Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Formation Supply Edit Problem

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III >> Scenario Design >> Formation Supply Edit Problem Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Formation Supply Edit Problem - 11/13/2006 10:39:08 PM   
rhinobones

 

Posts: 1540
Joined: 2/17/2002
Status: offline 		Having a problem with getting formations in a TOAW III scenario to accept changes to the Formation Supply level. There are about 60 formations in this scenario. Most of the Formations will accept the change but about a dozen of them completely disregard the Formation Supply change. It’s like a switch has been thrown that disables this edit for a few selected formations.

I originally noticed this problem when the scenario was built in ACOW and so it has been carried over to the TOAW III conversion. I have tried making the change using both the pull down menus and from the formation equipment editor screen.

Any ideas on how to work around this problem?

Regards, RhinoBones
Post #: 1
RE: Formation Supply Edit Problem - 11/13/2006 10:48:55 PM   
ColinWright

 

Posts: 2604
Joined: 10/13/2005
Status: offline 		Are you using supply squads?

_____________________________

I am not Charlie Hebdo

(in reply to rhinobones)
Post #: 2
RE: Formation Supply Edit Problem - 11/14/2006 3:03:29 AM   
rhinobones

 

Posts: 1540
Joined: 2/17/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ColinWright
Are you using supply squads?


Think you may have troubleshot this problem in record time.

Yes, all formations contain a HQ that has supply squads. However, the formations giving me problems each have three HQs (one Army level, two Corps level) and all three of the HQs have supply squads. I’ll have to experiment a bit to see if the extra supply squads are causing a conflict.

Regards, RhinoBones

(in reply to ColinWright)
Post #: 3
RE: Formation Supply Edit Problem - 11/14/2006 1:01:32 PM   
golden delicious


Posts: 5575
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: London, Surrey, United Kingdom
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: rhinobones

[Yes, all formations contain a HQ that has supply squads. However, the formations giving me problems each have three HQs (one Army level, two Corps level) and all three of the HQs have supply squads. I’ll have to experiment a bit to see if the extra supply squads are causing a conflict.


Yeah. As I recall, the formation will use the highest supply level possible, and discard the other two. Multiple HQs is generally to be avoided unless a formation had a redundant HQ. You can move the other HQs to separate formations- if they still co-operate, they will give the same supply boost.

_____________________________

"What did you read at university?"
"War Studies"
"War? Huh. What is it good for?"
"Absolutely nothing."

(in reply to rhinobones)
Post #: 4
RE: Formation Supply Edit Problem - 11/14/2006 10:23:26 PM   
rhinobones

 

Posts: 1540
Joined: 2/17/2002
Status: offline 		I removed the offending support squads and now all is happy in Scenarioland. Appreciate the insight.

quote:

ORIGINAL: golden delicious
Multiple HQs is generally to be avoided unless a formation had a redundant HQ. You can move the other HQs to separate formations- if they still co-operate, they will give the same supply boost.

This is the 1937 scenario and multiple HQs have not presented any problems other than the Formation Supply. They seem to function well enough since they are mostly intended to be the repositories of the Corps artillery and Motor T. All Formations and Units are deployed using events, and since the event structure is so complex I hesitate to add new Formations. As is the Formations always break down into the maximum 32 individual units and that seems to be about the right population for the number of HQs. Don’t want to introduce an anomaly.

Regards RhinoBones

(in reply to golden delicious)
Post #: 5
RE: Formation Supply Edit Problem - 11/14/2006 11:48:35 PM   
ColinWright

 

Posts: 2604
Joined: 10/13/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: rhinobones

I removed the offending support squads and now all is happy in Scenarioland. Appreciate the insight.

quote:

ORIGINAL: golden delicious
Multiple HQs is generally to be avoided unless a formation had a redundant HQ. You can move the other HQs to separate formations- if they still co-operate, they will give the same supply boost.

This is the 1937 scenario and multiple HQs have not presented any problems other than the Formation Supply. They seem to function well enough since they are mostly intended to be the repositories of the Corps artillery and Motor T. All Formations and Units are deployed using events, and since the event structure is so complex I hesitate to add new Formations. As is the Formations always break down into the maximum 32 individual units and that seems to be about the right population for the number of HQs. Don’t want to introduce an anomaly.

Regards RhinoBones



The event bugaboo isn't all that ferocious once you get used to dealing with it. Everything just gets moved one or two slots. I've been dealing with it for years in Seelowe. Combing through a five hundred-event list and firmly putting everything back where it should be takes about fifteen minutes.

Of course, one should make sure the news line for each event suggests what it orignally referred to. for example, if event 253 calls for disbanding the 2/4 Wombatshires, it makes life a lot easier if the event is tagged with 'debug 2/4 Wombats disband.' Then if you make changes, event 253 now calling for disbanding the 3rd Destroyer Flotilla kind of stands out.

_____________________________

I am not Charlie Hebdo

(in reply to rhinobones)
Post #: 6
RE: Formation Supply Edit Problem - 11/15/2006 12:45:48 AM   
Telumar


Posts: 2236
Joined: 1/3/2006
From: niflheim
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: golden delicious


quote:

ORIGINAL: rhinobones

[Yes, all formations contain a HQ that has supply squads. However, the formations giving me problems each have three HQs (one Army level, two Corps level) and all three of the HQs have supply squads. I’ll have to experiment a bit to see if the extra supply squads are causing a conflict.


Yeah. As I recall, the formation will use the highest supply level possible, and discard the other two. Multiple HQs is generally to be avoided unless a formation had a redundant HQ. You can move the other HQs to separate formations- if they still co-operate, they will give the same supply boost.


I have seen a scenario where an US armour division, being represented by battalions in a division, has also CCA, CCB and CCR brigade sized HQs assigned in addition to the divisional headquarter - that makes sense. I believe it was one of the Sicily scenarios, can't recall which. And it was back in COW.

_____________________________

http://thetoawbeachhead.wordpress.com

(in reply to golden delicious)
Post #: 7
RE: Formation Supply Edit Problem - 11/15/2006 11:38:14 AM   
golden delicious


Posts: 5575
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: London, Surrey, United Kingdom
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Telumar

I have seen a scenario where an US armour division, being represented by battalions in a division, has also CCA, CCB and CCR brigade sized HQs assigned in addition to the divisional headquarter - that makes sense. I believe it was one of the Sicily scenarios, can't recall which. And it was back in COW.


The trouble is that with four HQs (presuming they were HQ iconed), you can throw two or three away- use them as light cavalry to complete encirclements since presumably they're motorised- without the formation suffering much in the way of ill effects.

_____________________________

"What did you read at university?"
"War Studies"
"War? Huh. What is it good for?"
"Absolutely nothing."

(in reply to Telumar)
Post #: 8
RE: Formation Supply Edit Problem - 11/15/2006 6:22:13 PM   
ColinWright

 

Posts: 2604
Joined: 10/13/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: golden delicious


quote:

ORIGINAL: Telumar

I have seen a scenario where an US armour division, being represented by battalions in a division, has also CCA, CCB and CCR brigade sized HQs assigned in addition to the divisional headquarter - that makes sense. I believe it was one of the Sicily scenarios, can't recall which. And it was back in COW.


The trouble is that with four HQs (presuming they were HQ iconed), you can throw two or three away- use them as light cavalry to complete encirclements since presumably they're motorised- without the formation suffering much in the way of ill effects.


Yeah. As a general rule, an HQ should not be created unless there's going to be a legitimate need for it. Otherwise, the player will naturally tend to put it to some other -- usually wildly implausible -- use.

_____________________________

I am not Charlie Hebdo

(in reply to golden delicious)
Post #: 9
RE: Formation Supply Edit Problem - 11/16/2006 2:49:19 AM   
ralphtricky


Posts: 6685
Joined: 7/27/2003
From: Colorado Springs
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ColinWright
The event bugaboo isn't all that ferocious once you get used to dealing with it. Everything just gets moved one or two slots. I've been dealing with it for years in Seelowe. Combing through a five hundred-event list and firmly putting everything back where it should be takes about fifteen minutes.

What event bugaboo?

_____________________________

Ralph Trickey
TOAW IV Programmer
Blog: http://operationalwarfare.com
---
My comments are my own, and do not represent the views of any other person or entity. Nothing that I say should be construed in any way as a promise of anything.

(in reply to ColinWright)
Post #: 10
RE: Formation Supply Edit Problem - 11/16/2006 3:13:07 AM   
rhinobones

 

Posts: 1540
Joined: 2/17/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: golden delicious
. . . the formation will use the highest supply level possible, and discard the other two.


Are you saying that TOAW will select the HQ with the highest supply rating and confer on that HQ that capability to boost the supply level to adjacent units? The remaining HQ(s) will not be able to boost supply levels. If so I might as well turn the extra HQs into line units, AD, artillery or something else that is useful.

Regards, RhinoBones


< Message edited by rhinobones -- 11/16/2006 12:52:39 PM >

(in reply to golden delicious)
Post #: 11
RE: Formation Supply Edit Problem - 11/16/2006 8:58:29 AM   
ColinWright

 

Posts: 2604
Joined: 10/13/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ralphtrick

quote:

ORIGINAL: ColinWright
The event bugaboo isn't all that ferocious once you get used to dealing with it. Everything just gets moved one or two slots. I've been dealing with it for years in Seelowe. Combing through a five hundred-event list and firmly putting everything back where it should be takes about fifteen minutes.

What event bugaboo?


Oh.

You've got some ferociously involved event list with four hundred events including disbands, withdrawals, form'n orders, etc. If you then add a unit or a formation or do something along those lines, all the unit and formation references can shift. Generally, it seems to happen to whatever units are 'downstream' from the change. For example, if I create a new formation towards the end of the list for Force One, I can be pretty sure references to units and formations higher up on the Force One list won't be affected. However, gotta look out for changes to events concerning formations and units further down the Force One list and throughout Force Two.

_____________________________

I am not Charlie Hebdo

(in reply to ralphtricky)
Post #: 12
RE: Formation Supply Edit Problem - 11/16/2006 11:49:41 AM   
golden delicious


Posts: 5575
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: London, Surrey, United Kingdom
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: rhinobones

Are you saying that TOAW will select the HQ with the highest supply rating and infer on that HQ that capability to boost the supply level to adjacent units? The remaining HQ(s) will not be able to boost supply levels. If so I might as well turn the extra HQs into line units, AD, artillery or something else that is useful.

Regards, RhinoBones


To my understanding, all HQs will give adjacent co-operating units the normal supply boost. The formation supply distribution level will be taken from the HQ with the highest level in the formation- this I'm less sure of. I expect JAMiAM knows the truth.

_____________________________

"What did you read at university?"
"War Studies"
"War? Huh. What is it good for?"
"Absolutely nothing."

(in reply to rhinobones)
Post #: 13
RE: Formation Supply Edit Problem - 11/16/2006 11:51:32 AM   
golden delicious


Posts: 5575
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: London, Surrey, United Kingdom
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

Oh.

You've got some ferociously involved event list with four hundred events including disbands, withdrawals, form'n orders, etc. If you then add a unit or a formation or do something along those lines, all the unit and formation references can shift. Generally, it seems to happen to whatever units are 'downstream' from the change. For example, if I create a new formation towards the end of the list for Force One, I can be pretty sure references to units and formations higher up on the Force One list won't be affected. However, gotta look out for changes to events concerning formations and units further down the Force One list and throughout Force Two.


To put this in terms of the way the program works, the event engine remembers units not by their name as it is entered in the editor, but by a global reference number, which is invisible to the designer. These references in the events aren't updated when you edit the OOB, so if units are added or deleted then the event will point to the same number- but a different unit.

_____________________________

"What did you read at university?"
"War Studies"
"War? Huh. What is it good for?"
"Absolutely nothing."

(in reply to ColinWright)
Post #: 14
RE: Formation Supply Question - 11/28/2006 7:37:36 PM   
Dabbs

 

Posts: 72
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline 		Want to make sure I understand this fully...  In a case where two countries are allied, part of the same force, but have different levels of supply - this can be effected through a) Formation Supply Efficiency and b) # of Supply Squads?   Given

a) if Force Supply is set at 40,
b) a formation with a supply efficiency of 50%
c) an HQ with half of its authorized Supply Squads

would typically provide 10 supply points/turn to its units?

Further modifications would apply or be involved in this calculation - relative to the amount of supply reaching their hexes, whether units moved in the previous turn, are adjacent to a supporting HQ, and/or airbase; whether their HQ has been destroyed; and bonuses for transportation asset sharing?  Also, force supply can be modified by event.

Anything missing?

(in reply to golden delicious)
Post #: 15
RE: Formation Supply Question - 11/28/2006 10:01:45 PM   
golden delicious


Posts: 5575
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: London, Surrey, United Kingdom
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Dabbs

Want to make sure I understand this fully...  In a case where two countries are allied, part of the same force, but have different levels of supply - this can be effected through a) Formation Supply Efficiency and b) # of Supply Squads?


The latter controls the former.

quote:

a) if Force Supply is set at 40,
b) a formation with a supply efficiency of 50%
c) an HQ with half of its authorized Supply Squads

would typically provide 10 supply points/turn to its units?


Not typically- only if they were sitting on the rail line, or near it, or in some other well-supplied location.

quote:

Further modifications would apply or be involved in this calculation - relative to the amount of supply reaching their hexes, whether units moved in the previous turn, are adjacent to a supporting HQ, and/or airbase; whether their HQ has been destroyed; and bonuses for transportation asset sharing?


Airbases don't affect supply.

_____________________________

"What did you read at university?"
"War Studies"
"War? Huh. What is it good for?"
"Absolutely nothing."

(in reply to Dabbs)
Post #: 16
RE: Formation Supply Question - 11/28/2006 10:54:04 PM   
Dabbs

 

Posts: 72
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline 		Okay, thanks for the clarification, the manual makes more sense now; I was interpreting it as one influencing the other.  Yes, I should have mentioned typically in relation to sitting on rail connected to a supply source.  I've been looking at supply values across different maps, terrain, roads, rail and such at length.  Each multiple of the supply radius equates to a supply drop along roads connected to rail. 

I came across something a while back that units sitting in or near an airfield receive some sort of bonus to their supply; don't know how much - but you are right in that it does not show on the map...and perhaps there really is no bonus.  There was something else, but I forget what it was...

Thanks for the help!


(in reply to golden delicious)
Post #: 17
RE: Formation Supply Question - 11/29/2006 1:42:46 AM   
Dabbs

 

Posts: 72
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline 		Okay...sorry...  Continuing again with instances where different formations have different supply levels...  Would there be any reason why "the best formations" should have a supply distribution proficiency of less than 100% (i.e. fewer support squads than equates to 100% prof)?  I'm considering this in the context of using their rating for what the maximum supply the best units can receive under optimal conditions as "The Benchmark" by which all other formations are compared (i.e. - 50, 65, 75, etc.)....a bell-curve representation vs strict grading...

The manual says it makes checks against the supply distribution proficiency **usually** when supplying units, but I have not come across other instances in which checks are made against it.  If there are other checks of significance, then I can see why performance would be strictly graded.  Otherwise, it appears to me that 80% of 50 and 100% of 40 are the same thing...provided the ratios remain the same. 

(in reply to Dabbs)
Post #: 18
RE: Formation Supply Question - 11/29/2006 2:18:26 AM   
ColinWright

 

Posts: 2604
Joined: 10/13/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Dabbs

Okay...sorry... Continuing again with instances where different formations have different supply levels... Would there be any reason why "the best formations" should have a supply distribution proficiency of less than 100% (i.e. fewer support squads than equates to 100% prof)? I'm considering this in the context of using their rating for what the maximum supply the best units can receive under optimal conditions as "The Benchmark" by which all other formations are compared (i.e. - 50, 65, 75, etc.)....a bell-curve representation vs strict grading...

The manual says it makes checks against the supply distribution proficiency **usually** when supplying units, but I have not come across other instances in which checks are made against it. If there are other checks of significance, then I can see why performance would be strictly graded. Otherwise, it appears to me that 80% of 50 and 100% of 40 are the same thing...provided the ratios remain the same.


I think you're right about that -- no reason why the 'best' formation shouldn't be rated at 100% formation supply.

Otherwise, I might as well mention a few things about supply.

1. As long as the airbase is in supply at all, air units will receive full supply. Also, and as I recall, there's no point in creating HQ's for formations of air units. Being adjacent to a cooperative HQ doesn't seem to affect the amount of supply an air unit receives. Of course, creating an HQ with missing supply squads and then making supply squads available later might have some sort of effect. Haven't checked that.

2. Similarly with ships. As long as a supply line reaches to a port on a given body of water, naval units anywhere on that body of water will receive full supply. Also, naval movement does not reduce supply or readiness. Here, I dunno what happens if full supply isn't available at the port itself -- but I would guess things work the same as with air units.

3. Although the supply trace won't show supply extending into them, units in badland hexes, etc will receive supply -- but only if the hex borders on a supplied hex. In other words, supply will extend to, but not through badlands hexes and such.

4. People tend to make strange assumptions about the effect of supply units. They will not provide a supply point. What they will do is add 25% of the base supply level to all hexes within the supply radius of the unit -- up to 100% percent of the base supply level. In other words, if a hex would ordinarily receive 25% of the base supply, if it's within the radius of a supply unit, it would receive 50%. If it was already receiving 100% of the base supply, it would still only receive 100% of the base supply level.

It doesn't matter what's in the supply unit -- all that matters is that the unit have the supply icon. You can make a tank regiment a supply unit if you want to.

All of the above applies to ACOW. I don't actually know if it applies to TOAW III, but absent any changes to the relevant parts of the program, I don't see why it shouldn't.

< Message edited by ColinWright -- 11/29/2006 2:22:29 AM >

_____________________________

I am not Charlie Hebdo

(in reply to Dabbs)
Post #: 19
RE: Formation Supply Question - 11/29/2006 3:31:45 PM   
Dabbs

 

Posts: 72
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline 		Thanks Colin, good points. It looks worthwhile to experiment with "handicapped HQ's" for air units deserving of such - could be an interesting dynamic.

Supply appears to "step down" an absolute base 25% (with variance relative to terrain, possibly weather) along roads for each multiple of the supply radius. I knew HQ's provided a bonus, but didn't know how much - sensible that they would provide a 25% step-up with a radius of 1...like a mini-mobile supply point. As far as I've been able to assess, all the points you've made apply equally to TOAW III.

(in reply to ColinWright)
Post #: 20
RE: Formation Supply Question - 11/29/2006 5:51:06 PM   
Curtis Lemay


Posts: 12969
Joined: 9/17/2004
From: Houston, TX
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dabbs

Okay...sorry... Continuing again with instances where different formations have different supply levels... Would there be any reason why "the best formations" should have a supply distribution proficiency of less than 100% (i.e. fewer support squads than equates to 100% prof)? I'm considering this in the context of using their rating for what the maximum supply the best units can receive under optimal conditions as "The Benchmark" by which all other formations are compared (i.e. - 50, 65, 75, etc.)....a bell-curve representation vs strict grading...

The manual says it makes checks against the supply distribution proficiency **usually** when supplying units, but I have not come across other instances in which checks are made against it. If there are other checks of significance, then I can see why performance would be strictly graded. Otherwise, it appears to me that 80% of 50 and 100% of 40 are the same thing...provided the ratios remain the same.


I think you're right about that -- no reason why the 'best' formation shouldn't be rated at 100% formation supply.


Well, remember that the supply values are integers, so there are numerology-type reasons. For example, if setting the best formation to 100% requires you to set the Force Supply level to 5, then it will be very difficult to set the second-best formation to 73% of the best formation, etc. I prefer to have a reasonable-sized value for Force Supply for this reason, and then work from there.

quote:

2. Similarly with ships. As long as a supply line reaches to a port on a given body of water, naval units anywhere on that body of water will receive full supply. Also, naval movement does not reduce supply or readiness. Here, I dunno what happens if full supply isn't available at the port itself -- but I would guess things work the same as with air units.


I'm not sure if a port is required. It's been a while since I looked at it, though.

quote:

All of the above applies to ACOW. I don't actually know if it applies to TOAW III, but absent any changes to the relevant parts of the program, I don't see why it shouldn't.


It's the same.

(in reply to ColinWright)
Post #: 21
RE: Formation Supply Question - 11/29/2006 9:38:57 PM   
ColinWright

 

Posts: 2604
Joined: 10/13/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Dabbs

Thanks Colin, good points. It looks worthwhile to experiment with "handicapped HQ's" for air units deserving of such - could be an interesting dynamic.

Supply appears to "step down" an absolute base 25% (with variance relative to terrain, possibly weather) along roads for each multiple of the supply radius. I knew HQ's provided a bonus, but didn't know how much - sensible that they would provide a 25% step-up with a radius of 1...like a mini-mobile supply point. As far as I've been able to assess, all the points you've made apply equally to TOAW III.


There's a 50% bonus for being adjacent to a cooperative HQ, I believe. That wouldn't show on the supply trace, since it would only be available to cooperative units.

_____________________________

I am not Charlie Hebdo

(in reply to Dabbs)
Post #: 22
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III >> Scenario Design >> Formation Supply Edit Problem 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

0.750