Headquarters Abuse

[Kiane]

It's frustrating that enemy headquarters cost extra movement to move over. I was next to an empty Rome in one of the Italy battles, but the AI had a headquarters unit in it, so I couldn't move in, even though I had already killed the enemy unit that was occupying it. Sure enough, a fresh unit moved in to take its place.

Please make some action to shove an enemy headquarters out of the way, I'm sure I'm not the only one who has run into this.

[Kiane]

This is a good example of it.
https://i.imgur.com/05qpv9q.jpg
If the headquarters unit wasn't there, my armor could move into the bonus objective E, and I know there are no enemy units there, but because the headquarters is blocking it, I cannot.

[Stonedog]

I have experienced it myself. It is frustrating , but whats really frustrating is when the AI actively AND OBVIOUSLY uses/ABUSES it as DEFENSE mechanic . Late game it will use it in a NO WIN situation , just to bleed down some of your Units .

I have seen 2-3 turns of this (EXPLOIT if a HUMAN was doing it) loop hole used before being able to stop its combination of what you describe certain Cities on some Maps and the adjacent terrain type/movement cost used by the AI .

Its a suicidal and non realistic way for it to drop a decent or very good final WIN score of the player the way I see it. Sometimes even causing a loss due to turn count limits. It would seem a good and legit way to turn a loss into a win and first glance. Yet seeing it repeat the during END game phase of the same maps/scenario in very similar situations a few times now has me frustrated as well.

Commanders that developed reputations of purposely bleeding their own troops , to do this in real world NON WIN situation over and over did not have a long life span once it was known for what it was. Many friendly fire accidents were not accidents at all once troops believed this was going on.

I do not believe this is done in any intentional manner by the Dev team for one second though, let me be very CLEAR on that. Its just a good AI using the rules it is governed by to try and win or slow you down. AI troops do not complain to AI Commanders, and AI Commanders have no clue, they just run the code and look for best case options in a given situation.

This will turn out a very difficult thing to resolve I fear. Having no emotion ties to its existence and doing the best it can with what it has is the AI full time job .How to code the self preservation versus do not lose at any cost that Cognizant ability of humans have into a AI is something the worlds MILITARY Forces have been trying to solve for the last 3 decades or more . Its WALL they need to bring down that will allow a DRONE unit to become what they need it to be. To LOWER COST of WAR, not save lives sadly.

[charles_d_berger]

Kiane, the enemy HQ isn't the thing holding you back in that image. It's the snow. Roads through mountain/alpine terrain are unusable when it's snowing, so the terrain there is simply mountain, impassable to mobile units.

But as to your broader point: WAI, I think. Enemy HQs don't block you entirely, but they do increase the MP cost to 3, so sometimes they will effectively prevent you from taking a hex you otherwise would be able to move into. This is by design. Think of the HQs not just as a couple of tents with some generals and maps in them - think of them as a whole slew of rear-area units (security, flak, LOC guys, random bits of reserves and replacements, ad hoc kampfgruppe, etc.). They're not a proper fighting force, but they can put up roadblocks and ambushes and isolated pockets of resistance, etc., all adding up to delay for your forces.

[Kiane]

Maybe it did start snowing early? I just don't remember snow from that early on in that scenario. Sneaking armor in is a thing you can do, but it can't land on mountain ranges, so it needs the clear hex to land on; have done it before under those exact same circumstances. I should have taken a screenshot when I was outside Rome, there it was more obvious.

If they want HQs to be able to stop you, make it a combat unit. I already fought and pushed an enemy out of Rome in another scenario, but the HQ was stubbornly there. In reality they would have fled with their defeated infantry.

[shde2e]

Yeah, I actually lost some missions because of the HQ and prisoners overrun cost.
It's absolutely infuriating.

[holy-death]

Originally posted by charles_d_berger:

But as to your broader point: WAI, I think. Enemy HQs don't block you entirely, but they do increase the MP cost to 3, so sometimes they will effectively prevent you from taking a hex you otherwise would be able to move into. This is by design.

While you're not wrong, it does create some insane scenarios.

HQ can't be attacked, so it can be impossible for combat-ready units to take a position. Especially when it requires a lot of movement points to move into that hex.

This creates a paradox where it's better to face a "proper" combat unit and fight it, rather than face a HQ unit, because a regular unit can be attacked and either destroyed or forced to retreat, which can open a hex for your troops.

In my opinion HQ should be either linked to a combat unit (and retreat/be destroyed along with it) or not take as much movement points (you could transfer HQ between units as normal). Alternatvely it should always retreat when "attacked" (which they sometimes do, when combat was resolved on the hex they were in), provided they weren't captured (a random chance).

[Winston Wolf]

Just restarted the campaign, playing the first scenario, Wadi Akarit. Turn 5, had the Italian HQ sat in Sfax and the German HQ in the hex above. I couldnt move in a fully supplied tank with 5 move or an infantry with 3 move, even with extended move.
Turn 6, the AI kept the HQs in the same hexes, same problem, unable to move into the city despite full movement. Scenario lost, please fix this blatant bug!
It makes no sense for movement to be penalised taking either prisoners or HQs. Look at Hearts of Iron 4

[charles_d_berger]

Nameless, how far away were your units from Sfax? If they were close, they should have been able to move in, displacing or eliminating the enemy HQs. If Sfax was right on the edge of your unit's movement allowance, then yes the HQs may have prevented you from taking the objective. Maybe post a screenshot of the situation, if you still have the save game and you think it is an actual bug. (Check "history" option to replay up to the relevant point.)

In general, the movement penalty for taking stragglers and HQs makes sense to me, as there were many situations in WW2 where units were delayed by roads clogged with refugees and remnants. The stragglers and HQs also represent disorganised and ad hoc combat formations that don't merit a full combat unit in game, but are enough to hold up an advance for a while. Think a few 88s at a crossroads, a stray platoon or two stubbornly resisting in a hilltop village, a wrecked minor bridge, a stretch of road littered with wrecked vehicles that have to be cleared away, an Army-level reserve battalion ordered to delay... that all takes time, which in game means MPs.

[charles_d_berger]

Or possibly your units were understrength? ie, less than 3 active steps, indicated by a small minus sign next to the unit. Understrength units can't overrun enemy HQs.

[Hans Gruber]

Recon in force is good counter to this. Just push them out of the way.

[Winston Wolf]

It looks like the units were weak, so unable to move in despite having full movement allocation.

[earl_uhtred]

+1. This issue has led me to ragequit more than once.

[DaviddesJ]

If the AI is smart enough to use its HQs to interfere with my movement, I love that!