The importance of simulated logistics in game design.

Started by republic, February 20, 2012, 12:36:28 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

republic

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?

bayonetbrant

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!  :-\
The key to surviving this site is to not say something which ends up as someone's tag line - Steelgrave

"their citizens (all of them counted as such) glorified their mythology of 'rights'...and lost track of their duties. No nation, so constituted, can endure." Robert Heinlein, Starship Troopers

MIGMaster

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

Jack Nastyface

#3
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
Now, the problem is, how to divide five Afghans from three mules and have two Englishmen left over.

Bison

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!

ArizonaTank

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
Johannes "Honus" Wagner
"The Flying Dutchman"
Shortstop: Pittsburgh Pirates 1900-1917
Rated as the 2nd most valuable player of all time by Bill James.

Martok

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.) 
"Like we need an excuse to drink to anything..." - Banzai_Cat
"I like to think of it not as an excuse but more like Pavlovian Response." - Sir Slash

"At our ages, they all look like jailbait." - mirth

"If we had lines here that would have crossed all of them. For the 1,077,986th time." - Gusington

"Government is so expensive that it should at least be entertaining." - airboy

"As long as there's bacon, everything will be all right." - Toonces

spelk

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.

bboyer66

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.

republic

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.

Mr. Bigglesworth

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.
"Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more; "
- Shakespeare's Henry V, Act III, 1598

Mr. Bigglesworth

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".
"Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more; "
- Shakespeare's Henry V, Act III, 1598

Staggerwing

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.
Vituð ér enn - eða hvat?  -Voluspa

Nothing really rocks and nothing really rolls and nothing's ever worth the cost...

"Don't you look at me that way..." -the Abyss
 
'When searching for a meaningful embrace, sometimes my self respect took second place' -Iggy Pop, Cry for Love

... this will go down on your permanent record... -the Violent Femmes, 'Kiss Off'-

"I'm not just anyone, I'm not just anyone-
I got my time machine, got my 'electronic dream!"
-Sonic Reducer, -Dead Boys

Mr. Bigglesworth

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.
"Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more; "
- Shakespeare's Henry V, Act III, 1598

JasonPratt

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.)
ICEBREAKER THESIS CHRONOLOGY! -- Victor Suvorov's Stalin Grand Strategy theory, in lots and lots of chronological order...
Dawn of Armageddon -- narrative AAR for Dawn of War: Soulstorm: Ultimate Apocalypse
Survive Harder! -- Two season narrative AAR, an Amazon Blood Bowl career.
PanzOrc Corpz Generals -- Fantasy Wars narrative AAR, half a combined campaign.
Khazâd du-bekâr! -- narrative dwarf AAR for LotR BfME2 RotWK campaign.
RobO Q Campaign Generator -- archived classic CMBB/CMAK tool!