Author Topic: C# Aurora Changes Discussion  (Read 135060 times)

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Garfunkel

  • Rear Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 878
  • Thanked: 61 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1725 on: September 15, 2018, 09:23:39 AM »
And now we have proper supply elements for ground forces. What was left unsaid, was how do we replace supply units that have been consumed?
 

Online King-Salomon

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • Posts: 36
  • Thanked: 10 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1726 on: September 15, 2018, 09:35:43 AM »
And now we have proper supply elements for ground forces. What was left unsaid, was how do we replace supply units that have been consumed?

Had just the same question myself   ??? ???
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 7010
  • Thanked: 1829 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1727 on: September 15, 2018, 09:45:51 AM »
Units can be moved very easily between formations in the same location, so you can build a logistics-dedicated formation and transfer supply vehicles from that formation into the formations that require them. For C# Aurora, there are no 'fixed' formations. You can combine formations, move units between them, detach units to form a new independent formation, etc.. You design formation templates for building purposes but they are flexible once built.
 

Offline Hazard

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • H
  • Posts: 259
  • Thanked: 23 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1728 on: September 15, 2018, 02:27:35 PM »
I'm kinda tempted to ask for a Large Logistics Module that's either Static only or limited to Static, Super Heavy and Ultra Heavy Vehicles. It's not the sort of thing you'd see outside of very large commands that expect heavy combat though. Does the system calculate total supply draw per combat round, per number of combat rounds or per day or something, does it check from the formation first or does it look in higher order formations first? And does it draw first from vehicle provided supply points or infantry provided supply points when you are talking of the same formation?

I'm already theorycrafting a little when it comes to how I'd integrate supply units. Infantry supply units are probably of limited utility outside of smallish drop formations to supply them while the rest of the army unloads, or when you are using large blob formations where the 12 size you lose to the light vehicle unit type is sufficiently a drawback when it means you can squeeze in a few more troops and thus guns.
 

Offline DEEPenergy

  • Leading Rate
  • *
  • Posts: 11
  • Thanked: 1 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1729 on: September 15, 2018, 02:43:57 PM »
I would also enjoy logistics modules on static units, as an abstracted way to represent a large cache of supplies, or supplies parachuted in by plane.
 

Offline Bremen

  • Commander
  • *********
  • B
  • Posts: 364
  • Thanked: 20 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1730 on: September 15, 2018, 04:52:12 PM »
Given how units work I think that's actually better represented by infantry. Unit size is chassis size + equipment size, and infantry is the only unit with a base size of 0. The only advantage static logistics would have would be slightly more hp, and since cost is based on size you can already have 2.2 1 hp infantry logistics for the same size and cost as a hypothetical 1 3 hp static logistics.

You can always just think of infantry logistics as a supply stash and a guy with a checklist, especially since it doesn't actually have a gun. A light vehicle logistics would therefor be the same stash with a truck to deliver the supplies with. In this case the idea of a buried bunker or otherwise protected supply depot would be handled by fortification value, including the difference between the maximum self fortification (3) and the maximum fortification (6) being the construction units building something like a buried bunker for the supplies.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2018, 04:55:10 PM by Bremen »
 

Offline Hazard

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • H
  • Posts: 259
  • Thanked: 23 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1731 on: September 15, 2018, 06:55:28 PM »
The issue is more with the mechanics of supply: Infantry supply can only supply inside the formation and not up or down the formation. A big Static supply unit would not be subject to that rule.
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 7010
  • Thanked: 1829 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1732 on: September 15, 2018, 07:04:25 PM »
I'm kinda tempted to ask for a Large Logistics Module that's either Static only or limited to Static, Super Heavy and Ultra Heavy Vehicles. It's not the sort of thing you'd see outside of very large commands that expect heavy combat though. Does the system calculate total supply draw per combat round, per number of combat rounds or per day or something, does it check from the formation first or does it look in higher order formations first? And does it draw first from vehicle provided supply points or infantry provided supply points when you are talking of the same formation?

All this is covered in the rules post. The text continues below the first screenshot.
 

Offline Hazard

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • H
  • Posts: 259
  • Thanked: 23 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1733 on: September 16, 2018, 05:29:43 AM »
All this is covered in the rules post. The text continues below the first screenshot.

... I need better reading comprehension.

Still, a question remains unanswered. There's no indication as to whether supply is drawn per combat round, per day, or per other measure.

I'd have no problem with units out of supply being even more limited than only 1/4th of the units making attacks. Up to and including no units making attacks. Hey, logistics are important in warfare, and if there's one thing planetary garrisons will be good at it's stacking endless piles of supplies so it's not as if they are likely to run out if you do it right. Which makes me repeat the question, are you going to add a Large Logistics Module for Static units that has more supplies?

Also, I note that the calculation for the GSP draw of a unit is (Penetration Value * Damage Value * Shots), but the racial force strength modifiers can cause confusion in this calculation on the part of players. Ah well, at least the GSP cost is calculated ahead of time and tabulated in the unit design window.
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 7010
  • Thanked: 1829 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1734 on: September 16, 2018, 06:17:01 AM »
All this is covered in the rules post. The text continues below the first screenshot.

... I need better reading comprehension.

Still, a question remains unanswered. There's no indication as to whether supply is drawn per combat round, per day, or per other measure.

I'd have no problem with units out of supply being even more limited than only 1/4th of the units making attacks. Up to and including no units making attacks. Hey, logistics are important in warfare, and if there's one thing planetary garrisons will be good at it's stacking endless piles of supplies so it's not as if they are likely to run out if you do it right. Which makes me repeat the question, are you going to add a Large Logistics Module for Static units that has more supplies?

Also, I note that the calculation for the GSP draw of a unit is (Penetration Value * Damage Value * Shots), but the racial force strength modifiers can cause confusion in this calculation on the part of players. Ah well, at least the GSP cost is calculated ahead of time and tabulated in the unit design window.

The key sentence is "However, if units with logistics modules are available, ground units can draw supply to both fight the current combat round and replenish supplies used in previous combat rounds." So supply is drawn each round if available. If there has previously been a break in supply, then after the current round is supplied, more supplies are drawn to replenish the inherent supply.

I'm not going to add a static module. The distinction between light vehicle and infantry is that the light vehicles can supply over distance (from superior units further back from the front line), while infantry can only supply locally. Static would be in a worse situation than infantry and cost more.

GSP costs are for the base value of the component. It isn't affected by racial strength modifiers.
 

Offline sloanjh

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • Posts: 2714
  • Thanked: 57 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1735 on: September 16, 2018, 08:57:22 AM »
If I think of vehicular supply as trucks full of stuff, then it seems like both the trucks and the stuff are consumed when the supplies are used, so that one must rebuild both the trucks and the stuff to replace the supplies.  If this is a correct interpretation of the rules, I'm interested in the rationale for this behavior.

I can see having some attrition on the trucks due to wear and tear but 100% seems high.  This brings up another thought: should the maintenance abstraction be higher/adjusted to also require GSP for units in combat, especially vehicular?  And I forget if there's a ground forces training system in place, but if so it seems that should have enhanced supply requirements too....

Thanks,
John
 
The following users thanked this post: DIT_grue

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 7010
  • Thanked: 1829 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1736 on: September 16, 2018, 09:11:16 AM »
If I think of vehicular supply as trucks full of stuff, then it seems like both the trucks and the stuff are consumed when the supplies are used, so that one must rebuild both the trucks and the stuff to replace the supplies.  If this is a correct interpretation of the rules, I'm interested in the rationale for this behavior.

I can see having some attrition on the trucks due to wear and tear but 100% seems high.  This brings up another thought: should the maintenance abstraction be higher/adjusted to also require GSP for units in combat, especially vehicular?  And I forget if there's a ground forces training system in place, but if so it seems that should have enhanced supply requirements too....

Thanks,
John

The 'supply trucks' are an abstraction of the logistics system. I considered having vehicles that carried supplies and could be replenished. However, that would require tracking the supplies as a separate item to the supply vehicles, building the supplies separately, adding rules/code to support that resupply process and adding the UI to support that extra detail. Eventually, I decided that having consumable vehicles was a lot more straightforward, so I made the logistics modules smaller and cheaper than originally intended to cover the cost of the vehicle.

GSP is only required for combat and the rest of the time maintenance is purely wealth-based for ground forces. although the point about training is a good one.
 
The following users thanked this post: DIT_grue

Offline hyramgraff

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • h
  • Posts: 38
  • Thanked: 3 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1737 on: September 16, 2018, 09:29:14 AM »
Eventually, I decided that having consumable vehicles was a lot more straightforward ...

To me, it sounds like the technobabble explanation is that the supply trucks that carry the bullets have an edible chassis.  Instead of having to use a truck to ship the MREs they managed to make the truck out of the MREs.   ;) :D
 
The following users thanked this post: Happerry

Offline Person012345

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Posts: 455
  • Thanked: 16 times
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1738 on: September 16, 2018, 09:48:57 AM »
I would think of it like there is a global, practically inexhaustable truck pool. When you create a supply vehicle, you're really just creating the supplies, then demanding a truck come and pick it up (something we can assume is a trivial matter for an interstellar empire to organise). They can be comandeered civilian trucks, purpose built trucks, whatever, they spend most of their time existing in the aether of the society until they are required. Then, when their supplies have been exhausted they go and do things, get maintained, make their way to where they need to go by civilian means, whatever, melt back into society and may or may not be one of the future comandeered trucks.

Yes, it's a little abstract, but it makes more sense than the trucks just spontaneously combusting because they ran out of bullets or something, to my mind.
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 7010
  • Thanked: 1829 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Reply #1739 on: September 16, 2018, 11:20:49 AM »
I would think of it like there is a global, practically inexhaustable truck pool. When you create a supply vehicle, you're really just creating the supplies, then demanding a truck come and pick it up (something we can assume is a trivial matter for an interstellar empire to organise). They can be comandeered civilian trucks, purpose built trucks, whatever, they spend most of their time existing in the aether of the society until they are required. Then, when their supplies have been exhausted they go and do things, get maintained, make their way to where they need to go by civilian means, whatever, melt back into society and may or may not be one of the future comandeered trucks.

Yes, it's a little abstract, but it makes more sense than the trucks just spontaneously combusting because they ran out of bullets or something, to my mind.

Yes, that is a good way of looking at it. Although I do like the edible trucks idea :)
 

 

Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53