Musical HQs (Full Version)

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



Message

Simon Edmonds -> Musical HQs (7/8/2018 2:20:21 AM)

I am a bit perplexed at the game allowing me to constantly chop and change my units from one HQ to another. In the first couple of turns I build up a reserve of admin points. Then at the end of every turn I carefully change the divisional HQs so that every division possible is within range of a HQ.
Historically this just didn’t happen. From the many books I have read, the corps commanders fought tenaciously to hold on to their attached divisions. And such transfers were the exception rather than the norm.

But WitE is supposed to allow you to recreate history. So this means that anything should be possible…. At a cost.

I think that the current cost in admin points fails to capture the logistical problems involved. Let,s say the 100th infantry division is transferred from corps A to corps B. For at least a week a significant percentage of the supplies for the 100th will continue to turn up at corps A. Corps B on the other hand will have made no plans to supply the 100th, so for a week or so, they will run short on supplies to send. From a morale perspective an additional factor will be the mail from home being sent to the wrong corps.
I think that from a game perspective any transferred division should suffer a degree of disruption for a week to cover the disruption that happened in reality. I have seen a number of other games where they force you to do the transfers at the beginning of a turn and I personally believe that this is too much of a straight-jacket.

My suggestion would be if a division is transferred before moving it suffers disruption for the rest of the turn. If it is transferred after it has started to move it suffers disruption for the rest of the current turn and the following turn.

The unit should suffer a temporary percentage loss to its attack, defence, movement and morale values. The loss to the defence value should be half that of the loss to attack.
The number of admin points should be increased substantially to better represent the resources wasted in sorting out the mess a transfer causes.

That way gamey concept of musical HQs can continue. It will just better reflect the historical consequences of doing so.

What are your thoughts out there?



AlexSF -> RE: Musical HQs (7/8/2018 6:18:13 AM)

quote:

In the first couple of turns I build up a reserve of admin points. Then at the end of every turn I carefully change the divisional HQs so that every division possible is within range of a HQ.


Sounds like a waste of a lot of APs ! I rarely do that, I always try to keep my HQs close to their units. That being said you raise a good point, transfering divisions like that should have an impact on their fighting abilities somehow.



No idea -> RE: Musical HQs (7/8/2018 8:52:27 AM)

Two things: this game doesnt reflect the generals desires/feelings about what YOU do. There was a great game for that if you are interested. But I think coupling both games would have been too much.

The game uses one week turns. I guess after a week most problems with changing a division from one HQ to the next should have been solved



Telemecus -> RE: Musical HQs (7/8/2018 12:25:02 PM)

Remember admin points are a finite resource - if you are spending them on reassigning units those are points you will not have for things like HQ buildups in future. The logistical costs will be incurred one way or another.



Wheat -> RE: Musical HQs (7/10/2018 1:03:41 AM)

I don't know how you have all those AP to spend Simon. I need them all the time for assignment of support units, leader changes, and most importantly, HQ buildups. Imo, the game nicely models the cost of unit transfers. Do you not try and fix the overloaded AGS problem? It's a huge cost in AP to do so. In my current game its turn 9 and I haven't had the AP to even consider it.



Simon Edmonds -> RE: Musical HQs (7/10/2018 4:12:58 AM)

Hi Wheat. I am still pretty new to wite. Until Telemecus mentioned it I hadn't even noticed the piece in the rules about HQ build-ups. It is only in the current game I am playing that I have gotten into Leader optimization. Mainly because I was looking for something to spend the admin points on. I guess that because I keep my divisions close to my HQs my admin costs must be lower than average. I am on turn 15 and have 261 points in the pool. I solve the southern HQ problem by consolidating divisions at the other end of the front and sending the spare HQ down south. I will try the HQ buildup in my next game. So much to learn... But all the time in the world to learn it. [:)]



No idea -> RE: Musical HQs (7/10/2018 9:50:33 AM)

You also want your APs to change leaders. And later, to make FZs



thedoctorking -> RE: Musical HQs (7/10/2018 7:09:29 PM)

Later, the Germans will have an effectively unlimited supply of AP's. When attacking, it makes a big difference if your attacking units are under the same HQ. If they come from different HQ's, everybody other than those under the "lead" HQ is nerfed by up to 20% (depending on how great the distance in organizational terms). So yes, this makes a big difference and I have frequently changed units from one HQ to another before an attack. You should really aim to have every unit in a stack that might be attacked be under the same HQ, same reason.



Simon Edmonds -> RE: Musical HQs (7/11/2018 2:32:57 AM)

No Idea. Yes it is now turn 19 and I am up to about 40 fortified zones to help prepare for the long first winter. Still have 211 APs so I will give the leadership group a shake up. [:)]



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.84375