Matrix Games Forums

whats the deal with supply? for eg a big part of the arhem campaign was holdin the DZ's to get supplied but i dont see any DZ's in the campaign.

HTTR employs a realistic supply expenditure system, right down to individual bullets. Howwever, it employs an abstracted resupply system which simply tops up all unit supply levels at 3am each day based on various factors.

Our new game Conquest of the Aegean ( COTA ) employs a realistic resupply system that traces lines of supply, despatches supply columns etc. For more info see the COTA Forum - New Features Thread

so even though i could be surrounded for days in arhem i still get supplied everyday? thats crazy for such a complex game

tonedog,

Rome wasn't built in a day. Our policy is to progressively develop our game engine over a series of titles. With each title we plan to release one major feature and as many other minor ones as we can. For COTA we have added a number of major feratures, including a realistic resupply system, mixed mode movement, new Delay code, Order of Battle display etc. For Battles from the Bulge ( BFTB ) we'll be adding Minefields and Engineering tasks for clearing minefields and roadblocks. Given the limited resources we have that's the best approach we can provide.

Having said that, the daily resupply system employed in HTTR still works reasonably well. The Allies typically only get their supplies increased by around 50% of their requirements. This was the historical average. The Germans meanwhile receive around 80% - again based on historical rates. Surrounded units engaged in combat quickly run out of ammo during the day and surrender or are destroyed.

tonedog,

I have played HTTR for almost 2 years now, and let me say one thing: don't get hooked up too much on this "issue" of automatic night resupply. It is really not significant in terms of the overall quality and complexity of the game. Believe me, fighting as the Allies in Arnhem is damn tough in HTTR, automatic resupply or not. Like Arjuna says, their resupply levels are low so even if they get some supply, they don't get much so it simulates their dire situation quite appropriately. In any case, the major feature in COTA is a fully realistic supply system with bases, supply lines, etc. so that they will take care of this "issue" (and COTA is just about to be released).

Notwithstanding this, there are lot of other things that HTTR do much better than any wargame out there: the combination of a flexible command structure (no more forced manipulation of hundreds of units like in all other turn-based, hex-based wargames...once you have tried it, you won't believe why this hasn't been done earlier), real maps without hexes, and strong AI makes HTTR the best wargame system currently on the market in terms of flexbility and realism.

If you have some money to buy one wargame these days, I strongly suggest you try out HTTR and/or the upcoming COTA. I guarantee you won't be disappointed. Moreover, the developers themselves are everyday in this forum, answering questions and discussing with the fans, never seen such a level of support.

The engine used for the series continues to evolve and improve.

So, COTA does a better job than HTTR in a number of areas such as supply and movement.

Does that mean that HTTR is unrealistic and/or not worth getting. I wouldn't say so. There is plenty of detailed and realistic modeling in the system: combat calculations, order delays, ... The game is fun, challenging, and educational despite a lack of focus on supply issues.

The same will be true of COTA (it won't literally be war in a box) and any other product no matter how hard the developer works to make it realistic and historically accurate. We have discussed topics such as arty fire mission behavior, recon, and national doctrines as areas for further evolution. But these areas will not receive special treatment in this iteration of the engine. Is that reason to stand on the side and watch instead of purchase? I don't think so. There is so much currently in the engine that it really isn't a problem unless one's only interest in ground combat is one narrow aspect to the exclusion of all else.

One of the best indications of the realism that is manifest by the engine is: Someone like me who approached playing the game as a game and not a ground combat simulation still ended up learning a bag of tricks that for the most part represent realistic strategy and tactics. Thus, the engine must be doing something right!