The logistic System is a gigantic mess

[GodwinW]

It doesn't teleport it actually costs the unit OP to get it.

Also, I like having to build roads to buildings. Makes sense to me.

[Hellkyte]

ORIGINAL: DeltaV112


Except there is no such trans-shipment problem in the game. All resource movement is centralized around the SHQ. Goods move from zones to the SHQ, from the SHQ to units, and from the SHQ back to zones. Further, there are only limited supply chains involved in logistics, because many of the resources are actually logistics free. Water, IP, energy all don't cost logistics points to move. Further even in cases where there are, like with fuel, the game automatically keeps reserves in zone stockpiles(and units have similar stockpiles) to smooth over local shifts.

Ah thanks. That right there was something I was curious about, so it really is just a hub and spoke system, but goes in and comes back out.

I was hoping it was more of a hybrid system where each zone could supply people locally based off of local production. I guess that's still doable by the user through setting up multiple SHQs and manually handling shipment between hubs.

[Laiders]

ORIGINAL: GodwinW

It doesn't teleport it actually costs the unit OP to get it.

Also, I like having to build roads to buildings. Makes sense to me.

OP? What's OP? That's not a game abbreviation I am familiar with yet. Do you mean AP? In which case, I'm not sure you're correct but I would have to check the manual.

Do you like having hundreds of LP wasted in a most unrealistic fashion for no reason? If you like building logistical networks (only in games; never done it as a job so far), like me, you probably don't. The current system with current implementation makes such waste inevitable. I cannot understand why this would be seen as a desirable aspect of the game and I feel it should be adjusted if at all possible, either by giving players finer optimisation tools to do the work ourselves or by getting the game to do some of it for the simplest cases and with a player override option if necessary.

I would be fine with the system being more inefficient in other ways. I actually feel like the game should be adjusted to make you use fuel stations rather than just building a couple of massive truck stations and paved roads. But I don't like this artificial inefficiency especially as those LPs do not represent capacity, as I understand it, but actual, effectively empty or very lightly loaded, trucks driving back and forth. Why would a nation keep sending empty trucks down a road when it needs those trucks elsewhere and has the ability to get those trucks where they are needed? It's nonsensical. I would be fine with it if I were deliberately forcing the behaviour (people will do bizarre things to please tyrants who hold power of life and death over them) but I am actively telling my people not to do it. If the game would let me, I would order every surplus truck driver who dared go down such a road shot until they stopped coming or I ran out of truck drivers.

As a side note, I'd kinda like it if the game design were adjusted so it doesn't force players into using single routes as much as humanly possible. It means player logistical networks tend to be very fragile because game mechanics heavily incentivise having the minimum possible number of routes. As I understand it, more routes equals more waste even if they converge at the same destination but I might be wrong on this.

[Falke]

ORIGINAL: Hellkyte
I was hoping it was more of a hybrid system where each zone could supply people locally based off of local production.

A zone only sends any surplus to the HQ ,so if in the zone production=requirement there is no useage of LIS to move goods

[Malevolence]

ORIGINAL: Falke
A zone only sends any surplus to the HQ ,so if in the zone production=requirement there is no useage of LIS to move goods

The zone only sends surplus to the SHQ. Correct.

I believe the zone does use Logistic Points for deliveries within the zone. This is why you must have a Truck station, etc. to form a new city and zone. You cannot, for example, take over a zone with no city. You must seize the hexes with your existing zones.

This only saves the LPs used for a longer trip to the SHQ and then back to original zone.

[Jdane]

OP would stand for Operational Logistics points such as a unit's.
It's unofficial though as far as I can tell.

[Hellkyte]

So, let's say I have an army on the the western front, will it try to get supplied from its local zone first before the SHQ?

[Laiders]

ORIGINAL: Malevolence

ORIGINAL: Falke
A zone only sends any surplus to the HQ ,so if in the zone production=requirement there is no useage of LIS to move goods

The zone only sends surplus to the SHQ. Correct.

I believe the zone does use Logistic Points for deliveries within the zone. This is why you must have a Truck station, etc. to form a new city and zone. You cannot, for example, take over a zone with no city. You must seize the hexes with your existing zones.

This only saves the LPs used for a longer trip to the SHQ and then back to original zone.

You absolutely can have zones with no logistics. I have several villages in my games that have no logistics of their own. They are entirely dependent on logistics supplied by larger settlements nearby. However, I don't think you can create empty zones. I think all new zones must contain a settlement. Then again, why would you even want to try to make an empty zone?

Jdane, surely OL or Op Log would make more sense than OP?

As for an Op Log 'cost', I think it was inherent to my original comment that I was both aware of it and was discounting it, for rhetorical effect, as a cost in this situation. This was because I wanted to point out the slight absurdity of supply only ever moving down road. If and only if (iff a philosopher's favourite conditional) a unit is nearby, supply can magically leave roads and enter any damn hex it pleases at quite some range too.

Are the army the only people licensed to drive vehicles off-road in my empire? Can I change the licensing laws?

[Jdane]

Hellkyte, since if I'm not mistaken a unit only gets its supplies from a SHQ, the answer would be no.

Laiders, I should probably have capitalized Points, but I generally think acronyms are crap, so I'll follow along what the community ends up using while stubbornly keeping on using complete words.
(Except for LIS because it is the holiest of manas.)
[;)]

[Laiders]

I get that but OP does not indicate logistics. OP would almost seem more like organisational points or something. I guess we should follow the cult of LIS and dub its mysterious lesser manifestation OLIS in recognition of its kinship to the glorious, immanent, divine LIS. [:'(]

Doesn't really matter. I now understand. Not sure why operational logistics is called that anyway. Surely that would be managed through operational headquarters? Shouldn't organic logistics inherent to a particular sub-unit be called exactly that?

[Jdane]

Organic logistics would be much better indeed.
OLIS being its hallowed name.

This game could really use a polish pass on its terminology to make it more consistent with the English language. But I won't throw the first stone since I myself am not a native speaker and am making my share of mistakes. As it stands, the current terminology manages to convey the message somehow.

[Hellkyte]

ORIGINAL: Jdane

Hellkyte, since if I'm not mistaken a unit only gets its supplies from a SHQ, the answer would be no.

Ah ok, that's what I thought, for a second I was thinking troops could be supplied locally, which would be a huge thing. But not the worst deal, just means that you really will have to use multiple SHQs if you want to run lean.

Kind of curious how many folks are doing that, because that's going to be massively significant for the efficiency of your logistics.

[GodwinW]

OP = Operational Points.

It is important to keep in mind that the Logistical Network only extends
itself over railroads or roads.
These roads have to connect one City or SHQ to another in order for them
to be in the same Logistical Network.
The Roads do not have to go directly to OHQs and Units since they have
Operational Logistics to pick up (or deliver) their supplies on a nearby Road Hex.

(p 307 in the manual)

Edit: 4.5.9 is the basic section about it.

[Laiders]

Personally, as I have mentioned elsewhere (seem to be doing more posting than playing this evening, probably because I'm tired and, great as the game is, it's kinda effort), tend to run lean logistics operations with the bare minimum infrastructure to get the job done. I build one truck station where two would be prudent and, it seems from posts in this thread, most players would build three.

I have not tried the black art of multiple SHQs because it scares me and I've never been in a situation where I have found it absolutely necessary. My current game is going to start reaching that point pretty soon as I eat my first ever major. I'll read the manual on it again tomorrow and report back once it's done.

[Hellkyte]

Without multiple SHQs you're going to be spending double the LPs than you would need to in a lot of places. I'm thinking you'll have to sooner or later. I haven't played with it myself yet, but I'm going to take a shot at it tonight.

[Jdane]

You certainly don't need a second SHQ when you just conquered your first zone. I learned this the rough way.
But the more you expand, the more you're justified to do it.
In my opinion, the best move would be to create a new SHQ as soon as you get your hands on a zone that is really self-sufficient, in other words, another major's capital.
Otherwise you're just asking for trouble and a significant amount of micro management to transfer essential resources from your 1st SHQ to the 2nd.

[Laiders]

That was my intuition at first glance. As I have just done that and almost finished mop up, I'll do it and see what happens. I think it will be kinda a waste as I don't think there is anything beyond the ex-major's capital zone. The next major, my tight frenemy, is to the south of my own starting zone (so in easy supply range) and all known minors have been gobbled by this point or will be soon.

[Jdane]

In this case, just keep it centralized and give it a try.
You can always raise a SHQ later if that's causing issues.

The main challenge would occur if you'd ever need to move your 1st SHQ with its humongous inventory, should you want let's say to split your domain in two main regions and your capital's situation end up being not ideal.

[liq3]

ORIGINAL: Laiders

Obviously, the game cannot be switched to a pull system and it is not clear if flipping things would make anything better.

Well, as you pointed out maybe "pull" is the wrong word. LP consumers can absolutely create LP where they need it, on demand, instead of the current system where it's pushed down roads evenly. Such a demand based system only runs into problems when there's an LP shortage. The other issue would be Strategic Move, as LP wouldn't exist until it's used. It'd likely end up receiving an unintended buff in flexibility and reduce the amount of planning the player needs to do to use it well.

Programming wise it does present some problems though. If there's just one logistic provider it's an easy problem to solve. When you have multiple overlapping the same roads range wise, and limited LPs, it becomes quite a bit harder though.

Personally I'd be pretty happy if we just got road signs that cap a direction at a specific number, instead of a percentage. That'd at least stop upstream road sign changes affecting downstream, and drastically reduce wasted LPs and micro.

[Malevolence]

ORIGINAL: Laiders
I build one truck station where two would be prudent and, it seems from posts in this thread, most players would build three.

Interesting... I've been upgrading my one Truck Station per city. I didn't think building another close by was a good idea financially. Do you recommend building more than one per zone?

Aside, as was written here, you need a second localized and strong industrial base to satisfy a second SHQ.