• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

happyman40

Lt. General
62 Badges
May 22, 2011
1.267
240
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Hearts of Iron 4: Arms Against Tyranny
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Hearts of Iron IV: By Blood Alone
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Semper Fi
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • BATTLETECH
  • Stellaris
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • 500k Club
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • BATTLETECH: Flashpoint
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • BATTLETECH: Season pass
  • BATTLETECH: Heavy Metal
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Magicka
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Darkest Hour
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
Does surrounding a nations capital cut off all supply available to units or does supply still get produced from other provinces and get distributed? More specifically, if capital continued to be surrounded would all a nations units eventually starve so to speak?
 
Supply and fuel is deployed to the map each day to IC provinces all over the map. Fuel is actual IC/fuel deployed, supply is effective IC/supply produced in production slider tooltip. The only supply that would be trapped in the capital are the invisible trades from allies and the IC supply deployed to a capital with IC in it. Also when you lock out the capital, you are creating 2 landmasses for that nation, a new stockpile will generate at a port or largest IC province.
 
So presumably the Generated Supply trickling into the old Stockpile at the capital will either "bounce back" or start to flow to the new stockpile province; from there to the provinces requesting supply from the network with the ensuing time lag?
 
When supply is deployed it flows towards the landmass stockpile. When it passes through a province that has a demand, it then becomes supply in demand instead of excess. The only supply that passes all the way to the stockpile is trully excess supply or supply deployed to the stockpile province.
 
Ok - so the mallus of having Capital surrounded or taken (assuming no difference in strategic supply effect) is the change in location of the stockpile that the excess supply moves to?

So that if provinces are in deficit supply they have to wait until sufficient "excess" has been able to arrive and then ship out of stockpile province?
 
If this is true, then why do:

1) many MP games ban log bombing of capitals and the infrastructure around capitals?? It is usually justified as a gamey tactic to destory the source of the whole armies supply distribution - hence log bomb the capital and starve the army, certain death.

2) what legitimate reason would anybody have to send an army to surround ANY capital .... and then refuse to attack or capture it, just sit there and have a picnic? If you surrond a city or capital it is for one reason, capture, not to surround it and do nothing?? It presumably does have an effect on supply to the army outside the capital or it would not be done (though I don't claim to have the tech knowledge of reading the code).
 
If this is true, then why do:

1) many MP games ban log bombing of capitals and the infrastructure around capitals?? It is usually justified as a gamey tactic to destory the source of the whole armies supply distribution - hence log bomb the capital and starve the army, certain death.

2) what legitimate reason would anybody have to send an army to surround ANY capital .... and then refuse to attack or capture it, just sit there and have a picnic? If you surrond a city or capital it is for one reason, capture, not to surround it and do nothing?? It presumably does have an effect on supply to the army outside the capital or it would not be done (though I don't claim to have the tech knowledge of reading the code).

1) Because if you logistically bomb the provinces in and around a capital you are locking away ALL their excess supply because excess moves at a rather disgusting throughput compared to demand, and may not even be effected by logistical bombing at all. So the excess flows into the bombed area and can't exit back out at anywhere near the rate that you send it out at, so eventually your supply system will be completely dead and your economy is gone. Unless you have fronts at a 360 degree angle around your capital, there will be sides of your nation that flow excess to the capital. That excess will be trapped by logistical gameyness.

2) He's probably gaming the Russian AI by sorrounding but not killing England so he can have all of his forces from sea lion ready to hit Soviets.
 
If this is true, then why do:

1) many MP games ban log bombing of capitals and the infrastructure around capitals?? It is usually justified as a gamey tactic to destory the source of the whole armies supply distribution - hence log bomb the capital and starve the army, certain death.

2) what legitimate reason would anybody have to send an army to surround ANY capital .... and then refuse to attack or capture it, just sit there and have a picnic? If you surrond a city or capital it is for one reason, capture, not to surround it and do nothing?? It presumably does have an effect on supply to the army outside the capital or it would not be done (though I don't claim to have the tech knowledge of reading the code).

1) I think the question of why ban log bombing on or around capitals is a different issue from whether blockading a capital has a different effect that capturing it - one really negates worrying about the other doesn't it?

2) It would have major political importance - just look at how quickly France fell once Paris was taken. OF course it would disrupt logistics and communication for the forces as well.

In relation to the game, and allowance of said behavior, if the mechanic is as has been described then it is moot as it makes no difference whether capital is taken or not.

If it does have a different effect then we either allow it and put onus on nation to defend its capital and supply lines or we create a whole set of rules and by laws regarding what is and isn't acceptable regarding cutting off unit supply.
 
2) It would have major political importance - just look at how quickly France fell once Paris was taken. OF course it would disrupt logistics and communication for the forces as well.

Yes, when Paris FELL, i.e. captured not surrounded. Yes in game the capture of the capital and relocation of logistics and command does cause disruption.

In relation to the game, and allowance of said behavior, if the mechanic is as has been described then it is moot as it makes no difference whether capital is taken or not.

If it does have a different effect then we either allow it and put onus on nation to defend its capital and supply lines or we create a whole set of rules and by laws regarding what is and isn't acceptable regarding cutting off unit supply.
Again IF surronding the Capital only has no detrimental effect on the supplies of the rest of the army, WHY not capture the capital also? There must be a reason why surrounding the capital but NOT capturing the enemies capital (very unrealistic) is done in game? Encirclement of a capital can happen for many reasons and not just poor of weak planning, capitals do get lost in wars, but how many just get surrounded and left alone in modern warfare? Anyway - it's Monday, I have to do some work :) see you later
 
2) He's probably gaming the Russian AI by sorrounding but not killing England so he can have all of his forces from sea lion ready to hit Soviets.

This is a MP game where a human Japan (but could be any country) has encircled a human Nat China (again could be any country) and then just sat there not attacking the capital because they didn't want to relocate the Chinese New Capital and supply deep inside China. But the question of surrounding capitals is being debated in the sense of all countries not just Japan/China.
 
Again IF surronding the Capital only has no detrimental effect on the supplies of the rest of the army, WHY not capture the capital also? :) see you later

The surrounding of capital obviously has a detrimental effect. No one is arguing that. The question is whether it is has a different one to capturing.

If it has no difference then there is no reason to worry what a player does. But I understand your point that the goal might be to exploit the game unfairly unless the game mechanic is clear and easily understood by all.
 
Surrounding the capitol should devastate the supply system. If previous testing is any indication, ALL supply produced will deploy to the capitol (don't know how), and while the system will choose another supply center, it will never get any supply. Eventually, the entire armed forces will be out of supply. You won't even be able to set up supply convoys, but I'm pretty sure you could still trade resources. This is a really cheap trick!!!
 
We are actually trying to ascertain what actually happens; maybe testing is required to prove exactly in this case?
 
We are actually trying to ascertain what actually happens; maybe testing is required to prove exactly in this case?

What I provided was based on testing Germany and England. I'm not even close to testing the supply system in China, but there is no such thing a set of supply systems for each. Supply systems should work the same no matter what country you are looking at.

If you want to be sure, access the console and use changecontroller REB prov# on all provinces surrounding the capitol. This will place the area under rebel control.
 
Surrounding the capitol should devastate the supply system. If previous testing is any indication, ALL supply produced will deploy to the capitol (don't know how), and while the system will choose another supply center, it will never get any supply. Eventually, the entire armed forces will be out of supply. You won't even be able to set up supply convoys, but I'm pretty sure you could still trade resources. This is a really cheap trick!!!

Supply deploys to all IC provinces in your controlled territory that is running on your supply network. It does not deploy directly to your capital. Only if your capital has some IC or an ally have troops in your territory does any supply deploy directly to your capital. If you want to "test" anything, make a 36 campaign with any large nation and delete all units on the map and then turn on and off supply production, you will be amazed.
 
Supply deploys to all IC provinces in your controlled territory that is running on your supply network. It does not deploy directly to your capital. Only if your capital has some IC or an ally have troops in your territory does any supply deploy directly to your capital. If you want to "test" anything, make a 36 campaign with any large nation and delete all units on the map and then turn on and off supply production, you will be amazed.

I thought so, too, but the issue under examination (a surrounded capitol) had ALL produced supply deploying into the stockpile. Use a German 1936 start, delete the units if you choose (it isn't necessary, but if you want to see if they actually draw any excess you need some units), and watch the German forces strangle.

EDIT: in the test done (about 30-minutes ago), the system chose Hamburg as the supply source, but supplies didn't deploy there.
 
Last edited:
All supply is produced/deployed to capital then goes to units.

Under normal conditions supply and fuel deploys to core IC. The excess (most of it) flows to the supply depot. Units draw supply/fuel from the supply depot, but some supply/fuel can come from the IC until the flow of supplies/fuel meets the demand of the units.
 
Supply and fuel deploy to provinces with IC and cores in addition to the capital. I am pretty sure that each unit of IC in a province limits the amount of supply and fuel that can deploy there. A 1 IC province deploys less IC than a 10 IC province.

The capital gets everything else. There is also some kind of supply throughput bonus to the provinces that surround the capital, but I don't know much about it.

But even with supply deploying to IC provinces, surrounding the capital would cut off a substantial amount of supply throughput from the principle stockpile since the majority ends up going there.
 
Supply and fuel deploy to provinces with IC and cores in addition to the capital. I am pretty sure that each unit of IC in a province limits the amount of supply and fuel that can deploy there. A 1 IC province deploys less IC than a 10 IC province.

The capital gets everything else. There is also some kind of supply throughput bonus to the provinces that surround the capital, but I don't know much about it.

But even with supply deploying to IC provinces, surrounding the capital would cut off a substantial amount of supply throughput from the principle stockpile since the majority ends up going there.

All supply/fuel produced deploys to core IC. The ratio is CoreIC/Supplies-Fuel Produced. IC in the capitol get their share of this number.

The throughput of the provinces around the capitol is unlimited.

In the example given (surrounding the capitol), all the supply did deploy to the depot, leaving nothing but remaining supply/fuel for the units.