zgrssd
Posts: 3385
Joined: 6/9/2020 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: zgrssd Revive! So now we got Airbridges. That gives me some ideas: - You would select how much carrying capacity a truck has, the same way you define the cargospace on a plane - You would have to match the engine to that weight to get any decent speed, but at the cost of needing more fuel - one big question was how much each subformation "weighs". The average 100 Soliers "weigh" 5 Logistics units. There is a comparable logistics price for artillery, guns and everything else that may need to be dragged. - You would select the cargo size of the truck, same way you would select to use light/medium/heavy tanks - each "unit" of trucks would use the same manpower. The Advantage of bigger trucks would be needing a whole lot less trucks overall, wich also means less manpower tied up in the driver pool Example: Truck cargo comes in the sizes 5, 10, 20, 40, 80, etc. 1000 Soldiers with no particular gear would have a weight of 50 "Logistics Units". Depemnding on wich "Cargo Size" I select of this units trucks: If I select Cargo Size 5, I need 10 units of trucks. Wich would required 1000 drivers. Wich happens to be the current state. If I select Cargo Size 10, I need 5 units of trucks. Wich would require only 500 drivers but be more expnesive to build and might need more fuel for the same speed If I select Cargo Size 20, I would need 3 units of trucks (technically only 2.5, but let us just round up). Wich would mean only 300 men used for driving If I select Cargo Size 40, I would need 2 units of trucks (again, rounding up for simplicity) If I select Cargo Size 80, I would need 1 unit of trucks with only 100 drivers. And would still have around 30 capacity to use for later For bonus points, why not also fold the IFV into this? Per my understanding, the IFV is a step between a truck and a APC: It is slightly more armed and armored then a truck, but not so much it should try to be in combat. Instead of a Carog Size 10, you design a Cargo Size 10 with buggy armor and gun. But at least it can defend itself against breaktroughs and air attacks. It might even get the buggies ability to scout (or at least a lesser version of it). The donwside of adding even token gun and armor would be more weight, wich means slower units or more fuel consumption due to a bigger engine I think I really need to clean up this idea a bit: When designing a Truck/APC/IFV you get to choose: - The cargo capacity. Steps like 5/7/11/13 Logistics weight/truck unit. This will be the main weight factor/what decides how good it is at transporting troops - and thus how many you will need - the Armor. This can be from none, up to buggy level. Maybe even 1 step above buggy level - the Weapon. I was think MG and Light Howitzers (to simulate various autoguns) - the Engine. What has to move around all the Cargo Capacity and Armor weight - if it should be a wheled or tracked vehicle A actuall truck would leave the Armor and Weapon empty A APC would add a token MG and token armor, at the cost of some capacity or speed A IFV would add a Howitzer/Autocannon and more armor, at the cost of relevant capacity or speed The Motized/Mechanized infantry formation in the field would: 1. calculate it's weight. 100 soldiers/Recruits/Colonists "weigh" 5 Logistics Capacity. So a 1000 man combat unit weights 50. 2. try to get the biggest transport vehicles availible 3. get just enough cargo capacity to cover the 50 in full 4. if you can not get the vehicle (not enough in storage, size limits of the logistics connection), select the next smaler cargo capacity and try to add them until you the sum adds up to mpore then the value from 1. The result would be that models with more cargo capacity would be prefered automatically. Wich also means less manpower bound in the drivers pool. It might even save logistics, as fewer trucks might use less fuel.
|