Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: KingHalford

Now we're having this bloody argument on eXplorminate's Discord.

I'm gonna copy/paste something I said there because it might highlight the issue from a certain perspective.

"I agree that using it to cut off supply from roads is busywork, but the cost of removing that would be to take the agency from the player in sculpting the logistics himself, and leaving much of the system to automation
and you know, that's how all the other games do it, if you're gonna automate it, just fully automate it and have done with it and then we've got Operational Art of War with a sci-fi vibe

Let me use a more obvious example to illustrate this point:

Total War: Warhammer has a problem. The RTS combat is amazing but the auto resolve sucks.
This means that if you want to really optimise your performance in that game you feel forced to fight every battle yourself.
Now, you don't HAVE to, the game is designed so you don't, but people do because they want to lose less troops than they would with autocombat
So is the answer to remove the RTS combat just to have the game automate it?
No
Same with Shadow Empires traffic light system, and I'd argue that the issue with Warhammer is WAY worse.
Now, some people don't like that RTS system so they might see no problem in removing it but the people who do like it will be unhappy.
Same with Shadow Empire here"

quote:

ORIGINAL: gilith

quote:

ORIGINAL: KingHalford

Now we're having this bloody argument on eXplorminate's Discord.

I'm gonna copy/paste something I said there because it might highlight the issue from a certain perspective.

"I agree that using it to cut off supply from roads is busywork, but the cost of removing that would be to take the agency from the player in sculpting the logistics himself, and leaving much of the system to automation
and you know, that's how all the other games do it, if you're gonna automate it, just fully automate it and have done with it and then we've got Operational Art of War with a sci-fi vibe

Let me use a more obvious example to illustrate this point:

Total War: Warhammer has a problem. The RTS combat is amazing but the auto resolve sucks.
This means that if you want to really optimise your performance in that game you feel forced to fight every battle yourself.
Now, you don't HAVE to, the game is designed so you don't, but people do because they want to lose less troops than they would with autocombat
So is the answer to remove the RTS combat just to have the game automate it?
No
Same with Shadow Empires traffic light system, and I'd argue that the issue with Warhammer is WAY worse.
Now, some people don't like that RTS system so they might see no problem in removing it but the people who do like it will be unhappy.
Same with Shadow Empire here"

The difference between Warhammner's RTS battles and SE's logistic system is that RTS battles are actually fun; managing logistics branches is not. It's just series of trivial decisions when placing traffic lights. Micromanaging is only fun as long as the decisions you're making are meaningful and not trivial. If it's trivial, then it should be automated.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DeltaV112
I doubt anyone has serious fun managing the traffic signs. The reality is that for traffic signs there is an essentially optimal solution which could be found by a computer, and all you're doing as a player is tediously figuring it out manually. If you avoid the tedium you're playing suboptimally, especially if long logistical distances get involved(I had to run an invasion across a bunch of empty terrain, which required a bunch of fiddling to maximize the throughput with the limited levels of truck stations I could build quickly). The thought and recognition of the need to build intermediate stations to support the offensive was interesting and required consideration of how supplies were flowing and would flow as I got further away from my territory, making sure I wasn't overstraining my resource production so the stations would finish quickly, and slowing the offensive to make sure I didn't run out of fuel. All of that was gameplay.

Fiddling with the signs so that I could do it as fast as possible wasn't gameplay, it was tedium- checking back and forth to see what percent back along the line gave the highest flow all the way along the line. Making sure to close all the side-roads the AI built also isn't gameplay, it's an idiot check. It's one of those things that might mess your turn up if you forget to do it because it's boring.

quote:

ORIGINAL: willgamer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dampfnudel


Vic please give us a pull/demand based system without traffic signs needed (but allowed).

NOT agreed!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Destragon

....

Also, note that I don't mention anything about automating the traffic lights for units. My problems are entirely about the logistics used by buildings.

quote:

ORIGINAL: KingHalford

I'm repeating myself now, I laid this out in depth above, but if you automate one of the most unique, innovative and fun parts of this game then you're mostly removing the players control over it aside from positioning stations and bases. The traffic light system isn't a problem unless you're engaging in some autistic constant micromanagement on a turn by turn basis to squeeze out an extra LIS point here and there, in which case you should just be building more Truck stations, because by the point of the game that such micro might a problem (mid-late game) you've either got the resources to place an extra base or you're going to lose.

There's also a clear paradigm in games design to either hide automated systems from the player's view or to remove it entirely and there's a solid reason for that.

Furthermore, go ask anybody who still holds a torch for pre-2.0 Stellaris about how they feel to have features removed from a game they paid money for and see how they respond. Paradox might never recover their reputation over that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dampfnudel



You you prefer dumb micromanagement over smart thinking? I suggest not to play strategy games in this case. Clicker games offer more senseless clicking than traffic sign mangement can ever offer"

quote:

ORIGINAL: willgamer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Destragon

....

Also, note that I don't mention anything about automating the traffic lights for units. My problems are entirely about the logistics used by buildings.

It's not only the problem of the dynamic loading of units, but also the vast flow of supplies into and out of zones to the SHQ.

Then there's the variability of the static building production AND raw material inputs due to upgrading and impacts from materials shortages.

How will an automated system, much less a "simple" pull system sort out the priorities of all the above (and I'm sure I'm forgetting about other variables)?

An engineering perspective says that "the devil is in the details" and I prefer the devil I'm learning about to an overly optimistic promise of a better system that will surely become its own Gordian Knot.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dampfnudel
1. demand is calculated for each hex. (already exists)
2. range of supplier is calculated (already exists)
3. connection of suppliers to demander is checked ((already exists)
4. Supply is subtracted from the supplier capacity. (already exists))
5. If multiple suppliers are in range the closets/biggest supplier has priority (new)

quote:

ORIGINAL: willgamer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dampfnudel



You you prefer dumb micromanagement over smart thinking? I suggest not to play strategy games in this case. Clicker games offer more senseless clicking than traffic sign mangement can ever offer"

Really!

Sunk to personal attacks!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Malevolence

quote:

ORIGINAL: DeltaV112
I doubt anyone has serious fun managing the traffic signs. The reality is that for traffic signs there is an essentially optimal solution which could be found by a computer, and all you're doing as a player is tediously figuring it out manually. If you avoid the tedium you're playing suboptimally, especially if long logistical distances get involved(I had to run an invasion across a bunch of empty terrain, which required a bunch of fiddling to maximize the throughput with the limited levels of truck stations I could build quickly). The thought and recognition of the need to build intermediate stations to support the offensive was interesting and required consideration of how supplies were flowing and would flow as I got further away from my territory, making sure I wasn't overstraining my resource production so the stations would finish quickly, and slowing the offensive to make sure I didn't run out of fuel. All of that was gameplay.

Fiddling with the signs so that I could do it as fast as possible wasn't gameplay, it was tedium- checking back and forth to see what percent back along the line gave the highest flow all the way along the line. Making sure to close all the side-roads the AI built also isn't gameplay, it's an idiot check. It's one of those things that might mess your turn up if you forget to do it because it's boring.

It's not my favorite logistics system, but I have fun using the traffic signs.

I, personally, would rather have the traffic signs than an automated system.

Given the other game mechanics, I think it's a good solution short of ripping out logistics completely. No logistics would take a lot of away from the game.

The traffic signs are a method to give the player agency over prioritization. I could imagine other ways to do that, but likely they would be as much or more tedium as well.

I do disagree with the enemy not being restricted by all the same logistics rules. Logistics and logistic targets are very cool attack surfaces (i.e. vulnerabilities) for players and the AI to exploit.

I do think there is room for other logistical elements. However, given the workload on one developer, I don't think that's a reasonable expectation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Malevolence

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dampfnudel
1. demand is calculated for each hex. (already exists)
2. range of supplier is calculated (already exists)
3. connection of suppliers to demander is checked ((already exists)
4. Supply is subtracted from the supplier capacity. (already exists))
5. If multiple suppliers are in range the closets/biggest supplier has priority (new)

Given scarcity, how does that loop decide which requests are filled first?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Vic

Just wanted to say I am reading this thread and making notes. I do feel there is room for improvement.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dampfnudel
There is already a priority screen in the game where you can limit logistic capacity used by specific things like zones/armies etc.

The same would apply here. There is a predefined priority list. (the player can modify it)
In last consequence in case of 2 identical things, like 2 divisons of the same army on the same hex share the supply equal.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Malevolence

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dampfnudel
There is already a priority screen in the game where you can limit logistic capacity used by specific things like zones/armies etc.

The same would apply here. There is a predefined priority list. (the player can modify it)
In last consequence in case of 2 identical things, like 2 divisons of the same army on the same hex share the supply equal.

So your idea to squash tedium is to manually set a priority for every game object on the map?

The whole purpose of the those priority screens is to further refine IF you feel like micro-managing more.

I would rather set the priority for an entire front with two clicks.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dampfnudel

What is the argument for having a push-based system over a pull-based system?
The only difference is that the first has always huge waste and dumb micromanagement while the second is efficient and is focused on strategic decision making.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Malevolence
(2) A "Red Ball Express" (i.e. main supply route) with some appropriate cost that allows to you to grease the skids with the movement of logistic points from a start point to and end point. Think of it as a temporary paved road.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DTurtle
... what is needed is an easy way to tell the logistics system, that THIS route is the one that should get most of the truck points going along it. So instead of placing traffic signs restricting truck points from going into a direction at a fork in the road, you instead place priority signs, or a priority road telling the system that at least 95%, 90%, 80% or whatever percentage of truck points are supposed to go along this path. I think that that is an addition to the current system that is easy to understand and easy to explain.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DTurtle

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dampfnudel

What is the argument for having a push-based system over a pull-based system?
The only difference is that the first has always huge waste and dumb micromanagement while the second is efficient and is focused on strategic decision making.

As others pointed out: A pull system works perfectly as long as the logistics are available to fulfill all demand. The moment that is not the case, then you have to have some kind of prioritization. And then suddenly you have lots of micro again. With the traffic lights, I can simply block off/limit one direction so that more goes in the other (for example to the front, and not to a back area city).

The strength of this game is that pretty much everything can work to a good enough extent with a very hands-off approach, but to get the most out of each system, you can then go into more detail. As an example, it is possible to get good enough troops, by simply updating the models with always the newest technology. To get the very best troops, you can then start looking at the various design scores, weight vs engine power, etc.

Repeating myself from my previous post: the problem with the current system is that it often requires some intervention to get even basic logistics working (not much but a little). I know of several people who had such problems with the logistics (just getting a second city connected) that they almost completely gave up with the game. They tried stuff like building additional truck depots (outside the city, because they couldn't build inside because of a private depot), building additional (shorter) routes, even building a second SHQ, etc. Unfortunately, none of that helps, or even makes the problem worse.

In my opinion, unless you want to overhaul the entire system (which at this stage is a no-go, I think), what is needed is an easy way to tell the logistics system, that THIS route is the one that should get most of the truck points going along it. So instead of placing traffic signs restricting truck points from going into a direction at a fork in the road, you instead place priority signs, or a priority road telling the system that at least 95%, 90%, 80% or whatever percentage of truck points are supposed to go along this path. I think that that is an addition to the current system that is easy to understand and easy to explain.

quote:

ORIGINAL: omzh

I don't think there is anything wrong with the traffic lights, and I enjoy a little bit of micro when it comes to logistics, and stretching out offensives that are further out. That being said, I think some of the ideas in this forum make sense to me personally, and would put logistics in a place where it isn't game-ending if you don't micro the system every turn.

1. Pull-based logistics - I tend to think this is the more optimal way to set up logistics, as having demand drive where logistics go removes the micro of having to constantly check your network to make sure none of it is getting wasted. I think DTurtle mentioned, it would require micro once you don't have enough enough supply to reach all of the demand, then you can adjust the routes using traffic lights to make sure supplies are going where they are needed.

One thing I want to add that's been suggested a lot is having a new mechanic that manages your logistics for you - I'm not really a big fan of that, if you're going to add it might as well simplify the system rather than adding a mechanic barely anyone would use, because no one really trusts an AI to handle this stuff for them.

2. Removing Roads - I want this purely for the aesthetics, but I'll admit even besides AI wonkiness I've mistakenly built roads I didn't want. Sure I can just traffic light them, but I'd rather make the map look clean if I can.

As above, the mechanics suggested to deconstruct roads I think is again an unnecessary gimmick. Make the roads free or half cost to deconstruct, it's not a system that needs to be over complicated.

3. More Information/Transparency with Logistics - Part of the problem my ignorant self has with the Current Logistics map mode is that I find it hard to tell how much supplies are actually needed down a certain road. What I would like to see is a map mode where you can see where your supplies are being consumed (e.g. troops/buildings) and how much they need so that I can properly allocate logistics as I need, and traffic light what I want. This follows to the next point brought up;

4. Change Percent-based Logistics to Absolute Value - I think the current percent-based system of traffic lights doesn't really allow for the full control of how much supplies go in which direction. I'd like to limit by the exact number of logistics I need, so I'm not going over and having it get wasted.

My final thought is I would like to see logistics having the same treatment of other mechanics, where it's not game-ending if you don't get deep into it but at the same time gives opportunities to min/max it and adjust based on your situation in game.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MarbleToad
And it makes sense considering your first units are a rag tag militia with hand-me-down patchwork gear and hodge podged unit compostions. Should logistics networks in this post-apocalyptic world have easily optimized logistics?

quote:

ORIGINAL: 76mm

quote:

ORIGINAL: MarbleToad
And it makes sense considering your first units are a rag tag militia with hand-me-down patchwork gear and hodge podged unit compostions. Should logistics networks in this post-apocalyptic world have easily optimized logistics?

But I tend to think the opposite--in these very resource-constrained worlds, maximizing resources/logistics would be a very important ingrained trait of every proto-civilization, and not something that should have to learned as you go... When every drop of water and bite of food is precious (and has been for centuries), you're not going to be shipping stuff willy-nilly all over the place.