Scorched Earth?

[Commander666]

Is there something special that SU units must do to have this work - other than click it... and stand there until retreated? I assume it doesn't work if player initiates retreat.

So I'm letting unit doing scorched earth be forced into retreat... but other stacks I'm retreating early. Is that maybe why it isn't working?

Or does it not work if unit has no leader, or is low org, or what... cause it don't seem to be working!? It was working for the AI SU, but hasn't for me as SU.

Or - perhaps - it works better when a bigger force is retreated? But I thought the idea was to select a single unit to do scorched earth so one can voluntarily retreat the others early.

 

[Mr_B0narpte]

For scorched earth to occur, the units have to be retreating from battle (it does not matter if you told them to retreat or if they were forced to) and you cannot have any units still battling in the province.

I.e. Lets say you are defending Kiev with 6 divisions divided into two corps - both with scorched earth on. You retreat the first corps on day 1, but scorched earth will not occur until the second corps are retreating too.

So obviously to maximise scorched earth you have to retreat units in tandem and as early as possible. But this is somewhat impractical as it can lead to units being over-run.

Being able to scorch voluntarily would be a great addition to AoD - but not sure what affect that would have on the AI.

 

[Commander666]

(it does not matter if you told them to retreat or if they were forced to) and you cannot have any units still battling in the province.

This is very clear.

So obviously to maximise scorched earth you have to retreat units in tandem and as early as possible.

Why? You just said - basically - the first stack won't do scorched earth because 2nd stack still fighting. (?) Or don't I understand retreating in tandem. What has "ASAP" got to do with it?

The question I'm really asking is how to get maximum scorched earth with minimum org loss suffered. Because I thought it had to be forced retreat, I was selecting one unit to do scorched earth (and basically become a useless unit thereafter having been forced into retreat with all org lost).

But - if scorched earth can be voluntary retreat after battle has started - just set all stacks to do that. Pause game, retreat all stacks when you want before losing too much org - even different directions. Resume game. I understand from you that would work. Correct? There is no battle as all units retreated same instant (?)

Obviously, the issue of preventing over runs is a different concern. Player should already have a unit in province he is retreating to (defense in depth).

I am glad voluntary retreat works for getting scorched earth. So - is the effect of scorched earth linked to how many units doing it? Because so far I can not confirm getting any consistent results. While provinces are degrading 15 infra when German conqueror takes SU territory, sometimes it was a lot more. ( the AI was not doing logistical strike.)

And sometimes - as Germany - I took some provinces with no infra degradation. Maybe that was uncontested conquest. (?)

What is the degradation of scorched earth in infra level? IIRC bases, factories and resources always go zero in normal conquest (no unit did scorched earth). But infra level upon conqueror entering seems to vary in a way I can not yet figure out.

When does the scorched earth effect occur? When retreat starts, or when retreat completed, or conqueror enters? It would be nice to read province infra, select unit to do scorched earth, retreat unit with end of all battles in that province, and read decreased province infra.

 

[Mr_B0narpte]

But - if scorched earth can be voluntary retreat after battle has started - just set all stacks to do that. Pause game, retreat all stacks when you want before losing too much org - even different directions. Resume game. I understand from you that would work. Correct?

Correct.

You increase the effect of scorched earth by having more units retreating in the province and also the longer they spend retreating, the more land is scorched.

IIRC when you conquer a province the infra automatically drops by 15, and every thing else (I.e. Forts, air bases etc) drops to 0. Scorched earth means you decrease the infra even more - the infra will start decreasing as soon as the units with scorched earth on start retreating and there is no longer a battle going on in the province. Once the province is conquered the infra drops by an additional 15 alongside what has already been scorched. Units still retreating cannot scorch the province anymore (but the conqueror can also not repair the province until all enemy units have left).

 

[Lord Jarski]

Was it that engineer brigades helped with scorching earth? I remember reading something like that ages ago but no practical experience of it being true.

 

[Pang Bingxun]

IIRC when you conquer a province the infra automatically drops by 15, and every thing else (I.e. Forts, air bases etc) drops to 0.

Wrong. Infra is reduced by 25% of current size, which will be 0.15 if it was 0.6. Forts, air bases and naval bases are reduced by 90% of current size. Factories are reduced by 50% of current size. The only thing that is reduced to zero is provincial efficiency and thus base ic.

Was it that engineer brigades helped with scorching earth? I remember reading something like that ages ago but no practical experience of it being true.

You may be referring to the effect that the engineer brigade has on attacking forts. It increases the hourly reduction in fort size, if i recall correctly by a factor of 3.

 

[Commander666]

Thanks for all the good info. So... the gist to my answer is... the more units doing scorched earth (and the longer it takes to retreat) the bigger the effect.

OK, that now leads to a winning strategy, and Mr_BOnarpte, I now get the significance of "retreating in tandem". In short, every stack should be set to do scorched earth and - provided one is in control of what is termed "strategic retreat", then probably all stacks would voluntarily retreat from a battle (possibly different directions) at the same time (tandem) to maximize the destruction .

Interestingly, scorching will continue as long as units are retreating - but end when conqueror enters that province. But repairing can not begin as long as units still retreating. So there may be great advantage in having a single INF slowed by ART brigade retreating into the furthest mountain place possible.

This now leads to capitalizing on the idea. Can retreats be made to go further than just to next province? I know that with navy sometimes it is possible to lock in a long retreat over several sea zones. But I have never tried it with land units. (?)

 

[Mr_B0narpte]

This now leads to capitalizing on the idea. Can retreats be made to go further than just to next province? I know that with navy sometimes it is possible to lock in a long retreat over several sea zones. But I have never tried it with land units. (?)

Good question, I'm afraid I don't know but I imagine that the unit would scorch every province its retreating through until it reaches its final destination - but remember a unit cannot scorch a province if there are other non-retreating units there so you would have to create a long open passage for it to work. That's quite risky.

 

[Zsar1]

Looking to collect a few opinions here. Would it be a good idea to move the "Scorch Earth" button from individual units to individual provinces (say, right next to their "Prioritise" button)?

There seem to be several problems with this mechanic, and all stem from the fact that individual units scorch:

• Provinces can be repaired while supposed to be scorched, if units fight delaying action there. (Waste of IC; also hurts the original intention)
• Retreating units may scorch provinces they are not supposed to, if attacked at low ORG in their destination (when backup is a few hours late).
• Staged retreats cannot be combined with scorching, which increases the risk of slow units (Inf+Art) of being overrun.
• Provinces may be non-optimally scorched, because some retreating units were not ordered to do so (difficult to manage without pausing).

And of course, this would mean that one click could suffice, whereas #unitsInProvince clicks are necessary right now.
... But there may be downsides I have not thought of yet.

I am imagining the process about like this:

1. a province is selected to be scorched
2. immediately all repairs to this province (and their IC allotment) cease
3. when any friendly unit retreats from the province, this unit starts to scorch it and continues until
4. it has completely left OR a hostile non-retreating unit is present in the province
5. retreating units continue to scorch an enemy-controlled province, if no non-retreating hostile units are there (to allow tactical counter-attacks)

Especially 5. may be controversial?

This setup should also make it far easier to teach the AI to scorch somewhat smartly than the current one.

 

[Pang Bingxun]

Provinces can be repaired while supposed to be scorched, if units fight delaying action there. (Waste of IC; also hurts the original intention)

I did not know this. What would help there and not only there would be an option to zero-priotize repairs in a province. While i dislike using scorched earth the option to depriorize certain repairs would be highly welcome.

 

[stevep]

I would definitely approve of an ability to select which provinces you repair 1st. Can be a right pain when you want to repair certain provinces while advancing into hostile territory but face a massive bill because the game decides to repair everything. Even with the ability to set priority on provinces, which of course you have to remember to remove later you can't control how much you spend and where.

 

[Pang Bingxun]

I would definitely approve of an ability to select which provinces you repair 1st.

By giving provinces priority they will be repaired first. What is lacking what provinces will be repaired last or never. If you estimate a province will be lost soon you donnot want it to be repaired even if you have the ic available.

Also nice would be an option to only repair certain buildings in a province. When advancing into enemy territory getting only Infra up might suffice for your needs. Such an option however might also result in a micromanagement mess. I am not sure if others will appreciate that as much as i do. As i recall it Lennartos is fond of keeping things reasonable simple, not overcomplicating them might be reasonable.

 

[Commander666]

Looking to collect a few opinions here. Would it be a good idea to move the "Scorch Earth" button from individual units to individual provinces (say, right next to their "Prioritise" button)?

Excellent, and will be much appreciated.

when any friendly unit retreats from the province, this unit starts to scorch it and continues until ... ... ... it has completely left OR a hostile non-retreating unit is present in the province.

All good; so there would be some sort of daily or hourly rate at which scorching occurs. Is sensible, as fires consume more over time. If other side can get there soon enough, they should be able to stop damage by preventing more from being scorched since really scorching of a province would take several days.

retreating units continue to scorch an enemy-controlled province, if no non-retreating hostile units are there (to allow tactical counter-attacks)

NO, this conflicts. If enemy enters province, scorching has ended. Paratroopers need control of province for scorching to end.

To simplify, scorching can only occur if you have control of the province, are not defending it with non-retreating units, and have units retreating from that province. When retreat stops or control of province changes (should that occur first), scorching ends.

 

[Commander666]

Even with the ability to set priority on provinces, which of course you have to remember to remove later you can't control how much you spend and where.

Managing the priority buttons works very well to get repaired what one most needs in respect to what funding one can afford. Of course, if player sets too many provinces on priority, they will defeat the logic of "priority".

Why does one have to remove the earlier priority setting.? Would it not still be a priority province? Actually, I find that the "blue province look" is quite helpful in determining the best ESE trace that I want repair prioritized for.

 

[stevep]

Managing the priority buttons works very well to get repaired what one most needs in respect to what funding one can afford. Of course, if player sets too many provinces on priority, they will defeat the logic of "priority".

Why does one have to remove the earlier priority setting.? Would it not still be a priority province? Actually, I find that the "blue province look" is quite helpful in determining the best ESE trace that I want repair prioritized for.

Commander666

The problem is when your making major advances on a broad front, or simply deep attacks, you can have a repair bill that vastly exceeds your immediate capacity and you can't tell how much the repair for each province is. Hence, even if only prioritised provinces are repaired before anything else you can not tell what amount you should put on this. If there was the capacity to suppress repairs, as there is for suppressing upgrades for units you could control resources far more efficiently.

Also there is the factor that you may have armoured forces doing deep penetration to disrupt enemy activity and especially downgrade some of their more important provinces. [Done this often as the Soviets against Germany]. Where in the short term there's no real expectation of holding the territory. Its wasteful having to repair such provinces because you can't control where you repair. Similarly as Germany do you really want to be repairing provinces that will be in Vichy France after the latter is formed but have been occupied by advancing German forces?

Pang put it better as its the ability to control when provinces are NOT repaired until your ready that is lacking.

A province may be prioritises because you want some resources in it at that point, or to restore infrastructure in support of an ongoing campaign. It may not be that much of a priority even a couple of months later, let alone a year or two when the main fighting is on another front. Hence other areas may have a markedly higher priority even if the original ones are still significant and if they take damage it may delay more crucial repairs.

Hope this explains my points more clearly.

Steve

 

[Pang Bingxun]

Similarly as Germany do you really want to be repairing provinces that will be in Vichy France after the latter is formed but have been occupied by advancing German forces?

Possibly. Vichy can become an ally of germany. In case of Vichy the logic is a bit unclear, but when liberating new puppets I rather repair their provinces as much as i can first, therefore i prioritise them.

Something to consider about repairs is that unlike reinforcements they donnot cost any resources. As germany is very much limited by resources it is important to maximize resource efficience. Something that does not consume resources is very resource efficient. Prior to ~1942 however that logic is less important as simply icd-restrictions do still apply.

 

[Commander666]

Hope this explains my points more clearly.

That did explain it much better... but IMO it still is not a good idea. I mean, while I clearly understand how it would help you being able to set provinces to no repair to better achieve your aims, I mean that the idea suffers problems of history, logic and complexity.

you can have a repair bill that vastly exceeds your immediate capacity and you can't tell how much the repair for each province is.

That is intentional as "a brake on conquest speed" and IIRC was modified for greater difficulty some years ago. Think how many hours it takes to run your MOTs thru a province. Now compare to reality. If you can not repair at 100%, you are probably conquering too fast for game balance and the repair bill should be doubled again to get greater realism into the game.

Also there is the factor that you may have armoured forces doing deep penetration

While you, I and other players may do that and it does indeed make for magnificent game play, IRL nobody dared do that without insuring that the path from supply depot to the panzers was repaired enough so the trucks could get to a new forward supply dump. In short, "deep penetration" in AoD means running 3-4 provinces or 1000+ km behind enemy lines while in real warfare it means going less than what tank can travel in one day maximum. And that was not even 100 km. Or it was out of gas. In short, deep penetration ends a few kilometers past where your fuel trucks can reach. But - with rapid prioritized repairs - true deep penetration is a reality.

I think the best argument to leave as is (or actually increase repair bills) is to handicap skilled players.

 

[stevep]

That did explain it much better... but IMO it still is not a good idea. I mean, while I clearly understand how it would help you being able to set provinces to no repair to better achieve your aims, I mean that the idea suffers problems of history, logic and complexity.

Not really as it denies the commander the ability to choose which areas to upgrade. To tell him that he must upgrade all provinces, including those of minor importance or which he may have no intention of holding does defy logic. Also I don't think it greatly adds to the complicity, at least not for the player. Don't know enough about the actual programming to say on that but if it is difficult that is a valid point.

That is intentional as "a brake on conquest speed" and IIRC was modified for greater difficulty some years ago. Think how many hours it takes to run your MOTs thru a province. Now compare to reality. If you can not repair at 100%, you are probably conquering too fast for game balance and the repair bill should be doubled again to get greater realism into the game.

Given that you have sometimes mentioned how quickly you have conquered assorted powers, markedly faster than in RL that does sound rather a strange argument. I'm actually a fairly inexperienced player, largely due to lack of time. Don't think my attacks compare to the historical ones so if you do what you propose you might make it a more challenging game for the experienced player but even more unrealistic for players like me.

Also given how much the game diverges from reality, for instance massed British strategic bombing forces in 39-40, fairly easy [for many players] Sealion and very deep conquests in Russia, massed conquests and annexation by powers such as the US, very strange naval and supply rules, the bias in favour of continental powers in terms of manpower for instance, how over-powered paras are etc, then I find it strange that a strategic commander can't priorities repairs to any realistic degree. Note here even when you priorities a number of provinces that doesn't allow you to select say only transport repairs or give any idea what the actual total cost for the province is. [This latter is what I was mainly arguing again].

While you, I and other players may do that and it does indeed make for magnificent game play, IRL nobody dared do that without insuring that the path from supply depot to the panzers was repaired enough so the trucks could get to a new forward supply dump. In short, "deep penetration" in AoD means running 3-4 provinces or 1000+ km behind enemy lines while in real warfare it means going less than what tank can travel in one day maximum. And that was not even 100 km. Or it was out of gas. In short, deep penetration ends a few kilometers past where your fuel trucks can reach. But - with rapid prioritized repairs - true deep penetration is a reality.

I think the best argument to leave as is (or actually increase repair bills) is to handicap skilled players.

Actually I think your wrong here because it is the mobility of the forces with unrepaired provinces when the enemy has largely collapsed that enables such deep penetration. Hence increasing the repair bills or making them more random would have no impact here. I'm talking here mainly using my experience of playing the Soviets and the sort of collapse of the German defences that occurs in 43-44. [Also started one game as the Germans but that has been paused for nearly a year because of other matters taking up my time]. If we wanted a truly realistic campaign we would need steps to prevent this, or thing such as the German advance to the Urals within months of attacking the Soviets but increasing the bill for already unrepaired provinces is unlikely to be a factor here.

Possibly what you would need to prevent this, which is what as you say occurred historically, is that units carry much less supply so they need to resupply far more frequently. Especially for motorised/armoured units. Basically units can make the 4-6 province penetration we're talking about on their integral supply without any addition needed.

Steve

 

[stevep]

Possibly. Vichy can become an ally of germany. In case of Vichy the logic is a bit unclear, but when liberating new puppets I rather repair their provinces as much as i can first, therefore i prioritise them.

Something to consider about repairs is that unlike reinforcements they donnot cost any resources. As germany is very much limited by resources it is important to maximize resource efficience. Something that does not consume resources is very resource efficient. Prior to ~1942 however that logic is less important as simply icd-restrictions do still apply.

Pang

That is a point but its probably not a high priority for Germany in May-June 1940. I'm only got very limited experience playing the Germans, one partial campaign I would like to resume when RL allows and am struggling to get the historical allies as it is. [Possibly coloured by mainly playing the Soviets before, where diplomacy is pretty much irrelevant. Everybody hates you and will join an alliance against you regardless of what you do so I didn't really do much to influence people as the Germans. Will seek to change this, if/when I can resume, that game.]

Steve