07-09-2003 22:53									#1
	Supporting troops Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

There are basically two major groups in military: armed troops and support troops.

Of course troops may also support themselves on the field, pillaging or else. But another possibility (and often the only effective one) is support the troops. I just thaught that some AI-directed support troops could relay between your territory and your troops in another territory. It would be done automatically, the player wouldn't touch a thing about it (but the player could place units to protect though).

It would arrange alot of stuff about sending troop to war. War making more sense economically (you can pillage instead of support, and support may have a cost) and tactically (difficulty of invading would make more sense, protecting could be useful...).

	08-09-2003 00:27									#2
	Tired of ads?

"No you stupid convoy! Don't go around the inland sea that way! Awww crap."
Making a good pathfinding AI is usually rather difficult.

	08-09-2003 08:53									#3
	Suffering from ads?

i concur. screw the AI.

here's what i would do.

take a page from RoN: troops in enemy territory take damage over a period of time.

now that you have that idea, create specialized units that you can control (or that you can give GOTO orders) that restore HP to units, effectively creating support units.

i would also be for allowing troops to rape and pillage land for hitpoints. if i burn a village to the ground, theres no reason my people cant eat the food there.

	08-09-2003 10:06									#4
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Taking damage is slightly wrong. Instead, the troops should have several attributes that gradually decrease. When the troops run out of bullets, there attack power is drastically reduced. When they run out of food, their hp drops precipitously.

	08-09-2003 16:18									#5
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Well, taking damage would be okay in my book. Units that are not maintained, especially mechanized units, have a tendency to break down rather quickly. The way I see, that is equal to taking damage. But sure....attributes would be another way of representing it.

Asmodean

	08-09-2003 18:18									#6
	Inflate your Upload Space

In my own ideal system of "how to qualify units", I have permanent damage (killed) and "quality of the troops" (which includes morale, fatigued, etc.). I guess it could affect the second caracteristics, or even the first in some cases (Napoleon in Russia). Even better would be to have the two caracteristics on units that count the NUMBER of men into them (so: number of men, permanent quality like elite, temporary quality like fatigued).

About the pathfinding, perhaps we could simply ONLY give a path that is followed thereafter automatically (and can be changed)?

Last edited by Trifna on 08-09-2003 at 18:33

	08-09-2003 20:54									#7
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

i suppose you could go that route, depending on how much memory you want to devote to every unit.

	08-09-2003 21:47									#8
	Inflate your Upload Space

Another thing to be considered, is that a many years ago, supply lines were often difficult, if not impossible to set up. Take Hannibal crossing the Alps. I'm pretty sure that he had no supply lines worth mentionong. He had to supply his troops by pillaging the countryside, or suffer attrition.

Asmodean

	09-09-2003 01:39									#9
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Asmodean, that's why I said that a second way was to pillage
Simple: Your troops have both possibilities. From the moment you lack supplies, you can pillage.


UberKrux: Well simply puting a path wouldn't take that much, not more than a few units here or there. And maybe Civ4 will come out when we'll have 2Gig DDR on new computers

	09-09-2003 01:53									#10
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Okay, Trifna. I see that.

But a model should be implemented, so that for large distances supporting should be increasingly difficult, especially taking your current tech level into consideration.

I.e. it should be easier for an army with modern tech level to receive supplies across an ocean, than it should for an army with Roman tech level.

Asmodean

	09-09-2003 21:02									#11
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

I agree. I guess technology is always affecting supplies: we can think about Hannibal that couldn't bring supplies from Carthage to Italy

	10-09-2003 16:01									#12
	Inflate your Upload Space

I really like this. It also adds more strategy to the war theatre by allowing for such evil ploys as cutting off the enemy's supply lines or even capturing his supplies. Pillaging is also a great concept, it allows for a third military objective besides conquest and the destruction of potential threats. I also like your distinction between health, experience and morale.

How would this be implemented? Should the supply troops be actual units that you have to move yourself? It will probably have to be abstracted somehow. How about this:

Each turn, the game plots the shortest supply route(s) from the supply centre(s) to the army in question. You may also override the AI decision and plot routes yourself. Routes cannot cross tiles occupied by hostile units. The longer the route, the more supply troops are needed each turn (a little like the freighter system in MOO2, only with distance as a second factor besides quantity).

If an enemy unit moves unto a tile used to haul supplies the previous turn, then he gets a chance to capture a portion of the supplies. This means that you either have to guard each tile of the supply route, plot it far from enemy troops or take a gamble. Scouts should be able to detect nearby supply routes, and spies would be able to get detailed plans on enemy operations.

	10-09-2003 20:08									#13
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

What I see as possible as a way to evaluate units is to have "number of troops", "permanent status" (they wont just lose their experience), and "temporary status" (RIGHT NOW, they are exausted, bad morale...). But let's not go into this too much since we'll lose the first subject of this thread.


No need of spies since in Civ, all units are always seen on your territory (could change though).

"The longer the route, the more supplies is needed."
Are you sure?? I mean that the Americans do not need to send the double of potatoes to feed troops just because they are in Iraq instead of Guatemala.

	10-09-2003 20:13									#14
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

I think what he means is that the longer the route, the more supplies you need to send, 'cause there is a chance that some or most may not arrive. But I'm not sure.

Asmodean

	11-09-2003 12:49									#15
	Increase Your PM Length

I meant supply troops, not supplies. You send the same amount of supplies, but you need more vehicles and personnel to transfer them. They still arrive just as fast, for sake of simplicity.

	11-09-2003 18:50									#16
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Okay, Sore Loser.

But!! Were this model ever to be used in a strategy game, you would have to take great care that it didn't become too time intensive. What I mean is that you don't want to spend half of your playing time only worrying about supplies. The model should be implemented in such a way, that it is easy to set up, maintain, and monitor your supply routes.
You want to focus on your overall strategy. Not whether this or that infantry unit has enough to eat.

Asmodean

	11-09-2003 21:10									#17
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Trifna UberKrux: Well simply puting a path wouldn't take that much, not more than a few units here or there. And maybe Civ4 will come out when we'll have 2Gig DDR on new computers

yes, but with a unit that does the supplying, you could attack it and steal the supplies for your own troops.

	11-09-2003 22:22									#18
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Uber, I fear I didn't understood... What does attacking some units or interposing into the supplying path have to do with your post about the computer's RAM?

	13-09-2003 01:42									#19
	Increase Your PM Length

Interesting discussion. Were features like this to be implemented, it would put a whole new spin on "amateurs think strategy, vets think logistics."

Seriously though... I think that supply should play an important part in how a unit fights. Whoever has the better supply routes would have a good if not decisive edge over their opponents.

Most of the supply would come directly from the mother country of the unit. Of course, you can still recover a bit by foraging on the enemy, but some things, such as ammunition, would not be compatible with yours (due to differences in technology, manufacturing processes, etc.), and therefore would have to come from home.

Like Trifna, I think that they should have a permanent status (quality) and a temporary status (condition). The permanent status would rise with combat experience as long as the unit survives, but condition would fluctuate from situation to situation. I think that the following factors should be able to affect the cost to supply, and thus the unit's condition:

1. Supply route length. Naturally, the longer a supply route, the longer it's going to take for whatever is being shipped on it to arrive, not to mention greater fuel and maintenance costs for whatever is hauling it.

2. Enemy intervention. This would interfere by causing a supply route to take the long way (see 1), or even cut off (a) unit(s) entirely. (Would also make a clever trick for finding enemy armies for those who know the supply formula).

3. The presence of roads/railroads/other transportation improvements along the route. Things go a bit faster if they follow a set path.

4. Technology. Of course, the better a technological "edge" a civ has, the lower the cost will be to support an individual unit. This would be reflected in the uses of inventions such as the radio to better coordinate movements of both troops and supplies. After the advent of air power, it should be impossible to completely cut supply lines, though they could still be severely disrupted.

5. Proximity to civilization in general. As we all know, it's easier to find something when it's on the map. In enemy territory, foraging will almost always occur, no matter how disciplined the troops.

6. Terrain. Sea routes are notoriously more expensive than land routes. Supplying over mountains is much more difficult than over grassland. Air power might be able to cut some of this out.

7. Air Power. Once a civ develops the ability to build aircraft, it should be easier (if more expensive costwise) to resupply.

8. Friendly ports and bases. If a unit is overseas, then it should get a benefit by sea supply if it is near a friendly (i.e. controlled or allied) coastal city. If a nearby friendly city has an airport, air resupply costs would be decreased.

9. Home Tean advantage. If a unit is within its own borders, drastically lower costs to supply.

More to come. I don't think I can fit all of this into one post...

	13-09-2003 13:35									#20
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: 4. Technology. Of course, the better a technological "edge" a civ has, the lower the cost will be to support an individual unit. This would be reflected in the uses of inventions such as the radio to better coordinate movements of both troops and supplies. After the advent of air power, it should be impossible to completely cut supply lines, though they could still be severely disrupted.

Yes, but then modern armies can't forage and require more supplies (mechanized replace parts, fuel...).
Air power allows paratrooping supplies, but unless you dominate the air (little anti air defense), a lot of the supplies will be lost to the enemy too.

	13-09-2003 18:55									#21
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by LDiCesare Yes, but then modern armies can't forage and require more supplies (mechanized replace parts, fuel...).

True. However, improvements in technology would also increase efficency of the convoy itself, thus lowering costs due to accidents, mixups, etc. Thus the overall cost is reduced. However, I do think that different types of units should require different levels of support, and not just modern mechanized units: ancient cavalry would cost more than infantry also, due to the fact that horses cost more to maintain than humans.

quote: Air power allows paratrooping supplies, but unless you dominate the air (little anti air defense), a lot of the supplies will be lost to the enemy too.

Also true. Quality of air defense would have an effect on supply by air. However, for units that are not under threat of having supply lines cut, the planes could land at an airbase or city a short distance away and unload their supplies onto trucks heading for the front, which would tie in with point 8.