Matrix Games Forums

I just read through the entire logistic section again, but this is not what is in fact occurring:

1) It says that all of the values being displayed in the overlays are indeed LPs.
2) This includes "Current LPs".
3) Further, it seems that LPs must always exceed TPs because the structures generate much more of the former. However, as pointed out above, weight could be messing this up because e.g. a truck station gives 1000LP and 100TP, which should be 10 times as much and therefore it will hold true that even at max weight LP>TP, for transport hubs this is not so. The "spreading out" issue can, of course impact this ratio, but how it applies to TP vs LP is completely unclear to me.
4) HOWEVER, all that said, in my current game I can sit with a unit on a hex that shows "Current LPs" of over 700, but a unit that started it's turn on such a hex will tell me that there are zero LP available to get reinforcements.

Therefore, something is very off here.

One possible solution to the puzzle. It could be that the LPs that are showing are coming from different zones. Since only one of my 3 cities has an SHQ, perhaps I am seeing LPs that are not connected with my SHQ, and therefore cannot give me reinforcements via Repl. Troops option. If so, this means that the LP overlays need a filter to show only those connected to the (or a selected) SHQ. What am I missing?

TPs and RPs are initial points. Traffic signals manage TPs and therefore impact the initial points in each Hex. "Preview Points" map layer is an estimate of those future initial points using only TPs and RPs for analysis.

When the player clicks next turn, the AI takes actions and in so doing may disrupt that preview points estimate. Roads maybe cut, etc. When the AI is complete, the initial points are calculated by summing TPs and RPs in each hex.

I believe the logistic system then uses those summed initial points as the starting basis for LPs in each hex (1:1?). It appears to begin at origins and work its way out debiting LPs as needed and at delivery points--a graph traversal. Logs indicate it begins with zones internally, then surplus is moved to the SHQ, then SHQ ships out to cover zone shortages and items warehoused at the SHQ.

At the beginning of the next turn, when the player again has control, current points (i.e. current LPs) are the LPs that remain unused in each hex after the feasible deliveries were conducted.

ORIGINAL: diamondspider
4) HOWEVER, all that said, in my current game I can sit with a unit on a hex that shows "Current LPs" of over 700, but a unit that started it's turn on such a hex will tell me that there are zero LP available to get reinforcements.

Therefore, something is very off here.

Check to see if there is a break in the line from the SHQ to that delivery point. I would bet there is a break--hexes with no (i.e. zero) or very few current points on the route.

I believe there are not enough LP's to cover delivery from the SHQ to the delivery point.

I also think this issue happens during the automatic deliveries in between the player's command period. If your SHQ has a "bottleneck", supplies will not be delivered despite LP's in hexes nearby to recipients.

The initial points indicated it should work, but all the LP's were used farther up the chain between your intended recipient and the SHQ. Once a hex drops to zero LPs, the supply chain is broken at that point. Also, I assume, if the chain is to weak to carry the weight, the chain is ostensibly broken for those items.

Thank you. I think this covers most of the issues that I am having, except the apparently bugged OHQ that apparently the SHQ commander hates so he refuses to send him reinforcements no matter what

Have you tried to directly upgrade the lousy starting troops you get in your SHQ with your new super troopers yet? Why shouldn't the SHQ have elite troopers ready to deploy?

Despite indicating it works; the next turn the SHQ either still has those starting rejects or gets angry and uses non-upgrade militia troops instead.

Yes, I checked that units would accept the rejects too, just to move them out.

I marched right up to near the SHQ, waited a turn, and then the first thing I did was try to recruit and no luck. I then created troops in city and was able to transfer them over into the bugged unit. I think what bugged this entire OHQ was that I tried UPGRADE on it hoping I could apply my shiny new automatic rifles to my troops. Instead, this changed it to a regiment level OHQ rather than brigade. I think quickly switched it back... perhaps it doesn't like a commander who can't make up his mind

In any case, I was looking to win the game but lost both of my top commanders in one turn and my line crumbed with the newbies in charge of it. So time to roll a new world and apply all that I've learned from my game as well as you terrific fellow travelers on this forum. So thanks!

you have to click on the little pictures inside the unit report to get the model upgrade screen.

that's also the only way ive found to deploy both anti-infantry and anti-tank variants of my standard tank chassis into units. It will only use the last design to form a unit.

It wastes a lot of resources to use that work-around.

Obviously I'm really late to this but some observations that I don't think have been fully explored yet.

1) KingHalford has mentioned a demand based system requiring a lot of AI on the part of major regimes. This would not be the case. Per the manual Major AI factions have infinite Logistical Points (LIP?) and Range. This brings up two issues. The AI does not interact with the current push system beyond the extent that their units need to be able to draw a line to a road, this means that the current system is likely to complex to automate in a satisfactory way. It also means that a sufficiently intelligent rework might bring the AI closer to a human level of play (i.e. playing by the same rules) I believe this would be an unqualified good. Whether it is worth the programming time or processing power is a separate issue (Getting the AI to a point where it could avoid road spam would be especially nice)

2) A push based system should not reduce the decision making space overmuch. The main decision making strength of the logistics system comes in prioritising limited resources. If you can cheaply solve any given problem by building a truck stop then I'd argue that you aren't using the system in way that requires decision making in any meaningful way. At the moment the main decisions I have made regarding the logistics system is where to move next based on my logistics capacity and whether branching off a road to build an asset is worth the extra administrative effort on my part (Call it PPP or player political points). I don't think a pull system would invalidate the first choice and I feel the second choice, isn't a fun one (can I be bothered to take on the additional hassle of doing this thing for the advantage it gives me is a pretty poor choice, especially when the private economy constructs its own road to the asset of it's own accord anyway.)

3)I have to admit I've not yet come across the decision making space given by having scarce resources. That said, I believe a pull based system would allow you to make these decisions in a much cleaner way, especially given that the major variable factor are military formations. I personally like ATGs system for prioritising HQs, and if you really wanted you could apply it to assets as well (although on off works just as well here) Under a pull system with such a priority you would need to identify which OHQs were in need of the most supplies, prioritise them to high and carry on with your life. Under the Current system I would identify the units, then I would follow the supply system back, tweaking stop signs as I go, until I believed they had enough supply. I hope this shows that both systems leave the player with the same interesting choices but that a pull system might make that choice simpler to make. It's a question of not mistaking complexity for depth.

That said I would be very much interested in meaningful decisions made in the current system that might not be possible to make under a hypothetical new system.

4) As an aside, I would like to commend this game on the range of scenarios it produces. I'm pretty green and haven't even had my first war with a major yet. However I can see from my numerous restarts that different planets demand different ways to approach the game and ask different ways to run your empire. I believe this is a large part in people not seeing the various problems and opportunities inherent in the current supply systems.

ORIGINAL: Malevolence

Have you tried to directly upgrade the lousy starting troops you get in your SHQ with your new super troopers yet? Why shouldn't the SHQ have elite troopers ready to deploy?

Despite indicating it works; the next turn the SHQ either still has those starting rejects or gets angry and uses non-upgrade militia troops instead.

Yes, I checked that units would accept the rejects too, just to move them out.

You want elite unit right at the start well recruit as reinforcement the whole formation let it alone in the hq gaining xp until you create the formation. Usually Once they look like regular i recruit them right away or use it trained reinforcement as they get drained.

Proto-civs not wasting resources isnt the same thing as the difficulties in getting supplies to the front lines. In the current system, the resources arent technically wasted. Building too many truck stations? Thats wasteful. But can be avoided by careful tweaking of the systems as is.

In the end, I dont really care whether it is a push or pull system. I personally like the push, but pull would be fine too.

But, a system that completely removes the difficulties of logistics, which, mind you, is the number one problem all armies have faced in every era since the beginning of warfare, reduces the fun for me. If the logistics puzzle is replaced with a simple and efficient system where I "set it and forget it," an aspect of the game which I enjoy will be removed because others find it less than enjoyable.

Now, if this pull system requires me to think about resources every turn and requires me to adjust it at least every other turn, Id be cool with it.

And, tbh, I dont have to tweak the logistics every turn in the current system unless Im making a massive invasion, consolidating conquered territory, or strapped for resources early game. So, I guess, if the game at bare minimum forced me to look at logistics and tweak them under those same circumstances, Id be ok with changes that helped improve the experience for those who have different tastes in mechanics.

ORIGINAL: MarbleToad
But, a system that completely removes the difficulties of logistics, which, mind you, is the number one problem all armies have faced in every era since the beginning of warfare, reduces the fun for me. If the logistics puzzle is replaced with a simple and efficient system where I "set it and forget it," an aspect of the game which I enjoy will be removed because others find it less than enjoyable.

Now, if this pull system requires me to think about resources every turn and requires me to adjust it at least every other turn, Id be cool with it.

Thanks for your perspective. To me at least, however, there is a vast gulf between a system that "completely removes the difficulties of logistics" (which as far as I can tell no one is actually asking for), and one that requires me to check, much less tweak, the routes of every truck convoy in my empire every turn (which to me is extremely tedious).

ORIGINAL: 76mm

ORIGINAL: MarbleToad
But, a system that completely removes the difficulties of logistics, which, mind you, is the number one problem all armies have faced in every era since the beginning of warfare, reduces the fun for me. If the logistics puzzle is replaced with a simple and efficient system where I "set it and forget it," an aspect of the game which I enjoy will be removed because others find it less than enjoyable.

Now, if this pull system requires me to think about resources every turn and requires me to adjust it at least every other turn, Id be cool with it.

Thanks for your perspective. To me at least, however, there is a vast gulf between a system that "completely removes the difficulties of logistics" (which as far as I can tell no one is actually asking for), and one that requires me to check, much less tweak, the routes of every truck convoy in my empire every turn (which to me is extremely tedious).

Still waiting to see some evidence that this is either necessary or even happening. I say again, if you're having to micromanage your traffic lights every turn, you're doing something wrong.

I think allowing the player to remove roads somehow would go a long way to fixing this issue without having to automate one of the more fun parts of the game.

ORIGINAL: mithrasoflego
(...)
At the moment the main decisions I have made regarding the logistics system is where to move next based on my logistics capacity (...)

I love how terrain, and difficulty (or ease of) building roads shapes my borders and where I go. It's such great fun to play a game in which terrain matters so much. It feels realistic and you get really interesting situations and bottlenecks etc.

Just throwing that out here (it doesn't really involve the discussion) because that part of your post made me realize it

I'm slowly crawling the message history because each message consumes a significant amount of my limited brain power, but about Malevolence's comment on the puzzling 900 / 100 split of rail points, I'd wager it's related to the fact that units can get supplies (and maybe replacements ?) from any point along the rail line, although from a tiny fraction of the total of logistic points which you only take advantage of when building either a rail head or a rail station.

(Hence 900 -> only to the head or station, 100 -> available anywhere to organic logistics of a unit.)

But admittedly that's half a guess.

ORIGINAL: KingHalford
Still waiting to see some evidence that this is either necessary or even happening. I say again, if you're having to micromanage your traffic lights every turn, you're doing something wrong.

Actually, I'm not saying that I'm doing this...I was responding to MarbleToad's point that this is the level of logistical detail that he enjoys. More power to him, but it's not for me.

You know.. the problem that's so nicely solved here is that with a 'pull' or 'on demand' system it becomes a good idea to spam roads everywhere.
I seriously dislike this in other games. The most efficient thing? Roads upon roads in every hex.

So just alone that part of the current system which *really* makes you care about where you build roads and when and where you branch them makes it totally worth it to me.

This is also an argument for why destroying roads shouldn't be cheap. In fact they may even need to be more expensive than building them, I'm thinking now. Because later on you have quite a lot of IP and you'll otherwise be adding and deleting roads every turn on TOP of the current logistics system to micromanage stuff.

Maybe even roads not being removable at all is Vic's solution to that. If that stays the way it is then I do really hope the AI will not spam roads and will build them only pretty rarely.
But no, I do still think they should be removable, I just think it should cost quite a bit. Maybe double the cost of building a dirt road?

Hmm.

The AI rat's-nest roads are most of the problem here from a tedium perspective. The bigger issue is how complicated it is to understand things like "the amount of current LP in a hex has no substantial relation to the amount of LP you can get from a given SHQ"... the conceptual problem is pretty severe. I think I understand it all now, but those overlays are mostly confusing and easily misleading. A new overlay that allows filtering by selected SHQ supply would be nice, and make that the default. Yes, shuffling resources around in general is important, but I find that the logistics involved in keeping my battle lines in supply is key and I have yet to see how to determine this with existing overlays.

I don't agree that removing roads should be expensive. I do agree that if he wants to make them non-removable making the traffic lights and overlays better, and especially reducing the AI road spam (may be difficult) is a fine alternative.

How about unused "dirt roads" fade away over time?

So you can delete roads by strangling them off with a traffic sign.

Sealed roads are permanent.