Supply Question

[Compass Rose]

In the attached pic from the game Tobruk, the British player advanced his recon units to the far west (left) of the game map and held the main road hexs at the end of the game map. One of the game settings we were using was virtual truck supply. Needless to say, because of this action, my troops have been in Isolated status for several turns.

My supply question is if we were playing with explicit supply instead of virtual truck supply, would all of the German units still be in isolated status if the Brits did the same type of move?

Thanks

[Strela]

The answer is no. Your opponent has taken the supply source hexes which are key for the virtual truck supply. The supply source hex is the starting point for the calculation of the supply path.

To stop the above happening, scenario designers should not limit the number of supply sources to prevent the above - in the above case a supply source further down the map would be harder to capture and deliver less supply to the German player - essentially simulating the choking of supplies without the isolated status.

Explicit supply works differently and has the supply on map - you will only be isolated if cut off (whether you have supply points in the pocket or not). Being out of supply in an explicit supply game essentially only affects artillery availability, ammo and fuel levels - not isolation.

David

[cazart!]

To stop the above happening, scenario designers should not limit the number of supply sources to prevent the above - in the above case a supply source further down the map would be harder to capture and deliver less supply to the German player - essentially simulating the choking of supplies without the isolated status.

I'd also suggest that it is a bit of a gamey tactic by someone who is overly familiar with the scenario. While there is nothing to prohibit it, I would be uncomfortable with it. (To be clear - I don't think working to isolate units is gamey, but sitting on known supply hexes is pushing the boundaries a bit far.)

[Ricky B]

And actually you would still be isolated as that check requires a path to a supply source - but your units could still draw supply as long as supply units are nearby. The check for isolation is strictly a path check to the supply sources available, which are still used but only for the isolation check, I believe.

Rick

[Volcano Man]

To stop the above happening, scenario designers should not limit the number of supply sources to prevent the above - in the above case a supply source further down the map would be harder to capture and deliver less supply to the German player - essentially simulating the choking of supplies without the isolated status.

I'd also suggest that it is a bit of a gamey tactic by someone who is overly familiar with the scenario. While there is nothing to prohibit it, I would be uncomfortable with it. (To be clear - I don't think working to isolate units is gamey, but sitting on known supply hexes is pushing the boundaries a bit far.)

Yes, I agree. Sitting on map edge supply sources with fast recon units is generally bad form. If the front line has pushed beyond it then it is fair game I guess, but you should play as if you have no knowledge of map edge supply source locations IMO, since they do not show up on the other side's map. Of course, not to say anyone is in the wrong here - people can play however they want to, but a little good sportsmanship does help keep people coming back to play you again in the future. ;)

You can also try to play with VST off, which I think will resort to Global Supply with no sources, but I am probably wrong about that -- someone correct me please, I haven't played with VST off in eons. :eek1:

I try to push a continuous front line past around the map where possible, which does a not job to catch bypassed enemy supply sources, or it causes them (with VST on) to divert so far out of the way that it is... mostly useless. In desert scenarios, the recon car screen is useful for this purpose (to maintain a front line screen, especially on the flanks).

[Mr Grumpy]

There are two schools of thought that tend to prevail on this ladder about this tactic, first is that although this is in no way cheating it is bad form to take advantage of a abstract feature like supply hex’s to gain an advantage.

Second there are players who believe that anythingwithin the rules is OK and the responsibility for defending your supply sources with some weak units is down to the player who owns them, however players who do this may find that they don’t get asked for a return match or your opponent will try the same tactic on them.

So choose your poison on what is right or wrong…:chin:


This problem is at its worst in the desert titles where units have huge MP allowances and there is always an open southern flank to sneak round and unless I am playing an opponent I trust I will always place units around my supply sources, interestingly in my H2H version of this very same scenario I placed a line of impassable hex’s to the south to prevent just such a move as I am aware that some players would try this tactic.

[raizer]

this is a Di#k move by your opponent imho

[Barbarrossa.]

In the Desert the British were famous for their use of Long Range Desert Patrols combined with Ultra they had a good idea where the Axis supply Dumps were and often blew them up. David Stirling is credited with the formation of the first embryo SAS which orginated from these patrols always light fast recce units. The Axis did not use these patrols to any extent and combined with the constant sinking of sea transport, supply, was the Achilles Heel of the Axis in the Desert. Accordingly in my opinion the tactic of the British player seeking out to destroy supply dumps is historically accurate and the Axis player needs to protect them. Perhaps an allusion to the LRDP at the beginning might be timely to avoid difficulties. :soap:

[raizer]

course the player never has to seek them out-he always knows where they are in the game and can simply move right to them without ever have to "seekout" or "decrypt ulta", whatever...just move to the hexes and end the game

[Dog Soldier]

course the player never has to seek them out-he always knows where they are in the game and can simply move right to them without ever have to "seekout" or "decrypt ulta", whatever...just move to the hexes and end the game

Conversely, an Axis player knows where the Allied player is headed and can set a "trap". Just spotting a light Allied reece unit like this is enough in most desert scenarios to kill it.

There are several measures an Axis player can take for rear security in the desert.

1. Axis Reece units are plentiful and can be used as VM suggests to create a screen on the flanks making a flanking move by the Allied player impossible or at least a very long trip. This is a passive response. It also does not preclude the need to garrison the supply point. It does have an advantage of using the Axis A/C at the front then recalling them quickly to the rear if an intruder is detected.

2. A more aggressive move is to create Axis Reece hunter killer groups. Most scenarios will only require one as in the scenario example in this thread. The group is composed of two or three armored car units and one or two motorcycle infantry. Both unit types have the high MP to cover vast areas. The M/C will need to be mounted / dismounted during search turns, but can in some cases be left in travel mode.
A little advance planning by the Axis player will allow these groups to cover more than half the rear area each turn searching out any Allied infiltrators. The Axis A/C can locate and pin an Allied A/C while the M/C infantry move up to deliver the assault. In stock scenarios such an infantry assault will destroy the surrounded Allied A/C outright. In _alt scenarios you might need to delegate some PkwI unit(s) to do the same job.
An air strike, will also do the job in a pinch. Some Axis artillery is of a long enough range, to be positioned at times to cover both the front and the rear. In stock games an artillery shot on the spotted Allied A/C will end the argument with flaming vehicles. The better disruption chance of air strikes and artillery strikes on armor will at least cripple the Allied A/C so it can then be finished off by surrounding it and assault.

3. In either of the above strategies, be sure to garrison the supply points with a long range HQ, like Rommel himself or an one hex range ATG. I prefer the ATG approach in most cases as these units are often dead weight at the front and have the advantage over the HQ to dig in on the supply point. They may even end the threat with an ambush shot on an Allied A/C trying to occupy the supply point from outside LOS. Once entrenched they will last long enough against a small Allied A/C force until you can send help to eliminate the threat. A spare flak unit can also help out if available. This will keep Allied air strikes off your garrison and add a ZOC where needed.

4. As the Axis you only need to guard / garrison one of these supply points, not all of them, to keep your forces from a cheap isolation. He who defends everything defends nothing. The other supply point(s) can be used as honey pots to trap Allied intruders. Just keep an eye on them by long range recon. If you find a squatter, (I hope you were expecting to find one) have your hunter killer group in range to swoop in on the squatter. Using the board edge to your advantage to not allow the squatter an escape route is just as fair as squatting is in the first place.

Bottom line, I never concern myself too much with the gameyness of supply source squatting. Like encircling an infantry Bn with 3 vehicle flak units, there is a counter move to such tactics. One has to follow the cardinal rule of PzC and always keep a reserve for the unexpected. Protecting / disrupting supply in the desert can be a mini game in itself in most North Africa scenarios. A real chance for some cat and mouse play for both sides.

Dog Soldier