Hearts of Iron IV - 33rd Development Diary - Supply

[mursolini]

They need a crazy amount of fuel to be produced so you could expect that they stockpile fuel for the ship's lifetime while building the ship. Being unable to build modern ships will quickly destroy the navy's ability to be an effective combat force anyway.

If only crazy amounts of fuel were easy to store. Most countries can`t even store 90 day`s worth, but here we are, storing the 12 years worth of your fleet`s fuel is no problem.

Which are included in the equipment, you don't just produce the rifle but also ammuntion for it.

Then what is the point of equipment anyway?
In this game, we were supposed to have equipment, are we not? What is the point of this feature, if what we get is not separated need for supply of highly specialised equipment and more easily supplied but requiring higher numbers consumables like ammo and fuel, that are often easily transferable between models. In HOI3 there was abstracted IC and practicals. Where is the upgrade over old system? What is supposed to be the key feature of this game?

That we get even worse system where resources and supply stockpiles are infinite, but fuel for your Pz3 can`t be used for your PZ4, and ammunition is not transferable between different models of tank with same gun?

This is a let down. Catastrophic or not.

 

[dav77-b]

So my tanks are using tanks as fuel?
Does that mean that reliability of my tanks is reducing my "fuel" demand?
And how does that work for ships? Do I have to supply my bismarck with 0.1 bismarcks per month? or can I fuel it with submarines?

 

[WeissRaben]

Oil should definitely be a part of supply - I honestly don't like the "so you don't have to stick them in port" part, because it sounds as "losing is unfun". Sorry, but I want to be punished if I fail to refuel my ships. And while a tank can be abstracted as "the #XX tank of this company", a capital ship will be more important and probably at sea for most of the game. And I don't want to have a fuel-strapped Japan that still sorties out Yamato, Musashi, and the whole Kido Butai as if nothing.

 

[TheDecider]

• It also worth noting that supply areas will change size if they are being fought over so actual levels will depend on how much you control.

Are you given a % of 'Local supply base' based on the % of provinces you control in the area?

Let's say there is a area with:
- 10 local supply base
- 10 provinces divided into
--- 9 regular provinces
--- 1 victory point city province (gives +1 supply)
total = 11 supply

You control the city but enemy has occupied everything else.

Is the formula (% of occupation * local supply) + sum(victory points) ?

Meaning you would get 2 supply? ( 1 province = 10%, 10% of 10 'local supply base' is 1 ) + ( 1 victory point)

 

[Forgiven]

I must be onlyone who kinda liked HoI3 supply system... few things would have made it a lot better (like being able to pick area to supplied from depot X that you placed yourself) but... still, you could work around it.

 

[Raptor83]

Looks good, but IMO there should be possibility (related to battleplans) to operate more that usual number of troops in the area, during prepared battle - IRL large offensives took a long time to prepare, due to need of stockpiling large amounts of ammo and fule in that area.

 

[Vukodav]

The "Tank" equipment as I said before also contains fuel, tanks need alot of oil to be produced so if you don't have access to oil you won't be producing many tanks which mean you will not have a replacement for the lost tank. The effect will be the same in the long term as if the game had fuel as a needed resource.

So, instead of creating just another two equipment items (fuel, supply) is better to make unrealistic system where you fuel your tank at the start and that is it? It is not even that, you build a tank with lots of fuel and metal, then you have to make more tanks in order for the previous one to work. In the end, I will have to produce Panzer V's to supply my Panzer I leftovers... and I won't get Panzer V's stats - because I just resupply my division and not upgrade it.

The whole system is riddled with holes that could all be patched by just adding two new buildable equipment. And I bet you that would be the first thing that mods will fix.

 

[Nicolas I]

Oil is built into the original equipment build for the equipment that needs it (tanks, trucks, planes, ships). Its not tracked separately or needed beyond building the equipment. I've been rationalizing it in that you are buying an average vehicles lifetime use of oil per vehicle.

So I will pay the same "oil component" price to build a tank that will be destroyed in 1940 than for one that will last until 1945 ? I find it hard to swallow that.

Must we understand that the replacement of motorized equipment includes an abstraction of oil used ? This way, high attrition regions would mean more oil is spent ? And the longer I travel, the more cumulative attrition would represent oil spent travelling ?

Nothing like that at all. Once your 1940 tank runs out of gas, they ship a replacement tank that's fully fueled and armed, and ready to go for the next 1000km or 100 rounds of main gun fire, whichever comes first.

Yes, build a tank that will last only until its fuel tank is empty. Very efficient. Very realistic !

Wasn't the introduction of equipment justified by the objective to be more realistic ?

yeah, which means that *how* to supply someone becomes more important. If you lose some resource you need (say chromium for advanced tanks) you might have to reoganize those divisions to be able to supply them.

So if I lose access to chromium that means I cannot refuel my existing advanced tanks ? Very logical indeed !

 

[Mrop]

I see the Japanese are launching a "supplies attack".

 

[Hatting]

Think on it people. Tanks move, fight, take attrition ---> lose tanks ----> make more tanks ----> need oil

At the end oil is still being used

 

[DignitasMoyes]

What limits a fleets time at sea? ... does a slow decline in organisation basically represent the need to return to port to refuel at some stage? But if ships don't require fuel, can my fleet of 30 ships sail the globe non-stop i.e. my Japanese fleet sails into the Atlantic and destroys a convoy or two and heads back to the Pacific to launch Pearl Harbour? The only down side being lower organisation? Also, if fuel isn't a concern, how do you model ship movement speed between provinces? Standard cruise speed Vs increases in speed to escape dangerous areas / or to get into a fight.

Certain routes of supply/equipment were optional in WW2 (i.e. the Russian convoys) can these 'extra' sources to allies be play controlled, i.e. created, delayed, suspended, cancelled?

I'm not altogether convinced by Podcat's comment of "buff to fun since you dont have to stick them in a port the whole game." If the Japanese navy is doing well your oil supplies should (in theory) be allowing for active operations. If your oil supply is suffering it probably means you've already lost the war and you are trying to best manage your terminal decline. Resource scarcity and limiting fleet movements to available supplies and your desperate last ditch war plans are probably part of the fun of 'going down with the ship' so to speak.

Anyhow. All I know is this game is going to be much better than Hearts of Iron 3, and I look forward to playing it. I accept there are bound to be a few limitations in any solid approach to a problem that doesn't always gel with the historical management of the same issue.

 

[Gre]

If I'm not mistaken, supply is not just equipment - if your tank is out of supply, it's out of supply and will suffer some penalties whether or not you can send a new tank to replace it.
But it should be possible to model the continuous demand for fuel and other expendables without having a stockpile or flow system.
The method for determining how much supply (and fuel) is available in a supply zone can be the same, but there could also be an overall supply/fuel demand. Then a certain amount of resources and factories would need to be allocated to fill it. If that global demand is not filled, the amount of supply and fuel in each zone - globally - will be penalized. And you can assign different zones - or even all groups of zones - a priority, so they get penalized less than others if global supply/ fuel demand is not met.
I would bet that something like this will be implemented in a DLC. You saw it here first.

 

[leemurthexvi]

sounds cool, kind of wonder if it will be possible to capture enemy equipment i would kind of like the idea of filling my custom Greece Cataphracts divisions with captained German armorer if not that OK i just lend lease form France or join the axis.

 

[Vukodav]

Think on it people. Tanks move, fight, take attrition ---> lose tanks ----> make more tanks ----> need oil

At the end oil is still being used

My only doubt is on fleets?

And what if I want to ride my tanks in circles around Moscow in June? No attrition, no fight... but I have to supply my tanks with tanks. Just another stupid and lazy shortcut in the development of HOI4.

 

[Denkt]

So, instead of creating just another two equipment items (fuel, supply) is better to make unrealistic system where you fuel your tank at the start and that is it? It is not even that, you build a tank with lots of fuel and metal, then you have to make more tanks in order for the previous one to work.

Podcat explains well why the new supply system is better then the old one:

yeah, which means that *how* to supply someone becomes more important. If you lose some resource you need (say chromium for advanced tanks) you might have to reoganize those divisions to be able to supply them.

In the end, I will have to produce Panzer V's to supply my Panzer I leftovers... and I won't get Panzer V's stats - because I just resupply my division and not upgrade it.

Equipment can't change their shape. If you use Panzer V to replace Panzer I, they will still be Panzer V.

The whole system is riddled with holes that could all be patched by just adding two new buildable equipment. And I bet you that would be the first thing that mods will fix.

No the old system was much worse, generic supply and generic fuel was very uninteresting.

 

[No idea]

Hello Podcat. Thank you for the DD. It is one of the most important aspects of the game, imho. 2 questions:

1. How are bottlenecks generated?

2. Do individual units "run out of supplies" each at their own time or do ALL the units in a given province run out of supplies at the same time? (for example, a unit can be at combat while another can be in reserve, so the one in combat should run out of supplies much faster)

 

[dizzle3]

They will get obsolete and they also need factories to be produced while fuel in HOI3 was produced basically for free.

It will take more tought to build an effective army, you can't just switch from producing tanks and still think your tank force will do well.

I don't think it's a total disaster as a system, just think it needs careful monitoring for exploits.

For example, if I disband tanks do I get some oil back from them? That's potentially a way to store fuel. Not as good as an actual stockpile, but a way to get around an oil shortage.

I'm also slightly concerned that it minimizes the importance of refineries since oil becomes tanks without needing to be converted to fuel by a refinery- a major target of allied air raids.

It might also be possible to mod fuel back in- as an equipment type which is required by armored divisions and is very subject to attrition.

 

[Denkt]

if I disband tanks do I get some oil back from them?

You can't destroy equipment, if you disband a tank division the tanks will be moved into your stockpile for later use.

I'm also slightly concerned that it minimizes the importance of refineries since oil becomes tanks without needing to be converted to fuel by a refinery- a major target of allied air raids.

Podcat have pretty much confirmed (in an older thread) that infrastructure affects how many resources are produced, so if you bomb infrastructure of oil states you can destroy your enemy's oil production.

 

[mursolini]

So, instead of creating just another two equipment items (fuel, supply) is better to make unrealistic system where you fuel your tank at the start and that is it? It is not even that, you build a tank with lots of fuel and metal, then you have to make more tanks in order for the previous one to work. In the end, I will have to produce Panzer V's to supply my Panzer I leftovers... and I won't get Panzer V's stats - because I just resupply my division and not upgrade it.

The whole system is riddled with holes that could all be patched by just adding two new buildable equipment. And I bet you that would be the first thing that mods will fix.

Indeed. Make fuel equipment and supplies equipment, issue is completely solved. How come they couldn`t come up with it?

Think on it people. Tanks move, fight, take attrition ---> lose tanks ----> make more tanks ----> need oil

At the end oil is still being used

The problem is that tanks have to be resupplied with fuel and ammo daily, while even without spare parts they can work for quite some time. So, it is close to impossible to come up with realistic way for divisions to have to be resupplied. You either have ammo effectivly for months worth of fighting, or you have to change all tanks in all your division every few weeks. Neither seems good.

Not to mention, that we will run into huge over-upgraded armies just like HOI3, because old equipment will be consumed at a very high rate, so virtually none will be left in stock for a few years, unless we want something like Germany storing 2-3 years worth of military equipment so their old tanks can retire on shedule.

 

[Vukodav]

Podcat explains well why the new supply system is better then the old one:




Equipment can't change their shape. If you use Panzer V to replace Panzer I, they will still be Panzer V.


No the old system was much worse, generic supply and generic fuel was very uninteresting.

We are talking about supplying here, not replacing loses. If it is the same thing for the developers, I just might stick to that "uninteresting" system that was unrealistic, but way more realistic than this.