Truck stations stop working when upgraded?

[Justus2]

ORIGINAL: zgrssd

ORIGINAL: ZiggyMaca

ORIGINAL: Sieppo

Thanks for the answers. I guess sudden work at a thinly working supply line at the front might be a good reason a disruption but it still makes no sense why heroic troops will just be let to starve and die since there is "more important things to be done". Thus, where can I prioritise that troop supply [:D]? I don't care about rioting enemies, let them eat cake! And metal supply in home country cities also can make sense but that's kind of silly too. .

You can set SHQ logistics limitations with the Unit Admin button on the right panel when you select your SHQ.

You really should not be changing those. Lowering SHQ > Zone has the potential to stall out your entire economy, as the supplies needed to run stuff no longer reach the Zones where they are needed.
It is the first thing and set to 40% for a good reason.

It would also likely not help. If the bottleneck is not right on top of the SHQ, those changes will not be helping at all. You are only setting yourself up for issues down the road by heedlessly playing around with them. 40/40/30/30 is a solid split.

I agree with the potential problems, but I think there are situations where adjusting these percentages for a short period can be helpful. For example, if during an offensive you have a major backlog of replacements at SHQ that can't get to the front, dropping the first 3 categories to reserve most of the throughput for replacements can prioritize getting those to the units that need them, and will be more responsive than upgrading your logistics infrastructure (which will take several turns to see the impact). As you point out, you are taking risk with your economy, but slowing construction or flow to stockpiles for a turn or two may be worth the risk to reinforce an army in contact.

Here's my reasoning:
SHQ>Zone 20% Need to still ensure some resources are getting out to the zones
SHQ>Unit 30% If you are in combat, you still need basic supplies getting out
Zone>SHQ 10% You can take the most risk here, it will delay getting material to your stockpiles, but hopefully you have a buffer
Rep>Unit 80% At most you have spent 60% so far, but anything not spent rolls to the next step, so this ensures that you will have at least 40% throughput available, and potentially as much as double if the prior steps didnt use as much.
Anything left over after this step rolls back to step 1, going over the set %, so if you don't need all of it you will get some more movement to the zones.

I would only do this for one turn or at most 2, just make SURE to switch it back when the replacements have been distributed. Then return to your 'default' percentages, and focus on building up infrastructure so you don't have that backlog in the future.

EDIT: Typos

[zgrssd]

ORIGINAL: Justus2

ORIGINAL: zgrssd

ORIGINAL: ZiggyMaca



You can set SHQ logistics limitations with the Unit Admin button on the right panel when you select your SHQ.

You really should not be changing those. Lowering SHQ > Zone has the potential to stall out your entire economy, as the supplies needed to run stuff no longer reach the Zones where they are needed.
It is the first thing and set to 40% for a good reason.

It would also likely not help. If the bottleneck is not right on top of the SHQ, those changes will not be helping at all. You are only setting yourself up for issues down the road by heedlessly playing around with them. 40/40/30/30 is a solid split.

I agree with the potential problems, but I think there are situations where adjusting these percentages for a short period can be helpful. For example, if during an offensive you have a major backlog of replacements at SHQ that can't get to the front, dropping the first 3 categories to reserve most of the throughput for replacements can prioritize getting those to the units that need them, and will be more responsive than upgrading your logistics infrastructure (which will take several turns to see the impact). As you point out, you are taking risk with your economy, but slowing construction or flow to stockpiles for a turn or two may be worth the risk to reinforce an army in contact.

That is more people on the front, meaning:
- you need to deliver even more food, when you already had issues
- you need to deliver even more ammo, when you already could not transport enough
- propably worse "out of supply" penalties, because your food delivieries did not improove but your consumption made a jump
- so you will get more losses from poorer performance
- you delayed getting the underlying issue fixed, by doing this instead of building logistics for 1-2 turns.

Shipping more people to a front you already can not supply, is just more people that will die to starvation and lack of ammo.[;)]

[Justus2]

ORIGINAL: zgrssd

ORIGINAL: Justus2

ORIGINAL: zgrssd


You really should not be changing those. Lowering SHQ > Zone has the potential to stall out your entire economy, as the supplies needed to run stuff no longer reach the Zones where they are needed.
It is the first thing and set to 40% for a good reason.

It would also likely not help. If the bottleneck is not right on top of the SHQ, those changes will not be helping at all. You are only setting yourself up for issues down the road by heedlessly playing around with them. 40/40/30/30 is a solid split.

I agree with the potential problems, but I think there are situations where adjusting these percentages for a short period can be helpful. For example, if during an offensive you have a major backlog of replacements at SHQ that can't get to the front, dropping the first 3 categories to reserve most of the throughput for replacements can prioritize getting those to the units that need them, and will be more responsive than upgrading your logistics infrastructure (which will take several turns to see the impact). As you point out, you are taking risk with your economy, but slowing construction or flow to stockpiles for a turn or two may be worth the risk to reinforce an army in contact.

That is more people on the front, meaning:
- you need to deliver even more food, when you already had issues
- you need to deliver even more ammo, when you already could not transport enough
- propably worse "out of supply" penalties, because your food delivieries did not improove but your consumption made a jump
- so you will get more losses from poorer performance
- you delayed getting the underlying issue fixed, by doing this instead of building logistics for 1-2 turns.

Shipping more people to a front you already can not supply, is just more people that will die to starvation and lack of ammo.[;)]

The challenge is the % are set for the entire SHQ area, not per route. So while you may have trouble supplying food, ammo or replacements to that front, the SHQ percentages will prioritize moving food, fuel and metal from the SHQ to the cities of that zone ahead of supplies to the units, and then prioritize gathering resources from the zone ahead of replacements. Overall, those priorities are important for the economy, but when applied to that specific branch, that can lead to unsupplied/ill-equipped troops. Changing the percentages in the short term will ensure that supplies to the troops and replacements take priority on the branches that have demand for those things, while the rest of your emplire (which wont have much need for military supplies/branches) will roll over the excess logistics and still maintain the economy.

If you are really struggling that much to feed your army, then I would reduce the SHQ>Zone to 10% and bump up SHQ>Unit to 40% (I haven't had to make it that drastic) - then you might get what the OP asked (starve the new cities along that branch, but feed the troops), but for the rest of your empire there will be little effect, as there is no great demand for unit supply or replacement so the excess will roll back over to SHQ>Zone anyway.