Global "turn off replacements" Why would I do this? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition



Message

JohnDillworth -> Global "turn off replacements" Why would I do this? (8/27/2009 1:30:54 PM)

Ready to start another GC after teh final patch comes out. I have been playing WITP for years and now AE. Often , I understand people turn off replacements for the Allies when they start a GC. Why would someone do this? Do you turn it off for all and then selectively turn it back on for some units? What is the downside? Is there a time in the game when it is OK to turn it back on?
thanks



Yamato hugger -> RE: Global "turn off replacements" Why would I do this? (8/27/2009 1:36:22 PM)

When you only have 20 infantry squads, you dont want them going to a restricted base force on the west coast. You want them going to combat units as a priority.



Graymane -> RE: Global "turn off replacements" Why would I do this? (8/27/2009 1:37:26 PM)

We turn it off so we can be selective about turning it back on for units that needs the reinforcements the most.



Chickenboy -> RE: Global "turn off replacements" Why would I do this? (8/27/2009 1:58:26 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth
Do you turn it off for all and then selectively turn it back on for some units? What is the downside? Is there a time in the game when it is OK to turn it back on?

This is exactly what I do. As previous posters have said, when you have few replacement units, you want them going to the tip of your spear where *you* really need them, not getting fat on the West Coast CONUS unnecessarily guarding some airbase in Utah.

Another major downside to replacements is that it costs scarce supply to fill a unit to its full TO&E. Anyplace where supply is absolutely CRITICAL (e.g., China, PI, some parts DEI) should have replacements turned off unless absolutely necessary.

Lastly, I would hate to see scarce replacements supplied just in time to go to a POW camp or be destroyed by the early IJ tsunami. Consider where your tenable defensive points are first before allocating replacements.



Xargun -> RE: Global "turn off replacements" Why would I do this? (8/27/2009 1:58:46 PM)

Because when you are Japan you don't want all of your slowly built armaments going to China or Kwangtung where there will never be used.

Xargun



fbs -> RE: Global "turn off replacements" Why would I do this? (8/27/2009 2:28:09 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth

Ready to start another GC after teh final patch comes out. I have been playing WITP for years and now AE. Often , I understand people turn off replacements for the Allies when they start a GC. Why would someone do this? Do you turn it off for all and then selectively turn it back on for some units? What is the downside? Is there a time in the game when it is OK to turn it back on?
thanks



I start with replacements off, base expansion off, and purposely limit what I do on the first 10-30 turns in order to simulate the delays to mobilize the country (as the allies). I think it's unrealistic that the very next morning after the attack all allied governments will have all units in the army and air forces already growing to wartime strength, all airports and ports expanding, and everybody is building forts around.

So for me it's a matter of flavor :D

Cheers :mrgreen:
fbs



John Lansford -> RE: Global "turn off replacements" Why would I do this? (8/27/2009 3:30:33 PM)

Is there any rhyme or reason to which LCU gets reinforcements first?  Suppose there's two LCU's, one at Pearl and another on Tarawa, both with HQ support, both needing the same number of infantry squads.  Who gets them?



Shark7 -> RE: Global "turn off replacements" Why would I do this? (8/27/2009 3:32:56 PM)

Even as Japan it makes sense to turn off auto-replacements and micro-manage your divisions so the armaments pool goes where its needed, not to some backwater static base force in the HIs, Korea or China.



RevRick -> RE: Global "turn off replacements" Why would I do this? (8/27/2009 3:55:27 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

Is there any rhyme or reason to which LCU gets reinforcements first?  Suppose there's two LCU's, one at Pearl and another on Tarawa, both with HQ support, both needing the same number of infantry squads.  Who gets them?


It the Replacements Allowed button is on for the head cleaning and grease trap bucketing detail in Anchorage, AK, guess who gets the troops first.



Shark7 -> RE: Global "turn off replacements" Why would I do this? (8/27/2009 4:09:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: RevRick


quote:

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

Is there any rhyme or reason to which LCU gets reinforcements first?  Suppose there's two LCU's, one at Pearl and another on Tarawa, both with HQ support, both needing the same number of infantry squads.  Who gets them?


It the Replacements Allowed button is on for the head cleaning and grease trap bucketing detail in Anchorage, AK, guess who gets the troops first.


Of course. It would simply be unacceptable if an officer actually had to pick up a toilet scrubbing brush or empty the grease trap...you need raw recruits for those tasks. [;)]



jazman -> RE: Global "turn off replacements" Why would I do this? (8/27/2009 5:00:09 PM)

Could someone discuss "automatic upgrade ships and air groups" in the same manner? Default is on.



crsutton -> RE: Global "turn off replacements" Why would I do this? (8/27/2009 5:06:44 PM)

No, this is a great feature. I spent at least an hour or two in my set up going to each base and unit to turn this stuff off. It is easier to turn it on on a selective basis. Brilliant!



John Lansford -> RE: Global "turn off replacements" Why would I do this? (8/27/2009 5:18:01 PM)

So what everyone's saying is whichever LCU needs the reinforcements the least, that's the one that will get them?

Well, that figures.  It is the military, after all...



rockmedic109 -> RE: Global "turn off replacements" Why would I do this? (8/27/2009 10:21:43 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: RevRick


quote:

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

Is there any rhyme or reason to which LCU gets reinforcements first?  Suppose there's two LCU's, one at Pearl and another on Tarawa, both with HQ support, both needing the same number of infantry squads.  Who gets them?


It the Replacements Allowed button is on for the head cleaning and grease trap bucketing detail in Anchorage, AK, guess who gets the troops first.

That's because it's CO has an Admin of 99 and a supply of Whiskey that he uses to grease the supply route.[:D]



Shark7 -> RE: Global "turn off replacements" Why would I do this? (8/27/2009 11:09:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

So what everyone's saying is whichever LCU needs the reinforcements the least, that's the one that will get them?

Well, that figures.  It is the military, after all...


And the military is the most efficient branch of any government. Kinda puts things into perspective doesn't it? [:D]



The Gnome -> RE: Global "turn off replacements" Why would I do this? (8/27/2009 11:16:28 PM)

Is there anyway to turn off supplies globally once the game has started?



Sheytan -> RE: Global "turn off replacements" Why would I do this? (8/27/2009 11:37:05 PM)

No, but there is a button on each base that lets you increase supply demand at that location. I would use that judiciously though. In my first AE game I had stuff stockpiled in locations I really didnt need it in that quantity using this as I overdid it.

In PI for example it makes alot of sense to pull all available supply to Manila or Clark etc right off, so it stockpiles there from all the other smaller bases. You will need it [;)]
quote:

ORIGINAL: The Gnome

Is there anyway to turn off supplies globally once the game has started?




pompack -> RE: Global "turn off replacements" Why would I do this? (8/28/2009 1:29:02 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jazman

Could someone discuss "automatic upgrade ships and air groups" in the same manner? Default is on.


Same arguements apply. Turn it off.

For ship upgrades, you don't want your carriers suddenly becoming unavailable for a month the day before your planned raid to South Framistan. New to AE there is also the problem of clogging the shipyards with the upgrade ships. Far better to plan them individually. A practice I recently initiatiated is to flash "show ships in repair" and check them for pending upgrades; there seems to be a bonus for upgrading ships with damage (and it also reflects real-life practice)

For air groups, it is the same problem as replacements only worse. While you are counting the days until you have enough F4Fs to replace the Buffs on a carrier, it can be very depressing when all of the a/c are used to upgrade a restricted unit scheduled for early withdrawal anyway.



donkey_roxor -> RE: Global "turn off replacements" Why would I do this? (8/28/2009 2:27:16 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

Is there any rhyme or reason to which LCU gets reinforcements first?  Suppose there's two LCU's, one at Pearl and another on Tarawa, both with HQ support, both needing the same number of infantry squads.  Who gets them?


I've heard it depends on the order of the LCUs in the game database. The higher the number, the earlier they get *opportunities* for reinforcements. E.g., if the Pearl LCU is 10th in the database and the Tarawa LCU is 18th, the Pearl LCU gets the chance to roll for (and receive) reinforcements before the Tarawa LCU. Note that they're not automatically reinforced - I think they have to pass a few rolls first.



Dili -> RE: Global "turn off replacements" Why would I do this? (8/28/2009 10:31:59 AM)

It is not only replacements. It is upgrades too. The frontline units need the best equipment first not some rear unit.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.359375