RE: Extremely Unrealistic Supply and Invasion Mechanics

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: Extremely Unrealistic Supply and Invasion Mechanics - Am I Wrong?

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] >> WarPlan >> RE: Extremely Unrealistic Supply and Invasion Mechanics - Am I Wrong?

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Extremely Unrealistic Supply and Invasion Mechanics... - 12/12/2021 11:46:47 PM

akashamon

Posts: 5
Joined: 5/23/2020
Status: offline

This!

quote:

ORIGINAL: generalfdog

Good responses here I would only add that it may not be as unrealistic as you think keep in mind German landings in Norway, and Crete were all done with British naval presence and superiority and north Africa was supplied. Taking Syria is almost the only way the Axis can hope to take egypt because without those ports they run in to to many supply issues, just like they did historically, it's all based on port size and distance from them, and interdiction of supplies by naval and air forces does work. In the screen shot I can see neither of you have occupied Cyprus which is a mistake, and your Axis opponent is having more issues then you think there is no way all that air force he has over there is worth anything, I bet they all have little red triangles and are almost useless , a few may be doing something if he is pumping supply trucks in to them every turn. Either way give it a chance for it's scale it is the most realistic best playing game out there

It is my first game with Blacklancer. He does not realize how bad this is for my troops if I am not able to take Egypt quickly. I should have taken Cyprus, it crossed my mind but I went all in to take Egypt as fast as possible. I was thinking from there the rest of NA, England might be an option along with Persia and then two front Russia. I dunno. I am new to these games (SC, Warplan), full disclosure.

Like ANY game the supply/rail/transport mechanics are crude when compared to reality. They hurt or benefit players for their choices and warplane has a good balance based on my units effectiveness in Syria. It was a good strategy because it was open (pincer Egypt) but I poured way to many troops than I can support, which Blacklancer did not realize.

Overall I like the supply and stockpile mechanics they make sense to me. Sometimes rail and transports are too OP. But I think the player needs that flexibility as well.

On the Med and allies control. I think navies often were close by but never saw each other? So, I like how Warplan does the battle mechanics and the allies player can completely block Beirut and garrison Cyprus to prevent any invasion. If the allied player leaves room there needs to be an option for the axis to make the med their lake, that is part of the fun imho. Even if that means my transports could sail through the enemy unit to land in Beirut. The enemy naval units were 3-5 hexes away. So I had room. I think if they block it out completely then the axis should not be able to move in.

(in reply to generalfdog)

Post #: 31

RE: Extremely Unrealistic Supply and Invasion Mechanics... - 12/13/2021 10:32:54 AM

AstroBlues

Posts: 398
Joined: 8/10/2007
Status: offline

(in reply to akashamon)

Post #: 32

RE: Extremely Unrealistic Supply and Invasion Mechanics... - 12/14/2021 10:59:38 AM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

I cannot believe no one has addressed the number one problem with the axis offensives in the Med:
Supply/shipping from the home country's ports (completely without escort!) to the destination ports flows freely, flows fully, cannot be intercepted at sea and with no production consequence for its interception by air.

FOR ****'S SAKE THINK ABOUT THAT!

Italy can send 40 supply to this port, that port, and ALL ports.
Germany can send supply to Iceland or the Azores with no chance of it costing him ANYthing.

All supplies need to move across the sea so that they can be intercepted by warships and so that they need to be escorted. It should function exactly like trade routes, but for over-seas supply.
Axis should not be able to repair railroads in Africa unless Turkey is friendly/conquered!
Cairo needs to be a supply source for the Allies so that they can, in essence, have infinite supply as long as it's in Allied hands.
Every intercepted point of supply must subtract from production points (add it to the accrual of Upkeep for the forces not being supplied on a 1:1 ratio).

The cost supply is not free. But because in this game it has no economic cost, there's no risk of interdicting said supplies. If you make supply travel by sea so that it can be intercepted, you will go a LONG way to adding realism to this game where it's grotesquely lacking.

Supply should have to be produced and this game just lets it flow like blood produced from a body. In the tiny place where supply does have to be factored down into individual points, the loss of it is meaningless. The impact on land units of the absence of supply in this case is grossly inadequate to the importance of supply on overseas operations.

Has War Plan Pacific not t done something different with supply? Can the Japanese just supply all their islands without ships, escorts, or consequence? What happy soldiers they would have had in 1944.

_____________________________

Fall 2021-Playing: Stalingrad'42 (GMT); Advanced Squad Leader,
Reading: Masters of the Air (GREAT BOOK!)
Rulebooks: ASL (always ASL), Middle-Earth Strategy Battle Game
Painting: WHFB Lizardmen leaders

(in reply to redrum68)

Post #: 33

RE: Extremely Unrealistic Supply and Invasion Mechanics... - 12/14/2021 2:03:53 PM

AlvaroSousa

Posts: 9927
Joined: 7/29/2013
Status: offline

The supply system is how it is for a variety of game play factors based on real life situations.

There is a lot more to supply than most players realized. Look at these examples, Rhodes before 1941, Malta, Rabaul. It is very complex and I put into place certain mechanics that encourage certain actions by players.

For example the UK had a garrison in Iceland. If in WPE the Allies could just cut it off why bother having a garrison? Axis take it just park a naval group outside and they eventually die.

Sometimes mechanics fit the scale and model of the game.

Only thing I can say is that WP2 will have a better supply system now that I am learning all the variables involved. Very likely it will involve sending ships to the location to resupply it and even building up supply. I have to see how this works for the player experience and how it can be done in an automatic way.

As for now you should be garrisoning Azores and Iceland. If the Axis want to put forth huge efforts into attacking these locations they will pay a heavy price.

_____________________________

Creator Kraken Studios
- WarPlan
- WarPlan Pacific

Designer Strategic Command
- Brute Force (mod) SC2
- Assault on Communism SC2
- Assault on Democracy SC2
- Map Image Importer SC3

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 34

RE: Extremely Unrealistic Supply and Invasion Mechanics... - 12/14/2021 4:54:15 PM

ncc1701e

Posts: 7380
Joined: 10/29/2013
From: Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AlvaroSousa

Very likely it will involve sending ships to the location to resupply it and even building up supply.

A welcome addition if there is a possibility for your opponent to intercept and sink these ships all their way home.

_____________________________

Chancellor Gorkon to Captain James T. Kirk:
You don't trust me, do you? I don't blame you. If there is to be a brave new world, our generation is going to have the hardest time living in it.

(in reply to AlvaroSousa)

Post #: 35