Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: zgrssd

ORIGINAL: W8taminute

I don't want a pull system for my logistics otherwise I'll just play other boring games that have this system. The original out of the box logistics system in Shadow Empires is an enigma but once you get used to how it works it is so refreshing compared to other games.

I really hope that there is an option to keep this original logistics system in the game. I don't want a pull system. Don't spoil my fun for this game please. I'm sure I'm not alone.

Just turn it off for your Empire.

I still have no idea why you find "making a maze of traffic sign" a engaging mechanic, but do not expect a lot of people willing to play without it.

Indeed

I repeat: You can still play the game exactly as you did before.

ORIGINAL: zgrssd

ORIGINAL: W8taminute

I don't want a pull system for my logistics otherwise I'll just play other boring games that have this system. The original out of the box logistics system in Shadow Empires is an enigma but once you get used to how it works it is so refreshing compared to other games.

I really hope that there is an option to keep this original logistics system in the game. I don't want a pull system. Don't spoil my fun for this game please. I'm sure I'm not alone.

Just turn it off for your Empire.

I still have no idea why you find "making a maze of traffic sign" a engaging mechanic, but do not expect a lot of people willing to play without it.

It is called preference. Some of us find the "maze" system engaging and compelling, something else to crack in the game, a logistics model that is virtually unique in wargames. I know I for one am somewhat OCD, and the system naturally appeals to that part of me. There is no accounting for preference. And it appears Vic is listening to both sides, has recognized the division, and has built another system with options to accommodate both sides in the logistics divide. I'm glad he has gone that way. Frankly, if he had scrapped the current system and gone with what is apparently a simpler system, I would still play the game because it is just so good, though I would miss the current sytem. And I will try the new system when it comes out of beta. In other games with complex systems that can be fully or partially automated, I sometimes play fully manual (Distant Worlds Universe) and sometimes automate some systems. The air war in WITW is one I can think of, where I automate and then make some manual adjustments. But it comes back to preference.

I was just live-streaming Shadow Empire 1.04 beta 4 and jotted down a few things:

* When you go to the Leaders screen it starts with Natural Relation Point turned on. Resetting turns it off. I assume this should start off.

* I tried the new Traffic Signs with the toggles at the top and turned off the Pull blockage indicator and applied road and rail to an offshoot that had an asset with 100 Pull on it. The Logistics was completely blocked and the Pull didn't bypass the road block.

* When applying Unit Stratagems to units in the Target list it would be really cool to be able to see any Feats already active on each unit.

* I had a message after an event that said 'Unrest increased by (inv) 10%'. Not sure what that means. In the unrest it showed an increase of 9% unrest and another 15% popunrest whatever that is as well.

* Some of the viewers made a suggestion to allow the option to have enemies that surrender to be added to your empire as POWs. The suggestion was to increase pop but also increase unrest. Thought it was a cool idea.

ORIGINAL: DasTactic

* Some of the viewers made a suggestion to allow the option to have enemies that surrender to be added to your empire as POWs. The suggestion was to increase pop but also increase unrest. Thought it was a cool idea.

... then we need the option to execute prisoners as well.

ORIGINAL: DasTactic


* I tried the new Traffic Signs with the toggles at the top and turned off the Pull blockage indicator and applied road and rail to an offshoot that had an asset with 100 Pull on it. The Logistics was completely blocked and the Pull didn't bypass the road block.

I learned you still have to at least allow 95% instead total block. Total block work different from the block percentages.

ORIGINAL: Smidlee

ORIGINAL: DasTactic


* I tried the new Traffic Signs with the toggles at the top and turned off the Pull blockage indicator and applied road and rail to an offshoot that had an asset with 100 Pull on it. The Logistics was completely blocked and the Pull didn't bypass the road block.

I learned you still have to at least allow 95% instead total block. Total block work different from the block percentages.

Nope, that's not it. If you set up a "block all" traffic sign and have it not apply to truck points, it will let the truck points through.
There is definitely something bugged with traffic signs and pull points here.

I just did some testing and it looks like pull points can ONLY get through a 100% block traffic sign if the traffic sign is also told not to block railroad points.

If you set it up to block truck and railroad points, but let pull points through, it will not let anything through.
If you set it up to not block truck points and also not block pull points, but block railroad points, it will not let the pull points through.

Here is an example picture:

Hey Vic, I have no idea if this is working as intended or not, but if you have a junction with a traffic sign that blocks pull points, but doesn't block truck points, the branching count for the pull point logistics still increases.

Edit: So tell me if I'm getting this right, I should be able to block a road 100% and if I uncheck the pull points box, points that units and assets are required should be getting through right?

Because this is not happening at the moment. Or am I completely misunderstanding the system?

ORIGINAL: Destragon

Hey Vic, I have no idea if this is working as intended or not, but if you have a junction with a traffic sign that blocks pull points, but doesn't block truck points, the branching count for the pull point logistics still increases.

You still have points going South-east (thanks to pull points overriding the block).
So it is technically still a fully working 3 crossing of 1 branch plus "very little, but still more then 0"?

I am not sure of course.

Some fixes coming up in next beta that should address an issue related to Zgrssd report.

Posted beta-5. Some fixes and a start to adding more answers to the WHY I AM NOT GETTING SUPPLIES HERE question.

ORIGINAL: ramnblam

Edit: So tell me if I'm getting this right, I should be able to block a road 100% and if I uncheck the pull points box, points that units and assets are required should be getting through right?

Because this is not happening at the moment. Or am I completely misunderstanding the system?

This should work with v104-beta5. I made a fix that could have caused this to not work the previous version.

In beta 5, "block all" traffic signs that are told not to block pull points still block pull points as far as I can see. Same as beta 4.



Edit:
Noticed a small typo in one of the pick-up issue texts. It says "... was to far for the unit's operational logistics range". Missing the second "o" in "too".
Thanks for these additions, by the way.

I don't do betas, but just wanted to say I appreciate the work of everyone trying the betas and reporting and helping improve the game.

I just sent an email with a save with a couple potential bugs.

I think there is one major improovement still missing to the pull System:
A way to distribute the non-pulled points properly.
If you produce 4000 Logistics and get 1000 pull requests, there is 3000 points you do not know where to send. So the System defaults for the old spread.
Right now I still got to block of asset roads manually and hope the override works.

I think a big part is detecting Dead End roads. I have thought about detection them a little bit. I would say a reliable definition of "dead end" is "a road that does not hit a city or Logistics creating asset".
While most of the Logistics providers are in or on the road to cities, the odd free-standing one might still apear.

Alternatively, you could just split the non-pulled points based on the weightings each direction is getting. With above 1000 pull requests, asuming you get requests like:
400
400
100
100

It would be a simple mater of weighting math, to distribute those 3000 points equally over those 4 directions.

Don't forget you can place custom pull point requests, too.
I think having the leftover points automatically just evenly spread out in the old way is the way to go, because there isn't really a way for the game to know where exactly the player would want their strat move and formation raising points. Unlike with the points required to supply assets and units, I don't think this can really get automated in a way to satisfy everyone.

ORIGINAL: Destragon

Don't forget you can place custom pull point requests, too.
I think having the leftover points automatically just evenly spread out in the old way is the way to go, because there isn't really a way for the game to know where exactly the player would want their strat move and formation raising points. Unlike with the points required to supply assets and units, I don't think this can really get automated in a way to satisfy everyone.

Agreed.

There is a way to prioritize--specifying supply routes (main, etc.) with player selected start point (sp) and release point (rp). Player specifies the number of "pull" points they want (but may not get) in each hex from SP to RP.

Then leave everything else to evenly spread.

I'm surprised no one asked for priority to units, or to assets, or to cities yet. A prioritized list like (1) cities, (2) assets, (3) units.

My experience, however, is limited. I've only tested pull, not really used pull so far.

ORIGINAL: Destragon

Don't forget you can place custom pull point requests, too.
I think having the leftover points automatically just evenly spread out in the old way is the way to go, because there isn't really a way for the game to know where exactly the player would want their strat move and formation raising points. Unlike with the points required to supply assets and units, I don't think this can really get automated in a way to satisfy everyone.

I do not want to mirco those things. Indeed, I would prefer it if I did not even have to block asset-only roads.

As for where the player wants excess logistics for Strategic movement:
On the main roads, of course. The ones that lead to a city. Or logistcs assets in the wild.
If he wants them on some dirt road leading to his mine? Then he cap put down some pull points[;)]

This looks like one of the improved tooltips. In any event, I just noticed it. It's an example of a good tooltip.