Supply Lop-sided

[Bdr.Mallette]

Is there an explanation as to why, 2 forces, having the same 1% supply replacememnt pool, and having relatively the same size forces, that one force could have SOOOOO much supply and the other not.
Is it dependant upon how many units are on the map at present or by how much total force can be applied by turn numbers and event generated re-inforcements.
For some reason, in Vietnam, the US/ARVN forces have almost unlimited supply whereas the NLF/NVA are above subsistance levels at times. Could it be due to the "across water" supply dumps and formation arrival hexes?
Both forces have, by regiment, have nearly the same number of units and replacement %...?

Confused.
Other than editing the actual supply needed for both forces or levels allowed, can there be another reason?

Wunderin?

[Martin Schenkel]

Check the Formation Supply Distribution Efficiency values. This regulates the amount of supply from the stockpile that actually reaches the units, on a formation by formation basis.

[Southern Dandy]

I'm not sure which set of supply numbers you might be looking at, but terrain hinders supply distribution and interdiction hampers it as well. Both of these things would in theory tend to play against the NVA and VC during the period of American involvement in the theater, especially the interdiction aspect!

Without more closely looking into the scenario in question, those are my best guesses.

Mr. Schenkel's point about the efficiency settings is well taken. American and western European forces tend to get high values in that department, while most other nations are poorly rated, which would also help explain the discrepancy.

John

[Bdr.Mallette]

Thanks for the help.

I've looked at the numbers and rate of supply, a little high but not impossible. I.E. 28 Assault squads 1 turn.
Supply must be a continuing question in TOAW.

[JAMiAM]

It sounds like you are referring to replacement rates, instead of supplies.

[Bdr.Mallette]

I guess yer right.
I am.
Different story.