Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Open Beta Patch v1.03-beta10 (last update 23 june!)

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Shadow Empire >> Shadow Empire MATRIX VERSION Open Beta >> RE: Open Beta Patch v1.03-beta10 (last update 23 june!) Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Open Beta Patch v1.03-beta10 (last update 23 june!) - 6/23/2020 4:47:19 PM   
GodwinW


Posts: 511
Joined: 6/5/2020
Status: offline 		Wow such nerfs to logistics. I cannot help but wonder why..?

(in reply to Destragon)
Post #: 151
RE: Open Beta Patch v1.03-beta10 (last update 23 june!) - 6/23/2020 5:50:41 PM   
KingHalford


Posts: 488
Joined: 8/18/2016
Status: offline 		Maybe it's because once you've figured the logistics system out there aren't that many occasions where you need to build new logistical structures. Limiting the output of individual networks should deepen the supply planning experience as players will have to plan their logistics more carefully.

< Message edited by KingHalford -- 6/23/2020 5:51:14 PM >

_____________________________

Ben "BATTLEMODE"
www.eXplorminate.co

(in reply to GodwinW)
Post #: 152
RE: Open Beta Patch v1.03-beta10 (last update 23 june!) - 6/23/2020 5:53:10 PM   
Culthrasa

 

Posts: 189
Joined: 4/16/2017
Status: offline 		Hey Vic,
I've got a couple of questions about the beta10.

Do the number of branches include ones where all supply is stopped in one direction? (for example 400 in, 400 out one way, 0 out the second way?)

Does a fourway branch give more penalty then a threeway branch?

Does the amount that is blocked by a traffic light influence the penalty?

This change makes the fact the private industry sometimes builds roads themselves ever more of an hassle. It introduces a branch which is dead ended (for only that asset being build) but it will give an cumulative extra penalty down the line. Could that be addressed somehow (like not building a road for an asset that could be build on an existing road like a farm and/or them building roads at all)?

Is the penalty a one time drop? (for example.. 400 in, 180 out one way, 180 out other way, 40 lost?)

Will the drop be visible somewhere? Logistics is a difficult topic for beginning players and having supply "vanish" will probably confuse them.

While i don't mind that this pushes supply more to rail, having different traffic signs for truck and rail becomes more of a must to be able to use the supply well. Could these be implemented?


And a more general question, what is the reasoning for these changes? What do you hope to accomplish? Is logistics stretching too far, is it too easy with a centralized system?

edit: added "different" to make it more clear

< Message edited by Culthrasa -- 6/23/2020 9:15:44 PM >

(in reply to Destragon)
Post #: 153
RE: Open Beta Patch v1.03-beta10 (last update 23 june!) - 6/23/2020 6:45:43 PM   
Nemo84

 

Posts: 115
Joined: 3/29/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Culthrasa

And a more general question, what is the reasoning for these changes? What do you hope to accomplish? Is logistics stretching too far, is it too easy with a centralized system?



Seconded.

Vic, I really think you should take a moment to write up a general overview of what you wish to achieve with the logistics system and what changes you have planned. This is clearly a hot topic amongst your playerbase, and it seems this latest patch is aimed at making things worse rather than better. Roads created for private assets could already badly mess up supply lines, and they will mess them up even worse after this patch.

(in reply to Culthrasa)
Post #: 154
RE: Open Beta Patch v1.03-beta10 (last update 23 june!) - 6/23/2020 7:03:12 PM   
Pi2repsilon

 

Posts: 42
Joined: 6/15/2020
Status: offline 		"*=requires a new game start to go into effect" -- does starting a new game by loading a saved planet (lastplanetgenerated.se1) and going through empire creation count as starting a new game for this purpose, or are you locked into the the game's state at the time of that planetgeneration savegame being made?

(in reply to Destragon)
Post #: 155
RE: Open Beta Patch v1.03-beta10 (last update 23 june!) - 6/23/2020 7:18:38 PM   
demiare

 

Posts: 470
Joined: 6/20/2020
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Pi2repsilon

"*=requires a new game start to go into effect" -- does starting a new game by loading a saved planet (lastplanetgenerated.se1) and going through empire creation count as starting a new game for this purpose, or are you locked into the the game's state at the time of that planetgeneration savegame being made?



It was already answered here - no, you need to generate a new planet. Last generated planet is still a save just a "Turn 0" one :)

(in reply to Pi2repsilon)
Post #: 156
RE: Open Beta Patch v1.03-beta10 (last update 23 june!) - 6/23/2020 7:42:02 PM   
Pi2repsilon

 

Posts: 42
Joined: 6/15/2020
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: GodwinW

Wow such nerfs to logistics. I cannot help but wonder why..?

Combating the game's absurd turn processing times, I'd presume.

It is a pain in the arse to play later in the game with the current turn times, and it isn't as if turns are resolved quickly at game start either. Those of us playing now are obviously willing to tolerate this - at least for now - due to the promise the game shows, but for that promise to be fulfilled and for this in the long run to be anything but a niche game for diehard wargamers, turn times have to come way down.

The last time I played a game with such long turn times was the Great Nordic War on Commodore 64 in 1986, and it was barely acceptable then.

If profiling shows that the logistics calculations are a significant part of the reason for that, then logistics needs to be overhauled to maintain the spirit of the design while taking much less time. Unsurprisingly, limiting branching and number of nodes in each branch (length) from the major sources will significantly impact this, so it is the obvious place to start along with refactoring the code for efficiency. If AI play isn't significantly affected by this (e.g. AI doesn't make efficient long-distance logistics networks anyway), then the major impact will be an increased challenge for the player to make a good logistics network, and that's fine. Let's see how it works out.

By the time this game hits Steam later in the year, it will ideally have turn times that appeal to non-masochistic 4X gamers, who aren't dedicated wargamers but are willing to give a 4X/wargame/management/RPG-light hybrid a chance. It has within it the seeds of greatness.

Just my thoughts as an ex-games developer.

(in reply to GodwinW)
Post #: 157
RE: Open Beta Patch v1.03-beta10 (last update 23 june!) - 6/23/2020 8:15:45 PM   
LordAldrich

 

Posts: 82
Joined: 9/30/2014
Status: offline 		What is the reasoning behind the logistics value changes? Are they meant to make the calculations more efficient? I can see how having shorter distances and fewer branches might be faster to compute, but I'm having a hard time thinking of an in-fiction explanation for why trucks can't drive as far when they have to make a turn.

(in reply to Destragon)
Post #: 158
RE: Open Beta Patch v1.03-beta10 (last update 23 june!) - 6/23/2020 9:07:21 PM   
Smidlee

 

Posts: 62
Joined: 8/24/2014
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: willgamer

quote:

-Rail Logistics => 5pts per Hex * (instead of 2)
-Truck Logistics on Sealed => 7pts per Hex * (instead of 5)


Not sure I understand... did this just make logistics even more difficult?

I believe it's one of those cases you can't have your cake and eat it too. I believe it's to keep a unit from getting logistic points from so many sources across the whole map slowing the late game down to a crawl.

(in reply to willgamer)
Post #: 159
RE: Open Beta Patch v1.03-beta10 (last update 23 june!) - 6/23/2020 9:54:16 PM   
Destragon

 

Posts: 475
Joined: 6/8/2020
Status: offline 		I don't really have an opinion on reducing the action points of logistics in general. It just reduces the reach of truck stations and makes you need to build an additional station in certain edge situations. That's fine I guess.

But I don't really understand this AP penalty for branches in roads. I don't think I like it, because it seems too imperceptible for players, like a penalty that people would never realise exists until they randomly read about it in the manual. And then once you do know about it, it makes you want to micromanage your road network even more than now, to minimise the amount of branching on your roads, to minimise the penalty.
It was already kinda annoying when civilians build a new private asset that connects to your existing road network, because it would drain too many logistics points, until you manually place a traffic sign there. This change presumably makes this slightly more annoying, because the civilians will also increase the branching penalty of whatever road they connected to.

(in reply to Smidlee)
Post #: 160
RE: Open Beta Patch v1.03-beta10 (last update 23 june!) - 6/23/2020 10:44:56 PM   
zgrssd

 

Posts: 3385
Joined: 6/9/2020
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Culthrasa

Will the drop be visible somewhere? Logistics is a difficult topic for beginning players and having supply "vanish" will probably confuse them.


Traffic Sign Menu, same as every other drop?

I think it may actually make the System easier for new players. Having the System be too lenient, means they run into issues to late thus too suddenly.
Crafting a learning curve is a important part of game design.

< Message edited by zgrssd -- 6/23/2020 10:45:20 PM >

(in reply to Culthrasa)
Post #: 161
RE: Open Beta Patch v1.03-beta10 (last update 23 june!) - 6/23/2020 11:33:24 PM   
LordAldrich

 

Posts: 82
Joined: 9/30/2014
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Destragon

...And then once you do know about it, it makes you want to micromanage your road network even more than now, to minimise the amount of branching on your roads, to minimise the penalty. ...


If (if) the branching was a major factor in the logistics calculation, then this could be the actual intended outcome. It basically pushes the logistics optimization computation off onto the player so that it doesn't show up in turn times.

Personally that doesn't sound like a ton of fun to me, but on the other hand long turn times aren't fun either. If a human is significantly better at manually doing the logistics optimization than an algorithm is (which does happen for all sorts of algorithms), then doing it "once" and minimizing the branches in your network might be an OK trade-off.

Hard to measure though - this is the kind of question that UX designers get paid a bunch to analyze.

(in reply to Destragon)
Post #: 162
RE: Open Beta Patch v1.03-beta10 (last update 23 june!) - 6/24/2020 12:17:12 AM   
GodwinW


Posts: 511
Joined: 6/5/2020
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LordAldrich
If (if) the branching was a major factor in the logistics calculation, then this could be the actual intended outcome. It basically pushes the logistics optimization computation off onto the player so that it doesn't show up in turn times.


That would imply that the bulk of the time AI turns cost is purely the calculation of the logistics numbers for the 1 human player. Instead of the time reflecting calculations for the AI. And that sounds unlikely. Also considering the fact that early on small planets with less AI players DO have way less of a turn time than Huge planets with lots of AI, despite the player's logistics system being pretty much identical at that stage.

(in reply to LordAldrich)
Post #: 163
RE: Open Beta Patch v1.03-beta10 (last update 23 june!) - 6/24/2020 1:09:53 AM   
Destragon

 

Posts: 475
Joined: 6/8/2020
Status: offline 		The changelog says "After the 4th branching (not counting the source)", but it's looking like it does count the source tile after all, or at least the very beginning of the logistics stream is considered to be "the first branching", even though it hasn't branched out yet.
I'm getting the 5th branching penalty on the 4th branching, unless I'm miscounting it.



I really don't think I'm liking this penalty. It feels really arbitrary or gamey to me. I just don't understand why it would be happening.
It encourages me to min-max the road in some way like this to get rid of the penalty:


Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Destragon -- 6/24/2020 1:30:55 AM >

(in reply to GodwinW)
Post #: 164
RE: Open Beta Patch v1.03-beta10 (last update 23 june!) - 6/24/2020 2:11:43 AM   
DasTactic

 

Posts: 1083
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		I'm guessing the nerfing of the logistics through the AP costs is to get players to use more SHQs to manage clusters of zones but I think this will add to the pain of players who aren't grasping the logistics system and this will be further compounded with the Steam release when the game moves away from the hard-core wargamers here at Matrix. So really not sure that this is a good option.
For me, the biggest issue with the way logistics is handled (thinking about new players trying to come to grips with it) is that the resources lists are not ever really current: the two-turn delay in seeing production/movement is a problem and probably should be from the start of that turn instead of the start of the next turn; and that constructing assets should be taken out of the pool when you start building instead of at the end of the turn.

(in reply to Destragon)
Post #: 165
RE: Open Beta Patch v1.03-beta10 (last update 23 june!) - 6/24/2020 3:37:38 AM   
ramnblam

 

Posts: 199
Joined: 6/9/2020
From: Australia
Status: offline 		Can confirm that the turn times feel much better, am looking forward to see how the logistic changes play.

(in reply to DasTactic)
Post #: 166
RE: Open Beta Patch v1.03-beta10 (last update 23 june!) - 6/24/2020 8:29:05 AM   
Culthrasa

 

Posts: 189
Joined: 4/16/2017
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Destragon

The changelog says "After the 4th branching (not counting the source)", but it's looking like it does count the source tile after all, or at least the very beginning of the logistics stream is considered to be "the first branching", even though it hasn't branched out yet.
I'm getting the 5th branching penalty on the 4th branching, unless I'm miscounting it.


I really don't think I'm liking this penalty. It feels really arbitrary or gamey to me. I just don't understand why it would be happening.
It encourages me to min-max the road in some way like this to get rid of the penalty:



Totally agree with you destragon... that is what the effect will be.. more fiddling to minimize the branches, lots of parallel routes and weird zigzags to keep everything on the same route... It just doesn't feel like an improvement nor fun gameplay..

< Message edited by Culthrasa -- 6/24/2020 8:30:21 AM >

(in reply to Destragon)
Post #: 167
RE: Open Beta Patch v1.03-beta10 (last update 23 june!) - 6/24/2020 8:29:23 AM   
Culthrasa

 

Posts: 189
Joined: 4/16/2017
Status: offline 		sorry, somehow i got a double post

< Message edited by Culthrasa -- 6/24/2020 8:30:08 AM >

(in reply to Culthrasa)
Post #: 168
RE: Open Beta Patch v1.03-beta10 (last update 23 june!) - 6/24/2020 9:05:47 AM   
Vic


Posts: 8262
Joined: 5/17/2004
Status: offline 		@Destragon,
Confirmed. It should start one branch later. Will be fixed.

@All,
On the matter of the WHY?

First of all these changes will have no impact on early games. As for to get to the 5th branching point requires already a rather larger road network. And the initial branching only takes -10 ap. Furthermore the sealed road is less effective for trucks (from 5ap -> 7ap), but early games usually only have dirt roads.

The reason i have made these nerves is for the mid to late game where the range of some Truck/Rail stations was just to far.

I have been looking at plenty of saves of like round 150, round 200 even round 300!.

Before the nerf a rail station could reach up to 100 hexes distance. And the HighSpeed Rail upto 200 hexes. Even truck station augmented with supply base III could over sealed roads go up to over 80 hexes.

Overlap between the networks of the source Assets is the whole idea, but it went to far in many of the late games where everything overlaps everything.

And thanks for the feedback. That is one of the ideas of these open beta's.

Also branches that are closed by traffic signs should not count as branch. That should already be the case.

I am still nerfing these rules. Going to reduce rail from 5ap to 4 ap and make Rail stations give more points than truck stations. Otherwise with the new distance rules they lose their interest.

Next 2 things planned are:

1. Clear feedback on if Units are not receiving supply or Zones not receiving Items ... WHY this is the case.
2. An optional pull-like-system to prioritize certain roads

Best wishes,
Vic



_____________________________

Visit www.vrdesigns.net for the latest news, polls, screenshots and blogs on Shadow Empire, Decisive Campaigns and Advanced Tactics

(in reply to ramnblam)
Post #: 169
RE: Open Beta Patch v1.03-beta10 (last update 23 june!) - 6/24/2020 9:51:48 AM   
Culthrasa

 

Posts: 189
Joined: 4/16/2017
Status: offline 		Vic,

I get that yo want to reduce the overall range of the truck station, and i'm totally Oke with it. But wouldn't it be easier to nerf(or even remove) the supply base instead of the branch penalty? Even a short road can have multiple branches cause mines/farms etc are positioned beside it. This is probably easier for players.
And to reiterate, could you make separate traffic signs for Rail and Road then? Currently a road in the same hex as a railroad can't be shut off without also shutting of the rail component, other then removing the infrastructure, rebuilding the rail and diverting the road to another hexside.

(in reply to Vic)
Post #: 170
RE: Open Beta Patch v1.03-beta10 (last update 23 june!) - 6/24/2020 10:20:33 AM   
Vic


Posts: 8262
Joined: 5/17/2004
Status: offline 		I'll look into it Culthrasa. No promise on that one yet.

Keep in mind that a road that arrives at the 6th branch with newbee players (not using traffic signs) will only have left: 0.5^6 = 1% of the initial points anyway.

Best wishes,
Vic

_____________________________

Visit www.vrdesigns.net for the latest news, polls, screenshots and blogs on Shadow Empire, Decisive Campaigns and Advanced Tactics

(in reply to Culthrasa)
Post #: 171
RE: Open Beta Patch v1.03-beta11 (last update 24 june!) - 6/24/2020 10:26:56 AM   
Vic


Posts: 8262
Joined: 5/17/2004
Status: offline 		some minor fixes done with beta-11

and some fine-tuning to the logistics changes of beta-10

best wishes,
Vic

_____________________________

Visit www.vrdesigns.net for the latest news, polls, screenshots and blogs on Shadow Empire, Decisive Campaigns and Advanced Tactics

(in reply to Vic)
Post #: 172
RE: Open Beta Patch v1.03-beta10 (last update 23 june!) - 6/24/2020 11:11:42 AM   
GodwinW


Posts: 511
Joined: 6/5/2020
Status: offline 		Thank you for the explanation on why, and I do agree that trucks could already reach quite far.

80 hexes though is only with dwindling logistics I take it, because max full logistics distance with Supply Base 3 should be 110 + 100 / 5 = 44 hexes, so half the 80 you mention.

But please do not remove Supply Bases. I really enjoy using them and building them and I think they're great potential strategic locations to protect, fight over, and consider in plans. It really adds to the map and the fun of deciding where to move your troops towards and even knowing this where to build them.

I enjoy figuring out where the truck AP's start to run out between two cities and thus where to build 1 Supply Station to serve both of them, for example.


(in reply to Vic)
Post #: 173
RE: Open Beta Patch v1.03-beta10 (last update 23 june!) - 6/24/2020 1:57:45 PM   
Destragon

 

Posts: 475
Joined: 6/8/2020
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Vic

The reason i have made these nerves is for the mid to late game where the range of some Truck/Rail stations was just to far.

Yeah, that's what I figured. Like I said above, I'm okay with nerfing the range of logistics stations, however, I don't like the branching penalty, because
1: It's currently too imperceptible for players.
2: It feels really arbitrary. Why would the branches increase the action point cost?
3: It encourages min-maxing your road network in some pretty unnatural way. By creating road snakes and by starting multiple roads originating from the same truck station that are not intended to touch each other, like a road octopus. It would make me want bridges or tunnels be added, so that you can have multiple roads going over one tile without touching each other, to minimise the branching penalty.

You can nerf the AP of truck stations or of supply bases or the AP cost of roads, but I don't see the point of the branching penalty.
If you nerf the AP of truck stations for example, the player can't get around it, but with the branching penalty, you give the player an option to bypass the nerf, which I doubt is intended.


quote:

ORIGINAL: GodwinW

But please do not remove Supply Bases. I really enjoy using them and building them and I think they're great potential strategic locations to protect, fight over, and consider in plans. It really adds to the map and the fun of deciding where to move your troops towards and even knowing this where to build them.

I think supply bases need some big rework, because they don't feel like they act the way they are intended to be used right now. Especially when you build a supply base and a truck station on the same tile. Isn't the intended purpose of a supply base to refuel logistics truck when they are in the middle of their journey?
I think supply bases should be changed so that they don't give additional action points to logistics trucks, but instead REPLENISH the exhausted action points of the logistics trucks.

(in reply to GodwinW)
Post #: 174
RE: Open Beta Patch v1.03-beta10 (last update 23 june!) - 6/24/2020 2:14:25 PM   
GodwinW


Posts: 511
Joined: 6/5/2020
Status: offline 		They've always worked like giving jerrycans along with the trucks, not refueling the tank.

I'm fine with them not being able to be built in cities which probably are the best spots to build truck stations. Which is the case currently.

But changing them like that? They'd better be a lot cheaper then because now you have to put them along every branch if your roads branch before the trucks have lost enough AP.
PLUS, it's way more work to determine what a good location is when you have overlapping Trucks coming in from all kinds of directions. I'm not a fan of that suggestion for those reasons and I think they give extra AP precisely because otherwise it'll be a lot of extra micromanagement.

And what to think about when you upgrade a road from dust to sealed? Would you really want to have to take all that into account in order to be the most efficient? I like them the way they are.

I agree with your points regarding the branches btw, very much so in fact. All 3 (I've already thought about suggesting bridges/tunnels :p).

< Message edited by GodwinW -- 6/24/2020 2:16:19 PM >

(in reply to Destragon)
Post #: 175
RE: Open Beta Patch v1.03-beta10 (last update 23 june!) - 6/24/2020 2:34:18 PM   
Destragon

 

Posts: 475
Joined: 6/8/2020
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: GodwinW

They've always worked like giving jerrycans along with the trucks, not refueling the tank.

I know how they work. I'm talking about what I THINK is supposed to be their actual intention, looking at the examples the manual gives you for them. (They place them like 4 tiles away from the truck station, for pretty much no reason.)

quote:

ORIGINAL: GodwinW
I'm fine with them not being able to be built in cities which probably are the best spots to build truck stations. Which is the case currently.

I agree that it would increase min-maxing potential to have supply bases replenish AP instead of adding AP, but I still think something needs to be changed about them.
The restriction to not be able to build them inside cities doesn't make any sense to me. At the very least, this should be changed to a restriction that just prevents you from having supply bases and truck stations on the same tile.
Supply bases are currently in a very weird spot, because they kinda act like an upgrade to the truck stations, that is for some reason a separate asset. If you can build them on the same tile, then I don't really see why they even need to exist in the game, but if you are forced to build them on separate tiles (not just because of this silly city restriction), then they at least make a bit more sense to me.
There's actually a thread about it in the suggestions forum:
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4834941

(in reply to GodwinW)
Post #: 176
RE: Open Beta Patch v1.03-beta10 (last update 23 june!) - 6/24/2020 6:37:18 PM   
Grotius


Posts: 5798
Joined: 10/18/2002
From: The Imperial Palace.
Status: offline 		I understand the rationale for nerfing truck distances. But what is the rationale for the branching penalty? Maybe it's designed to improve performance -- to speed up logistic calculations by reducing the number of branches?

_____________________________


(in reply to Destragon)
Post #: 177
RE: Open Beta Patch v1.03-beta10 (last update 23 june!) - 6/24/2020 7:36:51 PM   
Vic


Posts: 8262
Joined: 5/17/2004
Status: offline 		Rationale for branching would be that there is only so many roads that can be served. Much like bus stops. A single truck cant be in 2 places at same time and a convoy would need to split up.

I by the way like the criticism on the supply bases.

Also I think I am going to make the branching count only for the percentage allowed through by the traffic signs.

Best wishes,
Vic

_____________________________

Visit www.vrdesigns.net for the latest news, polls, screenshots and blogs on Shadow Empire, Decisive Campaigns and Advanced Tactics

(in reply to Grotius)
Post #: 178
RE: Open Beta Patch v1.03-beta10 (last update 23 june!) - 6/24/2020 7:51:00 PM   
Culthrasa

 

Posts: 189
Joined: 4/16/2017
Status: offline 		That sounds pretty good vic, it would make the small branches only going to a mine less of a liability further down the road...

(in reply to Vic)
Post #: 179
RE: Open Beta Patch v1.03-beta10 (last update 23 june!) - 6/24/2020 10:03:25 PM   
GodwinW


Posts: 511
Joined: 6/5/2020
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Vic

Rationale for branching would be that there is only so many roads that can be served. Much like bus stops. A single truck cant be in 2 places at same time and a convoy would need to split up.



Thank you for answering :)

Hm, in my mind there's just only trucks driving if logistics are used, not when they're not. If they're not used they're 'potential trucks' that can be sent out and are held in reserve because they might be needed (to raise a formation or do a strategic move or so).
And how many can go where, in order to not duplicate trucks, is diminishing per branch. Half the trucks (or potential trucks) will go left and the other half goes right at a fork in the road. So this is already the case (let's say no traffic lights). So the way I see it the fact that branches divide logistic points in half already signify that trucks cannot be in 2 places at once.
If the Logistics points did NOT decrease on a road splitting in two, then I see that trucks are in 2 places at once. So now I do not.

(in reply to Vic)
Post #: 180
Page:   <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Shadow Empire >> Shadow Empire MATRIX VERSION Open Beta >> RE: Open Beta Patch v1.03-beta10 (last update 23 june!) Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
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

0.703