quote:

ORIGINAL: carlkay58

T03 Supply Thoughts:
...
Rail is fine and good for the long haul of supplies, but trucks are used to move supplies from the depots to the units. To keep truck wear and tear down you need the depots as close to the front line as possible. You also have the wagon rule that says any unit within three hexes of a depot does not use trucks. This is very important during the bad weather when trucks will breakdown all of the time. BUT many people forget that the offset to this is that units supplied by wagons will double their supply requirements. If you are having problems moving supplies to the front line making the amount you need double is not going to help you. This is an important fact to keep in mind.

quote:

I then have some work to do in moving the LW forward to support the front lines. I advance as many of the Recon Kolufts that I can and also advance some of the fighter groups. I then fly supplies forward to L'vov and Riga.

quote:

ORIGINAL: carlkay58

homer82:

One of the problems with playing around with MAX TOE is that the unit will actively degrade to that point by sending elements back to the replacement pools. I really don't know if this consumes rail capacity or not. But a unit at 50% is more likely to rout, shatter, etc. if placed under stress by enemy attacks. I personally rarely modify MAX TOE (I do not tend to micromanage) but under some situations I would - a quiet sector (such as AGN) perhaps lower MAX TOE to 80% to free up replacements for more active sectors. Any reduction beyond 80% would have to be done in the late war for me. It's a personal decision and I really don't know how much that would really help overall.

...

quote:

ORIGINAL: carlkay58

homer82:

One of the problems with playing around with MAX TOE is that the unit will actively degrade to that point by sending elements back to the replacement pools. I really don't know if this consumes rail capacity or not. But a unit at 50% is more likely to rout, shatter, etc. if placed under stress by enemy attacks. I personally rarely modify MAX TOE (I do not tend to micromanage) but under some situations I would - a quiet sector (such as AGN) perhaps lower MAX TOE to 80% to free up replacements for more active sectors. Any reduction beyond 80% would have to be done in the late war for me. It's a personal decision and I really don't know how much that would really help overall.

Supply priority for units can vary also depending on whether this is an active sector or not. I typically keep infantry armies at 2 -> if the units do not need the supply they will not request it so no real problems there. I typically keep motorized units at supply priority of 4 during 41. I will reduce that to 3 when the weather starts to be bad but motorized MPs are very dependent on supply levels and that is too important to play with. Again this is my personal opinion. If you do lower supply priorities then you are also reducing the demand for supplies from the NSS and possibly reducing the flow of supplies to the front. My system has been to maximize (within reason) demand for supplies in the front line to try and maximize the flow to the east. These things are something that can be played with once the weather turns bad.

quote:

ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS

quote:

ORIGINAL: carlkay58

homer82:

One of the problems with playing around with MAX TOE is that the unit will actively degrade to that point by sending elements back to the replacement pools. I really don't know if this consumes rail capacity or not. But a unit at 50% is more likely to rout, shatter, etc. if placed under stress by enemy attacks. I personally rarely modify MAX TOE (I do not tend to micromanage) but under some situations I would - a quiet sector (such as AGN) perhaps lower MAX TOE to 80% to free up replacements for more active sectors. Any reduction beyond 80% would have to be done in the late war for me. It's a personal decision and I really don't know how much that would really help overall.

Supply priority for units can vary also depending on whether this is an active sector or not. I typically keep infantry armies at 2 -> if the units do not need the supply they will not request it so no real problems there. I typically keep motorized units at supply priority of 4 during 41. I will reduce that to 3 when the weather starts to be bad but motorized MPs are very dependent on supply levels and that is too important to play with. Again this is my personal opinion. If you do lower supply priorities then you are also reducing the demand for supplies from the NSS and possibly reducing the flow of supplies to the front. My system has been to maximize (within reason) demand for supplies in the front line to try and maximize the flow to the east. These things are something that can be played with once the weather turns bad.

I agree with you, When the heavy mud hits and your trucks start to feel the strain of distance from depots, and you know winter is around the corner, is this the army with 50% TOE that you want to go into a blizzard with? Sure, you can start to raise the TO&E then, but time is short and you need supplies to dig into your level 2 forts. Manpower reductions just makes that all the more difficult. I tried using some unit supply priority 1 in a game as some suggested and found it totally unworkable for me anyways. When blizzard hits, you want full strength divisions dug in at level 2 so fatigue is generally less, and so are your attritional manpower losses. Lower manpower losses mean lower replacement freight required that leaves more winter supplies for other purposes.