Should I be building Soviet HQs? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series



Message

Grotius -> Should I be building Soviet HQs? (12/30/2010 5:02:48 PM)

I'm playing the Campaign Game as the Soviets, and it's now July 17, 1941. Lots of my Corps HQs were disbanded automatically last turn. The manual says mechanized Corps HQs will be disbanded, but I seem to have lost dozens of Rifle Corps HQs too. All in all, I lost 57 Corps HQs in that one week. I gather this feature reflects the chaos in the Soviet chain of command in the initial weeks after the invasion.

Anyway, the result is that I suddenly find myself with many units attached directly to Army HQs, usually well out of command range. I also now have a shortage of Corps HQs. So I have several questions:

1. Should I be building HQs?

2. To complicate things, I seem only to be able to build a "HQ Combined Arms Army". I can't seem to build a Corps HQ -- or can I? Should I just build a bunch of new Army HQs and then attach *them* to Army HQs, converting them somehow to Corps HQs? Apologies if I missed this in the manual.

3. Also, I see reference to "Tank HQs" in these forums, but I can't build those either. Am I missing something?

4. Finally, I've read and re-read the supply rules, but I'm still confused about supply. If I have a combat unit that is "red" to its HQ (more than five hexes away), can it still draw a full load of supply/ammo/fuel from a nearby railhead? (Er, does any railhead within 10 MPs provide full supply?) If so, then the only drawback from being "red" to the HQ is that the HQ can't contribute support units in combat?

Thanks!



Flaviusx -> RE: Should I be building Soviet HQs? (12/30/2010 5:07:42 PM)

No.

The only time you should ever build an HQ is when tank army HQs come into play. (These become available to build around July of 42.) Don't ever build an army HQ. By 1942 you'll have more of these than you know what to do with and may indeed want to start disbanding some of them.

Corps HQs are not available for building. The Soviets abandoned corps HQs in 1941 as they proved ineffective due to a shortage of officers and lack of training. They shifted to an army/front based structure to compensate for this, radically simplifying their command structure.

Corps would eventually be reintroduced into the Red Army, but in game terms as combat units, not headquarters.



Grotius -> RE: Should I be building Soviet HQs? (12/30/2010 5:16:01 PM)

Thanks for your reply. So I should attach combat units directly to Army HQs, then? That implies that I should have Army HQs quite close to the front -- within five hexes of their attached units.

Also, can I attach one Army HQ to another to establish my own chain of command? Not sure I want to do this, but I'm curious.

Finally, how about my last question: can a combat unit sit on a town or railhead to draw supply, or should it always be within 5 hexes of its HQ to get fully supplied (with ammo, fuel, etc)? E.g., when a unit routs, I often want to send it to the rear for a couple turns to let it recover morale and so forth, but this takes it out of range of its front-line HQ. If I send the routed unit to a town/railhead 25 hexes behind the front, will it draw supply normally?



Flaviusx -> RE: Should I be building Soviet HQs? (12/30/2010 5:23:02 PM)

You'll get different answers to this question depending on who you ask.

I detest corps HQs and try to accelerate the shift to army HQs as fast as possible for a variety of reasons. Soviets start off the game with limited numbers of good leaders, and I like to concentrate those in armies as quickly as possible, and get units attached to those armies.

Other players prefer to leave the corps HQs in place and use them as an extra layer of command. (They will eventually get removed automatically.) My own view is that each layer of command you make leadership rolls on becomes decreasingly effective and the best place to make your leadership rolls is at the first check. Given the shortage of good leaders that first check is likely to fail if you spread them out among corps.

You cannot attach one army to another. Armies can only be attached to Fronts or to STAVKA.




Grotius -> RE: Should I be building Soviet HQs? (12/30/2010 5:51:12 PM)

Thanks. I think I get the idea. Time to rethink my command and control scheme!

How about my supply question? If a unit is more than 5 hexes from its parent HQ, but within 5 hexes of a railhead, does that unit receive a full allocation of supplies, including ammo and fuel?



hmatilai -> RE: Should I be building Soviet HQs? (12/30/2010 6:15:17 PM)

In my campaign game as soviets I've never been able yet to build any Combined Arms or Tank Army HQs. Are there any prequisites for this, other than time? Currently I'm playing somewhere July / August 1942.

I do see the list for building tank brigades, rifle divisions, cavalry divisions, mechanized brigades, gun brigades etc. but HQs have been missing from the list from start. Maybe I've missed an option or something? Not that I've missed those yet too much, as Germans are already crushed (Bagration in June 42), but out of interest was just wondering when those appear.




randallw -> RE: Should I be building Soviet HQs? (12/30/2010 6:41:32 PM)

A unit successfully traces supply by:

Being within 5 hexes and 20 MP of it's HQ
and the HQ is within 25 hexes and 100 MPs of a railhead

OR

25 hexes and 100 MPs to a railhead by itself



Grotius -> RE: Should I be building Soviet HQs? (12/30/2010 7:08:58 PM)

Thanks, Randall. I think what was confusing me was whether those two methods of supply-trace are equally effective. I don't think they are. At Normal difficulty and above, it's apparently preferable to trace supply from an HQ within 5 hexes/25 MPs. A combat unit can instead trace directly to a railhead, as you say, but if it does so it is less likely to receive a full dollop of supply. Quoth the manual (20.4.2):

quote:

For scenarios with a difficulty level of normal or greater (3.3.2), combat units will receive significantly fewer supplies and fuel than they would have if they were able to draw supply through their HQ unit in the first supply sub-segment.


So it really does sound imperative to keep combat units close to their HQs.

I have some more questions about supply, but to avoid thread drift, I guess I'll start a new thread.



amatteucci -> RE: Should I be building Soviet HQs? (1/2/2011 1:47:49 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: hmatilai

In my campaign game as soviets I've never been able yet to build any Combined Arms or Tank Army HQs. Are there any prequisites for this, other than time? Currently I'm playing somewhere July / August 1942.

I do see the list for building tank brigades, rifle divisions, cavalry divisions, mechanized brigades, gun brigades etc. but HQs have been missing from the list from start. Maybe I've missed an option or something? Not that I've missed those yet too much, as Germans are already crushed (Bagration in June 42), but out of interest was just wondering when those appear.



+1
[&:]



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
8.359375