Major Aspect of War Missing?

[Dominus Anulorum]

The thing that has always bothered me about total war games is the lack of any kind of supply chain. Now, I love these games, but this seems like a big oversight. Supply was and is a HUGE part of war. It was one of the reasons that no one (besides Rome) ever truly achieved a massive empire and kept it for any significant amount of time. It gets very difficult to send supplies long distances, especially into a territory that is hostile. It is also why countries never kept huge armies around and curb stomped anyone who got in their way. It just cost too much to keep them around. Plus, sending them into enemy territory was tricky because you had to either take a huge baggage train, or have heavily guarded supply lines, both of which make large armies even more unwieldy and thus less attractive. Rome crushed most of its opposition, at least early on, with speedy, small units, sometimes only a legion or two, which could pick the enemy to pieces and still defeat them in an open field (Rome was just awesome.)
I feel that if this was somehow implemented into TW games, it would solve the problem of late game campaigns being too easy. Right now, once you are in the late game you can afford multiple elite stacks of men and you can send them all over the place. In reality, there would be major logistical problems with this. Any thoughts on this issue?

[Humble Warrior]

But this kind of logistics people would prefer not to think about, although it is a key element of warfare. Good, successful Generals made sure their supply line was good before going to war, bad Generals, didn`t.

But there are many major aspects of warfare missing in TW, for example: troops ships. A thousand or so men did not all squeeze on to a battleship. One thing I liked about Galactic Civ is that you could actually encounter troop ships and if lucky, destroy them even if you lost the battle (the AI was pretty good at trying to prevent this happening too).

To be fair to CA, though, they do have a very mild supply penalty if in enemy territory too long too represent this; but it is very mild and you can`t cut it off.

[-=PHX=-Hades]

But this kind of logistics people would prefer not to think about, although it is a key element of warfare. Good, successful Generals made sure their supply line was good before going to war, bad Generals, didn`t.

But there are many major aspects of warfare missing in TW, for example: troops ships. A thousand or so men did not all squeeze on to a battleship. One thing I liked about Galactic Civ is that you could actually encounter troop ships and if lucky, destroy them even if you lost the battle (the AI was pretty good at trying to prevent this happening too).

To be fair to CA, though, they do have a very mild supply penalty if in enemy territory too long too represent this; but it is very mild and you can`t cut it off.

I don't think we are meant to believe that all those men would fit on 1 ship. I think they just imply that the warships are the escorts for the troop ships your men would be on. Although I would like to see some type of transport ship in the next game.

I would like to see some type of supply system as long as they don't make it too complicated. Some type of combination of roads and supply ships with a set number of supply level that your country has a time, kind of like they have the food in Shogun 2.

[CptAustus]

I don't think we are meant to believe that all those men would fit on 1 ship. I think they just imply that the warships are the escorts for the troop ships your men would be on. Although I would like to see some type of transport ship in the next game.

I would like to see some type of supply system as long as they don't make it too complicated. Some type of combination of roads and supply ships with a set number of supply level that your country has a time, kind of like they have the food in Shogun 2.

they tried to bring supplies in with specialised buildings requiring specific materials, which is interesting. But then, if it turns into the resource system in Civ 5, the game would become a little boring.

[Robin de Bodemloze]

There are Paradox games or things like Nobunaga no Yabou for such excruciating levels of detail really. I would get pretty tired of TW games if I had to make sure each unit of samurai had enough onigiri to last the winter. Just saying

[Erwin Rommel]

There are Paradox games or things like Nobunaga no Yabou for such excruciating levels of detail really. I would get pretty tired of TW games if I had to make sure each unit of samurai had enough onigiri to last the winter. Just saying

Pfft. Your not going far with that, my men pack mochi cakes.

And besides we have the food supply right? The only thing missing is to add the food as some part of the upkeep costs.

Then again, you have to consider the map of Japan as well.

[Felixlynch777]

I've thought about this as well. I'd have to see it in practice to see whether it'd work or not.

Lol, agreed Humble. Fitting 2000 men on 1 bow kobaya seems rather implausible.

[Fanest]

i think this could be done in the way trade ways are done, meaning each army would have supply line, which would start in your closest province. This mechanic could be suited to any kind of attacks like invasion, guerrilla warfare etc.

[Hikaru Genji]

i think this could be done in the way trade ways are done, meaning each army would have supply line, which would start in your closest province. This mechanic suited to any kind of attacks like invasion, guerrilla warfare etc.

I could see that working very well--and then if an enemy "blocked" the supply line there could be an effect similar to attrition on the army.

[Ferdiad]

Just give Generals a supply trait reflecting the level of supply they have, It's done very well in Bygs mod for SS.

[♘Top Hat Zebra]

Just give Generals a supply trait reflecting the level of supply they have, It's done very well in Bygs mod for SS.

I think this is the best way to do it, honestly.

[Fanest]

I think this is the best way to do it, honestly.

imo this is not the best way but the easiest one

[♘Top Hat Zebra]

imo this is not the best way but the easiest one

For CA, it's the same thing.

[Fanest]

I could see that working very well--and then if an enemy "blocked" the supply line there could be an effect similar to attrition on the army.

well i would start with lowering morale (by 1/3) in the first turn, then in the next one diseases spreads out and there are some deaths, after that desertion and even more death, these effects would led to disintegration of your army that in about 5 turns.
new units suited only for sabotaging supply lines (which would be more or less worthless in big combats) could be introduced and guerrilla units which could remain in enemy territories for around 5 turns etc. etc.
imo this would improve gameplay tremendously

[Ferdiad]

Its easier for the casual noobs to understand than a indepth comprehensive system.

[Fanest]

For CA, it's the same thing.

true very true

but yea that trait system is very good in SS but CA really should and could do it on the "higher level"

[Ferdiad]

They wouldn't get it right if they tried to make it too complex, better if they started off slowly and worked their way up from their.

[Captain Arrrgh!]

The basic gameplay that CA tells us will be in their games invariably isn't, or removed, or broken and half fixed. Though logistics is imperative to a functional military (I was in logistics in the army), I really don't want to see yet another thing that will be buggy, then recieve five patches that may or may not fix it and most probably ruin some other part of the game. Logistics is way to lofty a goal. I'd rather have CA come closer to realeasing what they promise will be in game in the first place. From Rome on every title has required volunteers from the community to fix issues CA has dropped.

[Humble Warrior]

The basic gameplay that CA tells us will be in their games invariably isn't, or removed, or broken and half fixed. Though logistics is imperative to a functional military (I was in logistics in the army), I really don't want to see yet another thing that will be buggy, then recieve five patches that may or may not fix it and most probably ruin some other part of the game. Logistics is way to lofty a goal. I'd rather have CA come closer to realeasing what they promise will be in game in the first place. From Rome on every title has required volunteers from the community to fix issues CA has dropped.

Well it`s been proven in the past that continuously reminding them of their failures usually helps them do better. But you have to be stubborn for whatever issue you have and, if you have a point, they may change it. The siege bug seems to be finally getting eradicated, but that took a lot of effort on reminding them.

One thing I`ve learned about CA over the years is if you slacken off too much, or even over-praise them, they start to not finish stuff that still needs doing. It`s a very difficult balancing act between prasing them and watching them stop bothering and brow beating until they ignore you altogether.

This is why I tend to ignore or not whine much about stuff I consider not as important to make space for what I consider important. And of course we all have our pet hates, we want fixing.

We shouldn`t be unpaid beta-testers, but that`s how it goes and has gone, for years.

[Gaizokubanou]

One of the reason why logistics is not in any TW is probably because TW series has always been about set piece battles. You always have gigantic (in video game sense at least lol, because TW battles are actually kind of tiny) and decisive clash of armies. Nothing (at least nothing functional in a sense of fun and being designed around) between low level skirmish~raids and the battle over Kursk.

If the game just dropped logistics into it, it wouldn't function all that well because current theme of big decisive battles can't represent the kind of attrition-raid based fighting that would logically accompany logistics.

Either the main battles have to get even larger so that currently interesting minimalist battles (at least 4 ~ 5 units to have center, flanks and support element) can be efficiently go raiding/protecting and wage their own skirmishes elsewhere, or a single unit's functionality has to improve from just being a rectangle block of men that has one or two abilities. I'm all for battles that are closer to real life in size of course.

BTW OP, Han dynasty says hi