Fallschirmjäger lost in Siberia!

[Commander666]

Say, where’s that thread how to STRAT DEPLOY units? As Germany, it is June 1942 and the Wehrmacht just reached the shores of the Sea of Okhotsk. But a lone Fallschirmjäger has been reduced to only 29% strength having spent the winter in a fruitless attempt to liberate Ukraine all by himself. Herman Goring and his useless 400km range transports simply defeated him much more than the bitter Soviet North. It will be quicker for the Wehrmacht to just finish its drive to Vladivostok (6 provinces away and only 7 Red divisions left) and annex the SU to so liberate Siberia. But – if that Fallschirmjäger doesn’t get out of northern Russia before next winter comes – it will probably be his grave!

So, how to do STRAT DEPLOY? I have Deep Repair and Deep Logistics techs achieved. I can strat deploy GAR. Why not regular units? Is that mission supposed to appear in the Mission Drop-down box, or what? With GAR I right click to get it… with units that just moves them.

Can’t find earlier threads that discussed that. HELP!

 

[Pang Bingxun]

Right click is the way to go. There are exceptions. No enemy landunit is allowed to be in the province or in an adjacent province. Also it is so that it takes some time to get ESE to a level that allows strategic redeployment. You cannot transport your units via railroad if the are no useable railroads.

 

[bosman]

So what is the exact minimum value for SR ?

 

[Pang Bingxun]

I have no idea.

 

[Blecky]

Say, where’s that thread how to STRAT DEPLOY units? As Germany, it is June 1942 and the Wehrmacht just reached the shores of the Sea of Okhotsk. But a lone Fallschirmjäger has been reduced to only 29% strength having spent the winter in a fruitless attempt to liberate Ukraine all by himself. Herman Goring and his useless 400km range transports simply defeated him much more than the bitter Soviet North. It will be quicker for the Wehrmacht to just finish its drive to Vladivostok (6 provinces away and only 7 Red divisions left) and annex the SU to so liberate Siberia. But – if that Fallschirmjäger doesn’t get out of northern Russia before next winter comes – it will probably be his grave!

So, how to do STRAT DEPLOY? I have Deep Repair and Deep Logistics techs achieved. I can strat deploy GAR. Why not regular units? Is that mission supposed to appear in the Mission Drop-down box, or what? With GAR I right click to get it… with units that just moves them.

Can’t find earlier threads that discussed that. HELP!

Obviously your paras are doomed. They must have horribly inaccurate maps if they go all the way to Siberia just to liberate the Ukraine :laugh:

 

[vimhawk]

Obviously your paras are doomed. They must have horribly inaccurate maps if they go all the way to Siberia just to liberate the Ukraine :laugh:

I think the term "Siberia" is often just used to mean a place far away that you don't want to go. I notice that when the Germans invade you get the option to move your industrial base to Siberia, but I don't think much of it actually goes there - it goes to the Urals. I believe the people of the Urals are rather proud of being neither European nor Siberian. The other common misconception from years back was of people being sent to work the "salt mines" of Siberia when I'm not sure there were any.

 

[Pang Bingxun]

OK, basically I can't STRAT DEPLOY a fully ORGed HQ from Berlin to Paris. Right click and he immediately walks. What should I see when I right click? Is it in the mission box?

You have to hold ctrl while you right click. Gar is an exception that does not need ctrl because it cannot move.

But to discuss this I need your definition of "railroads" because I don't know what you mean, unless these supply routes are just called railroads - which is perfect by me. But if there is some existing "railroad" in the map, I can't see it and please explain. Thanks.

I have no precise definition of railroads regarding SR because my knowledgy of SR is limited. Mainly the term refers to infra as infra represents especially railroads. But even if you take a province that has high infra left SR is often not anabled immediately. ESE is down and it takes 1 or 2 days to reach acceptable levels. I interpret this as getting the gauge to your level and all those things that are needed to establish supply routes.
After all the criterium is much more easier than your reply would suggest. It is simple something about ESE in the province from where you SR. I simply got confused that you did not use ctrl. Using ctrl+right click is one of the first thing a newby to the game has to learn and this has been this way long before doomsday.

@ manpower and attrition: Due to partisans your tc is heavily overloaded. Your ESE in siberia is so low that reinforcements donnot suffice to met the need for reinforcements. So you lose 250 manpower, 500 manpower or more and only 10% is reinforced. german AI has the same problem. When units get to an area with better ESE the reinforcements can be catched up and the bill fo the manpower wastage is presented to you. Somehow the best reason for Bitter Peace is that you donnot get siberia. :laugh:
There are some things you can do:

1. Regularly check the manpower mouseover. The total manpower need for reinforcements is mentioned there.
2. Always use LW in siberia and any (sub)artic climate. The same does also apply to deserts.
3. Only invade subartic climate after the winter is gone. This helps a lot. Deserts are a problem in the whole year. The only good advise is probable to the avoid them completely.
4. Use as little troops as possible. Have as little manpower in those regions as possible. The best way to take siberia is is use l.Arm1939 or Arm1943 and later models. With speed 15 they can take siberia fast. Be careful that the supply line is not cut off.
5. If the the supply stockpile of a unit if very low it can be an option to allow the unit to rest for a week at a place where climate and ESE are favourable.
6. Use GAR differently. If you get partisans down to 0% you are doing something "wrong". If you spread them more loosely you can cover a greater area and you tc overload is reduced a bit more. As your manpower will not suffice to supresses the whole of russia this does some good.
7. Still you are likely to never be able to get enough GAR to get the tc load down to 100%. That is unless you liberate some big chunk of territory like siberia.

 

[bosman]

Heh, it's actually somehow funny, reading so many times, that people don't know most important basics which, are not so obvious. As a HoI player since the beginning (HoI 1) i just know this (well, my mate told me that once), but if i was a new player, how could i know that ? Of course it's possible to find official information about that, but if i don't know, that such an option even exists, how am i supposed to search for it ?

It's almost certain, that many people don't read manuals, but this should be written with capital letters or maybe ...
... changed finally ?

 

[cjheigl]

If all else fails, you could plunk down an airfield and fly them out. (Airdrop them to a friendly province.) It's even more realistic, as in real life a makeshift airfield is constructed much easier than a railroad over 100s if not 1000s of kilometres.

 

[Commander666]

If all else fails, you could plunk down an airfield and fly them out. (Airdrop them to a friendly province.) It's even more realistic, as in real life a makeshift airfield is constructed much easier than a railroad over 100s if not 1000s of kilometres.

Unfortunately this does not work in AoD. Please try it. PAR needs enemy target to fly to.

 

[Commander666]

Heh, it's actually somehow funny, reading so many times, that people don't know most important basics which, are not so obvious. As a HoI player since the beginning (HoI 1) i just know this (well, my mate told me that once), but if i was a new player, how could i know that ?

So true! Frankly, it is illogical that GAR deploy using one method; all other units another. The number of posts over the years about that idiosyncrasy attests to the fault in the game. Pang’s remark of “newbie” is purposefully belittling.

In 10 years of playing I have never needed to Strategic Redeploy (SR) any unit other than GAR. I don’t do it during conquest to purposefully not increase TC. However, SR has many advantages. Aside from usually getting unit moved faster (unless short distance) and saving on supplies, SR provides a friendlier environment than the hostile map conditions. Units in SR may repair quicker than on map in some cases. And one of the most alternate ways of using SR is if having units overseas that you are trying to upgrade but the overseas daily upgrade rate is pitifully small. An example of this might be German conquest of USA and trying to get the GAR upgraded to next level. Simply take all extra GAR that you can get away with and constantly redeploy back and forth in your conquered area in the States. In the time of 2-3 of redeployments they will be upgraded.

“Newbie”! How cleverly ignitable! :excl:

 

[Commander666]

Dear Pang,

Thank for teaching me the trick of “hold down crtl while right clicking mouse”. I am so happy that the Fallschirmjäger who was “lost in Siberia” will be home by Thanksgiving.

I have no precise definition of railroads regarding SR because my knowledgy of SR is limited. Mainly the term refers to infra as infra represents especially railroads. But even if you take a province that has high infra left SR is often not anabled immediately. ESE is down and it takes 1 or 2 days to reach acceptable levels. I interpret this as getting the gauge to your level and all those things that are needed to establish supply routes.

I agree with the above reasons that will delay ability to be able to do Strategic Redeployment (SR). Same as GAR can not SR until a little ORG is gained. The game mechanics controlling this are OK. Importantly, THERE ARE NO RAILROADS in AoD. It is a concept totally abstracted. However, what the player does to improve ESE in a conquest of Russia really is best simply called “building railroads”. This involves prioritizing repair of specific damaged provinces, starting new infra construction, and placing GAR along a specific route to minimize revolt risk – all for the purpose of improving ESE at the frontline line.

Using ctrl+right click is one of the first thing a newby to the game has to learn and this has been this way long before doomsday.

Very bad choice of word to have used answering my post while implied at me. :angry:

@ manpower and attrition: Due to partisans your tc is heavily overloaded. Your ESE in siberia is so low that reinforcements donnot suffice to met the need for reinforcements. So you lose 250 manpower, 500 manpower or more and only 10% is reinforced. german AI has the same problem. When units get to an area with better ESE the reinforcements can be catched up and the bill fo the manpower wastage is presented to you.

This is an excellent explanation of what is happening when I disband a couple GAR and the increased MP “just disappears next day”. However, the critical flaw in your above is “due to partisans” since there are zero partisans on my railroads which are a line of NIL REVOLT RISK provinces created with a string of GAR with MP brigades. Rather, the full explanation is much more complex and goes like this:

Due to low infrastructure along the length of the railroad – and the supply demands of the units at front – the amount of needed supply cannot be carried by the partisan free railroad (the situation if a string of GAR/MP are installed). Hence, the extra supplies needed will flow indiscriminately along each side of the railroad and there encounter partisans so causing TC to become heavily overloaded. In these cases one should improve infra along the railraod, place more GAR beside the railroads, and not do SR. Of course, all these wishes have serious limits during conquest.

There are some things you can do:

I agree with your many points but a couple need relooking at and one is a major misconception as regards the best way to build a railroad across Russia.

4. Use as little troops as possible. Have as little manpower in those regions as possible. The best way to take siberia is is use l.Arm1939 or Arm1943 and later models. With speed 15 they can take siberia fast. Be careful that the supply line is not cut off.

Obviously, the less forces you use the less supplies needed = less probable TC overload. Using LT ARM is a very good choice. However, MOTs are much better than ARM regarding Russia and going for all of Russia if trying to use the minimum needed divisions. Just give 1/3 of the MOTs SP/TD so they can effectively win against any remaining T-34s.

However, I recommend a balanced Wehrmacht - especially ARM-3 until the Soviets have been mostly crushed. For my game I found 36 MOT-2 and 18 ARM-3 perfect. However, I only had 4 Lt-ARM which was decidedly insufficient. Next time I would reduce ARM to only 12 and increase LT ARM to 12 also. The ARM is vitally needed until a bit past Moscow. 12 Lt-ARM and the 36 MOTs are a better "speed choice" for finishing off SU. But most important in this "mix" are the 24 CAV which did everything from blitzing the Pripet Marshes, to safe guarding aircraft sitting on very hostile captured air bases, to starting railroad construction by holding the line that GAR are deploying to, to just being a very capable battle unit when run in stacks of 3 and providing the most important "missing speed" between the faster mobile units and the INF to keep the whole advance safe from partisan uprisings or Soviets cutting off the Wehrmacht spearheads.

6. Use GAR differently. If you get partisans down to 0% you are doing something "wrong". If you spread them more loosely you can cover a greater area and you tc overload is reduced a bit more. As your manpower will not suffice to supresses the whole of russia this does some good.

The above deserves to go into the distinct class I have established for “illogical statements”. I will save this for when “Barbarossa – a Blitz” continues again (delayed due to my other workload). For now I will only say this. Because I took ALL of Russia and built 3 railway lines across it – any of which I can make “green” using the GAR which I have – I am in a perfect situation to game test if we get lower TC using a continuous line of GAR placed on the best supply route; or lower TC by purposefully removing GAR off the railroad and “scattering them about”.

7. Still you are likely to never be able to get enough GAR to get the tc load down to 100%. That is unless you liberate some big chunk of territory like siberia.

Now you are back in the ballpark of game logic and strategy.

Somehow the best reason for Bitter Peace is that you donnot get siberia.

Firstly, I do not advise missing Bitter Peace. I purposefully did it because I wanted a game of the Wehrmacht rescuing Japan by swooping down from Mongolia using 35 MOTS, 12 ARM, and many CAV to hopefully crush the Chinese in “less than a month”. Meanwhile I will also be attacking over the Himalaya from conquered India using the fast Lt Arm to go thru the very long and zero infra Taklimakan Desert while a dozen brigaded MTN attack from Burma thru those mountains.

Frankly, it is my game… and I will play it as I like. I am bored with doing “Bitter Peace”. I only liberated Siberia once before (years ago) and wanted to learn how it goes on v1.08, how many INF do they build, what is the relative IC loss due to liberation of that HUGE country, and what will be all the pros and cons of that decision.

But the best thing that has come out of this decision is that now I have learned how to plan and build the most effective railroads across Russia. As I said earlier, I played most of the conquest using the supply map mode, and have much to share with Forum regarding “Going for Siberia” if that is what player wishes to do.

I am not saying going past Bitter Peace is a wise German choice. In fact, it is the most difficult choice the player of Germany could undertake. But let’s look at the facts. Starting with a historic Barbarossa, I took Moscow in a month and ALL of Russia in a year. As impressive as that game feat is, there is nothing more impressive than the fact that my total Compare Losses for THE WHOLE GAME is ONLY ¼ million KIA as when I annexed the SU in 1942. That is most probably not what any newbie might achieve on this Grand Strategy Game - or many experienced players either! Usually players average about 1.5 million KIA to achieve just Bitter Peace.

But I will not get into screen shots and a serious discussion about it here. When “Barbarossa – a Blitz” returns I will show Forum who is the true “newbie” regarding building railroads across Russia (or for that matter, possibly just liberating Siberia!).

And it is real nice to see that - as of today - the thread "Barbarossa - a Blitz" has garnered over 4,500 views thereby effectively surpassing the total views of all threads started by Pang Bingxum on the first page, and the second page, and the third pages... and... "Heck! Where is that calculator of mine so I can add up how many "Pang threads" it needs to get same number of views?" :rofl:

 

[Titan79]

Unfortunately this does not work in AoD. Please try it. PAR needs enemy target to fly to.

Hmm, are you really sure, Commander? IIRC, one of the great new features introduced by AoD is that one can finally get his paras out of a newly conquered territory (provided it has an airport, of course) by dropping them again on friendly soil.

 

[Pang Bingxun]

I agree with the above reasons that will delay ability to be able to do Strategic Redeployment (SR). Same as GAR can not SR until a little ORG is gained. The game mechanics controlling this are OK. Importantly, THERE ARE NO RAILROADS in AoD. It is a concept totally abstracted. However, what the player does to improve ESE in a conquest of Russia really is best simply called “building railroads”. This involves prioritizing repair of specific damaged provinces, starting new infra construction, and placing GAR along a specific route to minimize revolt risk – all for the purpose of improving ESE at the frontline line.

When you take a province with 200% Infra, 0% dissent and an nearby ESE of 200% the ESE in the province is ~10% at first. It will climb fast without paying any ic or using any GAR. I was only(or at least mostly) refering to this behavoir of advancing supply lines.
BTW: I used the term railroads because that is what SR represents. And Infra represents mostly railroads, this even shows up in the infra mouseover. But i am not very enthusiastic to debate about terminology.

Very bad choice of word to have used answering my post while implied at me. :angry:

I understand that you may feel insulted by that. But that is why you surprised me. Assuming that you donnot know how to use SR seemed wrong. Every SR uses ctrl. Gar uses SR by that method. But Gar cannot move without SR so there is the additional "shortcut" of directly making movement SR.

This is an excellent explanation of what is happening when I disband a couple GAR and the increased MP “just disappears next day”. However, the critical flaw in your above is “due to partisans” since there are zero partisans on my railroads which are a line of NIL REVOLT RISK provinces created with a string of GAR with MP brigades. Rather, the full explanation is much more complex and goes like this:

Due to low infrastructure along the length of the railroad – and the supply demands of the units at front – the amount of needed supply cannot be carried by the partisan free railroad (the situation if a string of GAR/MP are installed). Hence, the extra supplies needed will flow indiscriminately along each side of the railroad and there encounter partisans so causing TC to become heavily overloaded. In these cases one should improve infra along the railraod, place more GAR beside the railroads, and not do SR. Of course, all these wishes have serious limits during conquest.

I have to disagree on some points. The main reason are partisan that cause an tc overload as the mouseover on the TC shows. Low Infra is almost irrelevant because if you have no dissent due GAR and have no tc overload your units would have a sufficiently high ESE for reinforcements at an infra level of 40+%.

Frankly, it is my game… and I will play it as I like. I am bored with doing “Bitter Peace”.

That is fine with me.

As impressive as that game feat is, there is nothing more impressive than the fact that my total Compare Losses for THE WHOLE GAME is ONLY ¼ million KIA as when I annexed the SU in 1942.

The problem with taking siberia in winter is attrition. Attrition losses donnot show up in the loss statistic and this hampers comparability very much.

 

[Commander666]

I used the term railroads because that is what SR represents. And Infra represents mostly railroads, this even shows up in the infra mouseover. But i am not very enthusiastic to debate about terminology.

Railroads is the perfect term for both. No debate. And building railroads across the length of Russia is a really neat game! It makes for very interesting screen shots.

But Gar cannot move without SR so there is the additional "shortcut" of directly making movement SR.

It is an illogical shortcut that has created problems for many people. Read bosman's post above for good advice.

Low Infra is almost irrelevant because if you have no dissent due GAR and have no tc overload your units would have a sufficiently high ESE for reinforcements at an infra level of 40+%.

This statement can collect with the other "illogical statements" because no player I know of has ever achieved a major conquest without incurring TC overload - unless, of course, they are hardly attacking. So, "Low Infra is almost irrelevant" is - somehow - your manner of disregarding true strategy.

You also seem to have forgotten my mentioning that my TC overload was running nearly double during the deeper part of the conquest. "Low infra" is in fact critical to TC overload - even if the railroad has 0% partisan - because the TC overload flows beside the railroad where there is major partisanship. Hence - getting the railroad infra up so it alone can handle the needed supply flow - and so avoiding partisans - is the key to reducing overload.

Logically, if the INFRA was high enough there would be no TC overload. I can move the same army I have in Russia from Berlin to Paris and have no TC overload because I am using 100% provinces. But I can not let the same army just even only sit in deep Russia without nearly double TC overload. Because if one province – like ELTON – is only 20% infra along the railroad line, that creates TC overload. So the supply needs to flow around that. At this point partisans are encountered, which also - as you correctly point out - contributes to TC overload.

But you can’t place garrisons scattered all over Russia to reduce that (Russia is too big!). You would need them in every province because the partisanship is so high. In fact, if you place GAR only every second province along the railroad line the whole railroad line has serious partisanship! It absoultely needs GAR with MP side-by-side to get a green line - and in a couple spots it needs an extra CAV. Welcome to the changed "revolt risk" done to the game as I am sure you know about!

So, building a true railroad with high enough infra – and placing GAR every province along it to get a “GREEN LINE” is the efficient way (and possible way). Of course, there are many techs to help reduce TC load, and using a smaller but better quality army will also greatly help. However, you would actually move the GAR off the railroad and "spread them around" to improve the most difficult situation encountered by going "across ALL of Russia". GOOD LUCK!

The problem with taking siberia in winter is attrition. Attrition losses donnot show up in the loss statistic and this hampers comparability very much.

I wasn't comparing attrition. I was comparing what is called "COMPARE LOSSES". There is no problem at all comparing 1/4 million KIA or 1.5 million KIA. And taking Siberia in winter is not a problem for a superior Wehrmacht. In fact, I delayed my attack on China waiting for the snow to come just because it is so much more fun doing it in the winter! :rofl:

BTW, I liberated Siberia July 11/42 and they gave me their first INF (a nice modern one) Sept 22/42. He's doing SR to those salt mines in the northeast corner! At this rate, the few Wehrmacht currently guarding the Far East need only be there one more winter. Seems like Siberia might be very capable of protecting all of the Far East by herself. And another really good reason to liberate Siberia is that they have a quite pretty flag. This usualy guarantees that the puppet will be a smart puppet - and concentrate on achieving techs AHEAD of Germany. And that is precisely what they are doing using their 2 tech slots.

However, I agree that it was a hard campaign as regards the attrition suffered last winter. It was not nice to so quickly consume my last ~250 MP when the railroad became effective in the spring and the strength rebuilding could start overtaking. It caught me by surprise. However, playing Germany on ZERO MP really is much better for having a more challenging game! I am so happy I got my MP back up to 19 total, and it is staying green while I am reinforcing at 100%. It taught me a lot about avoiding unnecessary Luftwaffe battles over France. And now finally those CVs will get fixed... then we'll show the Brits! And once the INT upgrade (all 20 upgrading together at 100%) it will be time for an air war again.

Have fun! I am.

 

[Commander666]

Hmm, are you really sure, Commander? IIRC, one of the great new features introduced by AoD is that one can finally get his paras out of a newly conquered territory (provided it has an airport, of course) by dropping them again on friendly soil.

Well, actually I am not really sure. I will certainly check it. That would be real funny because the PAR stuck in Siberia was on an airbase - of course - and further had at his private displosal all 6 of the available TRA - plus a string of established airbases he could have dropped on going all the way back!!!

How hillarious! Somebody finally fixed something that really mattered! "NO", I did not know that (if correct). I will try that asap but all the PAR are in Paris right now and the TRA still in Russia! It will take a while to get the TRA's ORG recovered when they get to Paris. This might be a dangerous test as the Luftwaffe decided to stop contesting the air space over Paris for a while since the RAF Spitfires can not hurt Germany - unless Germany engages them. I'll see what I can do.

EDIT: OK, I am sure now. I didn't do the test. I only had to remember what I saw in the mission box for the many use of PAR that I did on v1.08. The ONLY mission choices are enemy target provinces. Darn! Nobody fixed it. Well, at least I don't feel like a total fool. Not knowing how to STRAT DEPLOY is most forgivable as that is illogical... but not knowing how to use PAR and TRA... well, that would be a real sin!

 

[Pang Bingxun]

This statement can collect with the other "illogical statements" because no player I know of has ever achieved a major conquest without incurring TC overlord - unless, of course, they are hardly attacking. So, "Low Infra is almost irrelevant" is - somehow - your manner of disregarding true strategy.

No, it is not refering to strategy. It is refering to a simplified theoretical situation designed to disprof the idea that low infra is a problem. It is only a relevant problem if combined with those things that i removed from this simplified situation.

You also seem to have forgotten my mentioning that my TC overlord was running nearly double during the deeper part of the conquest. "Low infra" is in fact critical to TC overload - even if the railroad has 0% partisan - because the TC overload flows beside the railroad where there is major partisanship. Hence - getting the railroad infra up so it alone can handle the needed supply flow - and so avoiding partisans - is the key to reducing overload.

Technically speaking this is not reducing the overload. But it reduces the downsides of tc overload to a much more acceptable level. Therefore in theory it is a good thing. The problem about is that building up infra takes a quite while. Due to that i conclude that building infra in russia is not a good idea unless the higher ESE can be utilized against a sufficiently strong enemy or at least in order to lower attrition. If only overrolling the remains of a eaten red army building infra on the way is not needed. If you want to utilize the supply line to attack china that is a different story.

Logically, if the INFRA was high enough there would be no TC overload. I can move the same army I have in Russia from Berlin to Paris and have no TC overload because I am using 100% provinces. But I can not let the same army just even only sit in deep Russia without nearly double TC overload. Because if one province – like ELTON – is only 20% infra along the railroad line, that creates TC overload.

TC overload does not depend on infra. TC overload is: tc load > available tc.
After taking a big chuck of russia the main reason for tc load are partisans.

So, building a true railroad with high enough infra – and placing GAR every province along it to get a “GREEN LINE” is the efficient way (and possible way).

The idea of the green line is a good idea. It makes sence to use GAR for it. Does it make sence to use many Gar-MP to make suppression > revolt risk without suppression? I donnot know. But not using parts of the available suppression because revolt risk is already down to something near 0% has downsides. There might be better ways to utilize Gar.

Of course, there are many techs to help reduce TC load, and using a smaller but better quality army will also greatly help.

Technically speaking there are no techs that reduce tc load. There are industry techs that increase ic and therefore tc. There are the logistic techs that increase tc. Those logistic techs also increase ESE.
Using a smaller army of better quality can reduce tc load. But in most cases better units cause a bigger tc load per unit. Therefore the possible gain is smaller than one might expect.

I wasn't comparing attrition. I was comparing what is called "COMPARE LOSSES". [...] And taking Siberia in winter is not a problem for a superior Wehrmacht. In fact, I delayed my attack on China waiting for the snow to come just because it is so much more fun doing it in the winter! :rofl:

That is fine with me. But if a senceful comparision is to be done one needs to compare the sum of losses suffered by both causes.

 

[Commander666]

No, it is not refering to strategy. It is refering to a simplified theoretical situation designed to disprof the idea that low infra is a problem.

Too much theory, and not a true game situation - which, by the way, will be suffered the very most only if going for Siberia. The TC problems with Bitter Peace are a cake walk compared to the Wehrmacht deep in Russia.

Technically speaking this is not reducing the overload. But it reduces the downsides of tc overload to a much more acceptable level. Therefore in theory it is a good thing. The problem about is that building up infra takes a quite while. Due to that i conclude that building infra in russia is not a good idea unless the higher ESE can be utilized against a sufficiently strong enemy or at least in order to lower attrition. If only overrolling the remains of a eaten red army building infra on the way is not needed. If you want to utilize the supply line to attack china that is a different story.

You should try speaking practically. I already stated that the real enemy (after the Bitter Peace line was passed by without taking Sverdlovsk) was not the Soviets but the attrition. Yes, building up infra as you proceed does take time. But I made a major screw up when I took ELTON (a 20% infra province) by not immediately starting infra construction BECAUSE I had not realized it is on the supply route to deep Russia. Not realizing that until later was my screw up. But there are 60% infra provinces skirting ELTON. Why does the supply trace thru Elton instead? Because the ELTON route is 1 province shorter, and AoD mechanics go for the "least number of provinces route". It, frankly, is nuts! Further, you can test using moving units that the AI often does not take the FASTEST route - but mostly the "least # of provinces route". But why should I build up a 20% province when a perfectly better (and faster for units moving) route goes around that? Because the supply from Berlin traces thru ELTON.

Never mind "over rolling" the remains of the Bolsheviks. You need a decent infra supply route - partisan free - just to not suffer horrible attrition to your units in deep Russia - or techically speaking - be able to efectively replace the strength lost due to attrition. Yes, China was another reason. But I also needed to move enough units to the Far East to defend that, right? That already is attrition with a poor supply line (technically units will not replace lost strength thereby weakening over the winter).

Right now I have ELTON at 35%... and there is a huge improvement for my big army poised to strike China. But the real "practical" in all of this is why would anybody go past Bitter Peace EXCEPT to rescue Japan? You think I can do that with half a dozen Lt ARM so I can avoid building the railroad? You must know how my TC demand will rise once I start just bombing with my 8 TACs based in Mongolia.

TC overload does not depend on infra. TC overload is: tc load > available tc. After taking a big chuck of russia the main reason for tc load are partisans.

We are not discussing that 2-3 = -1. We are discussing what causes Transport Load to rise. Once it rises past available Capacity, of course the difference is the Overload. The point is NOT the LOAD or the OVERLOAD. The only relevant point is what - along the route - creates greater than normal resistance. It is two things - partisans and low infra. If that were not true, why does my overload drop significantly every time another round of new infra along the "bad spots" in the route raise that province's infra another 5%. Because nothing else is changing. The army has been sitting there for months recuperating. All the GAR have been in place. Only the infra is improving at ELTON and some other spots; and TC OVERLOAD is dropping.

The idea of the green line is a good idea. It makes sence to use GAR for it. Does it make sence to use many Gar-MP to make suppression > revolt risk without suppression? I donnot know. But not using parts of the available suppression because revolt risk is already down to something near 0% has downsides. There might be better ways to utilize Gar.

Of course the "Green Railroad" is a good idea. Don't get what you trying to express in the rest except the last bit - a better way to use GAR. SURE! Let's disband ALL of them, and get my MP back up! :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Technically speaking there are no techs that reduce tc load. There are the logistic techs that increase tc. Those logistic techs also increase ESE.

Right! As soon as I post this I can go back and check what I wrote. But does it matter? Technically certain techs increase TC. By the principle of 2-3 = -1 that will become 3-3 = 0 meaning less overload. So - practically speaking - there are some vital techs that will reduce TC overload (by way of increasing TC capacity). Why would anyone even debate this self evident truth?

Using a smaller army of better quality can reduce tc load. But in most cases better units cause a bigger tc load per unit. Therefore the possible gain is smaller than one might expect.

You are just trying to find something to argue about. Sure, a brigade causes extra load. But it takes a lot of brigades to equal the load of one extra division. You know, what you wrote just above here sounds like Germany should "go for Siberia" using 1918 infantry as per your "technical focus" because 1918 infantry have less TC load than 1941 INF. If you want to reduce TC load significantly, just reduce the size of your army. Of course, you might lose the war! Or you could just do the right thing - a sufficient size army kept a bit smaller by using quality troops and building your railroads as you advance.

But if a senceful comparision is to be done one needs to compare the sum of losses suffered by both causes.

You are very right. It is not nice to lose probably at least 100 MP due to attrition of the Wehrmacht one winter deep in Russia. It was quite the lesson. I better find another 100 new MP because they will still be there another winter! Maybe we can "sea cruise" them out of there from China’s shores and get to friendlier Australia instead! :laugh:

However, there is no acurrate figure for MP that player loses due to attrition in game. But I am sure you might be able to theoretically calculate what it would be - if you knew the player's total units. But as you don't, we simply are left with ONLY one comparison - COMPARE LOSSES. And I lost just 1/4 million men conquering Poland, Norway, France, all the other countries that goes with that, the ongoing air and sub wars, AND Russia - fought all the way to the Soviet Far East. Put that into your "theories", Pang!

EDIT: And the most hillarious part about it is that it all became possible because of just 12 CAV-IV that trudged thru the Pripet Marshes - a game unit (German CAV) which you have very much devalued and not properly appreciated in your references to that unit elsewhere.

Anyway, I have no time - or desire - to banter with you regarding theories or "techically speaking". Mussolini just demanded that Hitler do something immediately about the 50 or so Allied divisions threatening to retake Alexandria. As the Suez Canal has now become a vital Kriegsmarine waterway, I am urgently needed to amphib Ethiopia and run some MECHs to the Vichy France border and just trap those 50 unwanted divisions. Got to go. BYE! :sleep:

 

[Pang Bingxun]

You should try speaking practically.

But theory is so much more fun.

I already stated that the real enemy (after the Bitter Peace line was passed by without taking Sverdlovsk) was not the Soviets but the attrition. Yes, building up infra as you proceed does take time.

In the time it needs to finish the first unit of infra soviet union could be annexed. Therefore in a practical situation there is not such a big need to increase infra.

But I made a major screw up when I took ELTON (a 20% infra province) by not immediately starting infra construction BECAUSE I had not realized it is on the supply route to deep Russia. Not realizing that until later was my screw up. But there are 60% infra provinces skirting ELTON. Why does the supply trace thru Elton instead? Because the ELTON route is 1 province shorter, and AoD mechanics go for the "least number of provinces route". It, frankly, is nuts! Further, you can test using moving units that the AI often does not take the FASTEST route - but mostly the "least # of provinces route". But why should I build up a 20% province when a perfectly better (and faster for units moving) route goes around that? Because the supply from Berlin traces thru ELTON.

Taking ELTON is no disadvantage for the supply line because supply line is not the lest # of provinces. Supply flows much more like water. It takes the route of the lowest resistance and the higher the infra the lower the resistance.

You need a decent infra supply route - partisan free - just to not suffer horrible attrition to your units in deep Russia - or techically speaking - be able to efectively replace the strength lost due to attrition. Yes, China was another reason. But I also needed to move enough units to the Far East to defend that right? That already is attrition with a poor supply line.

Not being able to replace strenght immediatly can be acceptable. If your unit has a low strenght that will lower attrition losses because they are proportional to strenght. If supply stockpiles are below 100% the saved attrition because of lack of reinforcements is even greater. There is however the downside that low strenghts divisions are poor at fighting.
I would not worry about defending the far east. The far east can be supplied via the vladivostok port.
In essence China is the best reason for building infra in russia. Is it a good reason?

But the real "practical" in all of this is why would anybody go past Bitter Peace EXCEPT to rescue Japan?

The logical alternative is to conquer japan. Total world domination.
Getting to help out japan can work by going trough india. The climate and the ESE there is much more friendly.

You must know how my TC demand will rise once I start just bombing with my 8 TACs based in Mongolia.

By almost nothing. Airforce and navy cause very little tc load. Fighting land divisions and partisans are likely to be the main reasons for tc load.

We are not discussing that 2-3 = -1. We are discussing what causes Transport Load to rise. Once it rises past available Capacity, of course the difference is the Overload. The point is NOT the LOAD or the OVERLOAD. The only relevant point is what - along the route - creates greater than normal resistance. It is two things - partisans and low infra. If that were not true, why does my overload drop significantly every time another round of new infra along the "bad spots" in the route raise that province's infra another 5%. Because nothing else is changing. The army has been sitting there for months recuperating. All the GAR have been in place. Only the infra is improving at ELTON and some other spots; and TC OVERLOAD is dropping.

Are you saying that tc load is dropping because you build infra at ELTON?

Of course the "Green Railroad" is a good idea. Don't get what you trying to express in the rest except the last bit - a better way to use them. SURE! Let's disband ALL of them, and get my MP back up! :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

There are 3 options:
1. Keep Gar tight in a main supply line as you suggest. This decreases ESE losses on this route.
2. Use GAR more loosely. This decreases tc load from partisans and therefore increases ESE at the source(capital).
3. Donnot build GAR. You are loughing about that but this could prove to be valid alternative. In terms of tc load and ESE the first 2 option are of course superior.

You are just trying to find something to argue about.

Am i trying? Those things simply catch my eye.

Sure, a brigade causes extra load. But it takes a lot of brigades to equal the load of one extra division.

If comparing the tc load of 1 Infantry division with the tc load by 2 Sp-Art brigades the 2 brigades cause the bigger tc load. This is quite a reason to not use brigades. Still i would advise to use brigades and top quality troops as you suggest.

However, there is no acurrate figure for MP that player loses due to attrition in game. But I am sure you might be able to theoretically calculate what it would be - if you knew the player's total units.

If precise figures are desired one would have to note the shown attrition of every unit every hour. One can use simpler methods to get rough estimations. Combat losses are easily read out. But there might be cases where sacrificing 50000 men in battle can save 100000 men from attrition.

EDIT: And the most hillarious part about it is that it all became possible because of just 12 CAV-IV that trudged thru the Pripet Marshes - a game unit (German CAV) which you have very much devalued and not properly appreciated in your references to that unit elsewhere.

I value them quite high in a supporting role. They are perfect for temporarly holding a province that is not going to be attacked by conventional means but could be lost if not defended against rethreating units. They are perfect to secure those provices that l.Arm1939 has taken.

 

[Commander666]

In the time it needs to finish the first unit of infra soviet union could be annexed. Therefore in a practical situation there is not such a big need to increase infra.

Right!? I mean, "HOW WRONG!" So now we have Pang finishing off Russia in just 3 months! Gee, even I couldn't do that! I guess we would have to define just eaxtly what is the START LINE. BP has fired, of course. Except we can't let it fire. So, we need to use the start line as per the Wehrmacht's position just before BP would fire. Heck, that's just a bit past the Caspian Sea. Seems I remember there remaining about 100 SU divisions - a bit too much for a "few Lt ARM" to blitz to Vladivostk! Back to the "reasonable size army" to not get wiped out by a very angry Stalin, the return of TC OVERLOAD - and needing those "green railroads"!

There is however the downside that low strenghts divisions are poor at fighting.

Why is there always a "downside" to your strategy ideas? :rofl:

I would not worry about defending the far east. The far east can be supplied via the vladivostok port.

I guess you have not experienced a determined Yankee amphib of that shoreline. German owned Vladivostok is supplied from Berlin - even with Siberia liberated. However, you can set up convoy to there which would give higher ESE than running supplies from Berlin. But as it will be only a few defensive troops (low total TC if the German army is no longer there waiting to invade China), I feel the convoy risk is not worth it. This is what I was referring to when I earlier stated "magical stuff happens when you get to the far east".

The logical alternative is to conquer japan. Total world domination.

As an Axis I do not attack my Axis friends. I know some people do. Maybe better to just play the Allies?



[

Getting to help out japan can work by going trough india. The climate and the ESE there is much more friendly.

Right? (wrong!) And you can suffer 1 million KIA trying to push that Chinese horde out of the many mountains you need to fight across. Or you can do it the really cool way, and crush them in a month using the army you put in place fighting Russia by just dropping down very easy terrain from Mongolia, take their capital in 2 weeks - and trap them against the Japanese.

Are you saying that tc load is dropping because you build infra at ELTON?

Correct. Same army, sitting same stationary, same GAR already in place. Only changes are improving ELTON and some other poor infra provinces in railroad. Climate same - summertime, and TC dropping. All Luftwaffe just sitting on the ground. Only thing changing is newly constructed infra, and TC is dropping. To run an accurate test I would need to get everything out of deployment - something I can do at any stage by reloading using one of the many file saves and simply creating a "no action game" to measure precise TC drop after new infra constructs. This might become part of "Barbarossa - a Blitz" when that thread renews and the Wehrmacht gets that far. Certainly the facts of TC, attrition and building the railroads are the most interesting part of the deeper conquest, and which I plan to concentrate on with screen shots and factual tests in that thread - when that thread gets there.

Taking ELTON is no disadvantage for the supply line because supply line is not the lest # of provinces. Supply flows much more like water. It takes the route of the lowest resistance and the higher the infra the lower the resistance.

This is the MOST interesting and MOST important statement of all discussed in this thread (other than clicking the mouse correctly to Strat redeploy!). It is because of the major importance in your above that I returned.

Let's start off by first "adjusting" your statement to better make your point. I think you meant to write, "Improving infrastructure at ELTON is no advantage for the supply line." Your point is that the supply will mostly flow around Elton using a one province longer route which has 60% infra instead of going thru Elton's 20% infra. If that were true, then I should not see any TC load reduction when Elton infra goes from 20% to 25%. But I do - subject to doing a perfectly "dead game test".

Next, allow me to correctly expand on your "Supply flows much more like water.". Water is an excellent analogy - but you need to point out the FULL situation. So, I will explain. Supply flows from the capital to the units much like water flows. However, when all your units are very far away, for the most part the supply flows like a long river to reach those units. As long as your TC is showing green, you can assume all of the needed supply is flowing within the banks of that river. As you increase the TC load, it is akin to pouring more water into the river, so the river rises. As you increase TC load further, the point will be reached when all the water that must be poured into the river results in that river overflowing its banks. This is the point that your TC display goes red. It goes red because the supply demand (amount of water) can no longer be carried by the route that is the most efficient (the river) and the river overflows, resulting in that extra water flowing very slowly as it spreads out across a flat country side full of obstacles like trees and things (partisans). The more water that is made to flow over this flooded non-river landscape, the higher is the red TC display.

Now let's get back to the river. The best way to keep the river from overflowing while pouring ever more water into it is to simply remove ALL obstacles within the river. Pick out the huge boulders, clear the banks from obstructions, and definitely remove anything damming the river such as trees and logs stuck under bridges. These blockages are the low infra provinces along the route, and improving infra there is akin to clearing out the river so more water can flow along it better.

But all of this misses the KEY POINT of "Where is the river?" so human player knows which are the critical provinces with low infra to concentrate on improving. Let's not get off on a tangent here, and keep this discussion of Berlin supplies flowing to Far Eastern Russia. How the heck does human know where is that river?

I have my way of determining that - something I will present with continuation of "Barbarossa - a Blitz". But I sure would like to learn your answer to this most KEY QUESTION. And I am sure so would all of Forum.

It takes the route of the lowest resistance and the higher the infra the lower the resistance.

I will only add that this statement is flawed. Now you are comparing to lightning. Supply does NOT just follow the "route of lowest resistance". If that were true it would flow 20 higher infra provinces around an area of low infra - instead of the shorter route of pushing thru the obstacle. In fact supply flows exactly like water. When it meets resistance it builds up (that is slowed supply = increased TC load). And when it has build up enough where ever it is damned, it then can push onwards. The only truth in your above is that supply will try to follow the highest infra route if possible - provided it is direct enough. But if you force it to flow from point A to point D because your troops are at point D, it will dam up inbetween at low infra points B and C long before it takes a much longer circuitous route via a distant points X and Y. If you dam it up enough at point B or point C, yes, then it will flow via other points also.

I am not going to explain here how I determined "where is the river from Berlin to the Far East". That goes in my other thread. But please tell Forum your answer now. And this really is the first - and most important key piece of info AoD player needs regarding deciding what to improve along a railroad... knowing where exactly is the darned railway as regards the normal situation of having no TC overload. Once that is know, then people can start planning for demanding more supply load while doing what is right to keep overload at minimum.