Date: Wed Jun 23 18:40:05 2004
Sender: Andy Dolphin
With the air and ground basics pretty much sorted out and the France 1940
scenario working reasonably well, let's start looking ahead to the next
playtest scenario, Russia 1941 -- the only additional scenario we can
realistically add before having to add naval rules. This will introduce four
elements to the game: Supplies, Production, Rail Movement, and Weather. I'll
start threads on the first two now.
To some extent, the inverted/uninverted counter rules already take supply into
account, as uninverting a unit means giving it what it needs to return to full
strength after significant combat. However, if supply rules ended here, it
would be possible for a German unit that breaks free in Russia to go rampaging
through Siberia without any supply and without any ill effects. So there does
need to be something additional put in the rules to force units to try to stay
in supply.
What I would suggest is the following system:
1. After the air/naval phase and before the ground phase, all ground units,
ports, and airbases check supply. Checking supply means that a path across
friendly-controlled hexes can be traced from a supply source. A unit out of
supply is marked as such, and can only make an attack or movement that could
get it back in supply during the subsequent turn.
2. At the end of the ground phase, all units marked out of supply are checked
again. Those still out of supply are inverted (or if already inverted, are
eliminated). Those in supply are OK and have the out of supply marker removed.
A port or airbase out of supply isn't eliminated, but is unable to base new
units.
Where it gets tricky is deciding how detailed we want to make the supply line
rules:
*What is a supply source? Obviously a controlled city in one's homeland. If a
naval supply mission goes through, the destination port will be a supply
source. If an air supply mission goes through, the target hex will be a supply
source. Depending on how we decide the rail system should be treated, any hex
that can serve as a railhead would be a supply source.
*Should there be a maximum length of a supply line? Realism would dictate
"yes"; the British inability to conquer Libya in 1940-1941 was because they
couldn't operate effectively more than 6-7 hexes from their railhead. On the
eastern front, the Germans had trouble due to the length of their supply lines,
as did the Russians in 1944-1945. And of course, the infamous railway in Burma
was built for supply purposes. The tangible effect of such a rule would be to
force countries to stay on the ball and build supply centers when their units
advance too far.
Probably a simpler choice that is more effective is to make it more
"expensive" to supply units more than some distance away from a supply source,
and just take for granted that no player is going to do something dumb like
forgetting to build a supply center. I prefer this; simpler is better.
*Should there be a maximum capacity of a supply line? In the case of naval and
air supply, absolutely during the initial supply phase (1). If supply is taken
from a railhead, probably the supply should count against the country's rail
capacity (to be discussed later). If supplies are taken directly from cities,
I don't see that a maximum capacity would be warranted. During the final
supply phase (2), I wouldn't want to see a maximum capacity. The Axis supply
problems in North Africa kept them from attacking, but they still defended
quite well.
comments?
Date: Thu Jun 24 21:17:28 2004
Sender: Phil Bradley
for the most part every thing sounds on the right track to me. I very much
like supply rules that aren't too damning otherwise the game turns into one of
a tactical nature where cutting supply becomes the main focus rather than
attacking units and taking objectives. A couple questions come to mind..
1. Is there going to be any ZOC (zone of control)?
2. I'm not sure if I agree with a controlled city having unlimited capacity for
supply. What if the city under siege? Maybe it would be fine to keep the
units that start in the hex supplied but any other units that come via airdrop
or builds should not be allowed any supplies.
thats all i can think of for now.
Date: Fri Jun 25 02:05:58 2004
Sender: Andy Dolphin
I wasn't planning on ZOCs. 100km (200 in the Pacific) is quite a large
distance.
I'm not too worried about supply of beseiged units. Note that only units
beseiged in one of their own cities would be in supply, and presumably the
population and leaders would be more favorably inclined to help them hold out
as they have a vested interest in not being conquered. More pragmatically, I
can't think of any successful drawn-out seiges of this sort during the war. On
100km scales, Leningrad was beseiged for several years (though on 5-km scales
they were able to get supplies through).
However, when it comes to production, this is more of a concern... Presumably
units should only be produced in major cities that have a line of communication
to some source of resources. yuck.
Date: Mon Jul 12 14:31:05 2004
Sender: Andy Dolphin
anyone else?
Date: Sat Jul 24 16:06:50 2004
Sender: Andy Dolphin
...bump...
Date: Tue Sep 14 23:28:40 2004
Sender: Andy Dolphin
...bump...
Dolphin Simulation Games is not responsible for the content of posts.
Please report any offensive messages to help@dolphinsim.com.
