What's your Strategy?
https://forums.matrixgames.com:443/
Quite simply apart from in the opening turns I have never ever seen this sort of thing.
ORIGINAL: Sauron_II
I'm so retarded.
I should have inspected Albert's map example to better understand the issues you guys are running into.
Why is there so many Priority 4's?
Of course P4s are going to accumulate supply. They cannot forward it on to another depot.
I am not seeing the same issues because I am very careful about dropping P4 depots everywhere.
IMO, you have way too many P4s.
Unless you are intentionally trying to accumulate freight stockpiles, the only place you need P4s are those depots directly servicing the front-line.
Otherwise, you will run into distribution issues.... like the ones you are encountering.
I am with loki on this one.
Quite simply apart from in the opening turns I have never ever seen this sort of thing.
ORIGINAL: Stamb
...
And the problem is that having system like NSS 0 0 1 1 2 2 3 3 and 4 4 on the front is less effective than 0 0 1 1 4 3 3 4 4. As for unknown reasons, for me, stockpiling freight and then dropping priority of that depot is more effective then just having an incremental line of priories. I would expect that if there is enough trains and rails capacity to deliver freight to both frontline with #4 and #4 in the middle, then in case of leaving some depots in the back to #3 would make no difference as all of the freight that could get to a #4 will get there and rest will stay in #3.
But as i said, i do not understand that logic and i made some topic showing that, IMHO, super depots somehow can get a lot of freight, while without a super depot you will get MUCH less freight for now obvious reasons.
I did not try it, but i guess that even when setting all depots at 0, and only 1 depot on a front to #4 (simulating that all freight should go there) will produce worse result than a super depot.
Personally to me it looks like that without a super depot - rail transport is not working in full power. Unfortunately you can not afford such a luxury as keeping FBDs on top of a depot.
I really appreciate all the answers.ORIGINAL: loki100
ORIGINAL: Stamb
...
And the problem is that having system like NSS 0 0 1 1 2 2 3 3 and 4 4 on the front is less effective than 0 0 1 1 4 3 3 4 4. As for unknown reasons, for me, stockpiling freight and then dropping priority of that depot is more effective then just having an incremental line of priories. I would expect that if there is enough trains and rails capacity to deliver freight to both frontline with #4 and #4 in the middle, then in case of leaving some depots in the back to #3 would make no difference as all of the freight that could get to a #4 will get there and rest will stay in #3.
But as i said, i do not understand that logic and i made some topic showing that, IMHO, super depots somehow can get a lot of freight, while without a super depot you will get MUCH less freight for now obvious reasons.
I did not try it, but i guess that even when setting all depots at 0, and only 1 depot on a front to #4 (simulating that all freight should go there) will produce worse result than a super depot.
Personally to me it looks like that without a super depot - rail transport is not working in full power. Unfortunately you can not afford such a luxury as keeping FBDs on top of a depot.
Since this has become a depot/freight thread, lets stress the basics. A Super-Depot does not pull more freight into the Soviet Union for the axis player, it distorts where a finite batch of freight goes.
The amount that can be sent in any turn is a capped number that may not be met.
The cap is fundamental, the freight is at the NSS, there are only a finite number of railyards of 2 or more in 30 hexes - that is a limit you can't break.
The amount that is actually sent out is likely to be less for a few reasons:
a) the malus on axis rail transport till April 42
b) You entrained reinforcements around Berlin in the turn - this have grabbed some of that finite rail capacity (lets call them trains)
c) Your rail net is congested, remember that congestion on dual track rails clears at volume/6 (if its 30k or less) and /4 for anything 30-50k. So crudely if you stress your system in one turn, it works less well for some time afterwards.
d) this matters as the 'trains' are represented as SMP, if there is no usage penalty, the freight can go up to 200 hexes, as soon as you generate usage penalties then it quickly becomes far more expensive for each unit to try and make that journey (in other words it calls on more trains to move 1 tonne so there are less trains left).
Why does that 'Minsk at 4' trick work?
Basically at some stage rail penalties have impacted so freight can't reach the front lines but can reach say Minsk. Since Minsk is a 4 it sticks there - very limited combat units are accessing it. When you release it, this batch of freight is not competing with the railyards in the Reich, it takes its 'trains' from the railyards around Minsk - and they have shorter journeys to the front so can overcome larger SMP penalties.
Why does this matter?
Well its all out of sight, but the more you know how to trigger the system to behave with very simple tools (on both the supply and demand side) the better your logistics will be.
And never forget, the system assumes SNAFU, so don't fuss at the occasional oddity. Your dispatcher got lost, couldn't read the writing, was having a bad day, got shot by the partisans ...
ORIGINAL: Stamb
...
I really appreciate all the answers.
You described this flow in some other posts. And i remember it.
And i still do not understand why having some depots at 4 instead of a 3 makes such a difference.
In my opinion if front depots are at 4 and if freight is out of SMP it will be stored in a closest depot (in my example it will be 3). And in the next turn it will be sent to a #4.
So what is the reason to keep some depots in the back at 4 and let them accumulate freight and only then releasing it, if having them at 3 for all turns should work the same?
how all of this freight that was stored somewhere in the back can get to a front if during all of the previous turns there was not enough trains or rail capacity (but probably trains as rails usage is around 5.5k for double lines) to get that same freight to a front. This is what bothers me.ORIGINAL: loki100
...
basically the 3s will do that role but with 2 small problems (that add up). First the freight doesn't stick so you don't get a controlled build up (usually the freight stays one turn and completes its move the next), second you have lots of 3s (most likely) so the freight has no clear rule to say 'come here - not there'.
ORIGINAL: Stamb
how all of this freight that was stored somewhere in the back can get to a front if during all of the previous turns there was not enough trains or rail capacity (but probably trains as rails usage is around 5.5k for double lines) to get that same freight to a front. This is what bothers me.ORIGINAL: loki100
...
basically the 3s will do that role but with 2 small problems (that add up). First the freight doesn't stick so you don't get a controlled build up (usually the freight stays one turn and completes its move the next), second you have lots of 3s (most likely) so the freight has no clear rule to say 'come here - not there'.
and in case of my expected setup which is the following:
0 1 2 3 3 4
NSS 0 1 2 3 3 4
0 1 2 3 3 4
I expect some freight to get to a 3 which are placed all over the map, as you told. And its fine, as in the next turn that freight will be forwarded to a 4. Which is where we want the freight to go.
ORIGINAL: loki100
...
Because of how freight moves.
Starts in the NSS, uses the rail capacity available in the Reich (lets simplify), goes as far East as it can and detrains - its 'train' returns to the Reich for next turn
Its now in a depot, if its not claimed by a combat unit (using trucks) then it uses the LOCAL railyards to entrain and move again.
So two huge advantages - its not now taking trains from the Reich and it has less distance to actually travel so doesn't need so much rail capacity to overcome any SMP penalties
Sometimes i can afford it. But it was my first game vs AI. And now its only t5 in PvP.ORIGINAL: loki100
The other bit is situational. There are times when yes, you want everything getting used now at the front. There are times when a reserve under your control is far better. You don't ideally put your entire army into the front line unless you have absolutely no choice - you try to keep a reserve?
ORIGINAL: Stamb
Also there are some weird situations like this when rail line in the middle has lower usage while previous and next rail has greater.
...
ORIGINAL: Stamb
Also there are some weird situations like this when rail line in the middle has lower usage while previous and next rail has greater.