New Idea for Civ 4: Supply Lines

[UnityScoutChopper]

As I mentioned in another thread, I've proposed a similar idea before, although it was "crueler" in that it downright killed units that ran out of supply.

I see only one fundamental dilemma: do we trace supply routes for supply sources?

If we don't, we're sacrificing realism for gameplay (with turns lasting 50 years, it's not what's IN a supply unit that's important; rather, the supply unit is representing a supply line, which must actually be fed somehow).

If we do, we're sacrificing gameplay for realism: I don't think any Civ lover wants to see the game become alienating for the masses, for all Civ lovers entered the world of Civ from those same masses once.

I'd go with the first option: please the mass market (and the AI for that matter) by not checking for supply routes. One can argue the realism aspect of that as follows: a supply unit, though it appears in the game as a unit, represents a supply line (just as the old Civ II caravans "touchably" represented the logistics of getting a trade route going, and the Diplomats "touchably" represented espionage activities, albeit rather sillily*). Its upkeep cost (see below!) represents the expense involved in keeping that supply line open during the very large time units used in Civ, even though nothing is visibly going on on the map.

Ideally, Civ 4 would implement variable unit upkeep (hey, CTP did it without falling apart -- well, OK, it did fall apart, but not because of variable unit upkeep). In that case, supply units could have:
1. A fairly high upkeep cost representing that though shown as a unit, they represent an ongoing investment. In fact, I would propose a low build cost, since the main cost of supply lines lies in their maintenance rather than their setup. If point #2 below is implemented, the base upkeep can be low, since the real real cost of supply lines is when they run outside friendly territory.
2. [Optional, since it's a complication] a. An increase in a supply unit's upkeep if it leaves its civ's cultural borders; b. [Double-optional] a growing increase as distance from one's cultural borders increases, to reflect the greater cost of supply lines outside one'; c. [Triple-optional] a second flat or growing penalty as supply units enter hostile territory.

I don't agree with any ancient units having an infinite Range Factor. 4x or not (in deference to jimmytrick), if range factor exists, then we have an excellent chance to keep the Romans from visiting China in 2000 AD, i.e. to feed realism -- and thus immersion -- with no loss in gameplay. The only disadvantage is that you eliminate the "Kon-Tiki" scenario, which arguably happened in real life, where some daring individuals really did go way off somewhere deep in the BC's, "with a settler" no less. But then their civilization split. :-)

I agree with the poster who mentioned that this can make the age of discovery more exciting -- it can make it more "real," by giving the units in that age a sudden tremendous jump in range factor. However, this still doesn't address what the CivIII haters of the world have called "settler diarrhea" -- that is, that the whole world tends to be settled by the time the age of discovery arrives.

As far as the AI aspect, I say: let 'em have it. Computer graphics improvement seems to be slowing down (e.g. Civ II is graphically closer to Civ III than to Civ I) and new graphics development tools are slowly becoming a commodity, so we can only hope that Firaxis will take a breather and focus on what marketing hates but what everyone who's fallen in love with Civ loves: AI development.

I don't like the idea of the AI absolutely refusing to exceed its range factor. The very least that could be done is to use (range factor+ RAND(c)) as the farthest it will go in a certain time factor or (may I dream?) strategic-planning time-ish unit ("excursion"), where c is some reasonable number. If players know it will always go out to its range factor and not a step farther, you can be sure that'll be exploited.

BTW Willem, weren't you also the one with the brilliant ship-rebasing idea?

In that light, if any good compromises on gameplay and realism occur to you regarding the following (IMO) "key realism flaws of civ", I'd be thrilled to read and discuss them (ideally in separate threads):

1. No real-life Civ is planet-spanning, or probably ever could be -- too many transportation and "corruption" issues in the past; too many diplomatic issues in the present. Yet it's easy to create a planet-spanning civ in Civ.
2. No real-life civ has continuously grown in power since 4000 BC; perhaps none even could.
3. No real-life civ is still "fielding spearmen" today.
4. No real-life civ ever paid or probably even could have paid another civ money to teach it the secrets of e.g. Monarchy or Free Artistry; these things tended to be disseminated "for free" through trade, conquest, and contact. On the other hand, there are other techs like Rocketry that certainly have and can be bought.
5. Abe Lincoln (et al.) could never reach the ripe old age of 6050! (And even 500 would be pretty nice. ;-) ) OK, OK, it wouldn't be Civ without that part!

Cheers,
USC

* Yes, I realize this is not a word. But it should be.

[Plotinus]

I'd like to add my voice to the chorus of support for Willem's idea. What a very simple and intuitive way of adding an interesting and plausible new element to the game. I too like the way that this ends or at least curtails the "Warrior roaming the planet for 1500 years" situation.

Presumably ships would have a much longer range than land units, to simulate the fact that you can go much further in a ship than on land (even though they don't go all that much *faster* than land units in the game). But it's still nice to see something that would simulate, for example, the rather battered state that the Pilgrim Fathers and their ilk were in by the time they reached the New World.

I like the idea of units devolving but it might be a bit silly - after all, a tank can't really devolve into horse-riding cavalry. Perhaps it might work if just some units devolved in this way, as a special ability, as opposed to dying when their supplies run out - thus, a Knight could indeed devolve into a Medieval Infantry, whilst a Musketman would just die. It wouldn't make sense to have, say, a Medieval Infantry devolve into a Swordsman, because a Swordsman doesn't have fewer supplies than a Medieval Infantry - he has different ones.

I especially like the new role that this gives Forts, if they are to serve as supply bases. It simulates, in a way, one of the historical purposes that castles have served in the past - to consolidate a ruler's hold on the land. For example, Edward I built shedloads of sodding huge castles in Wales after he conquered it, to show the damnable Welsh precisely who was boss. Similarly, building forts under this system will extend the player's power over regions that have not yet been settled. I can imagine a situation where a region is subdued - either by clearing out barbarians or by conquering (perhaps razing) enemy cities, and then forts are built to maintain a military presence before the settlers move in, using the supply lines that have been set up in this way.

[Nikolai]

Good to have new ideas. But Willem; you should post this in the Civ4 ideas forum(Civ future forum), where we are making a new List. Then it will be organized and sent to Firaxis like the old List!

[The_Aussie_Lurker]

Hmmm, I had a very similar idea to Willems-though even more simple! In fact, in my opinion, I thought it was simple enough to be implemented in Civ3-rather than waiting for Civ4!!
Basically, as Willem suggests, each unit has an Operational Range (OR), with Scouts, Workers, Settlers and Spec Op units having the best, and motorized units having the worse (though they do move faster, motorized units also require a lot more maintainance than either mounted or foot units)
Tech Level and Terrain should also be a factor in a units Operational Range! For instance, deserts, mountains and Jungles should reduce OR, wheras Forests and Plains might increase it! In addition, you could have units which ignore the OR cost of certain terrains-like Guerillas who operate in Jungles, or cavalry that works best in Deserts!! Also, Modern Era units should, on average, have higher OR's than their counterparts in earlier eras.
In a nutshell, OR determines the number of squares outside friendly territory that your unit can operate-just as Willem suggests! Friendly territory includes captured cities (with a barracks/Granary), anywhere within your own borders, or the borders of an ally or someone you have an ROP with and fortresses (connected to a city by road/RR) Some naval transports could also act as friendly territory for land units on foreign shores!
Just as Willem has said, any unit outside their OR will, during the turn-over period between turns, suffer 1hp damage AUTOMATICALLY!! This kind of system could help to simulate such historical situations as Napolean's attempt to invade Russia (whilst Cossacks harrassed his supply lines !) or Hitlers attempt to capture Stalingrad and the oil fields of the Caucuses!!
As I've said, though, the changes needed to be made to the game, to incorporate this concept, are not too complex, and in my opinion could be brought into Civ3 as part of another XP!!

Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.

[The_Aussie_Lurker]

I'd just like to explain a few additional things about the idea for supply lines which I mentioned above.

1) The important thing about operating within foreign territory is that, unless you're using Spec Op units (like paratroopers or geurillas) you will be very limited in how deeply you can penetrate into an enemy nation.

2) The only way to extend this range is to either build forts (supply depots), and connect them up to a 'friendly' city (via roads or RR), or capture an enemy city with an intact granary and/or barracks-and use this as a new 'base of operations'

3) Of course, this will add a new tactical level to the game because, like the aforementioned example of the Cossacks, you can defeat a much stronger opponent by using fast units to disrupt their lines of supply (e.g. by sitting on or pillaging their connecting roads/RR, or capture their forts), which will leave them stranded outside their OR-'withering away' until they can get back within range of a supply point! (This was, of course, also the way that Soviet tanks were beaten in Afghanistan !)

4) Point (3) means that, aside from your SoD, you will also have to allow for a 'garrison force' in order to protect your vital supply lines-when staging an invasion!!

Oh, and on a final, unrelated note, I feel that RR's, rather than giving infinite movement, should act as a 'rebasing' facility between two connected cities, or a city and a fortress!! The maximum number of rebases a unit could make per turn would be equal to its MP's, with each rebase costing 1mp! This way, a tank could move instantly from one city to another-two cities over-but would only have 1mp left (so long as each city in the sequence was connected by RR)! This, I believe, would still allow RR's to facilitate the rapid movement of units through your empire, whilst still limiting the players response to an incoming invasion! If used in any other fashion, RR's would simply give the standard movement bonus granted by roads!!

Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.

[UnityScoutChopper]

I'm sorry, The_Aussie_Lurker, but,

a. while I myself would like the idea, it would turn a lot of people off to the game. It is not less complicated than Willem's; it's more complicated.
b. we can forget about either idea being implemented in an expansion pack -- look at the radicalness of the idea and the conservativeness of what was implemented in Conquests, and you'll see what I mean.

USC

[Willem]

Originally posted by UnityScoutChopper


BTW Willem, weren't you also the one with the brilliant ship-rebasing idea?

Once again I have to say that it wasn't my idea. I was just reiterating something someone else brought up, which I thought was a good proposal.

[Willem]

Originally posted by Nikolai
Good to have new ideas. But Willem; you should post this in the Civ4 ideas forum(Civ future forum), where we are making a new List. Then it will be organized and sent to Firaxis like the old List!

I just don't have time to wade through all the post that are sprouting there. I figured if I started a new thread, any discussion generated would stick with this idea, not wander off into all sorts of tangents.

[Willem]

One thing that occurred to me last night, if units had a range limitation built in, it would go a long way to simplifying the pathfinding that needs to be done. As a result, the turn times would be considerably shortened.

[Antrine]

This last point is a cannon ball!! Every step of the way HAS TO CONSIDER IMPACT ON PROCESSING LOAD. That, even if you sport a fast computer today. Once the game gets a going it is so easy to just keep adding one thing then another.

[The_Aussie_Lurker]

Hi USC,

You know, I don't think that my idea is that complicated, and would not add too much micromanagement to the game! Maybe if I gave a working example, it would help show how simple my idea is!
Basically, lets say that, in the ancient era, non-combat/spec op units would have a standard OR of 8, foot units would have an OR of 6, and mounted units would have an OR of 4. Each age, these basic OR's increase by 1, and Replaceable Parts would grant an additional +1 to OR.
So, lets say that you're in the ancient age, and you want to invade your neighbour with your ancient cavalry (move:2). Well, this will be fine-just so long as your target lies no more than 4 squares from your border! If not, then either a) you'll have send out a worker to build a fortress (and connect it to your empire by a road), b) capture an enemy city closer to your border-to serve as a launching point or c) take your chances and hope that you can capture your objective BEFORE your units hp run out!!! The issue of terrain is quite simple, if the path between you and your objective passes through hostile terrain (like marsh, mountain, desert, tundra etc), then your effective OR is HALVED!! As I mentioned above, though, it would be possible to have units which can 'Ignore OR Costs'-in the same way they currently ignore movement costs of terrain! In many ways, my idea is not that much more complicated than choppers in Civ2!!
The reason that I feel such a feature is sooo important-not just for civ4, but for Civ3-is that, in spite of improvements to the games combat tactics between Civ2 and Civ3 (most notably via the concepts of 'resistors', nationality and culture/movement rates), the game still seems to reward an unplanned, 'Stack of Death' mentality!! My supply line idea would actually force a player to more carefully plan an invasion, by laying the appropriate ground work as they go (either by invading cities within range, or by building 'supply depots'!) It will also give weaker opponents a better way of defeating an invading force-which does not simply entail throwing your units, suicide fashion, against the invaders SoD's!!!
Anyway, that's just how I feel, what do the REST of you think of my idea? Is it too complex??

Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.

[YC4B4U]

Okay, call me confused....

Is it just me or is the title of the thread incorrect. It seems to me that we are talking about supply range and not supply lines.

Supply range is a circle around a supply source where you do not get any loss of hit points. Outside of this range the bad things happen (loss of hit points).

A supply line would be like CTP2 trade routes where there is a line on the map that joins a unit to a supply point. In this case if the supply line is cut or stretched too far the unit starts to lose hit points.

A third alternative is carried supply. Almost like hit points except it decreases each turn that a unit is away from a supply point. Now that could get really annoying because you would have to manage the amount of supply for each unit each turn. Then imagine you have one hundred units in the field! This may work for ships though... Only problem is trying to code it for the ai.

So please confirm what we are talking about here (feel free to type slowly for me )

[ratster]

Yeah, well thats the problem when you try to implement supply rules, it tends to get pretty muddy pretty quick. Thats prolly why they're(supply rules) not implemented(except abstractly) in CIVIII.

[The_Aussie_Lurker]

The problem, Raster, is that they don't have ANY rules for Supply!!! I think that either a 'supply range' system, like Willem and myself have suggested, or a 'supply line' system like YC4B4U has mentioned (in the first part of his post), would be the best way to go!! Anything more than that would simply require TOO much micromanagement!!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

[Willem]

Originally posted by YC4B4U
Okay, call me confused....

Is it just me or is the title of the thread incorrect. It seems to me that we are talking about supply range and not supply lines.

Supply range is a circle around a supply source where you do not get any loss of hit points. Outside of this range the bad things happen (loss of hit points).

A supply line would be like CTP2 trade routes where there is a line on the map that joins a unit to a supply point. In this case if the supply line is cut or stretched too far the unit starts to lose hit points.

A third alternative is carried supply. Almost like hit points except it decreases each turn that a unit is away from a supply point. Now that could get really annoying because you would have to manage the amount of supply for each unit each turn. Then imagine you have one hundred units in the field! This may work for ships though... Only problem is trying to code it for the ai.

So please confirm what we are talking about here (feel free to type slowly for me )

All of the above.

Basically it's about including a range limitation with units, and discussing ways that it could be implemented. Ideally for myself, there would be a specific supply line, but it's also a discussion of other ways of looking at the range issue. Whatever might work the best in the game, both from the perspective of the player and the AI.

When I first came up with the idea I thought of supply lines because I was thinking of a string of Fortresses to provide for the range. But in essence I have been discussing supply range.