Author Topic: What to do with alll those targ...I mean trains and trucks  (Read 341 times)

Rojo

  • Guest
What to do with alll those targ...I mean trains and trucks
« on: November 02, 2001, 08:27:00 AM »
With the addition of roads and rail, it is now possible to add a more complex logistical model to the main arena than a simple rebuild time modifier. The strategic posture of a modern nation-state at war is a complicated system that has been likened to a human body. Factories and their supporting cities are the body's organs, processing raw materials and turning them into the essential building blocks to propel and repair the body. The road and rail system (and maritime transport where applicable) are the arteries and blood vessels that carry those building blocks to the rest of the body. One can choose to attack the body's functioning in different ways. You can attack the extremities directly, as in crippling a hand of a leg. Cut all the arteries and veins feeding that extremity, and that appendage sickens and eventually fails. Lastly, you can go after the organs themselves, paralyzing the entire body until it dies.

Right now, the strategic system in the MA only affects the rebuild times of things you damage. You could completely destroy all the factories, refineries, and other strategic targets (leaving the HQ out of the picture for the moment) of the enemy, and they can continue to pursue the war without pause. Likewise, killing convoys and trains has no affect on the situation at the front, except to delay (not prevent, just delay) rebuilding of destroyed facilities. So long as no damage is done to a base, destroying any strategic targets or logistic lines-of-communication (LOC - the convoys and trains) is a useless gesture. Conversely, when a base or factory is damaged, the arrival of a convoy, train, or supply drop causes a complete and immediate resurrection of the facility. This also is unrealistic (dare I use that word in connection with the MA?), and overly simplified. Now that we have LOCs and strategic targets modeled, we have all the elements to more closely simulate full-scale warfare.

What am I talking about? Supplies! It should now be relatively easy to model all the effects of isolating a base, either by cutting its LOCs or by hitting the source of supplies. There are two ways a base's capabilities should be negatively impacted. First, the enemy can destroy stuff at the base. Second, consumables like fuel, ordnance, and troops can be used up. Either situation can be fixed by the timely arrival of fresh materials. The difference is, cutting off the supplies can render a base nearly useless without the need to strike the base itself. Destroy a convoy to a base, and that base should begin to run out of supplies. Kill the depot, and all bases in the area should run low on supplies. Destroy a country's oil refineries should affect all bases throughout the country.

Now before anyone panics at what I'm suggesting, let me go into a little more detail of what I'm proposing. Let's take the situation regarding fuel at a base (the system can be extended to cover other items like ordnance and troops). A base starts with fuel at 100%. So long as a convoy arrives on schedule, fuel remains at 100%, unless fuel tanks are destroyed by enemy action. Bases normally get a new convoy dispatched to them 5 minutes after the previous one either reached the base or was destroyed. What I'm suggesting is that every convoy that fails to arrive have an incremental effect on the availability of fuel. The first convoy that fails to reach the base causes fuel availability to drop to 75%. The second missed convoy in a row drops it to 50%. A third missed convoy in a row drops it to 25%. This is as low as it can go as a result of missed convoys or destroyed fuel tanks.

Damage to fueling facilities at a base destroys the fuel storage capacity; killing half the fuel tanks will reduce the capacity to store fuel by 50%. Thus you may have a fuel storage capacity at a base of 50%, but only have 25% fuel available due to 3 missed convoys in a row. A convoy's safe arrival has two affects. First, it repairs 25% of the remaining damage to the storage tanks. Second, it completely resupplies the available storage tanks (including any just repaired). Going back to our example, a convoy arrives, repairing enough fuel storage tanks to store 75% of full capacity (remember, we were down to 50% storage capacity due to damage, but 25% fuel available due missed convoys). The convoy also fills all the available fuel tanks; i.e. fuel availability is now at 75%, or 100% of the non-damaged fuel storage capacity. Supply drops would have the same effect as the safe arrival of a convoy.

Ordnance could be handled in a similar fashion, by dividing up the classes of weapons in the following fashion:

Ammo at 100% - all vehicle and aircraft ordnance available
Ammo at 75% - all aircraft and vehicle ammo available, plus rockets and bombs smaller than 500 lbs
Ammo at 50% - all aircraft and vehicle gun ammo available, plus rockets and bombs 100 lbs and smaller
Ammo at 25% - all aircraft and vehicle gun ammo 40-mm and smaller available

Troops would either be available or not available, based on damage and convoy status. Barracks destroyed or three missed convoys would disable troops at a base. Only a convoy can rebuild and/or resupply barracks. Resupply missions would have no effect on troop availability.

Strategic Targets:

I haven't quite figured out yet how trains affect the current MA, except that they affect rebuild times of strategic targets (which ones, I'm not sure of). However, here's how I'd handle them. Generally, production facilities are place in a location near the source of their raw materials (oil refineries are near the oil fields, generally; steal mills are near ore deposits, factories are near population centers). So the flow of finished goods is generally via rail roads, between the production facilities and the population centers. These population centers (cities) also act as distribution centers, funneling the goods out to the areas that need them. Trains would move between the finished goods from where they're produced towards the city. Because depots can be captured, the movement of goods from city to depot would have to be handled in the abstract. Convoys would of course radiate outward from depots to bases.

The terrains in the MA should thus be laid out as follows: Each country would have one or two cities (regional capitols, we'll call them). A refinery, barracks complex, and an ordnance factory complex (collectively known as production centers) would be scattered around the regional capitol, connected to that capitol via a railroad. Trains would spawn at the capitol, in a major rail marshalling yard (a large train station, in other words) and head towards the production centers. Ideally, it should be the other way around, with trains spawning at the production centers and moving to the cities; however, you can only have so many stations in a terrain. Besides, I want the marshalling yards (stations) to be part of the regional capitol. The depots would in turn be connected to the bases via the road/convoy system.

We've already talked about what happens to bases when their supply line to the depot is cut. Now for the strategic part of the equation. Damage to the regional capitol would simply affect rebuild time of the production facilities and the city's marshalling yard, just has it has in the past. This reflects the city's role as a labor pool to repair and operate production centers. Damage to a particular type of production center will cause shortages of the product produced at that production center at all depots in the region. This in turn would restrict that product at bases fed by that depot, just as if the convoy had failed to arrive (but only for that specific product; other products would still be available). The percent damage done to the production center would dictate the reduction at the base. Resupply drops would still have the same effect as with missed convoys. Damage to the marshalling yard in the city (a separate target, but co-located with the capitol) would prevent trains from spawning. Likewise, hitting the train from the production center to the capitol would also cause shortages, but for shorter time than damage to the production center or the rail yard.

Again, the idea is to recreate more completely the myriad of ways to affect an enemy's ability to make war, at the tactical level (hitting the bases and convoys), the operational level (hitting the depots and trains), and the strategic level (cities and production centers). Because hitting an area target like a factory can now have a more immediate impact on the war effort, you'll likely find more bombers plying the skyways with a system like this. It will also give Jabo's more jobs to do, jobs they traditionally performed. What do you think?

Rojo

  • Guest
What to do with alll those targ...I mean trains and trucks
« Reply #1 on: November 02, 2001, 01:16:00 PM »
<punt> Someone must have an opinion.

Offline Nifty

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4400
What to do with alll those targ...I mean trains and trucks
« Reply #2 on: November 02, 2001, 01:23:00 PM »
It's too long to read in one sitting.  You highly overestimated our attention spans.   :D  (reading it now...  gimme an hour!)
proud member of the 332nd Flying Mongrels, noses in the wind since 1997.

Offline Nifty

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4400
What to do with alll those targ...I mean trains and trucks
« Reply #3 on: November 02, 2001, 01:43:00 PM »
okies, I like it.  I like it a lot and here's why.  It gives bombers something to do other than destroy hangars with pin point accuracy.  Bombers could then assume their true strategic role and pound the cities and factories (as well as depots).  The tactical targets would be left to the JABO planes as it should be.  (this is my opinion, and not a fact.  :))

Not to mix topics, but if the above system is adopted, you could make bombing from buffs a little more challenging (historic bombsights, bombs effected by dispersion, AND increased bomb blast radius based on the size of the bombs) and still make solo buffing a viable and fun activity.  

Even without bomber considerations, this system offers choices in the way we wage our virtual war.  You could remove a base's ability to drop ordnance and deliver troops without ever hitting the base, yet they still can up fighters (making Lazs happy).  I like it.   :)
proud member of the 332nd Flying Mongrels, noses in the wind since 1997.

Offline Gadfly

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1364
What to do with alll those targ...I mean trains and trucks
« Reply #4 on: November 02, 2001, 01:46:00 PM »
Good stuff, Red, but(there is always that but, isn't there?), with limitless amounts of vehicles, you lose the one thing that truly defines strategic and tactical planning.

It is all about allocating YOUR resources to deny the enemy HIS.  No matter what formula you come up with, if it does not require you to lose(risk) some of your assets to achieve it, you are still playing capture the flag.

An example of what I mean would be something like this:

You only have 5 heavy bombers available in the air at any given time, or in any given time period.  If you have to decide how to use them to deny the enemy something, then you have a real war.

If you can instaspawn anything, anytime, or by denying the enemy you incur no cost, then you are back to the hamsterwheel.

[ 11-02-2001: Message edited by: Gadfly ]

Offline Nifty

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4400
What to do with alll those targ...I mean trains and trucks
« Reply #5 on: November 02, 2001, 02:03:00 PM »
gadfly, you're right, but what you suggest has serious monetary consequences for HTC.  "wtf do you mean I can't take off in my bomber from anywhere because X amount are already up???"  Even if you do attempt that, who decides where said resources go?  The first Joe to get them, or someone with higher rank (kinda like being in control of the CV)?

The MA will always be a hamsterwheel.  What Rojo is suggesting just adds some of those plastic tunnels for the hamsters to play with along side the wheel to make the whole cage a little more interesting for the rodents.  err, I mean for us.   :D
proud member of the 332nd Flying Mongrels, noses in the wind since 1997.

Offline Gadfly

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1364
What to do with alll those targ...I mean trains and trucks
« Reply #6 on: November 02, 2001, 02:05:00 PM »
I know, Nifty, therein lies the problem.edit-(the monetary thing)

You know that WWIIol is trying something like that, right?  It seems to work ok, but there are some screamers, too.

I think that we, as gamers, will tolerate a lot more than we give ourselves credit for, perkination is a good example of what many said would not work.

[ 11-02-2001: Message edited by: Gadfly ]

Offline Kieran

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4119
What to do with alll those targ...I mean trains and trucks
« Reply #7 on: November 02, 2001, 02:11:00 PM »
Yup, supply can add a new dimension to the game, but globally limiting instaspawn is doom. If you limit the respawn near contested areas, fine; saying all planes, tanks, boats- whatever- are gone for an entire country is something to be approached cautiously. It should be something very difficult to accomplish. IMHO the defender should always have an easier go than the offense.

Offline eskimo2

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7207
      • hallbuzz.com
What to do with alll those targ...I mean trains and trucks
« Reply #8 on: November 02, 2001, 02:19:00 PM »
Rojo,
Great ideas!
And well written (as always).
It is a logical system that can incorporate current maps without major modifications.  Lots of positive/realistic changes that can be implemented with little code work/time (I assume   :) ).

My only input is that I would suspect that trains and convoys would become too important of targets.  If so, perhaps no change would take place until the second train or convoy in a row fails to make its destination...

If you haven't taken the time to read Rojo's plan, please do so.  It's pretty interesting and thought provoking.

eskimo

Offline Ripsnort

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 27260
What to do with alll those targ...I mean trains and trucks
« Reply #9 on: November 02, 2001, 02:27:00 PM »
AW had this when I flew it along time ago, not as thorough but roughly the same idea(without using Trains as the target), hitting refineries brought down the quality of your fuel.

Developers cringe at the thought "limitation".

Rojo

  • Guest
What to do with alll those targ...I mean trains and trucks
« Reply #10 on: November 02, 2001, 04:06:00 PM »
Sometime this evening, a very special artical will be published on The Wargamer's web site at http://www.wargamer.com/  .  Call it a peak into Aces High's furture. It's just possible that dreams really do come true.

[ 11-02-2001: Message edited by: Rojo ]

Offline Kieran

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4119
What to do with alll those targ...I mean trains and trucks
« Reply #11 on: November 02, 2001, 04:13:00 PM »
I am formulating an hypothesis about what you folks have been hinting at for some time now. I hope I am right.

Offline Buzzbait

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1141
What to do with alll those targ...I mean trains and trucks
« Reply #12 on: November 02, 2001, 05:06:00 PM »
S!

These are excellent ideas and should be adapted.

The functioning of all forward Air and Vehicle bases should be dependent on convoys and trains getting through, not repaired by the same.

Eskimo is right that the loss of a few trains and convoys should not immediately affect supply.  It should be a longer process, with numbers like 10 or more being required to be destroyed before a field can be shut down completely.

Rojo

  • Guest
What to do with alll those targ...I mean trains and trucks
« Reply #13 on: November 02, 2001, 08:06:00 PM »
Hinting at? Why, I don't know what you mean, Kieran  ;).

Offline Kieran

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4119
What to do with alll those targ...I mean trains and trucks
« Reply #14 on: November 02, 2001, 08:15:00 PM »
At least tell us when the article is posted! hehe...