HQ in infinite supply isolated

[worg64]

A thing to consider is the HQ with infinite supply that are isolated.

I run into this problem in the deserts of irak where the english HQ starting in Basra run around for ever and always at supply 5 regardless of me having cut all its way to the sea. It wasnt untill I could box it in I actually could kill it off.

This also happends when a advance get encircled and cut of but still the HQ provide supply to those units in the pocket.

I would suggest here that a HQ that are isolated dropped its supply value by one per turn, this would easily solve this problem.

[John DiFool the 2nd]

Long term issue and suggestion that's been talked to death here. The designer has stuck to his gun on this, for good or bad.

[worg64]

thanks for the input John DiFool the 2nd, I did not know that.

I do hope the game designers will change their mind tho

[lettowvorbeck]

Crazy things occur even without HQ help. I just had an Italian unit squeeze between my Austrian lines. Now he's 75 miles in my rear, GAINING supply level and reinforcements while being totally surrounded. Doesn't make a lick of sense.

[Hubert Cater]

If the Italian unit has gained control of a port, town or city then it would be in supply and would be able to reinforce, is this not the case?

[lettowvorbeck]

Yes, it was a town and I know the game system gives them all 5 supply levels, friendly or not. But it doesn't make sense (to me, anyway) to receive military supplies and reinforcements in an isolated enemy town. You can seize food from enemy towns, but I just don't see the rationalization of being able to obtain reinforcements, which would be a physical impossibility. I know that's just how the game system works and has been debated on the boards.

[Bill101]

Another way to look at it is that every force has fluctuating levels of effectiveness in real life, and if rested and not in action most forces will attain a higher front-line strength. Thus the reinforcement represents the ability to rest and regain strength.

However, the unit's morale and readiness won't suddenly rocket up to high levels on it being reinforced, and these are major factors on the unit's effectiveness in action.

Additionally, without a HQ they should also be pretty much dead meat if attacked by a good force.

If they were to leave that resource and move elsewhere then their supply will decrease again, making them even more susceptible to destruction. Couple in the fact that any land unit destroyed with a supply value of less than 5 cannot be cheaply rebuilt, too many rash attacks like this may actually cost more for the perpetrator than for the victim.

[worg64]

Well I fully agree with a normal unit, that situation is very much as you describe it Bill.

But I really dislike a isolated enemy HQ running around in circles behind my lines and creating havoc because that HQ will always as the game works now be supply5 and able to run around.

It gets specially bad if that HQ also has the company of corps, they all get isolated but can do a lot of damage beause of that HQ that keep providing them with supply.

It would work much better if a HQ that got isolated lost is minimum supply after a turn and started to decline in supply untill in got into supply again.

That said I know you have talked about this a lot according to the forums so I assume you find it the easiest way to handle it at the moment by not having isolation affect supply to HQ.

But if you could come up with a "easy" way to deal with this, it would be great!

At least thats what I think.

[crispy131313]

I don't think this should be a big issue. If there is a rogue HQ behind your enemy lines then destory it. It's survival and the "mayhem?" it creats is more a flaw of the defending player than the game mechancis itself.

[worg64]

It all depends on where and how, the english HQ landing at Basra and running amok among the desert oasis is just not that easy to deal with.

I am sure their is many similiar situations as well, especially in the WW2 campaign where the units are more mobile.

Worst case scenario tho is not the lone HQ but a HQ with some corps tagging along.

And it is not really so much about deal with them as it is very unrealistic that a isolated HQ can provide supply for itself and accompaning corps deep behind enemy lines.

[crispy131313]

Supplies could be airlifted in (e.g. Stalingrad, Chindits), airdropped (e.g. Market, Budapest) or delivered by clandestine naval operations (eg Subs). Patrols (eg. LRDG, Fernkampftrupps) could simply exfiltrate back to their own lines to replenish, then return on patrol. In the case of the Russian front, partisan groups would often find large enough gaps in the front to simply walk (ride) over to friendly lines and resupply.

On a map of tiles it is hard to recreate unconventional supply lines, but it is not impossible.

[worg64]

Yes maybe in WW2 to some extent put not even the massive airlifts to Stalingrad was enough to keep the 6th army supplied and that demanded huge amount of air commitment and air losses, as for the chine front those was mainly infantry corps and had little or no motorisation and heavy equipment and lived mostly on rice and what small else they could scrap together.

In WW1 to keep a isolated HQ and some corps supplied behind enemy line would be impossible since they dont have air supply and patrolls would never ever be able to transport for so many men a HQ with corps is, in terms of needed ammo, food and water alone and as for petrol and spare parts they wouldnt be able to contribute anything at all.

I dont have the numbers in my head now but look it up at the internet the amount of supply a ordinary sized corp demands and you will see it is impossible.

Partisans can to a much higher degree live on forage because they as well as the chinese dont have motorisation and heavy equipment.