Logistics Tail Manpower Mod

[Commissar Yossarian]

Would anyone be interested in adding a section detailing with the manpower cost of your logistics tail?

I'm not sure if it would be easier to try and add a separate law or simply add it as a modifier to the manpower calculation.

Overall though I would like to see the logistics tail being tied to your doctrine and distance/diffusion of your armies.
-Superior Firepower should have the most penalizing tail, with the others decreasing from there depending on the branching choices.
-Navies and air force doctrines would also have varying requirements as supporting a strategic bombing mission is much more intensive than a fighter defense.
-Ideally the player would then be able to select a 'law' that then increases/decreases the base modifier.
Once the modifier is set, a total manpower reserve is calculated as a precentatge of the combat troops deployed, including a value for ships and planes.

The effect would be to change supply throughput across the land and through ports. So that if you are Russia with a short supply tail you can crank down the tail and take a massive penalty on supply throughput potential but not have it negatively affect your combat troops since you are so close to your supply base. The USA fighting half way around the world while supporting massive bombing campaings may need to increase their supply tail to keep a D-day style invasion going. Germany would be able to start lean but would run into man power issues and a trade off if they start pushing too deep to quickly costing them men a the front to keep the ever increasing supply machine fed.

 

[panzerzombie]

Would add some realism to the thing. The %-age of recruitable manpower is probably arbitrary and seem to produce a lot more divisons than historical feasible i think.

Anyway apart from historical accuracy, its nice to try to work out the differences in countries.

 

[Denkt]

A solution would be to massively increase the supply need for most units and create several types of logistical support battalions that can reduce the supply needs by like -80% for massive cost in manpower, support equipment and trucks.

Superior firepower could increase the damage stuff does but also increase the supply consumption by a hugh factor forcing you to get the expensive logistical battalions.

 

[EntropyAvatar]

I like that solution, Denkt. Though will the AI know how to use it?

Edit: Also, might it not make supply troops too easy to kill?

 

[Denkt]

I think if you take the time you can get the ai to play along the rules, but only @Wiz can tell.

How do you mean supply easy to kill?

My idea would be to create support battalion like the onces already in the game but these would maybe need up to maybe 50000 manpower (for the most expensive type) which are only suited for rather large divisions.

Everything else could be balanced around that so that you get good use of supply expensive divisions.

 

[EntropyAvatar]

How do you mean supply easy to kill?

I mean that supply manpower integrated into the frontline division may be subject to more combat losses than they should be if they were operating in the rear areas.

 

[panzerzombie]

I mean that supply manpower integrated into the frontline division may be subject to more combat losses than they should be if they were operating in the rear areas.

Hm you could tweak that with really high defensive values and low other values to simulate the rear areas.....but the rear area guys got some of the heat from artillery and aircraft so losses would be justified...

edit: no wait, would that result in a (defensive) average value distributed over the whole division ? If so, then its not a good solution.

 

[Commissar Yossarian]

I think it would be an out given the mechanics exposed so far, but how would you tie it to doctrines?

The other problems I see are how to balance the loss of a support slot, and to how to provide variation amongst nations.

Finally how would you handle the air force and navy?

There were distinct differences in logistic tails for differing armies that didn't necessarily impact their combat performance due to their unique situation. Throughput seems like a better knob to turn than consumption. I still want the Russian's to be able to cram a hundred divisions into the front with little to no tail when they are backed up against Moscow, but not have millions of tonnes of ordinance get magically transported and organised from the US with no manpower requirement for the bombing campaign against Germany.

PS: Oh how I miss the concept of building supply and fuel as a consumable. I just love that the USA can fly over a Strat bomber and magically all the munitions for it will just appear in Britain with no convoy requirements; artillery tubes are directly attached to munition factories!

 

[adam_grif]

I'm not sure if a mod will be able to pull it off, but I definitely think it belongs in a DLC. The numbers of divisions that America and the UK got surrounded and destroyed in the WWW game felt a bit off. Like it felt to be an unrealistically large number of divisions from all factions in the field at one time, and an unrealistically easy ability to replace them and ship them around at will.

I think there should be an expansion DLC that fleshes the systems out, logistics takes some manpower, but more importantly, factories take manpower to work too. Instead of just modelling an abstract "industrial efficiency" modifier or something (a smaller modifier can exist to model the quality being taken out if need be), you will literally need to man factories with your population. This might help prevent the huge inflation of factories we saw too.

 

[dav77-b]

I think laws working with %recruitable population malus and adding supply/combat boni in return are just fine.

Example:

no logistical effort: -0% recruitable population: +5% supply consumption -5% combat effiency -10% movement speed
small logistical effort: -10% recruitable population; -5% supply consumption +5% combat effiency +5% movement speed
Big logistical effort: -20% recruitable population; -15% supply consumption +15% combat effiency +20% movement speed

 

[keynes2.0]

My idea would be to create support battalion like the onces already in the game but these would maybe need up to maybe 50000 manpower (for the most expensive type) which are only suited for rather large divisions.

Wouldn't that mean that the logistics battalions would take losses whenever the frontline is in combat?

 

[Denkt]

1. About supply: My understanding of supply is that it should be seen as your logistical capacity. It is basically a stacking limiter so that you can not keep massive amount of divisions in one place.
2. About doctrines: Im pretty sure you can make the doctrines give negative effects so you can have superior firepower increase the supply needs for battalions while other doctrines reduce the supply needs for their battalions.
3. About logistical support companies: You can mod in several different types of logistical support companies each with differen't cost and effect. Im pretty sure you can have the doctrines effect these so for example make superior firepower have more effective logistical companies as a counter for their high supply need.
4. About laws: I feel it is a better idea to use support companies then laws to represent supply trains because it is more flexible.
5. About air and naval force: Here you have to use laws because that is the only way I can think of which add a manpower cost. If the game allows you could make the air laws greatly reduce the supply needs for strategic bombers but not effect fighters much, so that a fighter defence need little manpower while a bomber offence need a lot of manpower. I guess you can use air doctrines as well to effect the supply need of aircrafts, and doctrines can be made to give manpower so I think you can make doctrines take away manpower as well.
6. About factories: They do have a manpower cost as you go towards harsher conscription laws the productivity of your factories drop. And you can only build a limited amount of factories in each province.

Wouldn't that mean that the logistics battalions would take losses whenever the frontline is in combat?

Don't know.

 

[Commissar Yossarian]

I think laws working with %recruitable population malus and adding supply/combat boni in return are just fine.

Example:

no logistical effort: -0% recruitable population: +5% supply consumption -5% combat effiency -10% movement speed
small logistical effort: -10% recruitable population; -5% supply consumption +5% combat effiency +5% movement speed
Big logistical effort: -20% recruitable population; -15% supply consumption +15% combat effiency +20% movement speed

I guess since there is no tech for affecting supply throughput and transport costs it would be more expedient to affect supply consumption to effect the same outcome.

However, I don't see a reason to have a combat modifier. Having a good logistics tail doesn't make an infantry man shoot better, but if he's out of supply he will certainly shoot worse which is already modled into the game. Also movement speed modifiers makes no sense, though I still want fuel added to the game as a consumable so out of supply and out of fuel are different problems.

 

[dav77-b]

I guess since there is no tech for affecting supply throughput and transport costs it would be more expedient to affect supply consumption to effect the same outcome.

However, I don't see a reason to have a combat modifier. Having a good logistics tail doesn't make an infantry man shoot better, but if he's out of supply he will certainly shoot worse which is already modled into the game. Also movement speed modifiers makes no sense, though I still want fuel added to the game as a consumable so out of supply and out of fuel are different problems.

If the soldiers have to carry more supply on their own, they will fight worse and walk slower.
Less soldiers busy looking for supply, are more soldiers shooting.

 

[Commissar Yossarian]

[QUOTE="Denkt, post: 20783310, member: 208633"

1. About doctrines: Im pretty sure you can make the doctrines give negative effects so you can have superior firepower increase the supply needs for battalions while other doctrines reduce the supply needs for their battalions.
2. About logistical support companies: You can mod in several different types of logistical support companies each with differen't cost and effect. Im pretty sure you can have the doctrines effect these so for example make superior firepower have more effective logistical companies as a counter for their high supply need.
3. About laws: I feel it is a better idea to use support companies then laws to represent supply trains because it is more flexible.
4. About air and naval force: Here you have to use laws because that is the only way I can think of which add a manpower cost. If the game allows you could make the air laws greatly reduce the supply needs for strategic bombers but not effect fighters much, so that a fighter defence need little manpower while a bomber offence need a lot of manpower. I guess you can use air doctrines as well to effect the supply need of aircrafts, and doctrines can be made to give manpower so I think you can make doctrines take away manpower as well.[/QUOTE]

I'm really not sold on on support for the logistics tail.
First there is already a logistics company in the game that is balanced to interact with the other game units and the tech tree. Adding others creats a sever balance issue and changes the games power curve in a way that makes rebalancing the rest of game units a necessity.
Second having many different types of logistics companies will be confusing to the player and makes for a weird tacked on feel.
Third how do you handle a division that is surrounded and lost? In reality you're not loosing the guys sitting back in the supply depot, or back home, but in game terms you would loose the logistics tail of manpower which is unrealistic and quite crippling.
Fourth, you're implementing laws for the air force and navy anyways so you might as well have a unified system for all three branches that makes it easier to balance.

Through a law I see it as a simple set of equations:

Required Logistics manpower Army =

TotatalBranchSupplyDemand*(1+AvgDistanceMod)*(1+DoctorineMod)/(BaseManPerUnitSupply)

Required Logistics manpower Air force=

(UnitsEffectiveSupplyRequirements)*(1+(UnitsEffectiveSupplyRequirements-SpareRail-PortCapacity)/SpareRail-PortCapacity)*(1+AvgDistanceMod)*(1+DoctorineMod)/(BaseManPerUnitSupply)

Required Logistics manpower Navy =

(UnitsEffectiveSupplyRequirements)*(1+(UnitsEffectiveSupplyRequirements-SparePortCapacity)/SparePortCapacity)*(1+AvgDistanceMod)*(1+DoctorineMod)/(BaseManPerUnitSupply)

Then you would have your logistics Laws for each branch:
110% Logistic manpower
-Army: -5% supply consumption for all land units
-Navy: +5% mission efficiency
-Air force: +5% mission efficiency

100% Logistic manpower
-Army: +0% supply consumption
-Navy: -0% mission efficiency
-Air force: -0% mission efficiency

90% Logistic manpower
-Army: +5% supply consumption
-Navy: -5% mission efficiency
-Air force: -5% mission efficiency

80% Logistic manpower
-Army: +20% supply consumption
-Navy: -20% mission efficiency
-Air force: -20% mission efficiency

65% Logistic manpower
-Army: +50% supply consumption
-Navy: -50% mission efficiency
-Air force: -50% mission efficiency

Finally the game would calculate the debit from your available manpower pool after the other game mechanics are eneacted (conscription laws et al).

Available manpower = Recruitable manpower - (ReqArmyManPower*Law%)-(ReqAirManPower*Law%)-(ReqNavyManPower*Law%)

If done this way it lets the player tune their supply tail to their situational needs for flexibility but keeps things easy to balance against a standard reference and doesn't get in the way of the other game mechanics. The player doesn't need to micro manage their divisions.

Also the supply tails needs grow and contract dynamically with force growth and power projection.

This also solves the combat effects problem as if your D-Day army gets surrounded and wired out you don't lose the million men States side and in England. They are now freed up to be issued a rifle and pushed into the meat grinder

 

[Commissar Yossarian]

If the soldiers have to carry more supply on their own, they will fight worse and walk slower.
Less soldiers busy looking for supply, are more soldiers shooting.

But this is already covered by the out of supply penalty on the game.

Just because your grunt has a full belly doesn't mean the division speed is going to go from 4km/here to 5km/hr. People only walk so fast. The game models a division carrying it's own internal supplies for X days. Once they run out the division cannot move without new supply. IE the troops are foraging to not starve. The game doesn't model starvation and slow degradation nor should it.

 

[Axe99]

Intereesting thread Commissar . I've been mulling over this as well - I don't think we'll know the best way to make it work until we've got our hands on the game, but from my angle, what I'd want from a logistics tail mod would be:
- Some way of requiring both equipment and manpower to maintain a chain of supply.
- The chain of supply becomes substantially larger when overseas or over an extended period of land.
- The player having the capacity to manage where their areas of high and low supply are.

The two 'best' hypotheses I've got for looking into this are:
- Looking at the 'capital' supply pool, and it's drop-off rate as it 'flows' between regions, and maybe having some kind of law-alike set-up, or off-map pool, that adjusts this - so Germany and the Soviets don't need to have a heap here, but the US would need a stack. The issue with this is that it's a universal modifier, so you can't focus your logistics where you need/want them.
- Having some kind of unit that increases the supply in an area, and that the capacity in that area can flow through like other supply capacity (this unit would then require manpower and equipment) - so you'd build a relatively small number of relatively large 'supply headquarters' which would boost supply in the surrounding region, keeping them behind the lines (but still having the possibility of them being surrounded and cut off).

In both cases, we have no idea of whether the AI could be taught how to use them sensibly. Even in the case of a law, whether we've got the levers to tell the AI to select an appropriate law when it needs to is up in the air. My personal preference is leaning towards units that increase supply, but I'm not sure whether either will be feasible.

 

[Czert]

well there are mixed many logistic things
1.divisions should be splited up to frontline troops/machinery and support troops which stocpile supply and take care of puting of supply to unit from supply point. (big city, build supply base..etc)
second line troops in combat actualy get realy light causalties unless there was serius breakthrought at front and division was encircled and destroyed or attack was so hard that there was no time for organized retreat. of course support troops were not imune to freezing, starvation...etc.
im sure you readed about units pulled back from front back to rear for reorganization and rest. that happened when unit was no longer combat effective due to causalties, so here new combat troops were trained here and division was rebuild around mostly unharmed second line troops.
2.logistic capacity/supply movement - there should be based limit how much supply can be moved throught provience based on thier actual infrastucture level. and actual infa level determine how much tranport/logistic units will be needed to move same amount of supplies ( you will need 3x more units to move supply in 30% infa prov than in 100).
3.building logistic capacity (trucks) will cost manpower and some civilian industry to produce with small manpower/industry cost to keep it running.

 

[Commissar Yossarian]

So think about it more maybe it would be better to do it at both levels.

Right now basic divisional logistics are suppose to be included into division itself with a more advanced/focused support structure by adding a generic logistics company as support. That's a good start, but it does feel odd to have the manpower be the same to provide an x% bonus to any division template.

To Denkt's point, maybe one should have the supply company scale in terms of manpower/equipment requirements based on the size, composition and doctrine of the division.

That way the divisional level issues remain at the division level, then for the longer tail that is at corps,army,theatre level you can abstract it off map with laws as above.

The laws level let's you set global requirements that factor in a things like distance and armed forces structure.
Division level let's you differentiate between the supply requirements of a simple inantry division vs one packed with artillery.