How do I use ammo trucks?

[RERomine]

Well, there is merit in what you said Charles. I'm not a big fan of having trucks to begin with. Too easy to kill.

Since the question involves ammo trucks, it's different. If you are using only your core and no support points, the quick answer is you have them in your core so you can have them at all. If, on the other hand, you are using support points, there are advantages to having an experience ammo truck verses something running the national average.

The ammo truck has to be in good order to resupply. If it's running away, it does no good and a more experienced ammo truck will hang longer.

Another one is simply to make sure you always have ammo resupply. There are battles where you just don't get many support points to use. Spending 10% of your support points on ammo trucks, when you would rather spend them on something specifically useful for that battle makes the choice somewhat difficult. You've got a Defend battle and 500 support points, what do you do? Spend 50 on ammo trucks? Buy 25 obstacle points? Get a couple of additional AAA units? By ammo trucks being in your core, it removes them from this equation. Overall, it still boils down to preference.

As far as just trucks, there are different reasons, some less tangible than others. I've had forces start with trucks in my core because I needed transport and couldn't afford tracks out of the gate. As soon as practical, I upgrade to tracks. Until I get to that point, I prefer to have the trucks integrated with the unit in question. It makes overall organization easier knowing squads B0, B1, B2 and B3 go with trucks (and eventually tracks) B4, B5, B6 and B7.

The example about 88s is very case specific since they (the 88s) draw a lot of fire and need moved frequently. In those cases, it helps to keep the transports in good order, but when used as infantry transports, once they have dropped them off they just have to scoot for cover. If they happen to get suppressed while loaded, rallying the truck rallies the carried unit. Once they are empty, I don't worry that much about rallying them except to try to keep the alive.

Overall, I don't like to use trucks, core or not. Sometimes, they are just a necessary evil.

[Charles22]

RERomine: I knew there were a few holes to my argument, the "get a unit cheap to upgrade to what you really want later (HT's)" was certainly one of them.

You've got a Defend battle and 500 support points, what do you do? Spend 50 on ammo trucks?

Precisely, or, perhaps better yet, choose so as to make the last 25pts. to an ammo truck, so that you don't get stuck with two if you only want one. If I think I need any resupply, ammo trucks are the first thing I pick, so as not to forget them. Should I forget them it's back to a reload to start all over again.

As far as ammo trucks go, whether core or not, consider the following, which is simplfying the problem here. Let's say an SS infantry platoon and ammo truck cost the same (SS infantry is actuaslly cheaper at the start):

9/39 - SS core infantry 75exp (let's ignore morale for the time being)
ammo truck support - 64exp support

10/39 - SS core infantry 80exp
ammo truck support - 64exp

5/40 - SS inf 83exp
ammo truck supp - 64exp

The other way around, your ammo truck, which cannot fight gains from 64 to maybe 75exp, but not that it matters, since it cannot but be used as a target, "while" your support SS inf stays with the mere 75exp throughout. As the war grows longer, should neither unit suffer damage in the core spot, the difference becomes more profound, as having an SS unit with over 100exp is constantly being replaced (or some other equal costing unit) SS units which are 'decreasing' in value, such that your '45 SS inf might be 65exp, while your core one would had been in the 100's. I don't think having a 100exp ammo truck helps, really. I don't think they unload any quicker, because I don't think the code was written to cover such obscure things as how quickly they unload tied to exp/morale. I know for a fact it doesn't make a difference with ordinary trucks, though, as I said, the trucks ability to cower, if there is one, would make really poor morale or experience possibly preferable to what is generally accepted as being good. Do my SS inf to truck comparison over a larger scale, say comparing an entire platoon or two of the very same units and the fighting quality of your overall force be3comes profoundly weaker. Of course, if one is in the habit of losing half our core, or half of the entire army, I can certainly understand how seeing the support forces as inferior would have pretty much a hollow ring (not that such a thing would describe anyone).

I just don't see any way around it, as trucks (with the exception of buying a cheap unit to upgrade later) and ammo trucka are a waste in core. You spoke of wasting 10% of support on ammo trucks, but it's not like your core gets off scott free having them there. Oh sure, it's a lesser percent of a larger total in core, but the points put to your overall army (core and support) is precisely the same, and some of them benefit from being in the core and some of them do not, so why not put the do-nots in support? Perhaps if your core is stronger, like with no trucks (though I carry 4 HT's, which are combatants) then the support you pick won't be so crucial? In a meeting engagement, for example, I almost feel guilty picking over 300pts. though 500 is available. Why is that? Partially because I'm not wasting points on non-combatants and have a more satisfying force. Frankly if it weren't for possibly wanting air support in that situation, which I cannot get in core, I would only be picking support just to have some units, that don't cause me total bleeding. IOW, it feels good to have some units whose loss only means a popint loss, rather than also exp/morale losses that fixing or replacing a core unti can involve.

As assualting or being assulted, goes, however, that's often different as you have more reason to need support, but IMO the support totals are then so overwhelming that it's just making it far too easy for myself to select all that support. So as I do things, you can see that having the habit of selecting trucks, ammo trucks, 1 inf platoon, perhaps some air support, and maybe a tank section have little to do with worrying about those trucks being spent there when the totals are so immense to start with. Nonetheless, my main point is not to say that somehow our support is all the more greater for one method or the other, largely because as I see it, the support force is pretty much just a pool I use to soak up some fire and also to provide what is either non-essential, unavailable, or makes no sense in core.

I can see wanting to have perhaps an 8 unit platoon, four of which are trucks, just to sort of keep them together, but then that's part of the problem isn't it (just ignoring trucks as a waste in core for the moment)? Get some or all the trucks destroyed after a bombardment that is merely trying to supress that infantry, and your poor infantry start suffering additional damage due to the destroyed trucks suppressing them (and since we get them in the same platoon to keep them together, why would you send them abroad only to become seperated?). Ordinary foot infantry doesn't have that problem, as they are plagued less by no trucks about them being destroyed from the same platoon (though the range of the destruction from the unit in question counts I'm sure).

So you might say, suppose I just absolutely had to have mobility for that foot platoon in the form of trucks, what would work better? Simple, a different platoon of "support" trucks. Not only is there an "additional" command to rally 4 of those 8 units, but the trucks don't have to stick around that infantry and can deliver them and get out of harm's way possibly easily. Tie them to that platoon and they will suffer suppression often enough for going to the rear and help with towing or loading some other things. You see? More versatility and no penalty for being support from other formations.

Oh, one last thing on keeping the core to it's heights of effectiveness, I'm sure there are those who tire of the advantages that having combatamt units very highly experienced may often make beating the AI even more of a cakewalk, and to such a viewpoint I have no answer, other than to play shorter campaigns.

[gila]

Charles seems to have issues with other gamers preferences on using trucks

[Charles22]

Originally Posted by gila

Charles seems to have issues with other gamers preferences on using trucks

If you want a less effective force, that's your poison. I offer a better way, or so I think. Ignore it or not. As I said earlier, I used to have trucks in core too, and just don't think it's a good idea.

[RERomine]

Having ammo trucks in your core is a matter of personal preference, I guess. Since core elements can be added (if you have repair points) and deleted whenever you want, it's not like you are stuck with what you pick at the beginning of a campaign. For me, I prefer a couple in the core so it's one less element to worry about taking out of support points. As with just regular trucks, ammo trucks can be upgraded to armored ammo carriers at a later point and some of those are armed. And while you are correct that experienced ammo trucks don't deliver resupply any faster, their experience might be the difference between being just pinned by nearby artillery and retreating or even worse, routed. Experience will also allow a better chance of rallying. Seeing my less experienced, yet cheaper ammo truck retreat three turns before I get it under control could mean units needing resupply have to wait six turns.

While I mentioned, I don't like trucks as transports because they are too easy to kill. Still experienced transports, be they trucks or tracks, will suffer less suppression to incoming fire, just like ammo trucks. They are also easier to rally as well. As an added bonus, units in them are also rallied. Higher experience of the transport also benefits the transported. Also, if the truck is less experienced, like the ammo truck example, it could go running away. You've got your 65exp truck running away with your 100exp SS infantry unit! A 100exp truck has a better chance of getting your 100exp SS infantry unit where it needs to go faster. How much faster? I don't know because I would never keep a truck in my core without upgrade long enough for it to get to 100exp. I'm just trying to point out they are not a complete waste of space.

A good argument could be made for not having transports in the core at all, whether they are trucks or half-tracks. They are nearly useless on a defend mission. I've had the AI assault with 100+ tubes of artillery. My infantry hunkers down in bunkers for protection, but unfortunately there aren't underground parking garages for the transports. I usually leave them parked on the back edge and hope the don't attract attention. If they aren't part of your core, however, you could end up spending a lot of support points on transports for other battles. My core has two SS infantry companies with 14 half-tracks each. That's over 500 support points if they weren't part of my core. For that reason, they are in my core and they do set out of harms way during defend missions.

I do understand the point you are making. You want your experienced core to be composed of units with some offensive or defensive capability. I'm just trying to point out that there are some advantages to having experienced non-combatants. If there were more limitations on changes that could be made in your core, I think it would matter more. It matters more early on before you stock pile some repair points so you can add to your core. Beyond that, I think it's just personal taste.

[Imp]

It all depends on the player & has pros & cons

Cons
Yes having non combatant stuff in your core is not particulary sensible from improvement point of view.
You have to spend repair points to fix them.
Likes of trucks are a liability if defending as allows attacker a bigger force as you would not buy with support points as you are not going anywhere.
In fact as RERomine said most taxis can be a liability on defence even indeed armour, you could not buy scout vehicles as prone to dying if thats your thing.

Pros
Dont have to remember to buy them each time. I need x trucks x utility blah blah.
Means you have a genuine core unit capable of operating without support as I nearly always do in meeting engagments.
If plan on becoming mechanised sometime can now upgrade & already in a niceorder for deployment.
As a thought Division is probably getting a bit naffed off at you for keep on hogging all the transport.
Support is now just that divisional assets assigned to you so.

Every one has there own idea of what they want yours takes advantage of the game system but why not have a proper core & theme say

(Edit) sorry Gila forgot WW2 but you get the general idea just adapt from below to what you want so any extra armour would be TDs SPGs or such not tanks if look at big picture as the rest of your unit is already engaged.

If you want to take advantage of the game system I would say the things that benefit the most from experience are FOOs engineers (fast mine clearing) scouts & armour esp in WW2. Helos to in MBT if you can keep them alive as dodge SAMs better.

Russian 80s armour formation
Everybody has a ride inc HQ & is self contained formation with integral AAA arty ammo trucks.
Ammo dumps cannot be used in meetings as no time to prepare for onboard stuff & support arty air rare.

Support points are for divisional assets so AAA arty air engineers plus option of following.
Allocating extra ground forces
When available why not use troops local to area or in this case maybe have the Poles help out.
Can possibly recieve local scout or partisan milita support.
For urban get troops assigned as now you are really the support.
If need more armour no tanks available sorry in use elsewhere but can have ATGM vehicle hunter killer unit assigned.

Now you have a theme & a proper fighting force to take through the campaign.

If its a long campaign with upgrades no piecemeal upgrading you have to replace the entire company so save those repair points or your unit will not be among the first to recieve the new kit.

[Imp]

To Charles22

Everybody to their own the flexibility of this game allowing for that is just one of its good points.

I used to buy my core like you maximising it, only have best equipment no trucks sacrificial lambs biggest squads so survive, even occasionaly reloading if I lost superman.
But times change & now its just a series of battles with the same guys.
Yes its gutting when you lose super FOO & his fast arty strikes but even if only half your core survives to improve for the next battle its easier than a regular one.
Besides you did have a second guy you were nurturing didn't you.

[PanzerBob]

Good daqy all

Trucks and Ammo Trucks in the Core, mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm,

IMHO, as mentioned I think it depends on what your are trying to portray. If you want to at least start in a historical TO&E for your force, you will find a lot of forces were likely to be lucky to have trucks. If the plan is to upgrade as you Campaign along, trucks are a good start so once you have made those upgrades you have a unit together, not some motor pool dudes. (Although for some US Units this maybe accurate) I've even a few times kitted my PzGen out with Sdkfz 10's or a mixture of HT’s and Trucks. I even tried a mixture of trucks and horses/mules and while historical it did slow down game play. Especially at the unit sizes I usually field.

I think as well that if you plan on having fully HT’d Infantry Units having the vehicles gain experience only makes good sense.

Ammo Trucks are a must if you have an onboard battery or two in a Campaign, especially SPA’s. Of course you can start with towed stuff with horse drawn everything and be real historical.

I think the bottom-line is this game is so awesome that one can do all these things and more.

Bob out

[Charles22]

Originally Posted by Imp

To Charles22

Everybody to their own the flexibility of this game allowing for that is just one of its good points.

I used to buy my core like you maximising it, only have best equipment no trucks sacrificial lambs biggest squads so survive, even occasionaly reloading if I lost superman.
But times change & now its just a series of battles with the same guys.
Yes its gutting when you lose super FOO & his fast arty strikes but even if only half your core survives to improve for the next battle its easier than a regular one.
Besides you did have a second guy you were nurturing didn't you.

You're right about that, only if I lose a superman he's lost; no reload there. Besides, how much does it matter if half or more of your core is supermen anyway?

[Imp]

Hi Charles

Okay lets clarify if you want the best super core then dont buy trucks ammo resupply in your core. I dont vs a human player.

But against the AI come on give it a break you do not need more advantages what you need is a fun challenging game.
Read my post them Germans were good I did not bother to mention I have 2 ammo trucks & 2 ammo mules in cmy core.
These have been hard battles & I am pretty good.
Be honest when is the last time in a Campaign the AI gave you a real challenge.
Do you accept the battle as it comes or change the map vision if you think it will be hard. I dont with the exeption being urban in the snow as time consuming.
Vs the AI I generaly play to fast risking losing a unit I would not in PBEM esp when mopping up

I would say we both want diffrent things from our campaign.
You I feel want an easy quick play victory as I used to.
I want a challenge & my hat is off to the team in that I have got one.
Sorry to those I am PBEM at moment but seeing if I can make the crossing fairly intact has gripped me, I am favouring a game vs the AI over a human good grief.
But things are tense & I have an uphill struggle once on the far bank. What happens if I lose my 6 engineers how do I fight the tanks then?