Supply & Attrition

[Rasic]

With the introduction of proper armies (the legion system) this is possibly the perfect time to introduce supply and attrition into the game. Whether we're talking about Hannibal in northern Italy or Julius Caesar in Greece supply was an important aspect of warfare during the era, and its possibly the most overdue feature of total war games in general.

A more detailed explanation of the choices:

Realistic Supply/Attrition - Very detailed with overall supply limits per region/province limiting the max amount of troops you can maintain in that area without receiving attrition. Land based supply routes (similar to sea trading routes) which can be blocked by enemy troops to starve out an area. Requires an army to restock periodically when fighting deep into enemy territory. Harsh weather attrition for hot/cold climates in appropriate seasons. Things of that nature.

Basic supply/attrition - Less complex and similar to cold attrition in shogun 2. Army has a set amount of turns before it needs to return to friendly territory or suffer minor attrition each turn for being outside of supply.

No supply - Self explanatory, no changes to current game mechanics.

Don't care - No preference, or you just want to kill things with as little mental activity as possible.

[oppaiO_O]

just want to kill things with as little mental activity as possible. XD but if it does get added it could bring a new strategical depth in game so i dont see why they shouldn't though while playing any campaign i always use my imagination and pretend that the military upkeep is taking care of all that stuff so i might not want any change but if it dose i won't complain since it might add a more realistic feeling to it but i think this option should be put as optional,....

[Rorarii]

I want a dotted line like trade routes, from your army to the closest supply depot... AND wagons, if your army has wagons it can feed itself for say ... hmmm 1 or 2 turns before foraging or reestablishing a supply link must be done.

sigh! .. wagons! .. dem wagons need paint'in i recon ..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VM5-xFenaZI

R

[MathiasOfAthens]

I want a dotted line like trade routes, from your army to the closest supply depot... AND wagons, if your army has wagons it can feed itself for say ... hmmm 1 or 2 turns before foraging or reestablishing a supply link must be done.

sigh! .. wagons! .. dem wagons need paint'in i recon ..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VM5-xFenaZI

R

That gives me an idea. If there is a dotted line perhaps the line can be attacked. Like raided. An enemy unit or units stands on the line and at the end of the turn if its still there your army receives some hits or something.


Anyway, this is a good idea and for those who dont want any suppy or attrition CA could easily disable the feature.

[Ichon]

Basic supply is closer to what I was thinking, enough to encourage an army advancing to station small garrison forces behind the line of march in forts for Romans for example. Since most provinces are only going to be 3-5 territories this would mean most of the time only a couple regions with forts unless an army is advancing very deeply. The benefits of secure supplies would be little to no attrition depending on skills of the general and lower cost of upkeep (using distance modifiers talked about in the other thread).

[The Unknown General]

Realistic other wise the game would be to easy.

[Condottiere 40K]

Which means you have to have detachments patrolling against bandits, guerrillas and enemy raiders.

[Lord of the Drunk Penguin]

Realistic supply & attrition.
Let them freeze their buts off in Germania as I cut their supply lines to shreds

[Mr. Shaboobies]

I think there should be realistic supply simulations in the game because it is so much more important than the actual fighting casualties wise. In most wars more people died from disease and other common things like starvation/exhaustion/freezing then in any fighting. There were also campaigning seasons between the planting and harvesting of the crops where the men would go off to war, and this is in no way represented in game.
This could also be another way for you to use your good commanders. Up to this point in the series, besides the ability to fight at night, the skill of your general command wise didn't matter at all. Compared to the ai, the human player is like a 30 star general so it doesn't matter if you are fighting an 8 or 2 star opponent, you always win anyways. With supply systems, commanders become better at denying attrition damage and foraging with their better skills (presumably command since supply skill is related command wise, just on a campaign map, not a battle map)

[Condottiere 40K]

Anthony would be in Babylon and could tell Cleopatra to kiss his ass.

[daelin4]

I'd like some more insertions of reality into TW games. Just make sure they're abstract enough that the details don't detract from most players' experience.

It needs to be relevant enough that it effects how the game plays out, yet not to the point where the player has to frustratingly go back to it every time because nothing else will work. And especially they are not left confused because it was done so historically accurate.

[Jester]

cant decide between realistic and basic

it all depends on how it s implemented and how it fits into the general gameplay. i cant see how you would be able to move your troops anywhere if the AI is still aggressive like crazy, spams troops out of thin air, backstabbing allies everywhere, ridiculous morale boosts in battles, everybody hates you and invades your provinces from all directions... in that case you d just lack the necessary amount of troops to secure your supply lines

[Lord Baal]

From my wall of Doom:

- Supply system for armies and navies: The addition of the attrition on the game is a very nice improvement. However the fact that in theory an army can stand on the middle of enemy territory for years if it's left undisturbed without any penalty beyond losing few mens every winter is disturbing, and is a big set back for the strategy part of the game. Implementing a supply system, along with better maneuvering, having to plan ahead a route for movement of troops and potentially supplies too would give a heck of fun! Both making them and disrupting them. Supplies should be delivered like the trade routes both by land and sea, that follow the army as soon it comes out of your territory, coming from the nearest controlled port and/or town big enough to support the army, in the land they could naturally follow the preexistent roads, on the sea they could follow the trade routes. The supplies bar/counter of the units in the army would remain filled as long the army is still connected to the supply route. This supply routes should cost money, the longer they are, the more they add to the basic upkeep of the units in the army and when the army goes back to your territory their upkeep should go back to normal again. Also longer supply routes should refill the supply more slowly, so if you stretch your lines too much even if you are connected the supply of your army can go down to zero unless you either conquer a near port, take a city(able to supply you) or develop new technologies.
Raiding this routes with land or naval forces depending on the case should cause the army to stop receiving supplies (Imagine you can stop a siege by raiding supply routes for a couple of turns with a small calvary force?). In the event the army is effectively separated from it's supply route it's supplies bar/counter should drop very rapidly, maybe in 1, 2 or 3 turns tops. An army without supplies could have a rapid drop in moral, effectiveness and will, it could have soldiers routing from the units and even whole units disbanding in the campaign map if they can't forage, pillage and/or scavenge what they need fast enough from local settlements, and the worst thing is that they might be more susceptible to bribery, depending on the general stats and traits. The same could apply to besieged armies in cities and forts, because basically besieging means cutting the enemy's supply in the hopes of making them surrender without too much fight. If a supply system is employed then the sieges could become more natural and organic instead of a repetitive issue with a artificial turn cap on it. This could also open up a new diplomatic option, ask for another faction (friendly or ally) for supplies, be it for an army or a city.
Now, the navies shouldn't be able to auto supply (unless they are on a friendly trade route or is sacking a enemy one), they should put the anchor on one of your ports, or an ally or friendly one in case there's a arrangement about supplying military forces. Ships/navies without supply will be more sensitive to mutiny and betray, and also will experience men losses like in Shogun 2 when they are at open sea. Beside this, some ships should be able to supply armies that are near a coast but stranded outside regular supply routes, this will give certain ships like the hypothetical troop transports or merchant ships a second and much valuated ability, bringing not only reinforcements but also supplies to your invading forces until you are able to capture a city with a port, from then on it will be understood that the supply train could be carried by private merchants, not requiring "official navy" ships anymore.

[dheta]

I agree this should be in the game but defently only as an option as there is bound to be alot of players who wouldent like to have the extra challage added. also if would be a pain to implement since supply and attrition would difer from faction to faction.

[Zimmy]

If supply and attrition is added I want to be able to do a scorched earth policy and starve enemy armies.

EDIT: But they should NOT starve in lush fertile areas. That makes no sense whatsoever

[Greve Af Göteborg]

The realistic supply & attrition would be great (perhaps as a checkbox when you start the campaign), but the basic version is good enough if we can't get the realistic one.

[Archimonday]

This is how i always envisioned suuply in a Total War game.

Upon selecting an army, one could right click the stack to bring up the unit info card, which also displayed a colored overlay on the map, lets use yellow as an example. This yellow overlay represents the areas of the map that the army will be supplied in, and thus, which areas of the map it can restore its basic provisions like ammunition, and food. Once an army crossed into a different colored overlay its supply situation changed. Marching into an orange zone would slow down the supply making it take more turns to be combat ready, until entering a red zone, supplies are cut off.

To maintain a yellow zone, a player must build forts along roads, or in crucial valleys, and capture towns and villages. The supply routes, indicated by a bold line on the map can be cut by capturing the forts, towns, and villages, or by positioning an army on the route. Like trade routes, these facets of the route increase their area of influence over time as they grow, and eventually may even allow for recruiting, movement distance, and morale bonuses.

[Zimmy]

This is how i always envisioned suuply in a Total War game.

Upon selecting an army, one could right click the stack to bring up the unit info card, which also displayed a colored overlay on the map, lets use yellow as an example. This yellow overlay represents the areas of the map that the army will be supplied in, and thus, which areas of the map it can restore its basic provisions like ammunition, and food. Once an army crossed into a different colored overlay its supply situation changed. Marching into an orange zone would slow down the supply making it take more turns to be combat ready, until entering a red zone, supplies are cut off.

To maintain a yellow zone, a player must build forts along roads, or in crucial valleys, and capture towns and villages. The supply routes, indicated by a bold line on the map can be cut by capturing the forts, towns, and villages, or by positioning an army on the route. Like trade routes, these facets of the route increase their area of influence over time as they grow, and eventually may even allow for recruiting, movement distance, and morale bonuses.

That's a great idea, I know CA hardly reads these threads but if they do they should use your idea.

[Petroniu]

This is how i always envisioned suuply in a Total War game.

Upon selecting an army, one could right click the stack to bring up the unit info card, which also displayed a colored overlay on the map, lets use yellow as an example. This yellow overlay represents the areas of the map that the army will be supplied in, and thus, which areas of the map it can restore its basic provisions like ammunition, and food. Once an army crossed into a different colored overlay its supply situation changed. Marching into an orange zone would slow down the supply making it take more turns to be combat ready, until entering a red zone, supplies are cut off.

To maintain a yellow zone, a player must build forts along roads, or in crucial valleys, and capture towns and villages. The supply routes, indicated by a bold line on the map can be cut by capturing the forts, towns, and villages, or by positioning an army on the route. Like trade routes, these facets of the route increase their area of influence over time as they grow, and eventually may even allow for recruiting, movement distance, and morale bonuses.

This is a great and practical idea. Let's just hope CA has at least something in mind for implementing this kind of features in game.

[Rasic]

From my wall of Doom:

Some very good thoughts in there. I think linking sea and land into supply could make some interesting game play and really make your navy important, especially if you have a bustling Mediterranean empire.

This is how i always envisioned suuply in a Total War game.

Upon selecting an army, one could right click the stack to bring up the unit info card, which also displayed a colored overlay on the map, lets use yellow as an example. This yellow overlay represents the areas of the map that the army will be supplied in, and thus, which areas of the map it can restore its basic provisions like ammunition, and food. Once an army crossed into a different colored overlay its supply situation changed. Marching into an orange zone would slow down the supply making it take more turns to be combat ready, until entering a red zone, supplies are cut off.

To maintain a yellow zone, a player must build forts along roads, or in crucial valleys, and capture towns and villages. The supply routes, indicated by a bold line on the map can be cut by capturing the forts, towns, and villages, or by positioning an army on the route. Like trade routes, these facets of the route increase their area of influence over time as they grow, and eventually may even allow for recruiting, movement distance, and morale bonuses.

I was sort of thinking something similar. On the more simplistic side of things just a green dotted line when you click on your army which would go from it's location to the nearest road (or where the road would be if there isn't one) and then follow that to the nearest supply area (port, city, forts). Sort of like the trade routes but it would follow the road and only show when you select that army so you don't have a bunch of clutter on the map.

I think the coolest aspect of it would be the interesting skills for generals though. Some kind of ability that lets you see the enemy supply lines more easily or something.