Should SUPPLY WAGONS be modified?

[Bridger]

Well obviously Caeser, i didn't think that the winter alone did it. It was a combination of a harsh winter for which the troops were unprepared (no winter supplies) and very long supply lines that were easily cut.

Oh, and those 5 gazillion soldiers the russian army had :P

[Leaper]

One thing you "could" do, if you want to simulate making supply tougher is to simply increase the cost of supply wagons. If you make them expensive enough, people may not come into your territory with 5 of them. They may decide to settle for 2 of them.... and 2 are easier to destroy than 5.

It is an over simplified answer to the "problem", but it would be easy.

Peace.

[Caesar Saladus]

Sorry if I jumped too fast Bridger, I just hear "Napoleon and Hitler were defeated soley by the winter" that I am a bit used to rushing to the Russians' defense.

That's an interesting idea, making the Supply Wagons more expensive. I am not sure how fast they die, but perhaps making them weaker as well or as an alternative?

btw that's another representation of Russia's attrition strength: their Light Cavalry does extra damage to Supply Wagons, don't they? They're experts at cutting off the supply of invading armies.

[HuangShang]

man, if the supply wagons get more expensive, they need to have better health...

what i see as an "fix" to the "problem" that was brought up is that suppy wagons actually need supply lines... then, if flanked from behind and cut off, the supply wagon would have less effect

[Caesar Saladus]

Well personally, I think that one of the charms of this game is how simple it is, and the high degree of representationalism (is that even a real word?)

The existance of Supply Wagons represents that your army has established lines back to your homeland. The game doesn't need to show supplies moving back and forth, and it doesn't need to have any travel paths beause all of that is represented by the wagons themselves. If you want to "cut off" your enemy's supply, you have to physically take out the wagons; destroying them could represent any number of things, from intercepting the convoys to destroying the railroad tracks to sabotaging the lines of communication. The more I think about it, the more balanced it actually seems the way that it is.

[Calanor]

I don't know if I'd call the fact that one, single Supply Wagon neutralizes all attrition "balanced", "realistic" or whatever. I agree, however, that it's not a bad idea to simplify things, yet I still feel that it should require some extra effort to offset a particularly high attrition effect. If I march into Russia, I should be required to pay extra attention to my supply routes (in RoN: the wagons), compared to if I'd invade many other nations.
So, how about elaborating my previous suggestion a bit by making the effect of the wagons cumulative? For instance, if one wagon would reduce the attrition effects by 25% or something along those lines, two would chop off 50%, three 75% and so forth. Thus, the argument previously put forth by Caesar Saladus..

If you have strong supply lines (represented by having a lot of Wagons), then you don't suffer from the attrition problems

..would still be valid. As your wagons get destroyed, you'd suffer from increased attrition, representing the fact that your supply lines have been weakened.

Cheers!
Calanor

[azalae]

Too realistic a game is no fun.

Supply wagon is good enough as it is. If anything is wrong, it means I need to improve my playing (strategy, use of hotkey, statistics etc).

[Jeje2]

Calanor: If you use cumulative wagon system, I would still like that wagons effect increases as game advances. Also one would need a simple way to find out the current attration level of a given nation. (Mouse over territory or something.)

(Since the nations attration level increases with time, it has to also be countered with somethig.)

The single wagon attration hold should also increase faster than the general territory attration increase - so that in "normal casres" in endgame one could whitstand the attration with fewer supply wagons than in early game.

[Caesar Saladus]

In Russia, you do have to pay extra attention to your supply routes because the Russian cavalry are particularily effective at killing Supply Wagons.

Having only 1 Supply Wagon does represent having thin supply lines. However they don't need to make it actually reduce attrition less, because it is already balanced. If the enemy invades your territory and has only 1 Wagon, that will take you about 2 seconds to destroy, and completely cut off their supply. Then the invading army will suffer the full force of your attrition.

There doesn't need to be a built-in penalty for having weak supply lines; you have to do the actual work yourself to make your opponent pay for it, by destroying his wagons. During Napoleon's invasion and WWII, the French and Germans would not have suffered the winter if the Russians had not conducted raids, destroyed railroad tracks, etc.

[TarlSS]

Don't the attackers in this game take enough heat? I mean what with attrition, partisans, and flanking the only saving grace they actually get is that siege outranges towers. Let'm be already.