Inherent Unit Portage (Gas tanks, haversacks, etc.)

[Deleted]

Just how much can a unit carry without L1 trucks?  In [49.14], the rules say "The fuel capacity rating is the number of fuel points a TOE strength point may have, so to speak, in its gas tanks" but only trucks have a fuel capacity that I can find.  Where are the fuel capacities for tank, motorized, and SPGs specified?  Similarly, in [50.0] the rules say "Each TOE [may] carry [enough] ammo to fire once" but then does not specify whether one should use the close assault (2 points/TOE) or barrage (4 points/TOE) consumption rate to calculate the portage of a gun type unit. There is no mention at all, that I can find, of an inherent portage capacity for stores or water.  Did I miss a capacity table somewhere?  How much (if any) of each supply type can a unit carry without trucks?

[tim]

Charts [4.47] [4.48] and [4.49] cover the fuel rates of guns and tanks. Aircraft have their own chart, but that's in total fuel points not pts per 5/CPA.

As for Ammo, I've always played by the best/worst case scenario. If a unit can Barrage (AR and HW, etc.) they have a 4a capacity, if it can anti-armor but not barrage, 3s, Close-Assault but not AT or Barrage, then 2. Does that sound reasonable?

As far as I know there is no inherent carrying capability for water or stores.  On water, think about the rules comment on carrying a 20 pound jerry can full of fuel across the desert.  Yes a man can carry enough water to take care of himself for a day, but not enough for 3-4 days in desert conditions.  So it seems reasonable that those need to be hauled in, just like the weekly delivery of food and miscellaneous gear that stores represent. 

[Michael Miller]

I agree with Tim's interpretation here.

[Deleted]

So you're saying use the fuel rate and CPA on [4.47] (for example), along with the consumption table [49.19] to calculate the capacities for tanks and guns. Okay, so far so good. What do we do about motorized units? Type a headquarters (of all nations) are apparently motorized (30+ CPA) so they must consume fuel, right? How much? Or is their fuel factored into the fuel consumption of their subordinate TOEs? What if they have none? (Not likely, admittedly, but still should be considered.)

I agree with the "max stonk" assumption for guns. That sounds reasonable.

I don't know about water. While it's true that troops weren't going to carry 3 days of water on their persons, water bowsers were organic battalion assets in the British army. I wouldn't think that L1 trucks should represent organic units, should they? It's possible, I suppose; just because I wouldn't have done it that way doesn't mean the game developers didn't.

It was not uncommon for troops to be told to draw rations for 3 or 4 days but the game distributes stores weekly. I don't know whether battalions had organic supply vehicles like their water bowsers but I can't imagine they didn't. I suppose, since the stores are distributed weekly, that actual distribution to the troops is "beneath the level of the game".

I suppose my problems are just my inability to deal with the inconsistencies in the assumptions and implementations of the rules. Sometimes it appears that the same guys built CNA and English spelling rules. "I before E, except after C ..."

[Michael Miller]

Despite my generally very high regard for the original author, most would agree that the original rules were draft-quality at best.

[Deleted]

So, for planning purposes, I can assume that all tank, gun, and truck TOEs/points carry fuel in their tanks as per case [49.19], all units carry ammo as per their max consumption in case [50.2], and no units carry water or stores "on their persons", as it were. Doesn't make a lot of sense but I can deal with it. That still leaves the question of whether or not HQs carry (or even need to carry) fuel in their tanks.

[tim]

Oct 12, 2014 19:11:04 GMT @grognard said:

So, for planning purposes, I can assume that all tank, gun, and truck TOEs/points carry fuel in their tanks as per case [49.19], all units carry ammo as per their max consumption in case [50.2], and no units carry water or stores "on their persons", as it were. Doesn't make a lot of sense but I can deal with it. That still leaves the question of whether or not HQs carry (or even need to carry) fuel in their tanks.

Sounds like we all agree with the above about fuel and ammo. 


HQs, Engineer, and Recce units - it looks like Tony took HQs and Recce units into account and assigned them a fuel rate of 1 (as well as a breakdown rate). See the Land Forces Spreadsheets for details. Now that I'm aware of that, I'm fine with it too. And I say that thinking that this may be covered somewhere in the rules but wasn't in the original tables. 

As for water and stores, the units are carrying some.  But they're consuming the water and food etc. as time goes by. The weekly distribution is mostly to restock their emptying haversacks and canteens/bowsers.  And of course the "daily", per Op Stage, pasta water usage.  I prefer to think of the 1st Line trucks as those organic vehicles you're referring to - ones subject to breakdown and expending fuel and water. 

[Deleted]

As I said, I can live with the inconsistencies, it'll just take some getting used to. If Tony made assumptions (or incorporated "unwritten rules") with his spreadsheets, that will take some getting used to as well. I haven't been exploring those yet because I can't see the code buried in them so the only way to validate them is to build my own and compare the results. I'm quite familiar with "black box" testing and, while it's not fun, it is useful and necessary. With all due respect to their developers, I never take the validity or veracity of black boxes as a given.

[Michael Miller]

Looking at my land forces TOE charts, divisional and regimental HQs have values in the spreadsheet for fuel onboard. It makes sense to me that HQs would use fuel like anyone else.

[Deleted]

Oct 12, 2014 20:53:36 GMT Michael Miller said:

Looking at my land forces TOE charts, divisional and regimental HQs have values in the spreadsheet for fuel onboard. It makes sense to me that HQs would use fuel like anyone else.

I agree that HQs would use fuel like anyone else, Mike; that's why I asked the question.  The rules do not make any such statement nor do they rule it out, so it's open to interpretation and I need to know what our interpretation is.  If Tony made an assumption and built it into the spreadsheets, fine.  I just need to know what that assumption is so I can plan accordingly.  I wouldn't want to be like Stig O'Tracy and get my head nailed to the floor for transgressing the unwritten law.

[Michael Miller]

The relevant case is below:

[49.12] Every vehicle in the game consumes fuel when it moves, except where specifically noted, (e.g. desert raiders and patrols among others, have slightly different rules.) Fuel users include HQs with non-parenthesized TOE Strength Points and all gun class units. They do not include motorcycles or the towing of tanks and trucks back to repair facilities. 

So non-parenthesized strength HQs are definitely included, but the parenthesized variety (which show up in the spreadsheets as RED) don't seem to be mentioned at all. Awkward again, but since they are not part of the "do not include" clause, I infer that they should be included. Recommend updating the case to something like this:

[49.12] Every vehicle in the game consumes fuel when it moves, except where specifically noted, (e.g. desert raiders and patrols among others, have slightly different rules.) Fuel users include HQs and all gun class units. Motorcycle-based units and towing of tanks and trucks back to repair facilities do not require fuel in game terms.

[Deleted]

Okay, I agree with that interpretation and re-write of [49.12]. That still leaves the question of "how much". I would recommend that HQs with an inherent CPA of 11 or more (since 10 or less are infantry classed, per [6.17]) would use (and thus be capable of carrying internally) fuel as shown on [49.19] given a 1 fuel rate and their inherent CPA.

[Michael Miller]

Agree with a 1 on the default fuel consumption rate. The only exception will probably be HQs of tank units which are rather more fuel hungry than the typical trucks and armored cars.

[Deleted]

You may be right, Mike, but to be honest I don't think armor unit HQs at the battalion level and above differ all that much from their infantry counterparts. I'll do a little research into HQ equipment and get back to you.

[Deleted]

Okay, preliminary research done. If we are assuming that the HQ actually represents the HQ itself and the HQ company, an armored BN HQ includes a couple of tanks that would not be in an infantry BN HQ. In the grand scheme of things that might not be enough to warrant special consideration BUT an armored battalion also includes tank retrieval equipment.  Since, in the game, tank retrieval (like truck towing) doesn't cost fuel, it would certainly be reasonable to levy the fuel cost of tank retrieval on the HQs of the tank units that provide the function.  So, given the assorted cats and dogs inherent to an armored battalion AND their otherwise abstracted retrieval function, I think it would indeed be proper to have armored HQs at a 2 fuel rate.  In fact, if I were the Axis supply guy, I might even argue that CW armored BN HQ should function at a 3 fuel rate but I'm not so I won't.