OOB Suggestion

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

OOB Suggestion

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 >> Suggestions and Feedback >> OOB Suggestion

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

OOB Suggestion - 7/21/2021 12:51:52 PM

postfux

Posts: 175
Joined: 8/18/2015
Status: offline

I am terribly missing the possibility to really organize the army and a meaningful chain of command. "Increasing size and complexity" of existing formations is not very satisfying in the current system. I would love a system working some way along those lines:

Battalion: A maneuver element of a certain kind of troops. It has no logistical ability to work beyond the railheads.

When levelling up a battalion you get a
Regiment: a HQ with some logistical abilities (trucks, support "units"), 4 additional empty Battalions, some support slots and an arty slot. Support troops are not maneuver elements but get added to the 5 maneuver battalions. You might add 100 mortar sized arty troopers and/ or 100 ATG troopers and/ or 10 buggys ... to each maneuver battalion this way. You can also add some small caliber arty as a manouver element in the arty slot. The maneuver elements and the HQ can be merged and broken up.

When levelling up a regiment you get a
Division: a HQ with increased logistical abilities, some empty regiment slots, some support slots and an arty slot. The support units are maneuver elements like a Scout Battalion or an TD Battalion, divisional arty can have bigger tubes than regimental arty. The maneuver elements and the HQ can be merged and broken up.

When levelling up a division you get a
Corps: a HQ with great logistical abilities, some empty division slots, and an arty slot. No new maneuver elements, but some corps artillery.

An Army is just an HQ for handling large quantities of supply and adding another leadership layer.

I think this would enable the player to grow the army much more organical. There would also be more realism to logistics. I am aware that scale was a design decision, but a battalion of militia infantry operating independently 1000 km beyond the railheads? This guys should patrol dirt roads or man strongpoints.

Apart from a meaningfull army organization such a system would also bring a real chain of command. Once a leader reaches a certain seniority he can be promoted and assigned to a bigger formation.

Post #: 1

RE: OOB Suggestion - 7/21/2021 4:44:56 PM

BlueTemplar

Posts: 887
Joined: 4/29/2010
Status: offline

Yeah something like that would be really nice to have, starting with the ability to have more than 2 custom units per OHQ (with extra restrictions of course).

That independent battalion isn't really : off-road supplies are delivered by abstracted logistic units, not by the units themselves
(otherwise range would vary per unit and with unit AP).

(in reply to postfux)

Post #: 2

RE: OOB Suggestion - 7/21/2021 5:12:53 PM

postfux

Posts: 175
Joined: 8/18/2015
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BlueTemplar

That independent battalion isn't really : off-road supplies are delivered by abstracted logistic units, not by the units themselves
(otherwise range would vary per unit and with unit AP).

According to the manual its "the operational logistics of each individual unit or HQ which picks up its supplies from the nearest road hex" (p. 307).

I know that its an abstraction any way you look at it but I think its much to easy to operate unsupported battailions far from the railheads and completely spread out.

In the end I think the idea of building up the army organisation and thus increasing the abilities form some humble milita beginnig appeals to me especially in the given setting.

< Message edited by postfux -- 7/21/2021 5:53:44 PM >

(in reply to BlueTemplar)

Post #: 3

RE: OOB Suggestion - 7/22/2021 10:31:03 AM

BlueTemplar

Posts: 887
Joined: 4/29/2010
Status: offline

quote:

the operational logistics of each individual unit or HQ which picks up its supplies from the nearest road hex

This headcanon is IMHO wrong because operational logistics have fixed AP (IIRC 100 ?) and their own AP terrain costs, unrelated to what units they are resupplying.

(in reply to postfux)

Post #: 4

RE: OOB Suggestion - 7/22/2021 1:04:15 PM

postfux

Posts: 175
Joined: 8/18/2015
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BlueTemplar

quote:

the operational logistics of each individual unit or HQ which picks up its supplies from the nearest road hex

This headcanon is IMHO wrong because operational logistics have fixed AP (IIRC 100 ?) and their own AP terrain costs, unrelated to what units they are resupplying.

You can look at it form both sides I guess. The manual defines it as the unit picking up the supplies from the network (=road).

AFAIK multiple units "picking up supplies from the network" dont put an additional strain on the network. Also if your network is already declining due to distance from the supply source you get 100% efficency for the next 4 hexes of clear terrain. Decline again starts on the fifth hex. This would point towards the simulation of an organic ability.

My main point is another one: I would love to increase abilities and not only size when I am developing the army.

An army or a division is not a big battalion in the end and should have more freedom to operate than a unit that typically has no meaningful organic logistic infrastructure.

Also the development of different formations is not very satisfying at the moment. You can get similar effects (and more operational freedom) by stacking different kind of units as far as I understand the combat mechanism.

There could also be some incentive to use support troops and arty of differnt sizes in a more "realistic" way.

I actually think the current system of formations and "increasing size and complexity" is some kind of placeholder since it doesnt add much to an otherwise very ambitious game.

(in reply to BlueTemplar)

Post #: 5

RE: OOB Suggestion - 7/23/2021 11:23:25 AM

BlueTemplar

Posts: 887
Joined: 4/29/2010
Status: offline

quote:

AFAIK multiple units "picking up supplies from the network" dont put an additional strain on the network.

I'm not sure that I see the relation since we're talking about the off-network operational logistics ?
(The network itself still has to transport these items of course.)

quote:

Also if your network is already declining due to distance from the supply source you get 100% efficency for the next 4 hexes of clear terrain. Decline again starts on the fifth hex. This would point towards the simulation of an organic ability.

That's not specifically how it works.
"Organic" has a specific meaning here.
For the network logistics, AP decline on roads simulates trucks having to refuel themselves, see for instance :
https://acoup.blog/2019/10/04/collections-the-preposterous-logistics-of-the-loot-train-battle-game-of-thrones-s7e4/

quote:

An army or a division is not a big battalion in the end and should have more freedom to operate than a unit that typically has no meaningful organic logistic infrastructure.

Well, ShEmp has its tactical bases abstracted as pickup points instead of being tied to OHQs, so this will always remain an issue I guess ?

But yeah, I guess we're off topic.

quote:

You can get similar effects (and more operational freedom) by stacking different kind of units as far as I understand the combat mechanism.

This has its own downsides, but more upsides (at least against the AI), I agree.

As always, more realistic doesn't mean better gameplay.

< Message edited by BlueTemplar -- 7/23/2021 11:24:08 AM >

(in reply to postfux)

Post #: 6

RE: OOB Suggestion - 7/27/2021 2:01:11 PM

postfux

Posts: 175
Joined: 8/18/2015
Status: offline

When supplies are moved in the network you will reach a point where you will have less logistic points for every hex you move farther east. A unit being offroad some hexes N wont have this decline (as I understand the rules). This would mean it es the unit not the network that is doing the offroad moving.

I have to disagree on the realism issue. While simplification obviously is necessary for a game "realism" can lead not only to more immersion but also to more interesting gameplay.

This is surely the case for the possibility to build up a "realistic" military organistaion and chain of command. It also does not need a complicated mechanic. All the mechanics for a more complex organisation loke HQs, Subunits and TOEs are allready there. All that is need are aditional organisational layers. SHQ then OHQs (of various sizes) seems to be a bit shallow.

If these new organisational layers come with additional capabilities it also enriches the gameplay this way.

The same is true for force composition. While small tube artillery is in the game I dont see an incentive to actually use it.

(in reply to BlueTemplar)

Post #: 7

RE: OOB Suggestion - 7/27/2021 4:17:04 PM

BlueTemplar

Posts: 887
Joined: 4/29/2010
Status: offline

quote:

A unit being offroad some hexes N wont have this decline (as I understand the rules).

It will have a different decline : a linear % for non-food items, even for the logistically (ground-)"free" ones like fuel or energy.
And a sharp cliff for food.

quote:

This would mean it es the unit not the network that is doing the offroad moving.

Again, this wouldn't make sense considering how the units all have exactly the same stats for organic logistics.

quote:

I have to disagree on the realism issue. While simplification obviously is necessary for a game "realism" can lead not only to more immersion but also to more interesting gameplay.

I don't see how we disagree here, as you say, more realistic can mean better gameplay, (and is something to strive for), but not necessarily so.

< Message edited by BlueTemplar -- 7/27/2021 4:19:37 PM >

(in reply to postfux)

Post #: 8

RE: OOB Suggestion - 7/27/2021 9:28:32 PM

postfux

Posts: 175
Joined: 8/18/2015
Status: offline

quote:

quote:

A unit being offroad some hexes N wont have this decline (as I understand the rules).

It will have a different decline : a linear % for non-food items, even for the logistically (ground-)"free" ones like fuel or energy.
And a sharp cliff for food.

I am not sure I understand what you mean. As long as the bottleneck display shows 100% they get what they need as long as it is available at the pickup point?

I did look into this a bit more closely. When you upgrade a unit the display shows the pickup point for the new equipment. Even when the unit is on a road it will reach back 4 hexes toward the supply source to pick up new equipment.

If you look into the supply details using the traffic regulation system you will see the network only ships supply along the roads.

In the game mechanics it definitly is the unit that is doing the supply hauling from the road (pickup point) to its position. The manual is correct in pointing this out.

quote:

quote:

This would mean it es the unit not the network that is doing the offroad moving.

Again, this wouldn't make sense considering how the units all have exactly the same stats for organic logistics.

That is exactly my point. A battalion of militia food soldiers shouldnt have the same logistical abilities as a motorized regiment or a tank division.

Adding more substance to HQs (an existing feature) like a truck pool (a similar feature is existing for mobility) could add a world of depth to logistics. The army would need organisation to get meaningful offensive capabilities.

While the game has a very complex logistic system in gameplay terms it translates to not much more than slamming down dirt roads and upgrading truck depots to get supply corridors where any unit can do just about anything. I think there are more possibilities in the existing system.

(in reply to BlueTemplar)

Post #: 9