Open Beta Patch v1.26o2 (12 may 2025)

[Destragon]

ORIGINAL: Vic

1) that when you look at the logs in the traffic sign popup there are much less entries for each hex and it is actually possible to better understand what is going on. all the overlap if you had many logistical assets was creating an incomprehensible (for me) number of overlaps and entries.

Do you mean specifically for logistics source tiles? What if we just build roads adjacent to logistics assets, instead of having them go directly through them, like I posted a picture of above?
Will it confuse the pull logistics when we do that? I haven't started a new game yet.

[Journier]

anyone see a issue in latest beta 9 of minor and major worker strike credit costs disparity?

minor and major worker strikes in my game are having similar costs like 250 credits each. however when i make the payoff the major worker strike soaks 1500+ credits out of my treasury.

[demiare]

ORIGINAL: Destragon
Will it confuse the pull logistics when we do that? I haven't started a new game yet.

Yes, because in that case this will play exactly same like pre-beta9 logistics. You will see in at long range in area where your capital LP flow is disappearing but game still try to use it instead of using "weak" LP from local Truck Station, resulting zero or almost zero actual supplies coming.

[Malevolence]

ORIGINAL: demiare

ORIGINAL: Destragon
Will it confuse the pull logistics when we do that? I haven't started a new game yet.

Yes, because in that case this will play exactly same like pre-beta9 logistics. You will see in at long range in area where your capital LP flow is disappearing but game still try to use it instead of using "weak" LP from local Truck Station, resulting zero or almost zero actual supplies coming.

Keep in mind, all supplies to units originate from the SHQ. Underestimate the magnitude of that requirement at your peril.

For example, public food in zone Bravo moves to the SHQ in zone Alpha, then is delivered to the units in zones Alpha through Zulu.

Luckily, in the case of Food, I think the weight is 1.

Moving a tank from the SHQ to zone Detla, however, is a much larger job and impacts every hex on the path to the delivery point. A guess, but moving 100 tanks requires and consumes 1,000 LP on every hex in the path.

Your SHQ hex only has a maximum of 12 potential exits---6 for truck lines, 6 for rail lines. That is the reason I lobbied for separate traffic signals for each transport mode.

[Malevolence]

As an aside, you should be using rail lines between cities--particularly over long distances and through bad terrain.

[Destragon]

ORIGINAL: demiare
Yes, because in that case this will play exactly same like pre-beta9 logistics.

That's not really true. The tiles where you have your logistics assets like truck stations are the important thing for pull logistics and they are the main thing that is affected by this change, no matter if you have a bypass road or not. I just haven't been able to test it yet though.

[Vhalor]

ORIGINAL: Vic

Thanks for the feedback everybody.

For the moment I think cutting of the logistics for a truck/rail station when reaching another station is a good one.

The big argument for me is:
1) that when you look at the logs in the traffic sign popup there are much less entries for each hex and it is actually possible to better understand what is going on. all the overlap if you had many logistical assets was creating an incomprehensible (for me) number of overlaps and entries.
2) that when using only the pull systems there will be much less cases where an already depleting logistics stream (due to distance from source) is high-jacking the pull points in a certain direction.

The supply bases will still be useful on long trajectories and especially on the frontline.

I am not rushing this beta however. And will give it some more time for reflection.

best wishes,
Vic

Having played a bit with this latest logistics change, it just feels even worse than imagined and makes everything so unnecessarily messy now. The log screen was also rarely, if ever, needed for me before. Things have to go really wrong before you have to look at that. Which now may be the case more often...

Before there was one beautiful and simple rule. You have logistics problems? Construct more logistical assets! It was that simple. Sure, depending on other factors, the positive impact would vary, but that's rather straight forward and really easy to comprehend.

Not only is that no longer the case and you will have to do a lot more analyzing and micromanaging, if you want to optimize your logistics, but worst of all, one wrongly placed logistical asset can now easily cripple your entire logistical network. Logistics simply disappearing into thin air like that doesn't seem very comprehensible. If you expand your logistical capabilities, you do not expect your network to just collapse for no apparent reason instead. The entire system right now is complex enough already without such an arbitrary rule interfering with everything.

On top, there's now no longer even the option to just opt out of the pull system and its accompanying changes, as was the case before. Because as crazy as it may be, right now I'd ditch the entire pull system without hesitation to just go back to the original logistical system. It has its annoyances, but at least for me they are far more manageable compared to the current one. Strange times indeed, when you find yourself chanting: "Down with the pull system and may the 1.0 logistical system rise again!" Perhaps the push system was the one true system all along?!

To end on a more serious note, I really hope this change can be limited to just the pull system itself, perhaps it could even do alright in that case, or at least the option to just ignore the entire pull system, along with this latest change, is restored!

[demiare]

ORIGINAL: Vhalor
Before there was one beautiful and simple rule. You have logistics problems? Construct more logistical assets!

Because as crazy as it may be, right now I'd ditch the entire pull system without hesitation to just go back to the original logistical system.

Irony that latest change changed almost NOTHING in logistic management ... except railroads are now mandatory as pushing LP from SHQ with trucks only will be too unstable past initial neighbor cities (well, and supply bases sometimes are mandatory too if you're fighting in middle of nowhere). No offense (seriously!), but all your frustration seems to be based on fact that you aren't playing in intended way.

So you were able to play in style "MOAR stations!" and it's even worked? O_O Then latest changes are indeed was really needed one. Hell, game have multiple viewmodes related to logistics - you almost completely ignored them and thought it was fine? [:(]

Before introduction of pull system you were forced to spend every damned turn fixing traffic signs if you're involved in any notable war. Amount of micro-management was too annoying - every mine you'd to build not on main road forced you to go into traffic signs screen again. Every damned upgrade to that mine! No way I want to see this nightmare again. [:@] How you could suggest it is beyond my understanding.

P.S. Also finally you MAY combine roads & rails without crazy shenanigans as finally local truck stations correctly push LP from railstops and no longer trying to drop this work on trucks coming from capital (yes, one hex gap in roads was almost mandatory sometimes if you don't want to see sudden bottlenecks as AI trying to use trucks more then trains).

[Destragon]

ORIGINAL: Vhalor

You have logistics problems? Construct more logistical assets! It was that simple. Sure, depending on other factors, the positive impact would vary, but that's rather straight forward and really easy to comprehend.

Not only is that no longer the case and you will have to do a lot more analyzing and micromanaging, if you want to optimize your logistics, but worst of all, one wrongly placed logistical asset can now easily cripple your entire logistical network.

I mean, this might even be part of the intention. If the changes make expanding your logistical network require a little more thought than just spamming truck stations, it sounds like it would actually be a good change.
I agree that it's a bit of an arbitrary rule though, not unlike the branching penalty.

Something I wanna know is if the asset stop rule will make it necessary to get an additional SHQ in late game when you might be reaching the limit of truck station + railway station in the capital.

Because as crazy as it may be, right now I'd ditch the entire pull system without hesitation to just go back to the original logistical system.

Woah, absolutely disagreeing on that.
I think I'm still more opposed to the branching penalty than this new rule.

[Razorix22]

On another subject, I've some troubles on the private jobs part since beta5 (not sure if related). Each of my cities list the total number of jobs 100 times less than reality, and making people leave and the private assets rust...

EDIT: Of course, can't post image since I didn't post anything for a week... So, I've that private Dome-Farm III for example, wich need 33K people, but employ 20,9K on my 130K population. In the private population tab, it list that only 2.500 private jobs are available.
If a use a stratagem to increase the number of private jobs (commercial assets or zoo for example), the number of private jobs update correctly, to be lost again next turn.

[Culthrasa]

@razor did you try a image site to post? I always use https://snipboard.io/ perhaps that way you can post image's.

[Razorix22]

Users can't post any links before they reach 10 posts and 7 days delay since that tenth post.

Maybe I can PM you... I'll try that.

[Culthrasa]

@razor, ahh oke

Here are the two screenshots you PM-ed me for all to see

[Razorix22]

Thanks a lot mate !

[Culthrasa]

To comment on my "own" post

You only have 20.400 private citizens in this city. Perhaps they aren't bothered to work (don't know if employment can reach 100%)?
The fact that there are "only" 2500 jobs is the number of filled jobs, not the number of total jobs (the closed down assets aren't counted) I think.
My suggestion would be to enlarge the total amount of people in the city and/or close public jobs if you can.

[demiare]

ORIGINAL: Culthrasa

The fact that there are "only" 2500 jobs is the number of filled jobs, not the number of total jobs (the closed down assets aren't counted) I think.

No, only 2500 jobs because most of private assets are mothballed (see yellow dot icon near asset name?).

Why AI is mothballing them is a good question and a reason to send save to Vic. Seems it's trying to salvage something, but how something could be more important then food is beyond me.

But 100% you overbuild public assets without taking population in mind.

[jimwinsor]

"On top, there's now no longer even the option to just opt out of the pull system and its accompanying changes, as was the case before. Because as crazy as it may be, right now I'd ditch the entire pull system without hesitation to just go back to the original logistical system. It has its annoyances, but at least for me they are far more manageable compared to the current one. Strange times indeed, when you find yourself chanting: "Down with the pull system and may the 1.0 logistical system rise again!" Perhaps the push system was the one true system all along?!"

I came to the same conclusion in a post on the main thread, although I think the pull system should remain as an option for beginner players.

[Razorix22]

ORIGINAL: demiare

ORIGINAL: Culthrasa

The fact that there are "only" 2500 jobs is the number of filled jobs, not the number of total jobs (the closed down assets aren't counted) I think.

No, only 2500 jobs because most of private assets are mothballed (see yellow dot icon near asset name?).

Why AI is mothballing them is a good question and a reason to send save to Vic. Seems it's trying to salvage something, but how something could be more important then food is beyond me.

But 100% you overbuild public assets without taking population in mind.

Sure I overbuild. ^^

But still, I can't understand why they are mothballing. What's weird is that, if I build a new private asset thanks to a strat (zoo or commercial), the mothballing stop DURING the turn and the numbers are back to normal.

[Vhalor]

ORIGINAL: Destragon

ORIGINAL: Vhalor

You have logistics problems? Construct more logistical assets! It was that simple. Sure, depending on other factors, the positive impact would vary, but that's rather straight forward and really easy to comprehend.

Not only is that no longer the case and you will have to do a lot more analyzing and micromanaging, if you want to optimize your logistics, but worst of all, one wrongly placed logistical asset can now easily cripple your entire logistical network.

I mean, this might even be part of the intention. If the changes make expanding your logistical network require a little more thought than just spamming truck stations, it sounds like it would actually be a good change.
I agree that it's a bit of an arbitrary rule though, not unlike the branching penalty.

Something I wanna know is if the asset stop rule will make it necessary to get an additional SHQ in late game when you might be reaching the limit of truck station + railway station in the capital.

Because as crazy as it may be, right now I'd ditch the entire pull system without hesitation to just go back to the original logistical system.

Woah, absolutely disagreeing on that.
I think I'm still more opposed to the branching penalty than this new rule.

ORIGINAL: jimwinsor

"On top, there's now no longer even the option to just opt out of the pull system and its accompanying changes, as was the case before. Because as crazy as it may be, right now I'd ditch the entire pull system without hesitation to just go back to the original logistical system. It has its annoyances, but at least for me they are far more manageable compared to the current one. Strange times indeed, when you find yourself chanting: "Down with the pull system and may the 1.0 logistical system rise again!" Perhaps the push system was the one true system all along?!"

I came to the same conclusion in a post on the main thread, although I think the pull system should remain as an option for beginner players.

Just want to clarify a bit. Starting with the "Because as crazy as it may be, right now I'd ditch the entire pull system without hesitation to just go back to the original logistical system."

I didn't mean that Vic should ditch the entire system. Only that I'd do so for myself, if that option is restored. I was a big fan of the idea of a pull system. But I'm just not enjoying the latest logistical system anymore. This latest change is when I fully realized that sad fact.

Now about the "just spamming truck stations". My point was, for newer players or those that do not care much about logistics, it was simple to understand and used to help to a varying degree. Not that it was the best approach and everything else should be ignored forever. More thought put into your logistical setup = better results. That's good. You want a easy foundation that can be expanded upon. Naturally that includes utilizing other options like rail after some time.

I'm not even sure you could play the game well without relying on the different map modes, so of course I use them, but digging into the traffic control logs really shouldn't be necessary at all unless things go really wrong.

Yet with this latest change, things are problematic now as players can screw up real fast. Remember, they don't have a good understanding of what's going on at all, because they are either new or maybe don't care to dig into the inner workings of the logistical system to begin with. They simply want to build another logistical asset to continue on and obviously expect improvement when they do. Instead however, logistical points suddenly disappear and it messes their entire network up... that seems like a serious problem to me.

As far as I'm aware, the main reason to even start making all these changes to the system was because people were constantly complaining that logistics are too complicated and ruining the game, so I highly doubt the goal of Vic is to make it more complicated. In the end, the real question is just how important and management intensive should the logistical system even be. I saw people saying "screw anyone who doesn't want to master it" to "just remove logistics!". Perhaps some kind of difficulty settings for logistics would be a better option instead of trying to please everyone in one ever expanding system?

[Vic]

ORIGINAL: Journier

anyone see a issue in latest beta 9 of minor and major worker strike credit costs disparity?

minor and major worker strikes in my game are having similar costs like 250 credits each. however when i make the payoff the major worker strike soaks 1500+ credits out of my treasury.

minor strike cost should be 1 Cr * workers in that Zone
major strike cost should be 2 Cr * workers in that Zone