What should happen to a unit whose home base is captured?

[Yitzi]

Thanks to Skyagusta, I have discovered that apparently when a unit's home base is captured, it keeps its old home base; before my patch that meant it did not require support, now it means that it requires support from that home base (which is now owned by an enemy).  This is fairly absurd, so I'm taking a poll on what should happen.  What I can think of as options (other than "it takes up support from the enemy base" (absurd), "units whose home base is owned by a different faction do not require support" (subject to exploits), and "it is now controlled by the home base's new owner" (horribly imbalanced)) are:

-The unit is disbanded.
-Home base determined the same as captured/pod-created units; i.e. your closest base, or none if it's far enough from any of your bases.  (This could result in units being disbanded if the base can't handle the new support amount.)
-Your closest base, no matter how far away it is.
-None.

So, which do you think it should be?

[Buster's Uncle]

Closest base seems most consistent with how the game tends to handle that sort of thing when it's working.

[Skyagusta]

I would also say closest base. In my opinion, it's better to err on the side of "punishing" the loser of the contest. I'm not a big fan of independent units. Realistically, if a unit loses its support base, and therefore its supply line, it will be rendered combat ineffective in a short amount of time. Also adds another layer of strategy if you are about to lose a base which is supporting a large army (and the closest base wouldn't be able to handle the influx of supported units)- do you attempt to quickly rehome them to a large production center, or selectively prune units so that the computer doesn't do it for you?

Now that I think of it, it also adds some strategery when you're on the offense- instead of just pounding the enemy's front line bases into submission, you could opt for the "Inchon Landing" (h/t Douglas MacArthur) in which you take a core base supporting a large force in order to "cut the supply lines" and force a few units to disband.

[JarlWolf]

I am in favour of them switching to the closest base- while this doesn't harm the player/faction/computer to the extent disbanding or even worse, losing control of the unit to the enemy (which doesn't make much sense to be honest) you have, realistically the units trying to draw supplies from other sources. And this could very well put strain on those supply centers and exhaust them, very much how real armies were-

It doesn't completely damp on the defender for losing a base and thus having units move to other sources of support, but it does hinder and possibly harm them in the long run if they don't re-organize or reform their military.

[Geo]

First a question. What happens with the units drawing support from a conquered base when it is renamed by the conqueror? Free support? Disbanded?

As for the switching, I'd be in favour of having such units draw support from the HQ base.

[Yitzi]

First a question. What happens with the units drawing support from a conquered base when it is renamed by the conqueror? Free support? Disbanded?

Renaming just changes the name, not the base, so it would be the same as without renaming.  Which is (at least sometimes*) that it continues having the old base; without my patch it then gets supported for free (same as if you home a unit to an ally's base); with my patch it actually takes up support in the old base.  And once this is fixed, it would be whatever it's fixed to.

*I found it in the case of the base renamed by the special losing-your-first-built-mindworm event; I have not determined whether it happens for other captured bases.  (If not, then whatever happens there will be what happens here too.)

[Lord Avalon]

Closest base. Would it be possible to have a message that says "x unit(s) added to (base)"?

[Yitzi]

It could probably be done.

[Yitzi]

Actually, what I thought was a bug causing it to keep its old home base actually turned out to be a different bug, so it seems that this is working correctly; if it turns out it isn't, or if I decide (or am asked once I start taking requests) to add the option to make it work differently than it currently does, this thread will be relevant again.

[Geo]

You won't spoil us with specifics on this other bug?

[Buster's Uncle]

See the CNN folder for details.

[Geo]

See the CNN folder for details.

Link? Since I haven't the faintest clue what you're talking about and find nothing CNN related in my unread topics list.

[Buster's Uncle]

Chiron News Network.  The 2.5 thread.

[Geo]

Much better info. 'Preciated.

[Buster's Uncle]