If you had a DH mod for version 1.02. Just presuming.... What kind of work would be involved in getting it ready for 1.03?
-
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.
The devs have already stated that oil and logistics are high on their priorities but they're trying to figure out how's best to change it so we don't end up with the diabolical mess that is AoD!
I liked the Logistics in AoD but it lagged the game out so much that when i discovered Dh i never went back to AoD
What is the point of building AA when the bombers loose a big part of their vulnerability to it?
It basicially forces a player to build INTs instead of AA, something which many players have done before.
Is this realistic?
I cite Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/456th_Bombardment_Group#Losses_and_casualties
Caveats by this number: by the time the strategic bombing campaign was in full swing, the Germans had problems getting fighters in the air due to lack of pilots and fuel.
So AA did play a fairly major role.
It basicially forces a player to build INTs instead of AA, something which many players have done before.
Is this realistic?
I cite Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/456th_Bombardment_Group#Losses_and_casualties
Caveats by this number: by the time the strategic bombing campaign was in full swing, the Germans had problems getting fighters in the air due to lack of pilots and fuel.
So AA did play a fairly major role.
less vulnerable does not mean invulnerable, and it is an indendent moddable value for each model. 
There is a difference if you have an old tactical bomber that flies right through the optimal firerange of aa or a nice semi modern strategical bomber that flies way above it.
There is a difference if you have an old tactical bomber that flies right through the optimal firerange of aa or a nice semi modern strategical bomber that flies way above it.
To be fair, the best bit of AOD's logistics system is actually the way it calculates ESE for each province, ie: supply efficiency is highest in high infra provinces and ports help too, but this efficiency does bleed into adjacent provinces. The net effect is that fighting deep in the Soviet Union is way way harder than fighting on the border, and the location of ports in say, north africa, is important.
The 'slow' element is that every formation carries a separate stock of supplies - but this isn't that important if you have a decent system for deciding whether a unit is in supply or not.
If you have further suggestions, feel free to write them in a dedicated thread. Logistics is indeed something we would like to improve in a near future.
The weird thing, i found a few days ago, is that an ese calculation part is already in the old armageddon code, it's just not visible and it's some weird hidden hardcoded function that effects org, which in turn affects most other parts of the combat engine.
It of course does take only the capitol or supply depots on other continents into account, has a rather weak effect and there are some problems with how the infrastructure is factored in.
And there is of course no buffer like the supplies carried around.
But the calculation part is there, and was there for years, so it can't really cause the slowdowns, which is very good news for the future when we decide to tackle the "logistics problem".
And just to show off:
Martin just did a routine performance check:
It of course does take only the capitol or supply depots on other continents into account, has a rather weak effect and there are some problems with how the infrastructure is factored in.
And there is of course no buffer like the supplies carried around.
But the calculation part is there, and was there for years, so it can't really cause the slowdowns, which is very good news for the future when we decide to tackle the "logistics problem".
And just to show off:
Martin just did a routine performance check:
Good, then we can expect good performance even with some additional content and a logistical system.
Thats what i hope. BUT the logistic system of course is still in the drawing board phase and won't be in 1.3, just to keep things clear.
Oh, and the numbers Martin tested are only engine related, we optimized a lot of generic events, and the changes to the unit stats should make 1.3 again a bit faster then 1.2.
Oh, and the numbers Martin tested are only engine related, we optimized a lot of generic events, and the changes to the unit stats should make 1.3 again a bit faster then 1.2.
Jesus Christ, how horrifying.1.3 again a bit faster then 1.2.
At some point the fastest speed will be too fast to actually play with.
Even if the game becomes 2x slower because of the future logistical system, DH will still be faster than ARMA!
The weird thing, i found a few days ago, is that an ese calculation part is already in the old armageddon code, it's just not visible and it's some weird hidden hardcoded function that effects org, which in turn affects most other parts of the combat engine.
It of course does take only the capitol or supply depots on other continents into account, has a rather weak effect and there are some problems with how the infrastructure is factored in.
And there is of course no buffer like the supplies carried around.
But the calculation part is there, and was there for years, so it can't really cause the slowdowns, which is very good news for the future when we decide to tackle the "logistics problem".
And just to show off:
Martin just did a routine performance check:
To be honest the actual supply/oil stock units carry in AOD are pretty much redundant given the supply stock of a unit can just be taken to be a part of ORG. I mean the gist of org is that it's the combat preparedness of a unit - reduced when it's exhausted, demoralized, disorganized and depleted.
Used up during combat? check
Reduced while moving/occupying enemy provinces? check and could be made more significant
Recovery rate determined by supply efficiency? yep. what's really needed is an improvement to how supply efficiency for each province is worked out.
The AOD supply stock system does have some other effects as well:
It prevents units from instantly disappearing when "out of supply" for a short period (i.e. marines stationed on Wake and not enough convoys+escorts to get a shipment out until next check). The game can have trouble keeping supplies where you want them, giving each unit a stockpile solves this problem handily.
It helps model long-range supply inefficiencies in remote areas. This is most notable in AOD when you start trying to roll tanks into the heart of Africa and they use their fuel faster than you can reliably ship it out to them short of ordering an offensive.
It better models large encirclements (which seems to be the way most HOI2 players perform them). So you've encircled all of Ukraine and the Soviet Army. Suddenly all of the Russians have miraculously run out of bullets. This is also true of something like Stalingrad (which you could argue as a 6-8 province encirclement that slowly gets smaller). The Germans didn't instantly run out of fuel and guns. They fought effectively for nearly a month and continued to hold out for 1-2 months after that.
I'm not sure the overall overhead is worth it, but it is one of the AOD features I miss most. Not nearly enough to give up decisions and a flashy map and other fancy stuff, but still.
Thing is, the Russians haven't "miraculously run out of bullets". They can still fight, just at a -20% penalty, and slowly bleeding organisation instead of regaining it. The way you say it it sounds like they all surrender the moment the pocket is closed, which isn't the case at all.
That is also very abrupt. Just because a supply line is cut doesn't mean people suddenly fight less effectively. It may lower morale, but the obverse is also true (at least initially when supplies are still there). Just because you're supply lines are cut off doesn't mean your fuel tank springs a leak and your musette bag disappears.
This is part of the problem - units that have totally run out of supplies shouldn't be able to fight with just a 20% penalty, they should get a MASSIVE penalty, e.g. a 60% one. However, in most cases they would still have some supplies for a long time, so the supply situation wouldn't be a 1/0 situation and the harshest penalty would be rare.
Well, yeah. Being totally out of supplies is modelled by units having 0 org and surrendering - effectively a 100% penalty. That's the "harshest" penalty.
Well one possibility would be to just have divisions that are out of supply only have some level of negative org regain, and reduce or cut out the other penalties entirely.
Last edited:
This has always struck me as the simplest way to model it. It's not perfectly accurate but doesn't have performance considerations like per-unit supply.
Instead of completely reducing the combat penalty, how about limiting it to -5.
Not drastic and sorta fits with panic/morale issues.
Not drastic and sorta fits with panic/morale issues.