U-boats and starving britain

[John DiFool the 2nd]

Originally posted by pzgndr:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> So in essence, supply routes (oversea) in SC2 must be scripted for a given scenario?

No, they do not HAVE to be scripted. By default you get 50% of overseas production for controlled resources, just like SC1. The convoy scripts allow for greater percentages, perhaps affected by seasonal weather. They also allow for majors to get some production from neutral minors at some activation level, like the Swedish Iron Ore scripts for Germany. And they allow for lend lease exchange of MPPs between friendly majors, which offers considerable flexibility for the Allied player now. </font>

[pzgndr]

Sea supply is not scripted at all. It's handled abstractly the same way as in SC1. You trace supply to controlled cities or HQs. There is one change though. Ports now provide supply to land units. So we can have stand-alone ports like Casablanca that mean something without adding production value.

[SeaMonkey]

And what if I ring that port with subs and surface combat vessels, a complete blockade of any supply coming in or out?

[pzgndr]

No blockades. You can always bombard a city/port to zero strength and thus zero supply. There's a Malta Effect script that reduces Axis supply in Africa if Allies hold Malta.

As we go along, we could consider other supply related scripts but Malta was pretty significant. It would be a pain to script all the other possible what-ifs. It would be even more of a pain to introduce more complex supply routines.

[Edwin P.]

Originally posted by pzgndr:

Ports now provide supply to land units. So we can have stand-alone ports like Casablanca that mean something without adding production value.

Excellent, a perfect addition that fits in nicely with a WWII Pacific island campaign.

[ March 27, 2006, 03:28 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[SMG42]

ok, so aside the hard coded rule around Malta, there is no possibilities of reducing the operational supply level of armies oversea?

If I take again my example of German units in Ireland, what will be, and how will be, their supply state? Given by the harbor in Ireland I suppose, ie a very good one?

I just wanted to be sure, I can live with that, I just prefer the way World at war elegantly handled supply, without being a complex game.

Did I say that Grigsby put out a very elegant game?

Where HoI is a clumsy elephant, WaW is a nimble springbok.

For now I'm undecided about the kind of beast is SC2

[Hubert Cater]

SMG42,

Malta is actually a script and not hardcoded... in fact pretty much all effects are via scripts otherwise hardcoding would get in the way of modulatrity and customization which is essentially what makes SC2 special.

For supply, the general rules are still not that far off from SC1, so in using your example, units in Ireland would have their supply value determined by the city and port strength of Dublin. Reduce the city and/or port strength and it will in turn reduce the supply of any units in Ireland dependant on them.

[Edwin P.]

As was stated earlier, you can "bombard a city/port to zero strength and thus zero supply."

I assume this means you can reduce the supply state of a German unit in Dublin by reducing Dublin to rubble.

I also assume, that the maximum strength of Dublin and its port is 5 as it can't trace a line of supply directly to an Allied or Axis capital. Am I correct? or has this changed in SC2?

I wonder, can supplies be shipped through a zero strength port. I.e. If the ports of Oslo and Brest are reduced to zero does Germany still recieve its MPPs? If the American ports are reduced to zero can the USA send MPPs to the UK?

[jon_j_rambo]

How would you reduce American ports to zero? You need strategic bombers and able cover all those ports from Maine to Texas. 3000 miles?

[acrashb]

Carriers? And in SC1 you could just reach America with t5 bombers. Likely not in SC2.

[Edwin P.]

In Sc1 there were only 2 American ports, German battleships could reduce the American ports to rubble, if they faced no opposition.

[Marky]

IIRC from playing if u based em on the NW coast of spain theyd just barely reach New York

i usually invaded canada

then i had forward bases for bombers AND fighters

of course before u invade canada u need u win the Battle Of The Atlantic but thats so freakin easy

[John DiFool the 2nd]

I dunno-at the risk of suffering the wrath of the

dreaded "M" word, I'm not sure adding supply convoys

in addition to resource convoys would be that bad.

Both would work analogously, both would then be

subject to interdiction in identical ways. Say the

base supply of a port is 5-then a sub, raider, or

air unit may "damage" the supply route all the way

down to zero. In some cases the relevant port may

be out of range of being damaged itself while the

route would easily be subject to interdiction. But

if the will of the designer(s) is against this

then I won't quibble too much...

[Hubert Cater]

I wonder, can supplies be shipped through a zero strength port. I.e. If the ports of Oslo and Brest are reduced to zero does Germany still recieve its MPPs? If the American ports are reduced to zero can the USA send MPPs to the UK?

If you reduce a convoy port, source or destination, to less than strength=5 the convoy is disrupted with 0 supplies being shipped. This is just another layer available in order to disrupt convoys.

[Hubert Cater]

Originally posted by John DiFool the 2nd:

I dunno-at the risk of suffering the wrath of the

dreaded "M" word, I'm not sure adding supply convoys

in addition to resource convoys would be that bad.

Both would work analogously, both would then be

subject to interdiction in identical ways. Say the

base supply of a port is 5-then a sub, raider, or

air unit may "damage" the supply route all the way

down to zero. In some cases the relevant port may

be out of range of being damaged itself while the

route would easily be subject to interdiction. But

if the will of the designer(s) is against this

then I won't quibble too much...

It is an interesting idea and perhaps something to consider for down the road.

[pzgndr]

I'm not sure adding supply convoys

in addition to resource convoys would be that bad.

Considering that convoy scripts all have a start port and end port, these are manageable in SC2. The many combinations of start/end ports for supply convoys depending on the many possible game situations you might get into would be unmanageable. Wait until you see how these scripts are currently implemented.

I really don't see it as a problem that needs fixing at the strategic scale. As it is, if a unit lands and does not capture a city/port then it's out of supply. If it does capture an overseas city/port, it only has supply of 5 which doesn't go too far. If you want better supply, then land an HQ. Simple. To disrupt supply, then attack the HQ and/or bombard the city/port. Generally if you can gain and maintain good supply conditions it's because you have sea superiority in the first place. So port blockades or supply route raiding shouldn't be a major issue.

And I'll mention again how unique Malta was and that this warrants a special event script. There may be a few other scripts we could consider later. Specific suggestions would be good.

[John DiFool the 2nd]

Okay no problem really. Will there be Mulberries?

[SeaMonkey]

Alright, I'm in agreement that a port or city reduced to 0, relays that nonsupply to the units. This is good enough for me. But Rambo brings up an interesting point, the only unit capable of that is the Strategic Bomber.

Why.... because if the port or city is occupied by a combat unit, then all other types of attack excepting SBs are directed at the occupying unit.

Right?

Solution....all units capable of strategic attack should have the ability of directing their attack at the infrastructure instead of the occupying unit.

We need the option.

[SeaMonkey]

If we are all in agreement.

Delay the release.

[saur_kraut]

Originally posted by SeaMonkey:

If we are all in agreement.

Delay the release.

Bah! :mad: No need to delay any further. Future PATCHES will get things to your liking and improve the game... Get this thing out to the public so we can give it a good workover... Let's face it, there's going to be bugs and gameplay issues that need addressing (that's normal)... They said 4-6 weeks and I expect them to honor that... :eek:

[ March 28, 2006, 06:56 PM: Message edited by: saur_kraut ]

[SeaMonkey]

OK sk ....I concede.

[Desert Dave]

Why.... because if the port or city is occupied by a combat unit, then all other types of attack excepting SBs are directed at the occupying unit.

Right?

Nope, SM,

Shore bombarding naval units, IE, CA's and BB's, attack the resource FIRST, very same as with bombers... with a 10% chance that the occupying unit will also take a strength point loss.

The chance of said unit being hit is increased by 10% for each achieved level of GLR (... gun laying radar).

And so, L-2 GLR BB Bismark, for instance, could bombard occupied Allied city or port, and have a 30% chance of also damaging whatever unit is there.

_________________

**Now,

Full well knowing yer (al)chemical background, I hesitate to mention... this all might depend on the initially introduced "guide-lines" of a Mandelbrot Set, since the Geo-fractals are intricately, exquisitely repeated FAR beyond some static, simplistic 4-D infinity, LOL... WHAT Infinity?

[Marky]

noo dont delaaaaaayy

that IS wat patches are for

i do agree though that supply and resource convoys or w/e ya wanan call em should both be interdictable

i do think thouh that blockades should sumhow be included, perhaps in a patch, if possible

[SMG42]

mmmh, ok but what about subs or anti naval planes? They were the primary mean of disrupting a convoy route, as a convoy route is essentially ships, not harbor.

SC2 has reversed the mechanism: to disrupt a convoy route, you don't target ships, because there is no convoy ships, but you disrupt either the port or the HQ on land, so you use big guns or planes vs ground targets.

[Hubert Cater]

SMG42,

I think the conversation has led to some confusion here. Convoys are only related to the transfer of Military Production Points or MPPs. To disrupt a convoy you can either:

1-Position a sub along any of the on map convoy routes

2-Damage the source or destination port below strength = 5

The subs don't target actual ships in order to disrupt a convoy but by placing the sub within a convoy route this simulates the sinking of the convoy ships in real life and in turn a loss of collected MPPs by your opponent.

The discussion relating to HQs was more or less a discussion about unit supply and how a unit calculates its supply and how to potentially reduce a units supply value.

With respect to Air and other Naval units these can be used to protect the convoy routes from subs and/or damage convoy ports etc.