Matrix Games Forums

On hex where the roads pass a river put a port. Does hitting the port can prevent supply moving?
Like i said it is crazy...

No.
 
Alfred

Besides not working, in what way would prevention of supply movement simulate bridges?

Actually logistic targets are what I am missing in the game - yet they were the second basic target system of the air forces.
1) Strategic bombing - factories, refineries, etc
2) Interdiction - bridges, railway centers, ports, rivers
3) Close air support - ground units
- of these the game actually represents mainly 1 and 3. Bridges and rail system could well be implemented in game somehow. Example - each railway in hex could have similar "Damage" factor as Runways, Ports and Airfield. Fully repaired it can pass 100% of nominal supply throughput...

Putting ports at river crossings would allow bombing the ports and thus the chance of inflicting port supply hits. But it would not prevent supply movement. Supplies will always move between two adjacent base regardless of the terrain that separates the two hexes (even if ocean - simulates coastal craft).
Btw, there are bridges in-game which did not exist IRL (Yelow River, Yangzte, Gulf of Martaban) - if you want to slow things, remove the roads / railroads (replace by railroad trail if you want to "simulate" ferries) and put ports on both river banks. Can be bombed for supply hits plus units will need to go out of strat move at the port before crossing.

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

Putting ports at river crossings would allow bombing the ports and thus the chance of inflicting port supply hits. But it would not prevent supply movement. Supplies will always move between two adjacent base regardless of the terrain that separates the two hexes (even if ocean - simulates coastal craft).
Btw, there are bridges in-game which did not exist IRL (Yelow River, Yangzte, Gulf of Martaban) - if you want to slow things, remove the roads / railroads (replace by railroad trail if you want to "simulate" ferries) and put ports on both river banks. Can be bombed for supply hits plus units will need to go out of strat move at the port before crossing.

Not even really necessary as bombing airfields can also result in airfield supply hits and they are usually easier to inflict than port supply hits.

The coding required to institute bridges would be immense and clearly was out of scope for AE. It would most definitely not be consistent with the abstracted supply/logistic delivery game routines. One has to go back to Grigsby's Western Front from c.1990 to see bridges explicitly represented. There is a reason why that feature has not been present in subsequent Grigsby titles. Anyone who played Western Front will understand the ROI from both coder and player, is poor.

Alfred

ORIGINAL: Alfred

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget
Putting ports at river crossings would allow bombing the ports and thus the chance of inflicting port supply hits. But it would not prevent supply movement. Supplies will always move between two adjacent base regardless of the terrain that separates the two hexes (even if ocean - simulates coastal craft).
Btw, there are bridges in-game which did not exist IRL (Yelow River, Yangzte, Gulf of Martaban) - if you want to slow things, remove the roads / railroads (replace by railroad trail if you want to "simulate" ferries) and put ports on both river banks. Can be bombed for supply hits plus units will need to go out of strat move at the port before crossing.

Not even really necessary as bombing airfields can also result in airfield supply hits and they are usually easier to inflict than port supply hits.

The coding required to institute bridges would be immense and clearly was out of scope for AE. It would most definitely not be consistent with the abstracted supply/logistic delivery game routines. One has to go back to Grigsby's Western Front from c.1990 to see bridges explicitly represented. There is a reason why that feature has not been present in subsequent Grigsby titles. Anyone who played Western Front will understand the ROI from both coder and player, is poor.

Alfred

The game engine doesn't allow "bridge" things. Sorry, too bad, but no joy [:(]. Dili is gonna have to go somewhere else.[8D]

Love LST's work around. It is elegant. Will require some pwhexe adaptations to the "gnarly roads" file, but think I can do him proud. It will also have the advantage of killing that rancid supply/oil/fuel flow movement that the "gamers" love so well.

LST, a man after my own heart. OK, then, your ideas will be put into the "gnarly roads" file, and I'll send you a personal copy.

Damn, I love it when people get righteous with data.[&o][&o]

Ciao. JWE

ORIGINAL: Barb

Actually logistic targets are what I am missing in the game - yet they were the second basic target system of the air forces.
1) Strategic bombing - factories, refineries, etc
2) Interdiction - bridges, railway centers, ports, rivers
3) Close air support - ground units
- of these the game actually represents mainly 1 and 3. Bridges and rail system could well be implemented in game somehow. Example - each railway in hex could have similar "Damage" factor as Runways, Ports and Airfield. Fully repaired it can pass 100% of nominal supply throughput...

I don't believe they can. Bridges shouldn't be allowed to be bombed in the game anyway (or the odds of success should be very small). That's how it really was. But it would be nice if retreating troops in possession of the hex could damage those, airfields and factories/oil fields but I'm pretty confident that can't be done in the game engine either (at least not the bridges). Other games have Aerial interdictment which slows down all movement by units from the side not having air superiority, but I doubt something like that could be added either. Dams would be another matter but I'm not sure there's any significant ones in this theatre anyway. Shortcuts had to be made in the most complex simulation game on this planet. On Gorn we have much better games, but they involve things too horrible (and childish at the same time) for me to mention in this forum.

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

if you want to slow things, remove the roads / railroads (replace by railroad trail if you want to "simulate" ferries) and put ports on both river banks. Can be bombed for supply hits plus units will need to go out of strat move at the port before crossing.

LST, very nice concept. I'm just going to have to incorporate into my mod ...

Thanks everyone.