RE: deeper Supply questions

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: deeper Supply questions

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] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command WWII War in Europe >> RE: deeper Supply questions

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: deeper Supply questions - 11/18/2021 8:30:50 PM

Hubert Cater

Posts: 5199
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline

quote:

It would be nice to see it intrinsically, without having to click on an HQ.
Or maybe an game option to turn an intrinsic display on/off.

I've considered it before, just never thought of a good way to represent it intrinsically that would look good, e.g. would there be a constant line from one HQ to the other etc.

Mind you I didn't spend a lot of time thinking about it, but it did cross my mind at one point and then I just figured since you need to click on an HQ to see attachments, e.g. it is also not intrinsic, it in my mind didn't feel out of place to essentially have the same mechanism for the parent/boost relationship.

< Message edited by Hubert Cater -- 11/18/2021 8:32:00 PM >

_____________________________

Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/FurySoftware

We're also on Facebook! https://www.facebook.com/pages/Fury-Software/233842800005900

Join our Steam Community:
http://steamcommunity.com/groups/strategiccommand3

(in reply to Taxman66)

Post #: 31

RE: deeper Supply questions - 11/19/2021 1:31:01 AM

Taxman66

Posts: 1665
Joined: 3/19/2008
From: Columbia, MD. USA
Status: offline

A few options off the top of my head:

1a)
There's a bit of room to the left of the HQ flag. How about using the letters P (Parent/Primary) and S (Supported/Secondary) and left 'blank' (i.e. as currently displayed to indicate not involved in a chain).
The letters P & S could then be color coded (i.e. matching) to indicate pairings. 5 or 6 different color combinations should be more than enough.

1b)
Similar to 1a) but draw a color matching border (say around the outside of the counter or perhaps around the interior flag of the counter).
Note: I don't think indicating Primary/Supported is absolutely necessary as it should be relatively easy to determine such just by looking at their positioning.

1c)
As 1b) but use a color matching status dot/circle on the HQs; Or perhaps 2 different symbols (say ^ for Primary and + for supported)

2)
HQs only use 2 of the 3 Upgrade slots (AA & Mobility), perhaps that extra slot could be used. If it has to be numeric and matching color to the 2 in use, then this is probably not a good idea.

_____________________________

"Part of the $10 million I spent on gambling, part on booze and part on women. The rest I spent foolishly." - George Raft

(in reply to Hubert Cater)

Post #: 32

RE: deeper Supply questions - 11/19/2021 6:30:10 AM

Duedman

Posts: 91
Joined: 8/9/2021
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Taxman66

1a)
There's a bit of room to the left of the HQ flag. How about using the letters P (Parent/Primary) and S (Supported/Secondary) and left 'blank' (i.e. as currently displayed to indicate not involved in a chain).
The letters P & S could then be color coded (i.e. matching) to indicate pairings. 5 or 6 different color combinations should be more than enough.

I like this idea. Absolutely great would be, if this would dynamicly change while you move a HQ but are still able to undo the move.
For example if you have a Parent HQ in Saratov and 2 other HQs. You threaten Kubitschyev and Stalingrad. The Allied does not know where to concentrate is defenses. But I'm scared as hell to move one of the 2 other HQs once the one, where you actually plan to attack has good support.
Because if I do, it might switch who gets the boost. And I cannot undo.

If I could choose (even by trial and undo with the indications suggested above) I could even switch the angle of my attack.

(Granted this was only a real concern with my imaginary reduced supply rules. As it is a second Parent HQ right next to Saratov with 5 base supply would also do the trick)

Still the suggestion of indicated colourcoded P/S symbols sounds very appealing to me.

(in reply to Taxman66)

Post #: 33

RE: deeper Supply questions - 11/19/2021 2:59:14 PM

Hubert Cater

Posts: 5199
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Taxman66
A few options off the top of my head:

1a)
There's a bit of room to the left of the HQ flag. How about using the letters P (Parent/Primary) and S (Supported/Secondary) and left 'blank' (i.e. as currently displayed to indicate not involved in a chain).
The letters P & S could then be color coded (i.e. matching) to indicate pairings. 5 or 6 different color combinations should be more than enough.

1b)
Similar to 1a) but draw a color matching border (say around the outside of the counter or perhaps around the interior flag of the counter).
Note: I don't think indicating Primary/Supported is absolutely necessary as it should be relatively easy to determine such just by looking at their positioning.

1c)
As 1b) but use a color matching status dot/circle on the HQs; Or perhaps 2 different symbols (say ^ for Primary and + for supported)

2)
HQs only use 2 of the 3 Upgrade slots (AA & Mobility), perhaps that extra slot could be used. If it has to be numeric and matching color to the 2 in use, then this is probably not a good idea.

Using the third slot is potentially problematic if modders end up using that third slot, and interior flag colour only works on NATO counters, e.g. we'd need something else for 3D units etc.

I think symbols would be along the right track, using letters is something we moved away from for SC3 due to multiple localizations, e.g. the game being in English, German, Spanish and French, and wanted to use a more universal system to represent things like Intercept, Escort and so on and thus the colour coded dots/circles there.

So colour coded symbols would be more consistent with that, and definitely you'd need a unique symbol for Parent and a unique symbol for Support.

Problem is there are only so many colours that stand out as significantly different in game, and with colour blinded players we'd have to pick the most optimal ones as the relationship between two different HQs, and how to differentiate between other sets of pairs is critical here.

Some good ideas though and something to think about for sure.

_____________________________

(in reply to Taxman66)

Post #: 34

RE: deeper Supply questions - 11/19/2021 3:17:22 PM

Taxman66

Posts: 1665
Joined: 3/19/2008
From: Columbia, MD. USA
Status: offline

How many chains are active at one time, in my games usually not that many. Black, White, Red, Green maybe Yellow/Gold.
I guess you could repeat/cycle back if that is preferable to adding ones that may blend.

As for symbols I just had the idea of:
Star for Primary (signifying command)
Pennant for Supported (signifying forward position?)

< Message edited by Taxman66 -- 11/19/2021 3:42:44 PM >

_____________________________

"Part of the $10 million I spent on gambling, part on booze and part on women. The rest I spent foolishly." - George Raft

(in reply to Hubert Cater)

Post #: 35

RE: deeper Supply questions - 11/19/2021 4:31:29 PM

Hubert Cater

Posts: 5199
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline

Thanks and more good ideas, however I'm a little weary of too many colours and then potential look of clutter on the map as well. It has me thinking of something similar but a bit different, and sort of a compromise.

One thing I like is the current under unit hex outline effect, blends well with the map and other elements, e.g. the ones we use for HQ attachment highlights and so on, and maybe a double hex outline for support units, one colour (which ever I find works best) and a single hex outline, another colour for the parent HQ. It would be the same colour combination for all parent/support HQs, and this at least gives you a quick indication of parent/support relationships in play when scanning the map.

Then if you wish to know which parent is the parent of a particular child, you simply mouse hover over the child and it reinforces/brightens the specific highlight of the parent. It could work both ways, e.g. mouse hover over a parent to see a reinforced/brighter highlight of the child. No need to actually click on the HQs etc.

Something like this, e.g. not exactly what you are after, but pretty close and likely much better than what is currently in place.

This is just off the top of my head, and not sure if or when I would have the chance to implement it, but that is my current thinking as it removes the need to ensure there are enough colours and just the right colours and that it doesn't then place way too many colours on the map where it starts to look like too much distracting feedback etc.

It also continues to work with either NATO, 3D and any other customized units etc as the highlights are under the units. Picking symbols as you suggest works too but then we have to think about where to place them on the unit, where it best works for NATO, 3D units as well as for potentially modded graphics as well. Under the units usually helps to remove any of those potential concerns and is just quicker to implement as there is less experimenting involved to get things just right.

_____________________________

(in reply to Taxman66)

Post #: 36

RE: deeper Supply questions - 11/20/2021 9:12:14 AM

Duedman

Posts: 91
Joined: 8/9/2021
Status: offline

In another thread you asked for examples, why the mechanic to automatically determine chained HQs does not always work.
I got one for you. I wanted the HQ next to Kamyschin get the boost. But it just would not work.
This also shows why I think 1(8) might be too much.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Hubert Cater)

Post #: 37

RE: deeper Supply questions - 11/20/2021 3:05:19 PM

Taxman66

Posts: 1665
Joined: 3/19/2008
From: Columbia, MD. USA
Status: offline

It's clear that HQ can't get a boost.
Boost chains can only involve 2 HQs.
There is only 1 HQ (pictured) on a supply giving source, though there must be one off screen to the North.
The in the town west of Stalingrad is supplying/supprting the HQ north of it.
The one off screen must be supplying the HQ at the top of the picture and not the one SE of Kamyschin.

As I explained in an earlier post you don't get to choose which HQ gets the boost when there are mulitples to choose from. In this case I presume the HQ at the top of the picture has a higher command ranking than the one near Kamyschin.

_____________________________

"Part of the $10 million I spent on gambling, part on booze and part on women. The rest I spent foolishly." - George Raft

(in reply to Duedman)

Post #: 38

RE: deeper Supply questions - 11/20/2021 3:36:12 PM

Duedman

Posts: 91
Joined: 8/9/2021
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Taxman66
As I explained in an earlier post you don't get to choose which HQ gets the boost when there are mulitples to choose from. In this case I presume the HQ at the top of the picture has a higher command ranking than the one near Kamyschin.

I was referring to an older topic where Hubert asked for examples when a mechanic to choose the boosted HQ would be beneficial.
And this clearly is one.
I would have liked the Hungarian HQ at Saratov (which is on the screenshot) to boost the one east of Kamyschin.

(in reply to Taxman66)

Post #: 39

RE: deeper Supply questions - 11/21/2021 2:30:59 AM

archmache

Posts: 57
Joined: 10/2/2021
Status: offline

Whatever ends up happening if we can choose what HQ gets boosted and by whom - like having a toggle for auto assign or manual for the units - would help a bunch. This may be too much micro but it is annoying when the hq doesn't get a boost when you want it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Taxman66

It's clear that HQ can't get a boost.
Boost chains can only involve 2 HQs.
There is only 1 HQ (pictured) on a supply giving source, though there must be one off screen to the North.
The in the town west of Stalingrad is supplying/supprting the HQ north of it.
The one off screen must be supplying the HQ at the top of the picture and not the one SE of Kamyschin.

As I explained in an earlier post you don't get to choose which HQ gets the boost when there are mulitples to choose from. In this case I presume the HQ at the top of the picture has a higher command ranking than the one near Kamyschin.

(in reply to Taxman66)

Post #: 40

RE: deeper Supply questions - 11/22/2021 1:21:44 PM

Hubert Cater

Posts: 5199
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Duedman

I was referring to an older topic where Hubert asked for examples when a mechanic to choose the boosted HQ would be beneficial.
And this clearly is one.
I would have liked the Hungarian HQ at Saratov (which is on the screenshot) to boost the one east of Kamyschin.

I don't believe I've ever disagreed it could or would be beneficial, and to clarify, it's just a matter of implementation considering when supply is calculated, which is before the turn, and to have it intuitive for the player so that they would understand why their selected HQ for boosting will not provide a boost until the next turn, and then when units have been moved, may not provide a boost at all depending on the new disposition. Then what to do in those cases, e.g. have the engine auto select an HQ for boosting again since the desired HQ did not work, and then how to explain that to players so they understand this and so that they don't think it is a bug and so on.

I had spent some time thinking about it but wasn't able to come up with a good solution just yet, unfortunately.

_____________________________

(in reply to Duedman)

Post #: 41

RE: deeper Supply questions - 11/22/2021 4:11:15 PM

Taxman66

Posts: 1665
Joined: 3/19/2008
From: Columbia, MD. USA
Status: offline

How about just selecting it as a HQ option during your turn, however it doesn't go into effect until the start of your next turn. That is, your current turn still provides chaining/supply as determined at the start of your turn.

_____________________________

"Part of the $10 million I spent on gambling, part on booze and part on women. The rest I spent foolishly." - George Raft

(in reply to Hubert Cater)

Post #: 42

RE: deeper Supply questions - 11/22/2021 6:51:14 PM

Hubert Cater

Posts: 5199
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline

Hi Taxman66,

That is pretty much the way to do it, however, from experience, many players will not understand why it has not yet gone into effect and will think something is not working. Then we have to still be able to show what the current pairings are, intuitively, as well as what the next turn pairings will be, also intuitively to the player.

Then there is that secondary issue where if you've moved your units, HQs around enough after making your desired choice of pairings, there is that possibility it will not actually be valid on the next turn, e.g. HQs will have moved maybe too far, or the supply has dropped making the pairings invalid etc.

What to do in those cases, what to default to, and how to convey all of that and why this has all happened to the player as well is a bit of a challenge so that they will not think something is broken either.

Honestly trying to figure all of that out so that it is entirely foolproof and not in any way leading to us having to answer the same question and explain the mechanics of it all, likely repeatedly, is something I'm just trying to avoid as we seem to have enough of those as is. Thus the current auto mechanism (for now) etc.

Hubert

_____________________________

(in reply to Taxman66)

Post #: 43

RE: deeper Supply questions - 11/22/2021 6:56:31 PM

Taxman66

Posts: 1665
Joined: 3/19/2008
From: Columbia, MD. USA
Status: offline

If you do another iteration of this game, and wish to keep the same supply mechanics I strongly suggest considering my suggestion of using a new unit (supply depot) as a forward supply point only (i.e. no HQ morale/readiness support to units).

_____________________________

"Part of the $10 million I spent on gambling, part on booze and part on women. The rest I spent foolishly." - George Raft

(in reply to Hubert Cater)

Post #: 44

RE: deeper Supply questions - 11/23/2021 12:51:33 AM

Elessar2

Posts: 883
Joined: 11/30/2016
Status: offline

One option would be to have a "redo supply" button, which will only affect units which haven't done anything yet that turn. This would also help to get supply of air units which failed to attach to an HQ their proper boosts.

(in reply to Taxman66)

Post #: 45

RE: deeper Supply questions - 11/23/2021 1:00:30 PM

Hubert Cater

Posts: 5199
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline

Yeah I could maybe see that, sort of an advanced 'Supply Phase' option where you can adjust supply before you start moving any units, e.g. set your HQ pairings then click recalculate supply, end phase and then you can start playing your turn normally.

It would be a departure from the current setup as we have no phases in game, but in a technical sense it could work and it would eliminate all of the above listed issues and concerns.

Something to think about and I'll make a note, but can't promise anything since as mentioned we are nearing the end of the development cycle on these games as we look to eventually move forward on newer things.

_____________________________

(in reply to Elessar2)

Post #: 46

RE: deeper Supply questions - 12/7/2021 8:14:02 PM

Duedman

Posts: 91
Joined: 8/9/2021
Status: offline

I still dont see the reasoning why it cannot just be done the same way as assigning units to HQs. Yes, it would only count in the next turn. But why do you think, that would confuse ppl? Just name it accordingly?
It would be a lot easier to implement than the "supply-phase-system".

I do very often just pray that a movement of a HQ during a siege, with many HQs involved, will not screw up everything. Because it occasionally just does! And you can not undo the HQ turn! Because to check, whats going to change supplywise you have to finalize the HQ turn. And then you are stuck with the results.

Adding to the picture above, there the HQ in Saratov needs to supply the HQ east of Stalingrad ..... but just doesn't I have another Screenshot.
I'll put it here again, because I can not find the thread where you asked for such examples

The HQ in Rennes supports Portiers. So the northern frontline stays at 4 Supply (which is a lot worse than 5 - you know the rules).
It is the end of the turn after heavy fighting. 3 Units, 2 of them US with long sea transport in danger of full wipe. This game went on for more than a month and is on a knifes edge.
I would have loved to change the boost towards the British HQ...

Sidenote: US HQ in the middle is Str. 7.
Cities: Rennes 5, Portiers 5, Tours 2, Le Mans 1

The system of supplyboosting HQs + chaining them is super awesome. Just a bit more control for the player would really be nice.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Hubert Cater)

Post #: 47

RE: deeper Supply questions - 12/7/2021 11:18:55 PM

Elessar2

Posts: 883
Joined: 11/30/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hubert Cater

Something to think about and I'll make a note, but can't promise anything since as mentioned we are nearing the end of the development cycle on these games as we look to eventually move forward on newer things.

Note the WitP AE devs have recently decided to push one final patch out. Would be nice if the Final versions of this set of titles would remedy any of these loose ends, even as you look to the next level. [One on topic for this thread would be for air units to get first priority on auto attachments.]

< Message edited by Elessar2 -- 12/7/2021 11:20:30 PM >

(in reply to Hubert Cater)

Post #: 48

RE: deeper Supply questions - 12/8/2021 12:57:02 PM

Hubert Cater

Posts: 5199
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline

I'm not really sure if we'll ever do a final patch... or at least an official one as such, any time soon. Reason being is that as there are still a lot of players playing the game, and we are still very happy to continually provide fixes for the game as needed.

Additionally there are still quite a few items on our list for the game, which we are also happy to implement when warranted, it's just a matter of winding down new features, or significant overhauls as we move our time and efforts towards eventual future products.

_____________________________

(in reply to Elessar2)

Post #: 49

RE: deeper Supply questions - 12/10/2021 2:11:13 PM

bfcj

Posts: 121
Joined: 4/10/2018
From: Tampa, FL, USA
Status: offline

Well I learned something from this thread, as I am one of those who only thought he understood supply chaining. And why my strat bombing of cities did nothing to slow the Axis overrun of my defense of Egypt. I'm not sure I have a valid opinion on what is best, only that I wouldn't be surprised to learn that many others only think they understand it. Thanks Duedman.

(in reply to Hubert Cater)

Post #: 50