Supply in EA 2012A

Veers

Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2006
Messages
3,413
Reaction score
8
Location
Kelowna, BC
Country
llCanada
Secadegas, that God among men, has made some excellent points regarding supply. See here.
I have, therefore, begun to make some sweeping changes to supply in EA.
Previously in TOAW there was a bug that prevented the event engine from removing a Force A supply point from territory occupied by Force B. It REALLY effed things up and quite frustrated me the last time I tried to work on EA back in 09. It's now FIXED. Hallelujah! Seriously, this is the revolutionary kind of awesome.

These changes will be encompassed int he to be released at some point 2012A.

Some background:
The best example of the sea supply roads being awesome was the eastern Med, with the Axis having to occupy Crete AND Cyprus to get supply to the Levant. Now, I still don't have a a way to make it work 100% like it does without the sea supply roads, but it'll come DAMN close, and frankly, it has excellent ramifications for supply everywhere in the damn Med, Channel, and even Norway!

The idea behind it:
I'll use the eastern Med as an example. Currently, of course, because of the sea supply roads you need to occupy Cyprus and Crete (and hope the Allies don't use the fleet to occupy the sea supply road between the two islands) in order to have supply flow to the Levant.
The new way, without sea supply roads will have events whereby the occupation of Athens will give the Axis an SP at Suda Bay(Crete), the occupation of Herkalieon(Crete) will give the Axis an SP at Nicosia(Cyprus), the occupation of Limassol(Cyprus) will give the Axis an SP at Beruit.
Bam!
The drawback:
The Axis could occupy Cyprus (without occupying Crete OR Athens) and they'd still get an SP at Beruit.
The kicker:
The events that place the SPs will all be reversible, meaning that if the Axis capture Limassol and then lose it, their SP at Beruit goes away! So, if the Axis go for broke and get Limassol without the pre-requisites, they'll have to keep control of an island that they have no supply on, an extremely tricky gamble.

So, while the opportunity exists to leap over Crete/Athens and go for Cyprus to get Axis supply in the Levant, unless the Allies are in a desperate way in the Med and can't spare anyone to go boot out an out of supply unit from Cyprus, then the Allies should be able to put a quick stop to the Axis efforts.

So, this gives us the ability to:
Make the Allied SPs on Northern France dependent on holding London, and my (initially poorly placed) SPs at Lorient, St. Nazaire, and La Rochelle to be dependent on holding Cherbourg.
Make the SPs in Norway dependent on holding Scapa Flow.

Make ALL Allied SPs in southern France (plus Palermo on Sicily) dependent on holding Tunis! (This one was not previously represented by sea supply roads, so it's an actual improvement! :D)
Make Gela(Sicily), Syracuse(Syracuse), and Taranto (Italy)dependent on holding Malta!
Make Anzio and Pescara dependent on holding Taranto!

And all the events will be reversible so you'll have to HOLD onto your staging areas to continue to receive supply!

By God, we've now got the ability to make the Allies hop, hop, hop how they had to historically, all without Sea Supply roads!
Historically, the Allies had to look at air coverage, ship range, transport timing, etc. While we can't model all of that, you'll have all the info you need handily ready for you in you're new "How to Supply Europe" handbook!

I'm excited!
Who's with me?
;)

In addition we can take away SPs like Paris and Belgrade upon the surrender of their countries so the Allies don't automatically have 100% SPs when they capture these cities (which of course wouldn't be historical, but is the situation we had before EA2012A!)

Below is what I've got so far:

Allies

Trondheim 108,27 Dep on Scapa Flow 76,21
Narvik 128,20 Dep on Scapa Flow 76,21

La Rochelle 46,52 Dep on Cherbourg 54,47
St. Nazire 47,48 Dep on Cherbourg 54,47
Lorient 45,46 Dep on Cherbourg 54,47
Brest 47,44 Dep on Cherbourg 54,47
Paris 60,53 Remove with Fall of France

Balearic Isles 37,74 Dep on Tunis 47,93

48,69 48,69 Dep on Tunis 47,93
Marseille 51,72 Dep on Tunis 47,93
Toulon 53,73 Dep on Tunis 47,93
55,75 55,75 Dep on Tunis 47,93
Cagliari 51,88 Dep on Tunis 47,93
Porto Vechio 57,82 Dep on Olbia 56,84
Genoa 61,75 Dep on Bastia 59,80
Livorno 63,78 Dep on Bastia 59,80

Anzio 63,89 Dep on Taranto 72,98
Pescara 68,86 Dep on Taranto 72,98

Palermo 57,98 Dep on Tunis 47,93
Gela 58,102 Dep on Malta 55,105
Syracuse 60,102 Dep on Malta 55,105
Taranto 72,98 Dep on Malta 55,105
Messina Removed Allied SP at Messina

Durazo 79,99 Dep on Taranto 72,98

Belgrade 87,88 Remove with fall of Yugoslavia

Herakleion 83,122 Dep on Alexandria 91,139
Kalami 78,113 Dep on Heraklieon 83,122
Navplion 81,113 Dep on Heraklieon 83,122
Athens 84,112 Dep on Heraklieon 83,122

Thesalonika 86,105 Dep on Athens 84,112

Axis
Plymouth 51,40 Dep on Cherbourg 54,47
Exeter 54,41 Dep on Cherbourg 54,47
Southampton 58,43 Dep on Cherbourg 54,47
Brighton 60,45 Dep on Cherbourg 54,47
Dover 63,47 Dep on Cherbourg 54,47

Balearic Isles 37,74 Dep on Barcelona 40,68

Olbia 56,84 Dep on Rome 63,87
Bastia 59,80 Dep on Rome 63,87

Suda Bay 81,120 Dep on Athens 84,112
Nicosia 106,130 Dep on Heraklieon 83,122
Beruit 110,136 Dep on Limassol 105,132
 

shunwick

Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2005
Messages
355
Reaction score
11
Location
Braintree
Country
ll
Veers,

It's probably just as well that you are not back otherwise you would run the risk of getting seriously pumped up. :)

Not qualified to comment on EA but I can't see any obvious problems with the scheme. The God among Men will be along shortly with the definitive response.

It never ceases to amaze me that this flawed masterpiece we call TOAW can still produce passion after all these years. It's why I love it.

This forum really has missed you, you know.

Best wishes,
Steve
 

Veers

Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2006
Messages
3,413
Reaction score
8
Location
Kelowna, BC
Country
llCanada
Cool. ;)
The real bummer about working with the event editor in TOAW is that there is a LOT of button pressing. I've been absent TOAW since I made this post, but I have done about half of the supply change so far and will continue to press the endless buttons when I get time and motivation (motivation to make awesome changes, plentiful, motivation to press the buttons to make the changes happen, lacking! :().
Stoked that people like the idea, though.
Once I finish implementing the changes I'll post the file to get a few more sets of eyes on it and then it'll be on to the next ideas for improvement. :)
 

Veers

Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2006
Messages
3,413
Reaction score
8
Location
Kelowna, BC
Country
llCanada
This forum really has missed you, you know.
I missed you guys too.
Always had a shitty feeling the in back of my mind for leaving without a word.
So sorry to all again for that. Not classy.
 

Veers

Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2006
Messages
3,413
Reaction score
8
Location
Kelowna, BC
Country
llCanada
Anzio

The Issue: I would like Anzio to be dependent on EITHER Taranto OR Olbia. To have this and have it reversible is impossible (far as I know, this issue is part of the reason, I assume, of why you don't have to hold both Stalingrad and Moscow at the same time).

My Solution: Have the SP on the Anzio hex be dependent on Taranto and have an SP on 64,89 (southwest of Anzio) dependent on Olbia.

The Problem with the Solution: This doubles the number of hexes that can be invaded in the Anzio area.

The Solution to the Problem with the Solution :D : Write on the map that you can only invade one at a time (see attached).

View attachment 36183

What do you think?
 
Last edited:

Secadegas

Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2003
Messages
665
Reaction score
3
Location
Lisbon, Portugal
Country
llPortugal
Re: Anzio

What do you think?
Sorry to being here again...:bite: but i really love this scenario... :headbang:

I find the "Solution to the Problem with the Solution" very practical and simple. Not very elegant though. But i can't remember any better.

I would suggest Anzio depending on either Olbia -Sardinia (i like that option) and Salerno (instead of Taranto).
Salerno could be depending on Tunis, Malta or Messina at your choice.
The rationale behind this is just historical.
 

medck

Member
Joined
May 22, 2007
Messages
60
Reaction score
0
Location
Alabama
Re: Anzio

The Problem with the Solution: This doubles the number of hexes that can be invaded in the Anzio area.

The Solution to the Problem with the Solution :D : Write on the map that you can only invade one at a time (see attached).

What do you think?
The problem isn't so much that the Allies could invade two hexes in the same turn, but that it spreads out the defensive forces? And the only way the Allies could invade both at the same time would be if they held both Taranto AND Olbia. If the Allies hold both Taranto and Olbia and have the sea lift, why not let them invade both (if they want to split their forces). If they hold only one of those locations, the Axis don't need to defend the other as heavily.

Of course, this raises the potential "problem" that the Allies could land at an UNSUPPLIED 64,89 when they control only Taranto and then make an unsupplied, but non-amphibious attack on the Anzio supply point (or vice versa).

The better solution: Allies can't attack Anzio unless they hold Taranto; Allies can't attack 64,89 unless they hold Olbia.
 
Top