Depots Madness?

[dpstafford]

It is the second turn of the 1805 scenario. Both Russia and Austria have built a chain of depots all the way from Vienna to Paris. Without having any troops any where near French territory. Shouldn't you have some military presents in a province before you can construct a depot?

[Reiryc]

ORIGINAL: dpstafford

It is the second turn of the 1805 scenario. Both Russia and Austria have built a chain of depots all the way from Vienna to Paris. Without having any troops any where near French territory. Shouldn't you have some military presents in a province before you can construct a depot?

Wouldn't the depot be 'present' enough? [:D]

[dpstafford]

ORIGINAL: Reiryc
Wouldn't the depot be 'present' enough? [:D]

Ahh, no. Serious answer anyone?? Who built the Russian depot near Paris when the nearest Russian troops aren't even to Vienna yet?

[carnifex]

Depots can only be built in cities under
your control, or adjacent to other depots
under your control, in a supply chain.

Literally this means that you can build a depot in a home province, then proceed to build depots over every single province on the map as long as each one was adjacent to the previous one. Well, you can't build in neutral provinces, so just make sure you declare war on everybody first [:D]

[jchastain]

True enough Carnifax. But I don't think anyone questions the legality of the depot but rather the sanity of it. Each depot costs good money to build and maintain. Why would anyone want to build them so far out in advance? Best case, it seems like an awful waste of money. Worst case, you just handed me your battle plan so that I can arrange my defenders along the exact path you plan to march.

[dpstafford]

ORIGINAL: jchastain

True enough Carnifax. But I don't think anyone questions the legality of the depot but rather the sanity of it. Each depot costs good money to build and maintain.

I'm not questioning the sanity of it, which I agree is dubious. I am questioning the design decision that requires the game to work in such a preposterous way. Austrians should not be able to build a depot in Paris until that have troops in the province.

[Uncle_Joe]

Well, since you have to place all of your orders before the turn executes, it would difficult to only be able order depots built where you currently have troops.

Perhaps they just should not appear on the map until friendly troops have been in the province?

[GreenDestiny]

ORIGINAL: Uncle_Joe
Perhaps they just should not appear on the map until friendly troops have been in the province?

Agree....that way you will not know what the AI want's to do.

[carnifex]

True enough Carnifax. But I don't think anyone questions the legality of the depot but rather the sanity of it. Each depot costs good money to build and maintain. Why would anyone want to build them so far out in advance? Best case, it seems like an awful waste of money. Worst case, you just handed me your battle plan so that I can arrange my defenders along the exact path you plan to march.

Lol, sorry I guess I was too subtle. My answer was meant to point out that exact thing, that you can build depots all over the map without realistic restrictions. Although in the end, this certainly does not affect the game much if at all. Sure the moving player can build tons of depots, but unless he wants to go broke he will only place the necessary ones. As far as telegraphing a line of march, if you were to gauge my intentions from depot placement I think you might be quite surprised when my armies take an alternate route.

Of course the above only applies to play against humans. I'm sure the AI is not clever enough to deceive others with conspicuous depot placement and actually means to march along that line. That should be fixed I think.

Well, since you have to place all of your orders before the turn executes, it would difficult to only be able order depots built where you currently have troops.

I think the ideal depot placement rule for land based depots would be that you can only build a depot in a province you control, or in a province where you have any land units at the start of the turn, or any non-neutral province adjacent to one of the above.

This would have the effect on invading armies that any land unit that moved one or two provinces into an enemy country would be able to draw supply from a depot, but moving three provinces in would force those units to forage.

[Hanal]

But the question of depot costs should be mentioned again.....if the AI is spending so much unecessary money on depots, then this can hinder the AI from performing more important build moves.....any unecessary AI actions which could hinder its' long term performance needs to be looked into.....

[carnifex]

IMHO the AI should have drastically slashed maintenance costs across the board, with depots particularly cheap, just to make up for the inevitable waste.

[Hanal]

The problem however is that the AI will probably just build more depots on the cheap....[;)]

[jchastain]

ORIGINAL: carnifex

I think the ideal depot placement rule for land based depots would be that you can only build a depot in a province you control, or in a province where you have any land units at the start of the turn, or any non-neutral province adjacent to one of the above.

This would have the effect on invading armies that any land unit that moved one or two provinces into an enemy country would be able to draw supply from a depot, but moving three provinces in would force those units to forage.

Excellent suggestion. An army charging ahead at full speed certainly would outrun its supply lines and be forced to forage. This would model that nicely. Great Idea!

[Reiryc]

ORIGINAL: jchastain

ORIGINAL: carnifex

I think the ideal depot placement rule for land based depots would be that you can only build a depot in a province you control, or in a province where you have any land units at the start of the turn, or any non-neutral province adjacent to one of the above.

This would have the effect on invading armies that any land unit that moved one or two provinces into an enemy country would be able to draw supply from a depot, but moving three provinces in would force those units to forage.

Excellent suggestion. An army charging ahead at full speed certainly would outrun its supply lines and be forced to forage. This would model that nicely. Great Idea!

I would think that this should only be true if the army is using forced march would they outrun their supply waggons. Otherwise, the waggons should move at about the same march rate as the troops.

[jchastain]

ORIGINAL: Reiryc

I would think that this should only be true if the army is using forced march would they outrun their supply waggons. Otherwise, the waggons should move at about the same march rate as the troops.

In my mind, it isn't really about one set of wagons keeping up with the troops, it's building an entire supply line to keep things coming up from the rear. Those troops eat what is in the wagon next to them every day. You need to bring another set of wagons up with more food the next day. And more again the following day. It is a logistical nightmare keeping a large army fed and moving it great distances in enemy territory certainly has a major impact on getting the job done.

[Reiryc]

ORIGINAL: jchastain

ORIGINAL: Reiryc

I would think that this should only be true if the army is using forced march would they outrun their supply waggons. Otherwise, the waggons should move at about the same march rate as the troops.

In my mind, it isn't really about one set of wagons keeping up with the troops, it's building an entire supply line to keep things coming up from the rear. Those troops eat what is in the wagon next to them every day. You need to bring another set of wagons up with more food the next day. And more again the following day. It is a logistical nightmare keeping a large army fed and moving it great distances in enemy territory certainly has a major impact on getting the job done.

I guess when I look at it, I see that in one month a unit/army/corp can move X number of provinces. Looking at the historical march rates in some campaigns, these marches seem pretty reasonable in distance. They should be able to be covered in most respects in around a couple weeks for the longest marches in the game without forced marching.

So I don't feel that in a month's time period, setting up the army depots along the march route is unfeasible also in that months time. When and where I see it could become a problem is when units force march as they would outrun the wagons ability to keep up and set up a depot along the march path.

So I do see it as outmarching the wagons because those wagons won't be able to keep up with the army to setup the last depot in the chain for the army to draw supplies from. ymmv

[Malagant]

So it doesn't seem unreasonable to you that as France I can have an army in Paris, set a depot there, start a chain of depots that goes through France, Bavaria, through neutral Prussia, through Poland to the border with Russia...all that in one month, when the army itself hasn't even crossed the Rhine yet?

[Reiryc]

ORIGINAL: Malagant

So it doesn't seem unreasonable to you that as France I can have an army in Paris, set a depot there, start a chain of depots that goes through France, Bavaria, through neutral Prussia, through Poland to the border with Russia...all that in one month, when the army itself hasn't even crossed the Rhine yet?

So you're saying that in protectorates and in the home provinces of france, that army depots couldn't have been made ready prior to the advance of the army? Am I reading you correctly?

[Malagant]

Who said anything about protectorates? Start in 1792, those aren't French protectorates, but one could still build a supply chain across all of Europe if one were so inclined.

I think it's gamey, so don't do it. I build depots only where my troops are. I believe the logistics of moving the massive amounts of materials required and setting up the infrastructre to support a two hundred thousand man army all across Europe is not something I should be able to accomplish in a month. [8|]

I agree with Carnifex. I think we should be limited in our placement of depots, and I like his idea for restricting where depots can be build.

[Reiryc]

ORIGINAL: Malagant

Who said anything about protectorates? Start in 1792, those aren't French protectorates, but one could still build a supply chain across all of Europe if one were so inclined.

Sorry, maybe I misunderstood the direction those depots were going to be built. You did specify from paris to bavaria and my understanding would be that it would go through the protectorates to get to bavaria.

Additionally, you said nothing originally about the date and have 'raised the bar' to now say it's 1792. Granted, you continue to raise the bar, then no, my response will not apply.

I think it's gamey, so don't do it. I build depots only where my troops are. I believe the logistics of moving the massive amounts of materials required and setting up the infrastructre to support a two hundred thousand man army all across Europe is not something I should be able to accomplish in a month. [8|]

I have no problem building depots in any of my provinces or my protectorates. This is why I used them in the example. I don't feel this is gamey whatsoever. It is perfectly reasonable and did in fact happen that napoleon would have stores/supplies gathered ahead of his march route in french territory.

I agree with Carnifex. I think we should be limited in our placement of depots, and I like his idea for restricting where depots can be build.

I think a depot should be able to be placed anywhere within your home turf irrespective of your troops and also in your protectorates.