Supply system improvements

[JMass]

From the manual (page 23): Controlling hexes is important for Supply reasons, as Supply can travel to units only through friendly controlled hexes (see 19.0).

It seems to me that the system is unbalanced in favour of nations that play late in the turn. I played a game as Russian and I found very easy to cut off from the supply advancing German armored units and eliminate them the next turn, the same does not apply vice versa because the supply is calculated at the end of the turn so commies are still in supply and can try to open a supply line.
So I think the supply system could be improved in this way:

1) Supply lines are totally blocked by enemy units and their zocs (negated by the presence of friendly units) and by enemy controlled cities while supply traced through enemy controlled hexes is halved.
2) Supply is calculated for each country separately at the end of their own turn.

Finally, I believe it is now difficult to simulate a landing in Normandy because allied units would not have supply, the nearest port is Le Havre but it has been German throughout the battle so it could be useful to add Mulberries.

[winky51]

I think for amphib operations they have a supply mission for navies.  Not sure if it only works on ports or ports and coast hexes.

[comrade]

You're right, supply rules favours countries that play later in the turn, but this is how it's been designed for various reasons (mostly for performance) and this is unlikely to change in near future.

Amphib landing is quite easy, all you need to do is to capture a port city in the same turn (remember to set up a supply convoy to this city before hitting next turn). This is why naval and air superiority is important for amphibious operations - allows softening enemy garrison in the port before attacking it.

[JMass]

ORIGINAL: comrade

You're right, supply rules favours countries that play later in the turn, but this is how it's been designed for various reasons (mostly for performance) and this is unlikely to change in near future.

I fear that could unbalance strongly matches against human opponents... [:(]

Amphib landing is quite easy, all you need to do is to capture a port city in the same turn

Uhmmm... I think that german panzer corps level 5 in ports could be tough nuts to crack.

(remember to set up a supply convoy to this city before hitting next turn).

Thanks for the hint! [:)]

[Plainian]

ORIGINAL: comrade

You're right, supply rules favours countries that play later in the turn, but this is how it's been designed for various reasons (mostly for performance) and this is unlikely to change in near future.

I think I read in another thread that some kind of Political Points determines the sequence in which countries move? ie country with highest goes first then next highest etc...
If this is the case then by reversing this rule, would this resolve it? so that Germany went last? Yes? No? Would it unbalance the game?

ORIGINAL: comrade

Amphib landing is quite easy, all you need to do is to capture a port city in the same turn (remember to set up a supply convoy to this city before hitting next turn). This is why naval and air superiority is important for amphibious operations - allows softening enemy garrison in the port before attacking it.

DDay sounds impossible then? Allies didn't capture Cherbourg in one turn/week? Le Havre would have been impossible to capture. It was fortified heavily. Plus Hitler kept the 15th Army stationed in the Pas de Calaid there for a good reason!

[JMass]

ORIGINAL: Plain Ian
DDay sounds impossible then? Allies didn't capture Cherbourg in one turn/week? Le Havre would have been impossible to capture. It was fortified heavily. Plus Hitler kept the 15th Army stationed in the Pas de Calaid there for a good reason!

On the map there isn't Cherbourg and I fear Germany needs just holding ports with a half dozen of panzer corps level 5 (strenght value 12) to frustrate allied landings

[Plainian]

ORIGINAL: JMass

ORIGINAL: Plain Ian
DDay sounds impossible then? Allies didn't capture Cherbourg in one turn/week? Le Havre would have been impossible to capture. It was fortified heavily. Plus Hitler kept the 15th Army stationed in the Pas de Calaid there for a good reason!

On the map there isn't Cherbourg and I fear Germany needs just holding ports with a half dozen of panzer corps level 5 (strenght value 12) to frustrate allied landings

Mmmh well maybe we can lobby to add Cherbourg s a port.

Keeping 6 Panzer Corps in the west sounds like an expensive way to defend France. I'm not sure what that equates to but it looks like something in the range of 12-18 Divs worth of armour? In a WW2 strategic game (boardgame/PC game) would a player be able to pursue such a strategy?

But that doesn't matter really as you've raised a valid point about being able to support an invasion if the allies cannot capture a port in one turn.

[JMass]

ORIGINAL: Plain Ian
Mmmh well maybe we can lobby to add Cherbourg s a port.

I tried successfully to add a port writing a new line in cities.csv and it could works to play against human opponents.

[JMass]

It seems are missing a lot of ports and some historical landings are not possible: Operation Torch, Husky, Shingle, Overlord, perhaps Anvil. And more: no supply for a Kurland pocket, no evacuation of Dunkerque... without forget Malta and Crete.

[Rekm41]

Not too mention the fact that when you have a city surrounded and you cannot kill the unit it just rebuilds to full strength. Finding this to be frustrating in North Africa. Something needs to be done about this

[JMass]

Here's a (partial) list of missing ports, at least some of them could be added:
North Africa: Oran, Algiers, Bone, Bizerte, Suez
Mediterranean: Chania (Crete), Malta
Italy: Siracusa, Messina, Taranto, Anzio, Livorno
France, Belgium, Netherlands: St. Nazaire, Lorient, Cherbourg, Calais, Dunkerque, Ostende
Latvia: Libau and/or Windau

It could be possible add manually them (except Malta) in cities.csv and cities_diagram.csv without obtain crashes and errors?

[JMass]

ORIGINAL: rekm41

Not too mention the fact that when you have a city surrounded and you cannot kill the unit it just rebuilds to full strength. Finding this to be frustrating in North Africa. Something needs to be done about this

Non only in North Africa, I had problems even in Russia, no linear front but cities as nearly invulnerable strongpoints.
fb.asp?m=1878012

[ebitt]

It could be possible add manually them (except Malta) in cities.csv and cities_diagram.csv without obtain crashes and errors?

 
Isn't there some AI routine that would have to be updated?  In another thread a graphing routine was mentioned.

[Mickrocks201]

I would think that the problem with inpregnable cities could be dealt with via supplies too.   I would suggest that if a city is cutoff from outside supplies it can only use it's internally generated PP's to replenish its garrison.   Perhaps some stockpiling could be allowed to a point -- PP's coulds be spent to be added to a cities reserve up to a specified limit per city, that way Lenningrad, Sevastapol and Trobruk could be handled.   As long as the city is not within a supply network (either via hexes or convoy) no more PP's could be added. 

I can see that the game does limit the amount of replenishment allowed based upon supply status, but the Italian unit in Trobuk replenishes to max value every turn despite being both surrounded and ostensibly blockaded with large Brit Navy in adjacent sea zone.  

[Rekm41]

I think that from what has been mentioned in this thread something needs to be looked at with regards to supplies and how they are distributed. Maybe not this upcoming patch but definitely the next one.
 
 

[JMass]

ORIGINAL: ebitt
Isn't there some AI routine that would have to be updated?  In another thread a graphing routine was mentioned.

I'll try to test the Edytor Grafu Miast.
[;)]

[ebitt]

Good Luck!  If I could only find a good Polish translation routine the whole business of new secenarios and modifications would be a lot easier.[:)]

[comrade]

ORIGINAL: JMass

Here's a (partial) list of missing ports, at least some of them could be added:
North Africa: Oran, Algiers, Bone, Bizerte, Suez
Mediterranean: Chania (Crete), Malta
Italy: Siracusa, Messina, Taranto, Anzio, Livorno
France, Belgium, Netherlands: St. Nazaire, Lorient, Cherbourg, Calais, Dunkerque, Ostende
Latvia: Libau and/or Windau

It could be possible add manually them (except Malta) in cities.csv and cities_diagram.csv without obtain crashes and errors?

Use Edytor Grafu Miast.exe to edit cities_diagram.csv (this tool creates polaczenia.csv file which is in fact cities_diagram.csv). Cities_diagram.csv is a file used by the AI. If you add a city but don't edit this file, the AI won't 'see' the city.

If the city is not a port than that's enough. Otherwise you should also create a node in the sea grapp by adding row in sea_nodes.csv and link it to other sea zones by adding row(s) in sea_edges.csv

[JMass]

ORIGINAL: comrade
If the city is not a port than that's enough. Otherwise you should also create a node in the sea grapp by adding row in sea_nodes.csv and link it to other sea zones by adding row(s) in sea_edges.csv

Thanks, this is the response that I needed, I have added Chania in Crete but the game crashed.
[:)]

[comrade]

Did you edit the files in scenario directory or edited a saved game? Make sure that all the coordinates in all files are correct. Check out ConsoleOut.txt, there may be an error information there.