kaliyama
Posts: 60
Joined: 7/22/2004
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: MarbleToad
quote:
ORIGINAL: omzh
I don't think there is anything wrong with the traffic lights, and I enjoy a little bit of micro when it comes to logistics, and stretching out offensives that are further out. That being said, I think some of the ideas in this forum make sense to me personally, and would put logistics in a place where it isn't game-ending if you don't micro the system every turn.
1. Pull-based logistics - I tend to think this is the more optimal way to set up logistics, as having demand drive where logistics go removes the micro of having to constantly check your network to make sure none of it is getting wasted. I think DTurtle mentioned, it would require micro once you don't have enough enough supply to reach all of the demand, then you can adjust the routes using traffic lights to make sure supplies are going where they are needed.
One thing I want to add that's been suggested a lot is having a new mechanic that manages your logistics for you - I'm not really a big fan of that, if you're going to add it might as well simplify the system rather than adding a mechanic barely anyone would use, because no one really trusts an AI to handle this stuff for them.
2. Removing Roads - I want this purely for the aesthetics, but I'll admit even besides AI wonkiness I've mistakenly built roads I didn't want. Sure I can just traffic light them, but I'd rather make the map look clean if I can.
As above, the mechanics suggested to deconstruct roads I think is again an unnecessary gimmick. Make the roads free or half cost to deconstruct, it's not a system that needs to be over complicated.
3. More Information/Transparency with Logistics - Part of the problem my ignorant self has with the Current Logistics map mode is that I find it hard to tell how much supplies are actually needed down a certain road. What I would like to see is a map mode where you can see where your supplies are being consumed (e.g. troops/buildings) and how much they need so that I can properly allocate logistics as I need, and traffic light what I want. This follows to the next point brought up;
4. Change Percent-based Logistics to Absolute Value - I think the current percent-based system of traffic lights doesn't really allow for the full control of how much supplies go in which direction. I'd like to limit by the exact number of logistics I need, so I'm not going over and having it get wasted.
My final thought is I would like to see logistics having the same treatment of other mechanics, where it's not game-ending if you don't get deep into it but at the same time gives opportunities to min/max it and adjust based on your situation in game.
Interesting ideas. I like them. But I do have some counterpoints:
If it was a pull based system what would become of the Truck Station and Supply Base relationship? Right now, as I understand it, the Truck stations add push and the supply bases extend the range. Also, there would be a lot less wasted logistics. I understand that this is could be seen as a benefit. But I also see the downside. The difficulty in optimizing the supply lines is an aspect of the game that adds verisimilitude. And it makes sense considering your first units are a rag tag militia with hand-me-down patchwork gear and hodge podged unit compostions. Should logistics networks in this post-apocalyptic world have easily optimized logistics? Or should a large part of the game be figuring that puzzle out? I personally like puzzles. To me, more puzzles is more better.
I agree with your design values but I don't understand how you apply them here. The logistics challenges in this game do not feel like the realistic supply challenges faced by armies.
The commonplace about logistics being the highest form of warfare is true but it doesn't mean commanders got bogged down in minutiae about road design.
In real life, army quartermasters don't send equal amounts of supply radiating out from every road at the supply base. Eisenhower didn't spend hours fiddling with road supply percentages.
In real life, quartermasters try to end all supplies towards the armies that need them and the problem comes from when armies don't use roads correctly or get supply lines tangled or cut off.
To me, it seems like the game has more versimilitude if you, as commander, don't have micro control over traffic lights. Instead you know the more you crowd armies on a limited road network, the less reliable and slower supply would be.
You could represent that in-game with systems that are almost entirely automated but generate diminishing returns on supply points the more supply points travel the same road and the more unit congestion there is on road. so supplying an army of 3 corps in one place would cost significantly more supplies than supporting 3 corps in opposite directions on the map.
I also don't find this a particularly interesting puzzle. The interesting puzzle is to decide how many supply points each army should get. The puzzle this system introduces is trying to do all of the math to figure out how to get to that optimal supply point allocation. It's a simple math chore that would be better if it was automated. You would give the player an even more focused command problem if you just let the player choose how many supply points each army got, and how much effective supply each army could get varied based on the math.
I assume we have this system in the game because VR wanted this level of complexity, but partially automating this stuff would probably be a huge drain on a one-man team, so it's a rational sacrifice to make.
< Message edited by kaliyama -- 6/12/2020 8:10:27 AM >
|
Printable Version
RE: The logistic System is a gigantic mess - 
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