For me, a wargame, strategy, or simulation just isn't the best it can be, without supply and logistics. And for me, the more complex the better. I enjoy games like the Anno series where I need A + B to make C, then C + D to make E, and so on. Where supply lines are delicate and must be protected, and a break in one place may have catastrophic and surprising effects later.
My first recollection of this sort of gameplay was with SuperHarrier VGA. You had to allocate assets and plot missions. If you lost too many aircraft or wasted ammunition, you were sunk.
Similarly, the Men of War series' ammo system really makes the game for me. Distant World and Aurora do a great job at this as well.
However, logistics should never be tedious, as it often is in War in the Pacific. The user interface in War in the Pacific (original, not sure about Admirals Edition) is wholly inadequate for logistics management. You should have a button in the base screen to click "immediate resupply" and then the game should allocate units from your automated convoy group to gather what is needed. The convoys should follow reasonably safe paths. With a proper UI in WitP they could make the logistics more complex, adding ammo types, food, etc. To me, having to babysit my merchant marines by telling who to go where by which route, takes me out of the the game.
The best model of logistics I currently can recall, is Distant Worlds. A massive list of goods and a relatively efficient way of getting them where they are needed. But even it has room for improvement. I think the UI does the game a disservice by having to dig to actually see what is going on with the logistics system, and you could play for a very long time and not even know what the various goods do and where you are getting them. I wish there were a difficulty slider for resources because I rarely ever experience a supply problem. And if you aren't having to worry about logistics...it isn't simulated properly.
So what is logistics to you, and who do you think is doing it right? How can it be better?
My thoughts are pretty well summed up here:
http://grognews.blogspot.com/2011/05/battle-lab-logistics.html
Having done this for a living for a few years, I can't imagine who'd be doing this for fun! :-\
Good 'ole logistics are fun in some regards, but WitP and other games with extremely detailed logistic models just put me off now. You could call me a "Logistics Lite" kinda wargamer :D
I would personally try to make a distinction between logistics, supply/inventory and resource management as GAME concepts (which are therefore slightly different than real-world constructs).
Althougth there are MANY definitions for each of these terms, I tend to keep things simple:
Logisitics is the art/science/management of getting the right thing to the right person at the right time. This would specifically cover convoy management (load and route selection, timing, escorts, etc)
Supply and inventory is the stuff you have on hand - number and types of ammo-load outs, pilot roster, tank replacements, etc.
Resource management refers to the "harvesting" concept seen in so many RTS games...gather wood to make X; gather stone to make Y; use X and Y to make Z...that sort of thing. Typically highly abstract in most wargames.
Understandably, a game that is solely dedicated to logistics may not be that compelling. Moving stuff from point A to point B can be fun (Lemmings was basically a logistics puzzle game) and there are more than a few historical examples that may make for an interesting logistics-based game (the battle for the North Atlantic, the Berlin Airlift). Perhaps a more interesting and valuable use of logistics within a wargame is to have unit supply influenced by the maintenance of supply lines where the supply lines essentially represent "logistic assets". Examples of this can be found in Chris Crawford's Patton Strikes Back!, and in many of the Close Combat games (CC2 A Bridge Too Far used air-drop and ground-based supply, and later games used the routes from the strategic map to determine if a unit could receive supply).
Supply and inventory management are IMHO an interesting and necessary component of any good wargame. Knowing that you only have so many ATGMs or AIM-9m a2a missiles adds a level of complexity to mission and campaign planning without being overwhelming or burdonsome, and managing a crew roster (especially if they "level up" with experience) adds personal intimacy. Supply can also be used to create logical parameters or boundries that enforce game balance. It really isn't that much fun (or instructional) to be able to buy 5 King Tigers to take on your opponent's 5 M1 Shermans.
I can take or leave resource management. Depending on how it is handled, sending out harvesters / woodcutters, etc can be unnecessarily labourous if managed / implemented poorly. One such example of bad resource management (IMHO) was the farmers / fishermen in the "Age of X" games. I really didnt enjoy having to create escorts for every group of farmers and fishermen on the map. Having said that, I didn't mind the spice harvester mechanism in Dune II, where resource collection (spice) was kept simple.
Just IMHO,
Jack Nastyface
Quote from: bayonetbrant on February 20, 2012, 01:02:32 PM
My thoughts are pretty well summed up here:
http://grognews.blogspot.com/2011/05/battle-lab-logistics.html
Having done this for a living for a few years, I can't imagine who'd be doing this for fun! :-\
I'm most likely a sick man, but I think it's fun that gives the reward of lost and greying hair!
IMHO logistics modeling can make an OK strategy game great. And I am not talking about "bean counting"... But I used to be a military "loggy" so am biased...:)
In a game where logistics is modeled well (WITP for example), logistical considerations can be the key to victory. Please see:
http://www.armchairgeneral.com/the-practical-art-of-moving-armies.htm
Quote from: MIGMaster on February 20, 2012, 03:08:20 PM
Good 'ole logistics are fun in some regards, but WitP and other games with extremely detailed logistic models just put me off now. You could call me a "Logistics Lite" kinda wargamer :D
I'd say this describes me as well. I think logistics in war/strategy games is important, but I really dislike having to micromanage the details myself. (The system is
Distant Worlds probably comes closest to representing what I see as my "ideal" logistics model.)
I like the way supply is modelled in Decisive Campaigns: Blitzkrieg from Warsaw to Paris and Unity of Command. Important, but approachable.
I think the AGEOD games take logistics, planning and timing into the heart of the game design - in fact the combat seems tacked onto a logistics and movement model.
I'd agree with folks that WitP models logistics and supply well, but the interface is totally inadequate for managing it.
Well I just finished the French and Indian war scenario in AGEODs Wars of America. Let me tell you that the game is all about logistics. You must attach enough supply wagons to your units to keep them is supply when embarking on any type of campaign. You also must construct depots to resupply the wagons and give troops their replacemants.
Wars in America also does a great job of simulating the weather. If your troops are not in a town or fort come winter, you will take more casualties then you would from most battles.
If it wasnt for the supply rules in the game, the British would run roughshod over the French. However with the supply rules, it makes conquering Canada a huge challenge.
Quote from: Martok on February 21, 2012, 06:18:57 AM
The system is Distant Worlds probably comes closest to representing what I see as my "ideal" logistics model.
I believe that Distant World's handling of logistics and the non-warfare economy in general should be studied and vigorously copied in wargames.
Logistics should be important, but not unnecessarily consume the players time. The UI and 'helper AI' should be smooth enough to just make it a component of the game, rather than a tedious sim within a sim.
There is a DVD set Battle for Europe that has a good overview of the importance of logistics. The series has overall commentary by Eisenhower BTW. He is in the videos and his voice seems to do the narration. If its somebody else's notes my apologies to his memory for screwing it up. Anyway, back on topic, the last disk has a section on the problems they had supplying the front in WWII Europe. I seem to remember it said a division consumed 100 tons of supply every day. Any break in that halts progress. Plans fall apart. Supply is critical to any military.
It is also critical to any business. Its often said modern companies compete with their supply chains. A supply chain advantage means a company grows while its competitors fold. A good example is Walmart that has a very efficient supply system.
Any wargame that does not simulate this area well is not realistic. Bombing a WWII rail yard for example could have more impact than sinking a battleship. An unsupported fighting force is nothing.
Correction 600-700 tons per day for a division. They said most spearheads were all held up by supply issues. The supply line was called "Red Ball Express".
Quote from: Mr. Bigglesworth on February 21, 2012, 04:55:15 PM
Correction 600-700 tons per day for a division. They said most spearheads were all held up by supply issues. The supply line was called "Red Ball Express".
IIRC there was a movie with that title a while ago about just this subject.
I imagine a small guerilla force harassing the truck route would have been massively effective in relation to the size of force used. I saw a documentary on the truck convoys in Iraq which was basically the same problem. A supply line is a great military target. That has to be modelled in the game.
Quote from: Mr. Bigglesworth on February 21, 2012, 04:43:19 PM
There is a DVD set Battle for Europe that has a good overview of the importance of logistics. The series has overall commentary by Eisenhower BTW. He is in the videos and his voice seems to do the narration. If its somebody else's notes my apologies to his memory for screwing it up. Anyway, back on topic, the last disk has a section on the problems they had supplying the front in WWII Europe. I seem to remember it said a division consumed 100 tons of supply every day. Any break in that halts progress. Plans fall apart. Supply is critical to any military.
I suspect you're thinking of "Crusade in Europe", one of the first documentaries ever made about WW2, and based directly on Eisenhower's autobiography about the war. Long out of print, but recently re-released on DVD along with its sequel "Crusade in the Pacific".
I haven't watched them yet (though I snapped them up as soon as they were re-released last year), but I own a copy of the autobiography. Even my Mom could understand and follow along with it. {g} Truly a genius work, and yes logistics are almost the end-all, be-all of the account (although that's to be expected at Eisenhower's level of authority.)
Meanwhile, may I suggest the Kohan games as perhaps the greatest example of RTS logistic/supply implementation? Extending supply through a series of forts is absolutely crucial to winning most maps, and the game tracks net resource expenditure (somewhat like Total Annihilation used to do) at any given moment, so you can focus on what needs improving and on what any purchase will net-cost you. And while resource nodes are important to exploit, the game minimizes and automates (without simply abstracting) the peasant/worker units.
Rise of Nations (plus its expansion) is the only RTS I know of that almost approaches the same logistic/supply balancing act.
No, that is the name of the set. Each 'episode' ,4 to 5 per disk, 5 disks, has part of the intro reading from a book which is probably the autobiography you mention. The passage sounds like its his voice reading the highlighted part. I seem to remember there were also a few clips where the camera is on Eisenhower where he gives part of the intro. Its been a few years since I watched it so I could be hazy on that, i might be remembering another set. I have 5 or 6 dvd sets on WWII.
Just looked it up
http://www.amazon.ca/Battle-for-Europe-Ww-II/dp/B000929UNW/ref=sr_1_11?s=dvd&ie=UTF8&qid=1329970878&sr=1-11 (http://www.amazon.ca/Battle-for-Europe-Ww-II/dp/B000929UNW/ref=sr_1_11?s=dvd&ie=UTF8&qid=1329970878&sr=1-11)
I'd rate it worth watching.
I definitely don't have the wargame experience of you all, but the more I have played WiTP:AE, the more I have realized that the game really is more of a logistics exercise than anything else.
The combat is also important, of course, but it seems that you spend most of your time effecting combat in order to escort/protect/sieze logistics resources.
I've heard the game referred to as "Logistics in the Pacific" and I would tend to agree with that.
A game that could greatly benefit from an improved logistics model (IMO) is the Falcon 4 (series). Theoretically you should be able to win a campaign in Falcon through attrition of the enemy's supply and logistics; for example, destroying all of his factories and depots would should have an effect on his supply/weapons/fuel, etc. However, this part of the code doesn't seem to be implemented, or it is implemented poorly. I've never been able to make a dent in the enemy's logistics in Falcon, although such a model of warfare is critical in most of the real and fictional modern warfare books I've read.
Ah, the good old Red Ball Express.
This is one of those great DOH! moments which makes one think of Homer Simpson at strategy..
To keep the german buildup down in Normandy, the Allies went after the French Railroad System. Very effective, it really crippled the armies fighting against the allies.
When the allies brfoke through during Operation Cobra, suddenly, there were no rail lines to forward supply to the advancing spearheads.
The Communications Zone planners had never forseen such a phenomenal advance right after all the bocage fighting. They came up with the Red Ball Express and using C47s to airlift gas.
Surprisingly, it was the british army that caused the most pain. Something like half of their truck companies were equipped with a new 3 piston engine. These broke down in alarming numbers once they had to travel over twenty miles from the Normandy beaches. In effect, about twenty-five percent of the lift capability vaporised off the planner's boards within two weeks.
Then during the advance into the Netherlands, Monty was so focused on Market Garden that he ignored the importance of clearing the Antwerp approaches. The Eleventh Armored division seized the city and the intact docks with a rush, but to get into Antwerp, ships had to travel through a twenty-five mile waterway.
Ther germans dug in on this, and kept the supplies from being unloaded so close to the need.
The section of this article called logistics problems is worth reading.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Market_Garden (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Market_Garden)
This looks like a good reference at the end. I'll have to check it out.
Ruppenthal, Roland G (1953), Logistical Support of the Armies: Volume I, May 1941– September 1944, Washington, DC: Office of the Chief of Military History, Department of the Army
- Ruppenthal, Roland G (1959), Logistical Support of the Armies: Volume II, September 1944 – May 1945, Washington, DC: Office of the Chief of Military History, Department of the Army
This games are purely about logistics. ;D
Fueling the Force
QuoteFueling the Force is an operational-level decision making simulation. During the simulation, the BLUFOR player will manage petroleum supply units, fuel, trucks, and trailer assets in order to successfully fuel land forces involved in various types of combat operations. The object of the simulation is to keep the force fueled. Fueling the Force was designed for and used by the U.S. Army's Command and General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.
http://www.decisive-point.com/portfolio/fuelingtheforce.html (http://www.decisive-point.com/portfolio/fuelingtheforce.html)
Forward into Battle
QuoteForward Into Battle is an operational-level decision making wargame that allows students to explore some of the logistics challenges posed while conducting Reception, Staging, Onward Movement, and Integration (RSOI) using a simulated conflict environment. During game play, the BLUFOR player will manage fuel, transportation assets, and security forces in order to successfully deploy land forces and fuel from sea ports of debarkation to their tactical assembly areas and logistical support areas. The OPFOR will manage various attack means to prevent the BLUFOR player from accomplishing his mission. Forward Into Battle was designed for and used by the U.S. Army's Command and General Staff College.
http://www.decisive-point.com/portfolio/forwardintobattle.html (http://www.decisive-point.com/portfolio/forwardintobattle.html)
^ yes, and designed for completely different purposes than just having a good time after hours 8)
Quote from: jomni on February 23, 2012, 10:57:07 PM
This games are purely about logistics. ;D
Fueling the Force
QuoteFueling the Force is an operational-level decision making simulation. During the simulation, the BLUFOR player will manage petroleum supply units, fuel, trucks, and trailer assets in order to successfully fuel land forces involved in various types of combat operations. The object of the simulation is to keep the force fueled. Fueling the Force was designed for and used by the U.S. Army's Command and General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.
http://www.decisive-point.com/portfolio/fuelingtheforce.html (http://www.decisive-point.com/portfolio/fuelingtheforce.html)
Forward into Battle
QuoteForward Into Battle is an operational-level decision making wargame that allows students to explore some of the logistics challenges posed while conducting Reception, Staging, Onward Movement, and Integration (RSOI) using a simulated conflict environment. During game play, the BLUFOR player will manage fuel, transportation assets, and security forces in order to successfully deploy land forces and fuel from sea ports of debarkation to their tactical assembly areas and logistical support areas. The OPFOR will manage various attack means to prevent the BLUFOR player from accomplishing his mission. Forward Into Battle was designed for and used by the U.S. Army's Command and General Staff College.
http://www.decisive-point.com/portfolio/forwardintobattle.html (http://www.decisive-point.com/portfolio/forwardintobattle.html)
No web store? :(
Several of their titles look worth trying.
Jim sells his stuff through HPS. He designs for CGSC and other military customers and retains the commercial rights
We're still early in exploring the game, but log plays a fairly significant role in Wargame: European Escalation.
Quote from: LongBlade on February 24, 2012, 03:23:18 PM
We're still early in exploring the game, but log plays a fairly significant role in Wargame: European Escalation.
Damn it! You beat me to it...how timely this thread really is.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on February 24, 2012, 04:43:52 PM
Quote from: LongBlade on February 24, 2012, 03:23:18 PM
We're still early in exploring the game, but log plays a fairly significant role in Wargame: European Escalation.
Damn it! You beat me to it...how timely this thread really is.
When you can snatch this pebble from my hand, Grasshopper...
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1081.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fj349%2Flongblade%2Fkungfusnatchthepebble.jpg&hash=687556a4cfce04ead5efc767187ef583c25e029a)
very interesting