Whacking HQs?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Whacking HQs?

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 Series >> Whacking HQs?

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Whacking HQs? - 5/20/2011 11:28:25 AM

Jabba
Matrix Trooper

Posts: 62
Joined: 3/24/2005
Status: offline

I know that enemy HQs lose all their supplies if you displace them, but how big a problem is this for the enemy?

Often I have a choice whether to use my mobile units to attack enemy combat units or to go after enemy HQs, so I am wondering whether it is worth doing the latter.

Post #: 1

RE: Whacking HQs? - 5/20/2011 11:41:40 AM

cpt flam
Matrix Elite Guard

Posts: 2352
Joined: 1/16/2011
From: caen - France
Status: offline

attacking unit, they will go toward thei HQ
displacing HQ will give you a part of they stocks
and (possibility)for units attach to be over 5 hexes ;so less supply

_____________________________

(in reply to Jabba)

Post #: 2

RE: Whacking HQs? - 5/20/2011 12:52:21 PM

herwin
Matrix Legion of Merit

Posts: 6059
Joined: 5/28/2004
From: Sunderland, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jabba

I know that enemy HQs lose all their supplies if you displace them, but how big a problem is this for the enemy?

Often I have a choice whether to use my mobile units to attack enemy combat units or to go after enemy HQs, so I am wondering whether it is worth doing the latter.

Historically, during an exploitation or pursuit logistics were a very high priority target. Enemy combat units slowed you down. Remember the goal of an attack is to unhinge the defensive position--this shows up in the statistical data where what matters is the depth of deepest penetration. Going after rear area garrisons is exactly the wrong thing to do.

_____________________________

Harry Erwin
"For a number to make sense in the game, someone has to calibrate it and program code. There are too many significant numbers that behave non-linearly to expect that. It's just a game. Enjoy it." herwin@btinternet.com

(in reply to Jabba)

Post #: 3

RE: Whacking HQs? - 5/20/2011 1:04:06 PM

James Ward
Matrix Elite Guard

Posts: 1183
Joined: 5/9/2000
From: Baltimore, Maryland, USA
Status: offline

Another HQ question. Are they ever destroyed? I know I've had stacks with HQ's in them surrender in pockets. I don't see them in the destroyed unit list.

(in reply to herwin)

Post #: 4

RE: Whacking HQs? - 5/20/2011 2:53:00 PM

Jabba
Matrix Trooper

Posts: 62
Joined: 3/24/2005
Status: offline

quote:

Historically, during an exploitation or pursuit logistics were a very high priority target. Enemy combat units slowed you down. Remember the goal of an attack is to unhinge the defensive position--this shows up in the statistical data where what matters is the depth of deepest penetration. Going after rear area garrisons is exactly the wrong thing to do.

In practice going after an HQ might slow you down more. It may mean taking a diversion. If the HQ is simply on the way to where you are heading then there is no dilemma, but this is not necessarily the case.

Logically, if all that matters is depth of penetration, then you should ignore HQs unless they are directly en route.

In some situations, attacking combat units will speed up your advance. They may be lying across your axis of advance, so the sooner you deal with them the better. But this may require you to ignore exposed HQs.

quote:

attacking unit, they will go toward their HQ
displacing HQ will give you a part of they stocks
and (possibility)for units attach to be over 5 hexes ;so less supply

I can understand the command advantages of knocking them more than 5 hexes away if there are still combats nearby to be resolved. Though in the situation I am thinking of, most frontline units have already been routed, so there is no real benefit from that.

What I can't really quantify is what the additional benefit is from reducing their supplies. Is it worth diverting a unit to whack an exposed HQ, when that unit could be used for other purposes?

< Message edited by Jabba -- 5/20/2011 9:42:25 PM >

(in reply to James Ward)

Post #: 5

RE: Whacking HQs? - 5/20/2011 3:01:34 PM

Fänrik Stål
Matrix Trooper

Posts: 108
Joined: 1/4/2006
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: James Ward

Another HQ question. Are they ever destroyed? I know I've had stacks with HQ's in them surrender in pockets. I don't see them in the destroyed unit list.

No, they always jump out of the pocket in my experience.

(in reply to James Ward)

Post #: 6

RE: Whacking HQs? - 5/20/2011 3:11:04 PM

arras
Matrix Trooper

Posts: 189
Joined: 9/7/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: James Ward

Another HQ question. Are they ever destroyed? I know I've had stacks with HQ's in them surrender in pockets. I don't see them in the destroyed unit list.

They can not be destroyed but they "displace". Which is nearly equal to "destroyed". They will loose all their stocks, most of the men and there is high chance for leader to be killed (or captured?). At last according to the manual.

Think of it like old HQ gets destroyed in the pocket and new one is formed with the same name and who ever managed to escape from old one.

However I'm jet to see killed general.

(in reply to James Ward)

Post #: 7

RE: Whacking HQs? - 5/20/2011 9:46:26 PM

Zebedee
Matrix Hero

Posts: 535
Joined: 8/30/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: arras

However I'm jet to see killed general.

I saw it a lot on the early versions of the game (it's very noticeable for me because leader deaths will 'pause' the flow of the game events and need me to intervene by clicking on it) but less frequently recently. Think I counted two soviet and one German death from displacement in my run through to late 41 under the .16 beta (darned pocketed unit routed next to a German HQ and displaced it before then surrendering