Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Supply chain idea.

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III >> Scenario Design >> Supply chain idea. Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Supply chain idea. - 11/21/2007 7:17:07 AM   
Fungwu

 

Posts: 161
Joined: 8/22/2007
Status: offline
Hi, I was thinking of designing my first scenario, and I had an idea to simulate a chain of supply.

Our protagonists will be RED. Give RED a terrible supply level. Like 10.

Then give them a bunch of units with something like 500 trucks.

In my example we will give side RED 4 supply formations:

Group A: with units 1,2,3,4 each with 500 trucks

Group B, Group, C, Group D, all with 4 similar units of all trucks.

House rules will state:

Group A must always have 1 unit within 4 hexes of a supply source, and all units of group A must always be with 4 hexes of each other.

One unit of group B must be within 4 hexes of the last(farthest from the supply source) unit of group A and all units must be within 4 hexes of each other.

One unit of group c has to be within 4 hexes of the last unit of group B, and all units within 4 hexes of each other.

One unit in group D has to be within 4 hexes of the last unit of group C, all units must be within 4 hexes of each other, and one unit must be within 4 hexes of the HQ unit of the formation they are supplying.

If the supply unit occupies any hex other than a road, than the distance allowable between units is -2 hexes.

If a supply unit is fortified then its neighbors can be 8 hexes distant, instead of 4.

So in game it would work something like this. Red starts out in his capital with an armored battle group and these 12 supply units split amongst groups A,B,C,D.

In the first turn the armored group advances 30 hexes down a road. One unit in group D must always be within 4 hexes of the HQ of the armored group, so Supply unit D1 advances 26 hexes down the road. All units of D group must be within 4 hexes of each other, so D2 advances 22 hexes, D3 18 hexes, and D4 14 hexes.

One unit of group C must always be within 4 hexes of the last unit of group D, so C1 advances 10 hexes to be near D4. All units within C group must be within 4 hexes of each other so, C2 advances 6 hexes, and C3 advances 2 hexes.

C4 is 2 hexes from C group so it can stay still. B group is in the same hex as C group so it can stay. Since the capital is a supply source in our scenario, A group can stay put too.

Now RED has a terrible supply of 10. But with supply asset sharing he gets a bonus for all transport units which did not move in the turn. So with all of A group, 2000 trucks, and all of B group, 2000 trucks, and one unit of C group, 500 trucks, he has got a pretty big boost to his supply. D group, and the other 3 units of C group moved, so no bonus from them.

Next turn his armored group moves another 30 hexes. D1 must advance to keep within 4 hexes of the HQ, and the rest of D must advance to keep the 4 hex spacing. And so C must advance, and B, and A to keep a 4 hex space between each unit, and each group. However since all his supply units are moving RED player does not benefit from supply asset sharing and his supply is back to 10.

Eventually, RED player faces a dilemma, Unit A1 is 4 hexes from the supply source in the capital and thus cannot advance any further.Every unit down the line is also at the 4 hex limit, and thus cannot advance.

So he must start digging in his units until they become fortified. This will take a few turns, and since digging in counts as movement, he will have no supply bonus for those turns. For every fortified unit he has he can increase the length of his supply chain to 8 hexes between units instead of 4.

Since the beginning of the supply chain must be near a supply source, you would have to give the players of the scenario the opportunity to capture forward supply points if you wanted them to advance beyond the maximum distance of 128 hexes or whatever.

The intent of this system is to force players to establish a defined chain of supply from their supply source to the frontline. Advances will have to halt once each unit in the chain is 4 hexes from each other. As the units fortify, the distance between them can increase, and thus the advance can continue.

When a new supply source, like within a major city, is captured, then the chain can be remade on the new point of supply and the advance can continue.

Because the players supply stockpile is set low, he will need the effect of transport sharing from all his trucks to get decent supply. If his supply units are moving up with the spearhead then he will not get this effect and suffer low supply. So every advance will move to a certain point, suffering from low supply because all its transports are moving. When it reaches the limit of the advance, its supply units can stop moving and thus asset sharing will kick in and boost his supply. If the player needs to advance further, he can start fortifying his units, which will allow him to lengthen his supply chain.

The enemy player on the other hand, has a tangible line of supply to interdict and attack.

Does this sound like a workable idea, and does anyone have any suggestions to improve it?

Post #: 1
RE: Supply chain idea. - 11/21/2007 8:18:16 AM   
vahauser


Posts: 1644
Joined: 10/1/2002
From: Texas
Status: offline
It seems like this idea will use a lot of units.  In a game like FitE, where the 2,000 unit limit is reached, then this idea might use too many units.

_____________________________


(in reply to Fungwu)
Post #: 2
RE: Supply chain idea. - 11/21/2007 9:17:56 AM   
Fungwu

 

Posts: 161
Joined: 8/22/2007
Status: offline
"It seems like this idea will use a lot of units.  In a game like FitE, where the 2,000 unit limit is reached, then this idea might use too many units."

Well I was think of trying it out in a smaller scenario to see how it would work but I think Fite might have enough space. I read somewhere that the Germans had 4 panzer groups and 7 infantry armies. If you gave each a supply organization with 10 units in each supply group you would need 11X10=110 units. You could get that by eliminating all those little german MP units (+20). Geting rid of turkey (+40) and by using the corps command units (+50?) Eliminating the northern half of Fnland and Sweden would give you another 30.

The distance between the Frontline and Moscow is about 100 hexes, so you could have a supply unit for each army and each panzer group every 10 hexes. Put in  supply points the germans can capture somewhere in soviet territory and you can reach the end of the map.

For soviets getting rid of MP units gives you 40. Getting rid of Murmansk and Archangelsk gives another 20.

Removing Turkish border guard gives you another 30. 

You could get 20 getting rid of some of the non reconstructing Airforce units that get blitzed by the germans on the first turn, combining the equipment of some AA btns, and getting rid of a few of the further flung fortress regions.

That would give you 110 units to match the germans.



(in reply to vahauser)
Post #: 3
RE: Supply chain idea. - 11/21/2007 10:59:05 AM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline
Another idea would be to reduce the number of rail lines. Many of the lines in Russia were of low capacity or were only single track, making supply of large formations difficult. There are so many rails lines in maps of Russia that it makes supply distribution unrealistic.
Here's a shot of the main higher capacity rail lines. The blue circles are the main junctions that were strategically very important. I'm actually thinking about doing something like this.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Fungwu)
Post #: 4
RE: Supply chain idea. - 11/21/2007 11:53:28 AM   
vahauser


Posts: 1644
Joined: 10/1/2002
From: Texas
Status: offline
sPzAbt653,

TOAW has primary and secondary roads.  Perhaps TOAW should incorporate hi-capacity and low-capacity rail lines.  Is this already on the wishlist?

Anyway, some combination of what you are suggesting plus what Fungwu is suggesting might be feasible.  I have some concerns about both suggestions taken individually, but perhaps taken together the two suggestions would alleviate my concerns.

_____________________________


(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 5
RE: Supply chain idea. - 11/21/2007 12:20:54 PM   
golden delicious


Posts: 5575
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: London, Surrey, United Kingdom
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: vahauser

TOAW has primary and secondary roads.  Perhaps TOAW should incorporate hi-capacity and low-capacity rail lines.  Is this already on the wishlist?


This would be part of a large solution involving the quantification of supply.

_____________________________

"What did you read at university?"
"War Studies"
"War? Huh. What is it good for?"
"Absolutely nothing."

(in reply to vahauser)
Post #: 6
RE: Supply chain idea. - 11/21/2007 3:55:51 PM   
jmlima

 

Posts: 782
Joined: 3/1/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Fungwu
...

Does this sound like a workable idea, and does anyone have any suggestions to improve it?




I see what you're aiming at, but it seems over complex , and specially there would be a larggggeeeee amount , not only of units, but also of movements to do , and ultimately bookeeping in large(r) scenarios.

By the end of it, we are probably better off grabbing the OCS series of games, even in there the supply model is simpler (it's also better than in TOAW...), and yet , it's a boardgame...

Having said that, any discussion regarding supply and replacements is TOAW will always get my attention...


< Message edited by jmlima -- 11/21/2007 3:56:46 PM >

(in reply to Fungwu)
Post #: 7
RE: Supply chain idea. - 11/21/2007 5:00:16 PM   
Adam Rinkleff

 

Posts: 375
Joined: 7/24/2007
Status: offline
quote:

sPz: I'm actually thinking about doing something like this.

Is your bottom circle Voronezh?

< Message edited by AdamRinkleff -- 11/21/2007 5:01:55 PM >

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 8
RE: Supply chain idea. - 11/21/2007 7:22:43 PM   
JAMiAM

 

Posts: 6165
Joined: 2/8/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jmlima

By the end of it, we are probably better off grabbing the OCS series of games, even in there the supply model is simpler (it's also better than in TOAW...), and yet , it's a boardgame...

I know I've mentioned it, once or twice before, but I'm a huge fan of the OCS series, and their supply model will likely serve as the basis for the quantified supply system in TOAW IV.

(in reply to jmlima)
Post #: 9
RE: Supply chain idea. - 11/21/2007 7:26:37 PM   
Veers


Posts: 1324
Joined: 6/6/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JAMiAM


quote:

ORIGINAL: jmlima

By the end of it, we are probably better off grabbing the OCS series of games, even in there the supply model is simpler (it's also better than in TOAW...), and yet , it's a boardgame...

I know I've mentioned it, once or twice before, but I'm a huge fan of the OCS series, and their supply model will likely serve as the basis for the quantified supply system in TOAW IV.


It's beginning to sound like there will deffinitely be a T4. This is good news. :D

_____________________________

To repeat history in a game is to be predictable.
If you wish to learn more about EA, feel free to pop over to the EA forums Europe Aflame Forums.

(in reply to JAMiAM)
Post #: 10
RE: Supply chain idea. - 11/21/2007 11:47:08 PM   
jmlima

 

Posts: 782
Joined: 3/1/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JAMiAM


quote:

ORIGINAL: jmlima

By the end of it, we are probably better off grabbing the OCS series of games, even in there the supply model is simpler (it's also better than in TOAW...), and yet , it's a boardgame...

I know I've mentioned it, once or twice before, but I'm a huge fan of the OCS series, and their supply model will likely serve as the basis for the quantified supply system in TOAW IV.



Yes you have.

And I'm certain it will be THE progress, together with something done to allow the player a better control of replacements of course...

(in reply to JAMiAM)
Post #: 11
RE: Supply chain idea. - 11/21/2007 11:51:20 PM   
ColinWright

 

Posts: 2604
Joined: 10/13/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AdamRinkleff

quote:

sPz: I'm actually thinking about doing something like this.

Is your bottom circle Voronezh?


Looks more like Rostov.

_____________________________

I am not Charlie Hebdo

(in reply to Adam Rinkleff)
Post #: 12
RE: Supply chain idea. - 11/22/2007 5:28:34 AM   
Adam Rinkleff

 

Posts: 375
Joined: 7/24/2007
Status: offline
quote:

Looks more like Rostov.

Well, the circle is south of Kharkov, which would be Rostov; but Rostov is on the Azov, and the circle is not...... I dunno. The southeast line coming out of Moscow is wrong I think; it should follow the Voronezh-Rostov line down to about 50km north of Voronez, and then branch off towards Stalingrad.

< Message edited by AdamRinkleff -- 11/22/2007 5:40:13 AM >

(in reply to ColinWright)
Post #: 13
RE: Supply chain idea. - 11/22/2007 5:58:53 AM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline
I don't remember the source (I hate that because now I leave it open to criticism) and I won't look for it unless somebody insists (time consuming). The reason I put that little screen shot together was as a visual referance, it indicated the main high capacity double track lines. I put the blue circles there because the referance stated that the main hubs were Leningrad, Moscow and the Donets industrial area. I suppose Voronezh is included in that but it would not be a specific referance to that city. The idea being that using Fite as a test I could do, these main lines would have priority on the map, while making sure that the three main areas actually did end up being imortant hubs to game play. Also, that shot only includes those lines in central Russia and not those that extend beyond to the Urals and Siberia.
For me it seems very interesting, but right now I'm still wading thru a test of the supply changes I've done (currently up to turn 50 something). I've got to go to at least turn 100 with this before I can make any changes.

(in reply to Adam Rinkleff)
Post #: 14
RE: Supply chain idea. - 11/22/2007 6:06:29 AM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline
'...it should follow the Voronezh-Rostov line down to about 50km north of Voronez, and then branch off towards Stalingrad. '

Could be, as I remember it, the referance described these lines verbally but not all with specific locations. For example, 'Moscow to the the Donets Industrial Region and then on to the Caspian Sea'. So the screen shot wasn't meant to be exact, just something to use as a guideline. I'd like to make something exact, but everytime I look at a new map, I see differences and discrepancies.

(in reply to Adam Rinkleff)
Post #: 15
RE: Supply chain idea. - 11/22/2007 6:25:05 AM   
vahauser


Posts: 1644
Joined: 10/1/2002
From: Texas
Status: offline
The definitive map of the USSR in WW2 will be coming out in a few months when HMS/GRD releases their new Europa boardgame "Total War".  That map clearly defines high-capacity and low-capacity rail lines in the USSR for WW2.  The map is at 25km per hex, though, so it will need to interpretation to modify it for 10km per hex.

_____________________________


(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 16
RE: Supply chain idea. - 11/22/2007 6:39:40 AM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline
That sounds greatly interesting. You mean I have to buy a boardgame? Wow, I haven't done that since ... um ... 1981? Oh, I remember the joy of planning my next move all day at work, only to return home to find that the cat had played 'chase the little pieces all over the desk' until they are all onto the floor, or Mrs. sPzAbt had decided to 'pledge' the desk and had 'put the game away'. Boardgames should come with one of those museum signs that say' Please do not touch this display'.

(in reply to vahauser)
Post #: 17
RE: Supply chain idea. - 11/22/2007 7:45:24 AM   
ColinWright

 

Posts: 2604
Joined: 10/13/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

That sounds greatly interesting. You mean I have to buy a boardgame? Wow, I haven't done that since ... um ... 1981? Oh, I remember the joy of planning my next move all day at work, only to return home to find that the cat had played 'chase the little pieces all over the desk' until they are all onto the floor, or Mrs. sPzAbt had decided to 'pledge' the desk and had 'put the game away'. Boardgames should come with one of those museum signs that say' Please do not touch this display'.


My all-time board game match along these lines must have happened about 1975. A friend of mine and I were minding a flea-market stall and playing 'Battle of the Bulge.'

He was the Americans. I was the Germans. I'd managed to cross the Meuse, and his response had been to try to slash my supply lines. Victory conditions were that I had to keep x units across the Meuse in supply for four turns or something. Had done it for three -- but he was on the verge of actually severing my supply. I was in no position to do much about it if he succeeded.

The tension is mounting...then there's a gust of wind. It flips the board over.


< Message edited by ColinWright -- 11/22/2007 8:26:37 AM >


_____________________________

I am not Charlie Hebdo

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 18
RE: Supply chain idea. - 11/22/2007 1:34:54 PM   
vahauser


Posts: 1644
Joined: 10/1/2002
From: Texas
Status: offline
C'mon guys.  I'm not saying you should actually play the thing.  And, in fact, you are correct:  boardgames are largely collector's items and museum artifacts these days.

The point I was making is that the map is definitive for the 25km scale (10-15 years of hex-by-hex painstaking research went into that map). And the OOBs are definitive (down to the battalion, for the Axis, and regiment, for the Soviets, on the East Front).  At least 15 years research and access to rare archival materials went into producing the OOBs.

All I'm saying is that that game is going to be more valuable as a reference and information source than anything else.



_____________________________


(in reply to ColinWright)
Post #: 19
RE: Supply chain idea. - 11/22/2007 1:46:24 PM   
golden delicious


Posts: 5575
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: London, Surrey, United Kingdom
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: vahauser

C'mon guys.  I'm not saying you should actually play the thing.  And, in fact, you are correct:  boardgames are largely collector's items and museum artifacts these days.


The simpler ones are still good. I played Axis & Allies quite a few times at university, as well as a couple of games of Kingmaker and Diplomacy.

_____________________________

"What did you read at university?"
"War Studies"
"War? Huh. What is it good for?"
"Absolutely nothing."

(in reply to vahauser)
Post #: 20
RE: Supply chain idea. - 11/24/2007 1:09:25 PM   
Adam Rinkleff

 

Posts: 375
Joined: 7/24/2007
Status: offline
quote:

everytime I look at a new map, I see differences and discrepancies.

Yah :<

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 21
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III >> Scenario Design >> Supply chain idea. Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.172