Supplying Modern Armies

[NotInventedHere]

I'm not sure if this is the right place to put this thread or if it could in fact be done, but what the hell, you don't get owt for nowt as they say.

I'm probably in a minority of one here, but i think that there should be some sort of supply/quartermaster type unit for modern armies.

Apparantly an army marches on its stomach, so i think that there should be this unit that can supply a unit with all of the ammo, fuel, food, spare uniforms etc which allow a unit to function. It would have a certain area of land it could supply and units in this area at the start of a turn could move and fight normally. If a unit started outside that area at the beginning of a turn then it couldn't move from lack of supplies.

THis would mean that invading armies would need to guard their flanks and rear to ensure that their supplies aren't cut off. Might make for more well rounded invasions instead of the usual (for me anyway but the computer does it sometimes) ignore units and go for cities. Might make forts useful as they would need to be taken out otherwise the units in them will sally forth and kill the supplies.

This could be extended to naval units aswell with limits of ship range being displayed. I mean ships do need to put into port to refuel, rearm, replace whipped out slaves, get more lemons and limes etc. Could lead onto diplomatic agreements to share naval bases to extend ship range.

Anyway, i haven't a clue how it could be done programming wise, but i think it would make things more realistic.

[Spec]

I agree. Seriously it would add a lot of depth tp the game, but if they add this, let's hope that the unit sequencing'll be fixed cuz you dont want to forget one of those units and play them last.......



Spec.

[Random Passerby]

I think the hitpoint system does this fairly well... it would be interesting if units in cities still only healed 1 hitpoint per turn if the city wasn't connected, and hitpoints were higher in general.

[Dida]

enough with the complexity.
What this game needs is more fun, and no more confusing ideas.

[sachmo71]

Yes, lets put even more emphasis on combat in Civ III. That would bring the masses flocking to this game.

[davidttm]

Please keep the combat as 'unrealistic' as possible

Lets add a Refugee unit to clog roads.

Lets have combat units lose hit points due to disease ("Sir, your galley has gone adrift, due to Scurvy"), desertion ("Sir, your rifleman has gone AWOL"), and poor leadership ("Sir, your Motorized Infantry has just fragged all its Lieutenants because they were ordering suicidal charges").

Losing combat should create a special "Leader", General Sir Douglas Haig, who decimates the civ's population (with sound effect, "Over the top!").

Just a few Modest (Swiftian) Proposals. Its not really a reply to this thread in particular. It's just a reminder that we don't want too much 'realism'.

-edit -

I got rid of most of my 'suggestions' because they were mean spirited and off-topic. Sorry. I was just ranting

Actually the Supply Unit is a pretty good suggestion.

[BlueO]

Hehe, davidttm, that sounds a little bit sarcastic, but I like it! Civ3 is too simple of a game for me I guess, and I get too easily bored with it. It feels like playing a simple rts game, but turn-based style. Build cities, build armies from cities, rinse and repeat...

The fun of civ3 is over for me, and I guess I do wish its more complex. Like clicking on a city, and you'll actually see stats for a real city. Like what kind of people there to what kind of buildings and how many are in the that city. Or clicking on a unit, and you get stats like how many and what kind of officers, equipments soldiers are carrying, and stats that would normally associate with a real combat unit. And a realistic overhead map with more realistic movement instead of the old fashion board-game type map. And tons of other nifty real-life stuffs that makes a game complicated and hard to figure out. For me, the fun part is figuring out the game, and civ3 is pretty simple in that regard. Not that civ3 is a bad game, I know its made for people who want simple and easy to get into games.

Computer these days are fast now, and has lots memory. There's no more need to do a board game conversion, which is what civ really is, if I understand correctly. That's why, i can't wait for moo3!

[Zachriel]

Re: Supplying Modern Armies

Originally posted by NotInventedHere
Apparantly an army marches on its stomach

That must be interesting to watch.

[Dida]

YES! YES!
let's add even more ridiculous features and lenghten the time it takes to complete a turn from 2.89 hr to 28.90 hrs.

[Tarquelne]

First of all, I'd like to extend my thanks and congratulations to those who sarcastically "shot down" the idea without - as far as I can see - actually thinking about it. I firmly believe that what the world needs is less thought, and more knee-jerk reactions.

I'd make 4 supply units. (I'd have 1 per age, but wouldn't use the rule for Ancient (not for realism, but because of the relatively low movement rate of units, and the limited number of units at that stage of the game) but have a specail supply unit for late Ind. or early Mod. - acts as a port, or fast, or something...)

The Supply Units could use the same "connected" calculation that cities use to check for connection to the supply "grid."

You could assume Armies don't need to be connected, so another reason to actually use Armies.

You'd need to mark out of supply units - maybe with a little icon, or change the HP bar color. I'd have the effects be:

No move/attack for planes and arty.
1/2 move, 1/2 attack, 0 bombard for ships
1 move, 1/2 attack, 1/2 defense for "slow" land units
1 move, 0 attack, 1/2 def. for "fast" land units

It would make attacking harder - which I think is excellent, since I end most games early because it's obvious I'm about to roll over the computer militarily. Anything interesting that makes that harder is good as far as I'm concerned.

Since some pretty big changes would be needed to be made to the code I doubt it'll ever happen, but it doesn't sound complicated to _me_ (But then, I've graduated high school and have an IQ of above 100 - maybe that's why?), and should, indeed, add some interest to warfare. You'd have to maintain supply lines, you could cut supply lines, rout an invasion (or have yours routed) with the loss of a HQ unit.... I _think_ the AI could be made to play well with the rules. Not certain, but I think so.... Adding some logistical concerns would go well with the Strategic Resources, which adds a little "logistics" to the strategic game.

My buddies AskQuestionsLater, GrayArea, HonestMistake, ShootThemLater all like NotInventedHere's idea, too.

[warmachine]

Abstract supply instead

A supply/quartermaster unit would require too much micromanagement of what is supposed to a strategic level of combat. Instead, units should need to trace a supply route of maximum length back to a friendly city. Foreign cities can be supply depots with a prior diplomatic agreement. Enemy units and their zones of control should be able to cut supply lines. Out-of-supply units would lose a point of health at the end of each turn.

[SpencerH]

A supply/quartermaster unit would require too much micromanagement of what is supposed to a strategic level of combat. Instead, units should need to trace a supply route of maximum length back to a friendly city. Foreign cities can be supply depots with a prior diplomatic agreement. Enemy units and their zones of control should be able to cut supply lines. Out-of-supply units would lose a point of health at the end of each turn.

I agree, I dont want to be micromanaging any more units but I would like supply and zones of control (reinstated). I guess the designers thought that this game style would allow more fluid warfare compared to previous CIV/SMAC versions. I have found though that the lack of supply and ZOC allows calvary (especially the rider) too much mobility especially when they counterattack over roads you have captured. I've had calvary move halfway across a continent in one turn to pick off workers (that then disappear ) well away from the front. Breakthrough and penetration is one thing, but this is just too unrealistic for me. An interesting sideline to this discussion is that if we had supply/ZOC we could design a "raider" unit that could be used for such deep penetration missions that didnt require supply and bypassed ZOC!

[Jack_www]

I would like to see some thing like this put into the game. Armies need supplies to be able to fight. This would allow I think for a lot of new things one could do in the game and make warfare a more of a changle. I think it would make the game even funner. And for once you would actually see armies fighting on fornts, instead of moble units going were ever they want and go deep into enemy terrority and be able to attack as much as it wants, just a little to unrealistic, but I know this game has many unrealistic features in it.