried, a wagon otoh has to lose the 10lbs a day grain per horse, plus fodder, fodder in volume is greater than its weight cost for transportation, a bale of straw is bulky beyond its weight, so a wagon losses freight forward lift capacity as it consumes some of its carrying capacity in delivering its load, in game manual this is costed as double freight cost, but no one has been able to explain what that means, it uses. 3 hex ranges, so we know itís a 60 mile round trip, which is a three day event for the wagon, so x number of horses times x lbs of grain times 3 is lost freight capacity as the game details fodder as the cause of the double freight loss, the difference between truck forward lift freight capacity, and wagon is massive, not x2 cost for wagon.So, we know the logistics in the East was operating near the max end of capacity, hence the logistical problems and only by taking trucks from 2/3 of the Army could it get operational movement capacity for 42.

Thematicly the game abstraction works as long as the player faces the same in game issues, regardless of how itís calculated, if no one needs to make static units as Germany then clearly the abstraction is not working.



whilst your data and calculations all make sense trying to map them to the game at the detail you present is futile. I just checked the ground elements in the game data and didn't find tents, typewriters or toilet rolls and certainly no herd of horses. The game doesn't track the number of horses nor the size of their wagons so comparing your data to the game is impossible. Would it help if I told you they are very hungry falabellas?

The system isn't a perfect reflection of logistics. I know this all too well in my day job when I have to turn spurious days of supply metrics into what that means as a list of specifically codified items by item count. In WW2 trucks did short journeys too and perhaps horses did go a bit further than three equivalent hexes.

< Message edited by RedLancer -- 3/24/2021 3:09:55 PM >


_____________________________

John
WitE2 Asst Producer
WitE & WitW Dev

(in reply to Hanny)
Post #: 25
RE: Static Units - 3/24/2021 4:03:09 PM   
MechFO

 

Posts: 656
Joined: 6/1/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100

quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO

...

Makes sense.

But back to main point, Static seems pretty useless currently with a huge negative and no substantial positive effect, which is a shame.


well, my reading is there are 4 main situational variants:

a) low intensity combat, poor supply
b) high intensity combat, poor supply (going to be tricky but is feasible)
c) low intensity combat, good supply
d) high intensity combat, good supply

If you put the 3 hex rule (with its implications) over that, you get some feel for where placing units to static might be worth it if you either want to release the trucks or really need a sudden dump of admin pts.

Clearly, you wouldn't by choice be using static mode in b or d?. C would be a huge gamble but might work in the wider context of a given game, d is clearly not a good idea.


Maybe I'm being obtuse, but nothing in the manual says that static has any supply advantages, except maybe saving on some unit fuel need and a bit lower vehicle attrition. Only case I see where it may be ok is c, because the doubled freight cost can be coped with, but even there, what's the upside? According to the manual, all units profit from the 3 hex rule, not only static ones.

Either way, I'll find out in the next few days


quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100
So its there as a tool, but yes, its not likely to be a major part of gameplay. To be honest, I never used it in WiTE1 that much, especially once I understood the trade-offs and the way you also needed a certain level of in-hex fortifications etc.


I was a fan in WITE but there only static units benefited from the 3 hex rule and every rail hex counted as a supply source, making it a much more flexible system.

(in reply to loki100)
Post #: 26
RE: Static Units - 3/24/2021 4:09:09 PM   
Hanny


Posts: 422
Joined: 7/5/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: RedLancer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hanny


I will tray again as nothing is practical in war unless it is logistical feasible to supply it.

We have the Qm reports for end of year, 120 million tons by truck moved, we have truck inventory numbers, so half a years truck freight moved per day, is 120 m tons/ 182 days, at an average number of trucks of 195k a month, is 3.3 tons a day a truck, which is well below itís theoretical capacity of 220 mph to deliver its cargo weight, which is x tons to 220 miles one round trip, and 10 round trips of 22 miles, of x times 10, so we know the average truck lift was a long one. By the same token no one is going to send a wagon of on a 60 mile round trip unless it has no other choice, itís much more likely they were 1 day trips.

Truck single round trip consumes its fuel tank but does not reduce freight carried, a wagon otoh has to lose the 10lbs a day grain per horse, plus fodder, fodder in volume is greater than its weight cost for transportation, a bale of straw is bulky beyond its weight, so a wagon losses freight forward lift capacity as it consumes some of its carrying capacity in delivering its load, in game manual this is costed as double freight cost, but no one has been able to explain what that means, it uses. 3 hex ranges, so we know itís a 60 mile round trip, which is a three day event for the wagon, so x number of horses times x lbs of grain times 3 is lost freight capacity as the game details fodder as the cause of the double freight loss, the difference between truck forward lift freight capacity, and wagon is massive, not x2 cost for wagon.So, we know the logistics in the East was operating near the max end of capacity, hence the logistical problems and only by taking trucks from 2/3 of the Army could it get operational movement capacity for 42.

Thematicly the game abstraction works as long as the player faces the same in game issues, regardless of how itís calculated, if no one needs to make static units as Germany then clearly the abstraction is not working.



whilst your data and calculations all make sense trying to map them to the game at the detail you present is futile. I just checked the ground elements in the game data and didn't find tents, typewriters or toilet rolls and certainly no herd of horses. The game doesn't track the number of horses nor the size of their wagons so comparing your data to the game is impossible. Would it help if I told you they are very hungry falabellas?

The system isn't a perfect reflection of logistics. I know this all too well in my day job when I have to turn spurious days of supply metrics into what that means as a list of specifically codified items by item count. In WW2 trucks did short journeys too and perhaps horses did go a bit further than three equivalent hexes.

All I did was show how we know trucks were operating at the extreme end of capacity, and why the manual is wrong to explain wagons are double freight cost from the effects of fodder, along with showing how a truck does in hours what a wagon takes days to do.

The game manual tells us each vehicle is a generic 2.5 tons freight for supply, which times numbers of assets gives you max load out, restricted by tonnage allowed at depot level,it tells us the wagon is double cost of freight, and is outside of the depot vehicle calculation, so what would help is if anyone knew what it means, is it that wagons are used from all units within 3 hexes of a depot and are costing freight capacity at double cost for the amount they request?, and base cost by truck for all distances from depots?.So a player could better of being 4 hexes from a depot with units and avoid paying double freight cost, rather than 3 and paying double, as trucks donít pay double cost and may still get all you need to 4 hexes from depot.

So if freight demand is 5 per unit, and 4 units are 3 hexes from depot, the freight cost by wagon is double, when the same units at 4 hex cost base 5, difference being 40 and 20 demand and freight cost, so itís the extra freight cost in mps of the extra hex that make the player aware of which option to take to max out his freight problems if he has them by position of units relative to depots.



< Message edited by Hanny -- 3/24/2021 4:19:47 PM >


_____________________________

To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.

(in reply to RedLancer)
Post #: 27
RE: Static Units - 3/24/2021 4:37:13 PM   
loki100


Posts: 10710
Joined: 10/20/2012
From: Utlima Thule
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO

...

Maybe I'm being obtuse, but nothing in the manual says that static has any supply advantages, except maybe saving on some unit fuel need and a bit lower vehicle attrition. Only case I see where it may be ok is c, because the doubled freight cost can be coped with, but even there, what's the upside? According to the manual, all units profit from the 3 hex rule, not only static ones.

Either way, I'll find out in the next few days

...


not being obtuse its a fair question. Crudely a typical unit on a quiet sector retains its own truck allocation and benefits (if it can) from the 3 hex rule), a static unit has shed its own trucks so for resupply it either needs the 3 hex rule or to draw off the depot truck allocation.

but to put it in context, a typical ID/RD has a truck need of around 30-40 trucks, so there is not a lot of saving till you start putting pzr divisions or tank corps onto static.

I've never used the option in testing WiTE2 which may say something about (a) my playstyle (not often all that precise) or (b) this is a tool for a very specific purpose - and agree it'll be harder to meet that test than in #1 where any railway hex was the key

_____________________________


(in reply to MechFO)
Post #: 28
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East 2 >> Static Units 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

0.414