Glabro

What is a "secondary supply source" in the game currently? All major cities? If yes, the entire point is that we need to exclude all but those that historically were supply centers, and potentially add the choice for the player to expand somehow at cost. And really, if you attack a resource and using the zocs cut it off from the capital, it really drops to 5? I have to keep an eye for it. For me, it simply doesn't work (or then again all of those I remember are "secondary supply sources" making the point somewhat moot.

It's a good point that the silent majority who buy the game only ever play the AI and never post on the forums, even for this type of game. However, I don't see how that should be a concern for the forum-going PBEM public; it's a concern for Battlefront and Fury Soft. However, we can be understanding of that, but we don't need to "cater" to that in our wishes and suggestions. I wonder how much less effort would a game like this without AI be. Probably not nearly enough less in comparison to the overall workload to make multiplayer-only strategy games. Still, I don't think we should hold back in our wishes for the AI's sake. Let's leave that to Hubert and Bill to implement.

Well, if you're now talking about relatively minor updates you can implement in a nearby patch for the game(s), I suppose any of them are an improvement, though I don't see how 2) could apply, a resource on the front lines would automatically start dropping in value (3 units adjacent with corner contact). But I guess if resources in supply "regenerate" 1 point per turn, it will work out ok. Shows a minor disturbance by the front, but gets serious when you're cut off and surrounded. The more detailed changes, I can understand if those are reserved for later updates or titles.

Hubert, 1) Correct, this is desired in general, but I would give a special supply consideration for the fortresses: it can remain in supply, but be subject to attrition ( about 1-2 pt?) each turn. This would in effect let the garrison of the fortress to remain supplied and fighting capable for much longer. However, this would only apply to the garrison occupying that tile, not to any adjacent tiles, nor can this rule benefit HQs, only fighting land units. 2) In this case I'd say to apply rule if garrisoned 1) BUT with a minimum of supply 5. Or alternatively if there is no fortress rule, then the current system (dropping to 5) is very adequate. 3-5) Port supply tracing resolves this. Whether or not a "limited supply" model is implemented where reinforcing and movement is harder / slower / more expensive is another question. 6) Also, certain minor nation capitals (especially "alternative" ones) should only work for the minor nations involved and possibly their immediate allies (Serbia / Montenegro)

So, to summarize my simplified proposition: 1. Implement the Supply Source cities as posted above: Essen, Breslau, Stalingrad, Leningrad...and the capitals. 2. Normal resources cut off provide 0 MPP and 0 supply. The value is shown in parentheses. (The resource does not go to 0 because when supply is restored it works normally). 3. Units cut off from a major supply source cannot reinforce AND if at 0 supply suffer attrition at the end of their owning turn (really should be dependent on the time of the year and length of turn; summer turns avg. 3 pts, fall 5, winter 7 - if not possible, use the average - a fall turn would represent them going a month without any food or other supplies!) 4. HQs cut off from major supply (not just out of range) still provide supply 5, but suffer attrition (number TBD, 2, 3 or 4 avg. per turn, again, would depend whether it can be seasonal). 5. (optional) Non-HQ units can be set to scavenge. If on top of a city/town type resource the resource will suffer the attrition instead of the unit. Has a NM cost if it's an owned city.

Keeping HQs at a minimum level of 5 basically does away with any supply considerations truly from being severe. There are no costs to keeping a HQ at 5 as is, and it can stay there indefinitely. You can even reinforce units indefinitely to a certain level with such a supply level! (I think 7, if you have supply value of 4). While I appreciate it's already an improvement to require a HQ in amphibious invasions (which is an expense in its own right, and alleviates the problems with gamey invasions like you can do against the Turks) the bigger issues of being out of supply in the regular land war will be much lessened. HOWEVER added to this special out of supply penalties for cut off troops only supported by out of supply HQs: they can't reinforce AND they suffer damage (0-2 damage, normally 1 per turn, similar to the Austrian desertion script if you hand over Trento and Trieste to Italy, somewhat similar but stronger and far more common than "storms" for ships - out of supply tiles are "storms" for land units!) - I think we'll have a relatively simple solution that could do the job. Alternatively you might want only the HQs take damage (probably a bit more, like 1-3 damage, avg. 2) as they're "eaten up", in this out of supply situation maintaining the supply of 5, this puts an effective deadline for the troops as well. That is, if we agree that totally out of supply units would start taking damage. As for the "totally out of supply" vs exceeded supply lines, that's easy enough to differentiate as you can trace a supply line for them: they just suffer the normal (current) effects of being out of supply, while those actually cut off by the enemy are the ones that truly suffer.

Great, Hubert! Since you can tell that I've quite a bit of game designer in me, I'll give you three solutions for the price of one. And from my part at least, everyone who is interested can give this a thought and post their own answers, but to make it clear, let's clearly headline each answer in bold like this: Answer #1 Solution 1 (not mutually exclusive): "Beachhead" (or another, better name) naval unit that represents everything the invasion needs to live on until they capture a port (including artificial harbours like Mulberries). Supply value of 5 or 6 (since it occupies a naval tile, the max. supply is 4 or 5 respectively. Hq supply counted as in phase 2. Solution 2: Purchasable supply points for the HQ. Similar to the "upgrade screen" for units, this would let HQs "upgrade" to carry supply points (represented by the little numbers on the base just like upgrade levels for units) that it would expend each turn it's in an out of supply situation unless set not to do so. Solution 3: A HQ unit can build a "supply depot" on its tile while it is in proper supply that will act as a limited supply source. If placed on a coastal tile it will effectively count as a beachhead and thus as a less effective port.

I haven't seen this happen. Do you mean that if a capital is captured, the other resources drop in value? In any case, that's not nearly enough. Yes! This is the idea. That is, if the enemy cuts your supply lines. Isn't this as it should be? And I didn't say that just capitals would be supply sources. I gave examples and reasons (and if I didn't, I can give more) why not every city or town can be a supply source, but a relayer? That's ok. Or did we have a misunderstanding? I didn't say that only the capital and few others would be "supply 10" while the others would be "supply 6 or 5" or something like that. No, cities like Warsaw etc. can still of course be supply 10, but as RELAYERS so normal supply can be achieved just like in the current game - the point being, if Warsaw, for example, would be cut off from its supply lines (no land / sea connection to a proper supply source) - it can't relay and would be treated as 0 for supply purposes! Possibly some sort of supply rules for partially OOS situations could apply - for example, to simulate looting and plundering the city to help the troops survive the out of supply situation better - but it'd be best if this had a cost - the resource would be severely damaged at least, and possibly have a NM cost if done to your own city, and this would only mitigate OOS damage, but still wouldn't allow reinforcements, decent readiness (no ammo supplies or any other materiel except scavenged food really). You could trace supply through a sea route with a port as normal, but under such limited supply it might be costlier to move, operate and especially reinforce! This reflects war in North Africa well in my mind. Supply was critical there. As for major invasions like D-Day, those would obviously enable you to open new supply sources at the "beachead" ports or towns so you could operate fully without the possible above "limited supply" hindrances . Like I said, either through an event or maybe certain resources are flagged as "supply capable" for either side (enabling you to upgrade it to a supply source from the right click menu at a cost). Failing that, you'd simply ignore the "limited supply" idea and institute other rules for seaborne supply tracing, if any. In those instances the HQs are all-important as relayers. But you're saying that there'd be instances where it'd be hard to supply units at all even with HQs? In that case we'd need a) either more towns in between a revision of the supply relay distances vs. the map scale c) buildable supply depots (HQs could build static supply relay depots to solve a LOT of supply issues) or d) Allow HQs to relay supply to other HQs fully as in phase 1 supply calculation from a resource (this should be imho in anyway) and chain HQs for extended operations like that. Ideally you could build cheap and cheerful HQs with low ratings (even 1 or 0) whose main purpose is to relay supply and (possibly evenbuild depots as before), solving a lot of problems. Didn't you realistically need to capture a port to stay in supply (and I mean actually survive, not just "remain in the occupied territory with limited movement and low combat value")? Were the invasion beachheads of Normandy and Sicily enough for supply and for how long? Perhaps this'd be a good example of where to use expensive limited supply rules, or some other ways to "prepare / gear up" for an out of supply situation - beachead rules, or even better, something that could work universally - pay up beforehand to load HQ units with "supply points" at an expense to enable that HQ to provide the kind of "supply 5" it can currently do for free and for as long as you want. Sounds like a good solution to me. The points would be automatically deducted by one when the HQ finds itself out of supply unless it's tagged as "not to expend supply points". It's your game, but I'd wish you took a good, long thinking of this issue as it is one of the keys to improving the series by a whole lot! That's all we can ask for. If you haven't yet tried them, I recommend board games like Paths of Glory and Europe Engulfed etc. to see how they model supply and how critical and surprisingly fun element such supply rules are.

You hit the nail on the head there. What is a supply source, and what is a relaying resource? Historically, not nearly every major city (let alone a minor one, or "town" as it were) was one. As German supply sources for the world wars, I would count the Ruhr (Essen if you want one city), Berlin and Breslau. The Russians would count Petro/Leningrad, Moscow, Kharkov, the Caucasus (Grozny), when pushed far back in WW2 they'd use Stalingrad, Baku, Yekaterinburg etc. I think this is a very important consideration for the future. You can't just have every resource be a supply source if you want to model WW1 or WW2, however they can be supply depots / relays like HQs. In this way the current model would work well if you simply added supply calculation to ACTUAL supply sources as mentioned above. A cut-off resource would not provide income, either - so cut-off resources dropping to 0 is a good idea. Furthermore, units should start taking damage when out of supply. I'd say a random damage of 3 (2-4 actually) might be good for totally out of supply units at the end of the owning player's turn. Units partially OOS (for example, by being on a supply relay before it drops to 0 (count unit supply first) or other reasons it's just partially OOS could take only 1 (0-2) damage in the same fashion. HQs shouldn't get any supply either if they have 0 supply. They should just work as a relay, along with their all-important leadership bonus. I'd also determine units that are only in supply through a (non-supply source) port to be in limited supply, and make them pay for doing actions...make reinforcements cost double at least if even allowed. Naturally, events and actions should enable you to open new supply sources at a cost, for example, the Allied Beachheads, Antwerp (demonstrates the supply source theory well - this is why Wacht am Rhein was launched, to cut a bunch of Americans out of supply with a surprise attack.), Munich for Germany are examples (in addition to the Soviet ones in WW2), so either players could activate new supply sources at cost from the specific resources' right click menus or events would allow them to be opened (though in this case you'd really need to be able to revisit that decision later at the war map menu if you say no, something that should be allowed for many other events too). Perhaps supply sources would also yield plunder in MPPs to the enemy if captured? That'd further explain why you don't establish supply sources close to the front, it's costly and risky and could potentially help the enemy establish one there too. The mechanic where captured supply relays (towns, resources) slowly build up from 0 to full value is a good one for simulating "outrunning your supply chain" as happened in Barbarossa already, so that's a strength of the system. But imagine the strategic depth added if we were to seriously model supply sources - we would start thinking of offensives and defenses in strategic terms, not just in local terms, and sweeping advances just to cut the enemy off supply enter play. Currently it just does not happen, or only on a very small operative scale. The game can only benefit from it.

A few thousand would hardly matter. Did you mean a few hundred thousand? An army is something on the order of 300.000, a corps 30-50k generally?

Aha, now I get it. HQs get boosted to 8 or 10 only if the supply comes from a resource, I see. Therefore linking does not even work. Because as far as I understood it, HQ2 in the picture offers no supply increases to the troops since everyone is still using the supply value from HQ1. So the only use for the Phase 2 supply for HQ2 is for its own movement purposes. Perhaps this merits a change? But as many have said before, the whole supply model needs a rethink for future games. Most games require you to link supply to a major supply source (capital or staging area) and most cities and towns are powerless to do anything but relay supply. But let's wait and see, I don't think you can do anything about it for the current engine.

I think the patch has been growing a lot from user feedback and has thus been taken back to the "workshop". I suppose even a small team like this has to go through all the hoops that software developers go when releasing patches with a publisher, so it's not simply possible to release numerous incremental patches.

Well, probably the Spaniards would be a bit more willing to fight for Spain if Entente invaded them. Invading Belgium doesn't make a lick of sense for the Entente, the British wouldn't go along with that. Instead the British would adopt a very aggressive "Easterner" policy like Churchill argued for, in all likelihood. However, another option would be persuading Belgium to grant military passage to the Entente. In the game there is no diplomacy option for that, something for the future? Also remember that in real world terms, it'd be a lot more possible to "stack up" for a major offensive against Germany's West Wall, but in the game there is no stacking, so it makes attacking with however large a force a real challenge.

Well, so the games have ended before the fighting on the West Front starts in earnest, but the latest two games are exceptions. Of course, I blew it big time against Don when I brought in Spain without realizing how utterly weak it is (without HQs) and he conquered it for himself with relative ease, so that game was unfortunately skewed by that.

I hold the line at the original starting locations after grabbing Lux. I might try a variation and see whether grabbing Belgium and the nearby mines is worth the wide line that results.

You just have to concentrate enough troops early enough and you'll get 'em. Works every time for me, but then again, I'm probably the the most vocal "East First" advocate on the board.

But how is that a problem, Bill? Isn't the relayed HQ supposed to go up to Supply 8 if the relayed supply value is 1 or higher? The way you're saying it sound like relaying supply to another HQ simply doesn't work by design, but the manual says otherwise. The entire point here is about relaying (for me at least), I understand normal supply perfectly well. To be crystal clear since there is a lot of confusion: I was under the impression that if you have an in-supply HQ (supply 8), it can make another HQ become supply 8 (as long as the combined movement cost to enter the tile with the otherwise out of supply HQ is seven or less) as well even if that other HQ is not in range of any other supply sources besides the other HQ with supply 8. If the relaying HQ has a supply value of 10, the relayed HQ can also have a value of ten if the combined move cost is four or less (since supply 6+ results in supply 10 for the HQs). Apparently I'm mistaken, and you cannot relay supply from HQ to HQ this way.

I assume the intention is not to allow relayed HQs to get a better supply level than the relayer, but somehow it's bugging and not giving me even the normal supply of eight. Can't really continue with Gallipoli like this.

Sure, Are you really telling me I'm the only one affected by this problem? This is the latest patch, by the way. Logically everyone should be affected the same way...

What I mean is this. My selected HQ is out of supply. Why? It was out of supply before the French unit garrisoned the town, by the way. It's basically made it impossible for me to do any offensives.

That's what I thought too about HQ supply relay, it just doesn't work for me. I've counted the tiles over and over again, but the relayed HQ always gets a supply value of 5 at least if I have a HQ with a supply value of 8 relaying. There is something there that we don't know as I've been frustrated time and again over this, and I'm surprised many of you don't seem to have been. Do you need a HQ with a supply of 10 to be able to relay or what? Don't tell me what is it in theory, tell me how it works for you in practise.

But how do HQs grant supply to other HQs? So far I've been unable to achieve this. (No, not just with out of supply HQs)

No, it's the brits who are on the offensive from the go in Egypt always.

I've long thought that taking the Stratcom engine that way might be an interesting new market alongside the grand strategy games, if you could link those scenarios to a dynamic or at least semi-dynamic (like PG or Panzer Corps, but hopefully with more optional routes) campaign. Of course, if it was possible to link operational maps along with the grand strategic game, that'd be great as well.

Interesting, so you're planning for smaller or more detailed scenarios! Hopefully you can get things sorted out!