Minimizing Troop Upkeep Costs (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Napoleonics] >> Crown of Glory



Message

carnifex -> Minimizing Troop Upkeep Costs (8/24/2005 12:21:24 AM)

Just a quick guide to how placing ground units in garrison vs foraging them will affect your money and food.

Placing your troops inside the garrison does two things. One, it halves their upkeep cost, and two, it makes them use supply and food (The term 'supply' is confusing - it's just more money). For example, an Infantry unit in garrison will cost 1 money upkeep instead of 2, but to feed it you will pay 1 supply money and 2 food, so you wind up saving no money and using 2 food. That same unit outside foraging pays the full 2 upkeep money, but doesn't have to eat the food.

There are four groupings of units according to their efficiency:

Army/Corps
These should always be in garrison. They cost 15 money outside vs. 7 inside and they consume no supply or food while garrisoned.

Guard, Heavy Cavalry, Light Cavalry, Cavalry, Horse Artillery

These all cost 4 money outside vs. 3 money inside. However, they all eat 1 food while in garrison (Guards eat 2).

Infantry, Militia, Rifle Infantry, Artillery, Howitzer, Heavy Artillery, Irregular Cav, Jaeger Infantry, Lancers, and Light Infantry

You get no benefit here. Each costs 2 on the inside and 2 on the outside. Inf, Mil, and Rifles eat 2 food, and the rest eat 1 food while inside in garrison.

Cossack Inf, Guerillas, Janissaries, Landwher, Cossack Cav

These are your worst garrisons because these units cost no upkeep so foraging for these boys is essentially free living. If you put them in garrison they will cost you 1 money each plus the food, and most of these guys eat 2 food (Cossack Cav only 1).


Now, looking back at all this, if food is not a concern, then you should definitely garrison the first two troop types because of the money savings. For everyone else, you will save no money, and even wind up losing some in the last group.

However, if food is a consideration (as it usually is), then be very careful about who you place in what city. You think you're saving some money on the upkeep (which is actually not true for most units), and all the while your food stocks are disappearing.

Hope this helped.



ian77 -> RE: Minimizing Troop Upkeep Costs (8/24/2005 2:41:11 PM)

At the moment during peace, I only have corps, armies, and attached leaders in garrison. If money is tight and I have plenty of food I can add cav and art, but usually food is scarce as well.

I think the whole area of supply, but particularly garrison supply, needs to be reassessed.

Is the game setting "forage", meant to represent the typical actions of the french units on campaign, living off the land .... helping themselves to food, livestock, wine, etc as they passed through? Or is it meant to be similar to the british forces in the peninsular campaign, paying for local provisions, and hanging "looters". If it is the french model, a province could only support so many foraging troops (which we have in game at present) but only for so long - eventually the food runs out. The french created the corps system because of the realities of foraging, the main army was split into multiple corps, who would each advance by a different route living off the land (looting / liberating) as they advanced through enemy territory. When the decisive battle was imminent the corps came together and the troops relied upon the four days rations which were carried in their knapsacks. After the battle, the units dispersed and relied upon foraging once again.

It is unrealistic to forage constantly in a province, and to allow foraging in "home" or allied provinces for very long, the local population would not stand for it.

Also, if cavalry divisions are 10,000 strong, they should eat more not less than an infantry division IMHO. Far more wagons and draft horses would be needed to transport the fodder for the cavalry mounts, which presumably accounts for the higher support cost of cavalry and artillery units, but that fodder has to be grown, and the animals pulling the supply wagons have to be fed as well,....

At present in most games I have seen, regardless of nationality, players are forced to adopt french supply tactics from very early on in the game.. dispersed corps living off the land. It would be interesting to know if the units of different nationalities could have different support costs, and whether or not the cost to build a french corps can be different to the cost of building an austrian corps? We already know that the number of units that can be assigned to a carrier unit can be different for different nationalities, can the other attributes of units be altered on an individual nation basis?

Ian



carnifex -> RE: Minimizing Troop Upkeep Costs (8/24/2005 4:08:04 PM)

quote:

It would be interesting to know if the units of different nationalities could have different support costs, and whether or not the cost to build a french corps can be different to the cost of building an austrian corps? We already know that the number of units that can be assigned to a carrier unit can be different for different nationalities, can the other attributes of units be altered on an individual nation basis?


Right now the units are generic across nations. I suppose master.txt can be edited to include French Infantry and Austrian Infantry, etc, instead of just "Infantry" and they could be given separate upkeep costs, but that would mean a lot of work.

It would probably be easier to assign a national multiplier for upkeep costs, so French upkeep would be multiplied by .8 or something like that.



ericbabe -> RE: Minimizing Troop Upkeep Costs (8/24/2005 4:14:17 PM)

Forage is meant to include both things like stealing crops and also buying food from the locals. In home territory, foraging has no negative consequences and is probably better representative of something like buying local food; in neutral and enemy territory (but not allied), foraging lowers attitude with that nation, and so probably better represents something a bit more aggressive.

We considered adding a middle range to the forage table in which the units begin upsetting the local populace (perhaps spawning local guerillas and the like), but the forage/supply rules are already fairly complicated.

Tweaking the garrison upkeep/supply rules may make sense. I could see reducing the food cost by 1 for every garrisoned unit, and perhaps allowing militia to be supplied in garrison for no monetary cost. Wall improvements are costly and should provide a tangible benefit.

Garrisoning units in a city keeps them "in supply" and so makes them eligible for receiving reinforcements.




ian77 -> RE: Minimizing Troop Upkeep Costs (8/24/2005 5:02:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ericbabe

Forage is meant to include both things like stealing crops and also buying food from the locals. In home territory, foraging has no negative consequences and is probably better representative of something like buying local food;

Should that not make their upkeep far more expensive, buying large quantities of food and fodder?

quote:


in neutral and enemy territory (but not allied), foraging lowers attitude with that nation, and so probably better represents something a bit more aggressive.

I had not realised that was in the game.... good idea!

quote:


We considered adding a middle range to the forage table in which the units begin upsetting the local populace (perhaps spawning local guerillas and the like), but the forage/supply rules are already fairly complicated.

I would agree, i was not wanting to try and make it more complicated... honest...

quote:


Tweaking the garrison upkeep/supply rules may make sense. I could see reducing the food cost by 1 for every garrisoned unit, and perhaps allowing militia to be supplied in garrison for no monetary cost. Wall improvements are costly and should provide a tangible benefit.

I certainly agree that the player should be encouraged to put troops into garrisons.


Ian



Gem35 -> RE: Minimizing Troop Upkeep Costs (8/24/2005 6:58:31 PM)

As far as Army/Corps , I am a bit confused here. When you set an Army and/or Corps WITH a light infantry,2 militia and 1 artilary division attached to forage as opposed to supply, do the light infantry,2 militia and 1 artilary division also forage or do they need to be set to forage as well?



carnifex -> RE: Minimizing Troop Upkeep Costs (8/24/2005 7:36:40 PM)

That option is broken at the moment. There is no way to force forage. If the unit can draw supply from a source, it will.



Bruckner -> RE: Minimizing Troop Upkeep Costs (8/24/2005 7:48:08 PM)

In the manual Howitzer cost 4$ not Horse Artillery. And are you sure about Guard?

P.S You can insert more units than the wall should be able to handle. For ex.: Insert Corps with 3 units into a 3 wall city, then insert 4 more units into the Corps inside the city. (Bug)



carnifex -> RE: Minimizing Troop Upkeep Costs (8/24/2005 11:43:15 PM)

quote:

In the manual Howitzer cost 4$ not Horse Artillery. And are you sure about Guard?


Yes, check the master.txt file in your Data folder for the correct costs.




ericbabe -> RE: Minimizing Troop Upkeep Costs (8/25/2005 12:08:26 AM)

The option seems to be broken. We are currently testing the fix.

Rules for simple national modifiers wouldn't be too hard to add, something along the lines of "French infantry upkeep cost is multiplied by .8."






carnifex -> RE: Minimizing Troop Upkeep Costs (8/25/2005 1:38:16 AM)

quote:

in neutral and enemy territory (but not allied), foraging lowers attitude with that nation, and so probably better represents something a bit more aggressive.


For the Russians, that attitude modifier should be fierce. Those guys gave foraging a bad name [:D]



Latour_Maubourg -> RE: Minimizing Troop Upkeep Costs (8/25/2005 10:33:09 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ericbabe

In home territory, foraging has no negative consequences and is probably better representative of something like buying local food;



If I lose troops due to foraging in my own territory do I have to see that as desertion then?


quote:

ORIGINAL: ericbabe

We considered adding a middle range to the forage table in which the units begin upsetting the local populace (perhaps spawning local guerillas and the like), but the forage/supply rules are already fairly complicated.



Too bad but understandable. Because when the surviving French came back more dead then alive from Russia in the Prussian territories. The Prussians didn't feel too posh finishing off the job because they hated the french for years of "living of the land".

L-M



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.656006