Supply

[SeaMonkey]

Everyone, imagine that the SC "logistical net" is concentric, like one inside another. You have the overall Allied or Axis net and then the smaller individual countries' "nets" reside inside the larger net, just like we have individual country economies inside the "World" economy, but in SC, there are two worlds, Axis and Allied.

I guess there could be three or more, but we're all dependent upon trade. There is autarky to a degree, however it is less efficient, ie 5 supply for smaller economies, but for the majors we need to have 10 to realize their efficiency level as a large economy.

[SeaMonkey]

I've been thinking I may have caused some misunderstanding by using the "weakest link" concept when probably it is better represented by the "strongest link" concept.

In this logistical scheme understand that primary and secondary "capital status" supply sources do not erode automatically but are only diminished by enemy actions. Cut off primary and secondary sources not linked/unconnected erode per turn automatically. Understand that cut off means from the "net" and unlinked means from another supply source.

Take Hubert's example of Algeria/Tunisia where only two sources exist, one is a secondary with capital status and the other a seaport(also a secondary), with or without an adjacent town/city, they all have 5 supply maximum and are linked to each other and connected to the "net". If through enemy action they are reduced they will recover automatically 1 per turn as long as they are connected to the net. If they are cut off, but remain linked they support each other by one recovering to the status of the stronger's supply level. For example: port bombed down to 3, cs source remains 5, port recovers 1 per turn to 5, no net connection needed. If the cs source was also reduced, say to 4, then the port can only recover to max 4. The cs source can recover, and ultimately bring the port back(both to max 5) but the cs source has to be connected back to the net for that to occur, 1 per turn.

If the primary or secondary supply source, ie. port/town/city is isolated(blockaded/surrounded), no link, no net connection, no "cs" status, it will erode(automatically) 1 supply per turn, no recovery until communications(link or connection) are re-established with a higher/stronger supply source.

Next I'll explain the "primary" source relevance of link/connection supply 10 level where a more intricate infrastructure is set up by the campaign designer, but you see how the designer can manipulate the supply model to be exceedingly difficult for an enemy to reduce through both "inter"(net connection) and "intra"(internal supply link) structure.

[Glabro]

Glabro, the players have a mechanism to expand the supply source by using HQs. When everyone is comfortable with our supply scenario we can talk about the consequences of not being connected to the "net" and how HQs are used as mobile extenders of the "net".

Then there will be discussions of how the net erodes automatically and at the hands of enemy actions.

Umm, I don't see how that relates to my questions, but very well. I was simply asking about the current scheme as I haven't ever experienced a resource worth a 10 dropping to 5 due to ZoCs.

Hmmm...now that I think about it, you probably caught on to the "extending" part of my message. I wasn't talking about relaying further with HQs or "extending" that way, I was talking about adding new supply sources - not relayers like HQs and cities / towns etc but that wasn't the main point of the message.

[SeaMonkey]

Yeah, sorry for the misunderstanding Glabro, but it seemed you were asking about the present SC supply model and Bill and Hubert are more equipped to answer those questions. I am not knowledgable about secondary supply sources or how, other than using the editor, a player could extend the number of supply centers, so I answered in the context of the present, developing new supply model.

[SeaMonkey]

Alright, I'm going to lay out a more complex supply model for a major power and I'll use Hubert's original set up of France, Paris, Verdun(fortress), Caen, throw in a port like Cherbourg and a bordering neutral country as it has relevance with connection to the overall Allied supply net.

Does everyone understand the definitions and rules around a "primary" and "secondary" supply source? Do we understand how "capital status" changes those definitions? Lastly, as far as the supply recovery ability of supply sources, do we see how the Allied or Axis net(inter) connection differs from the smaller (intra) linkage of supply sources?

It's all pretty simple, after all I am a simpleton, but if anyone needs clarification or can propose a scenario not covered by these rules, we need to hash this out.:confused:

[SeaMonkey]

One thing I've thought of, which may be difficult to code, is if you have a grouping of 2 or more supply sources(all without cs) cut off from the overall Allied or Axis net they should automatically degrade 1 supply per turn. But, since they are mutually supporting and have the ability to rise to the highest supply level of any one of the linked supply sources(in the isolated pocket), there may be a case where a supply source(s) is both recovering and degrading at the same time.

Hubert, can you code something like that, where supply sources(without cs) would never rise above the strongest supply source level in the isolated pocket, while that strongest supply source(in the pocket) is also degrading 1 supply per turn?

[Mancspartan]

Does everyone understand the definitions and rules around a "primary" and "secondary" supply source? Do we understand how "capital status" changes those definitions? Lastly, as far as the supply recovery ability of supply sources, do we see how the Allied or Axis net(inter) connection differs from the smaller (intra) linkage of supply sources?

It's all pretty simple, after all I am a simpleton, but if anyone needs clarification or can propose a scenario not covered by these rules, we need to hash this out.:confused:

Hiya SeaMonkey, if you dont mind I would like clarification on these points. I`m understanding quite a bit more thanks to this thread, the manual, and obviously playing the game, but an explanation of these points would really help, if you don`t mind.

Cheers

[SeaMonkey]

Would be my pleasure Mancspartan, as I'm thinking this through as we go.

"Primary" = a source of 10 supply (abbrev. P)

"Secondary" = a source of 5 supply (abbrev. S)

Both P and S supply sources are subject to automatic degradation, 1 per turn, if not connected to the overall Allied or Axis logistical net.

If either a P or an S is designated as having "Capital Status"(abbrev. CS) it is not subject to automatic degradation when unconnected and can only be reduced by enemy actions.

If a P or S suffers degradation, either automatically or by enemy action, it can recover by being connected to the overall Allied or Axis logistical net or by being linked to another P or S with a greater supply level in which case it can recover to the maximum supply of any linked P or S, 1 per turn.

I believe that covers it, simple...right?

[Mancspartan]

Hiya SeaMonkey

Yep, got it.

Thankyou.

[Hubert Cater]

Just wanted to say thanks a million for all the comments and feedback and after quite a bit of discussion our end over the last few days, I think we've got something in mind for a new supply system based on this thread that should hopefully address all of the major concerns

[Glabro]

Good. Maybe this solution can be implemented in the next patch, and a more complete revision (perhaps) can await further titles.

I noticed now that cutting Warsaw off from primary supply did indeed drop its level to 5. That represents "limited supply" where you still can route supply to the location quite well, but does not really account for the "totally cut off" situations for resources or troops, so let's wait and see!

I think the main thing is to remember that

[SeaMonkey]

Whatever Hubert and Bill decide on, please, guys, make sure those HQs will be degradable/not recovering their supply status also when in an isolated condition or we'll have those units in contact forever getting reinforcements.

And, thanks so much for listening to us fans, we do appreciate y'alls hard work.

[Glabro]

Why do out of supply units with or without HQs need to even be able to get reinforcements is something I don't get.

Where do they get them? How are they able to get the logistics needed to reform (ie, where do they get the access to your MPPs that clearly are needed for reinforcement / reform)?

Only units in supply should have access to your MPPs, just as only the resources that are in supply can provide you with MPPs.

[SeaMonkey]

Obviously Glabro you make a very good point, but I'll play the Devil's advocate and reach out with a bit of an explanation, not necessarily one that I agree with, but based upon just a bit of logic.

During a battle both sides take casualties and they are of a variety of severities, some are sickness, fatigue, flesh wounds, incidental accidents, what we might consider as "minor". Also in this mix would be weapons that have suffered some kind of malfunction in varying degrees that would essentially take them out of the combat power of the units engaged.

Again in a combat situation it is not continuous conflict, there is down time and during this down time, rest and rehabilitation of the weapons and soldiers occur actually bringing back some of the combat effectiveness of the units engaged in the form of, for game purposes, reinforcements.

Obviously, these are not really reinforcements, per say, of the origin that cost MPPs, but usually there is some kind of outside action being taken by the command centers responsible for the units of both sides in action and they are most likely making an effort to help their units' situation. Airlifts, infiltration, seaborne resupply, any manner of effort to relieve their subordinate units and that costs resoures, ie. MPPs. We also know that in this SC scale, or any scale for that matter, the ability to actually cut off all outside support is subject to the enemy's scrutiny. Remember we are dealing with humans here, which are far from perfect, and their attentative ability to seal off a belligerent is subject to their condition also, which in combat, is usually not that effective.

So, in game turns, perhaps some minor ability to reinforce in a temporary manner would be in order and somewhat realistic.

How about it........are you buying?

[Ivanov]

How about it........are you buying?

I don't know how about Glabro, but I'm not buying it at all;)

Reorganization would only work in case of partially or temporarily cut off units. The good examples could be here Bastogne or Stalingrad. Bastogne was cut off a little more than on turn, if we would like to represent it in the game and was being resuplied from the air. The 6th army in Stalingrad, was also able to survive some time due to the limited air drops and reorganization, but it's ability to perform any kind of combat, was steadily deteriorating. Due to the current supply system, the game wouldn't be able to simulate the Stalingrad kessel, because the completely surrounded German units with a HQ support, would have their supply value, firmly set well above the value of five.

[Glabro]

Not buying it either, to be honest. In fact I'm at the extreme camp as I want cut off units not only not be able to reinforce, but actually be destroyed if left out of supply on its own without enemy assaults even required! Remember we're talking about huge numbers of men, 30-50k per corps. With desperate measures (airlift etc.) I could see the unit just suffer attrition instead of being destroyed! But that would cost a lot imho.

[SeaMonkey]

EEeeK!:eek: Such negativism! Well...I tried.

Can't say I don't agree.:cool:

[Glabro]

Seamonkey, if it turned out that it was impossible to institute realistic / conventional supply rules and SC needs to have "soft and cuddly" supply rules, then your solution would be ok!