Hearts of Iron IV - 33rd Development Diary - Supply

[mursolini]

I don't think that is correct, they did delay the game and one reason could be that they did not find out any way to make HOI3 supply system superior to the supply system shown in this DD.

This system would be something almost everyone would be in favor IF it had supply and fuel as parts of equipment, that are produced by factories and distributed same way equipment does. There you are, vastly superior supply system to HOI3.

The developers know what they wan't HOI4 to be, that was the first DD posted.
They have actually played HOI4 as well as HOI3 and they know which supply model is superior. Atleast we should give this new system a chance.

What will you say of HOI3 release state then? Should we assume that laggy, crashy , buggy and having some sysyems not even working, was exactly the state of the game they wanted?

"Could be better" is a poor criticism if you don't specify how. People compare to what they are familiar with, which, in this case, is often HOI3.

I specified HOW the current supply system would be much better at least 3 times.
Any sound critisism for suggestions?

HOI has always been farther towards the reality games on that scale. I would like to see it continue to move more to that side. Parts of HOI 4 are moving that way, the Division Designer, experience, unit modifications, and the new factory system seem to me to be moving the game in that direction. The new resource system (with no stockpiling), the lack of an OOB and Divisional Leaders, and now the Supply System are, to me, clear moves the other way.

Indeed, division designer seem particularly unnecessary detail for the strategy game. Yet, most people are for it. But when supply system is reduced to EU4 state, some peope don`t mind?

The thing is, the ratio of material and factory days used to build a new tank with a 'standard lifetime of fuel and ammo' isn't standard, and will vary (wildly) by the various uses of the tank. If, for example, the ratio set is for Germany in Barbarossa, then the USSR (which had huge levels of tank attrition compared with the other majors) will have some pretty expensive reinforcing to do, which will require more oil (because its tanks were built with the amount of fuel a German tank in Barbarossa used, on average) than it should have, so the USSR suddenly needs more oil to achieve its historic tank production and reinforcement rate than the Germans. If, on the other hand, you set it for the Russians in Barbarossa, the Russians are fine but now Germany needs nowhere near as much oil as it should for one standard tank 'life', and will have an easier time building up a large armoured force.

Exactly!

Your still confused about equipment and supply being the same thing. They are not. You don't send replacement equipment as supplies, you send supplies as supplies. You send more Panzer II when you lose some Panzer II and want to replace them.

You don`t sent supplies, since you don`t produce supplies. "supplies" are a logistical capacity in current area, and supply consumption is the logistical load on the network.

I hope the devs take note of the feedback on the forums. I think that adding Oil refineries as strategic buildings producing fuel (same type as synthetic rubber plants), and having a small stockpile to act as a buffer for let's say 1 week representing the oil in process of conversion, and the fuel already in the supply network would be pretty easy and solve most of the complaints expressed on the forum, and will also prevent different gaming tactics that some players here already started to think about.

Countries with lots of oil but very limited refining capacity would, under the current system be able to field large tank armies, even though in reality they would not have been able to fuel them.

I would be willing to wait an extra month for the game if this crucial aspect will be fixed. If not, I hope modders will rise to the challenge and will create probably the most popular mod for the game.

They don`t even have to make it this complicated and simply make refining fuel be handled with current civilian IC, taking oil but outputting fuel.

Why do a lot of people in this thread say that supply = equipment and that theres no supply? X amount of your civilian factories are locked into producing supply for your army. Supply is a thing which isnt the same as equipment! Equipment is a part of the supply units need.

They don`t provide supply for your units, they provide consumer goods for your population. There are no supply production of any kind. "supplies" are a logistical capacity in current area, and supply consumption is the logistical load on the network.

 

[Axe99]

I might have dreamed something i will not deny that i just think i remember seeing supply. Its true theres no flow system but even if its just a supply cap the units still need to be in supply and that is not the exactly same thing as equipment. which a lot of people make it sound like.

I don't think you dreamed it . I have a vague recollection of something like that early in the DD timeline, but we also had fuel in the unit stats box back then, so the supplies may have fallen out of the design along with fuel (or not, we really don't know ). In terms of the supplies=equipment thing, if the only thing we're 'sending' to our units is equipment, then it kind of has to proxy for everything. Think of it like a regression with only one variable instead of three - the equation still needs to balance, but it by being a more limited function it's less flexible and deep in how the game models supply needs.

 

[mursolini]

In RL you are totally right!
But I was talking about ingame mechanics! I know that Germany (and other countries) had problems with getting enough supply/fuel In R e a l L i f e. But HOI4 assumes that there was enough in every country and the problem is more on the logistics side. They basically abstract lacking fuel in German frontline troops (which lead to lower combat value) by slowing down their tank-production, thereby slowing down their replacement rates and thus lowering combat value. The effect is the same. I haven't thougt about exploits yet, though...

The effect is not the same, if German armored corps can march towards moscow and back because you have 2k panzer Is in your stockpile, that would proxy as fuel.

Statistics is not very good proxie for tactical situations, and HOI4 is a game about tactical division vs division fights and moves.

 

[BeauNiddle]

I think a major issue with the new system is that by not having supply as entity it doesn't seem to capture the major impact of being low on ammo for lack of industrial output or transport.

All German units in the Crimea fight and stay in supply so long as they are not over the region's supply limit.

Real life- the Germans artillery were very low on ammunition for months because of poor supply, as they were not the priority for shells etc. Which had major impact on the fight.

Ok so game has to be fun over realism when there is a choice. But I find if HoI had logistics impacting on units performance for low ammo and fuel states fun.

I really hope they improve this, and have fuel and supply packets to be produces. Heck they don't need the flow, they can have a tap on or off approach and give each unit X % resupply based on the stats they are using.

I have another question:

How does the current system represent the Western Allies use of more resources for Logistics?

If the German industry can only produce 80 artillery equipment units a month and the Moscow theatre requires 100 then the Crimea units will slowly degrade over time as attrition isn't replaced. (assuming Crimea has a lower replenishment priority than Moscow) Or they will pull older less capable guns from the stockpile and thus fight less well (much the same effect). Thus leading to interesting choices for the German player - do you let other theatres run down or do you divert industry away from producing those shiny new Tigers (or sacrifice the really efficient pz4 production lines in the hope that the tiger lines will be high enough in efficiency before you run through your tank stockpile) Alternatively the Germans could cease operations in the Crimea front in the hope of reducing attrition whilst the Moscow offensive continues.

As for Allied logistics if you're asking about the superior firepower tactical branch then I assume it's something like +10% soft & Hard at the cost of 20% more attrition (to simulate needing to send more resources to the front). If you have the industrial output to keep your armies fed then you get better damage potential. If you're asking about Allied focus on supply movement then maybe they researched bonuses to spill over or to improved throughput (to counter any supply bottlenecks)

 

[Lifthrasil]

What I dont quite understand: Why should "fuel" and "supply" be seperated items? "Supplies" just means "everything a unit needs to function", so fuel could be abstracted into a single "supply" resource that is transported down the road.
The problem many people have here is that they dislike units "living off the land" even if cut off. But Podcat already said the numbers are subject to rebalancing. So maybe in the end, a province could sustain just 1 division each, and everything else is subject to your supply route management. And if supply is just one item, why can't it be abstracted totally?
If your supply lines are cut off, your units run out of supply (they WILL have an individual supply-meter/stockpile) and then tanks probably won't move anymore until you open supply routes again.

The new system makes more sense the more I think about it! We just have to move away from the old thought-musters in HOI3 were supply and fuel were tangible, seperate items!
Then it makes sense and isn't even immersion breaking

The effect is not the same, if German armored corps can march towards moscow and back because you have 2k panzer Is in your stockpile, that would proxy as fuel.

just to tag you

 

[JamesJameson]

You don`t sent supplies, since you don`t produce supplies. "supplies" are a logistical capacity in current area, and supply consumption is the logistical load on the network.

I am talking about when you send supplies overseas. Yes each province has a supply cap, but that cap is a local cap. The province that your capital comes from, or the next best closest supply source, is the main supplier. How else would we get bottle necks in supplies? I understand it does not work like HOI3 where it was a free pull system, that found a path and got taxed along the way. It's more of a group of provinces that are grouped for gameplay purposes. So you can think of it like supply going from one large group of provinces to the next.

Spoiler: DD Quote

Incoming supplies from neighbor area. We trace back to capital, or if capital is cut off the next best area. The supply you get is limited by the lowest infrastructure on your route (also possibly sabotaged by resistance), including your own infrastructure level. So for a player what you need to care about is what the bottleneck is, because that is what is going to affect how troops on the front fare. There is also some guaranteed spillover from neighbors to soften the transitions between bad and good areas (simulating that even if decent railway lines stop at a point it's feasible to transport some distance with trucks or horses etc"

 

[Enigma1]

The thing is, you can't compare in game with real life, especially when it comes to stockpiling and supplies/fuel.

We all know in game that if we need an 'x' stockpile, then we are going to have it, we start in 1936 and plan.
So, we need a system that 'cheats' to offset the 'Hindsight' factor, which IS the most crucial element of what breaks the game and separates real life scenarios from in game situation.

There is no point saying things like 'but in real life ammunition and fuel was a situation 'x' faced in 'x' area of the world' as none of us in game would face the same, as we would stockpile to compensate.

So, while I understand the desire to have a workable fuel and supply system that 'feels' right, I am very much aware of the 'hindsight factor', and while I might wish for a perfect system that allows fuel and supply to work as many of us would want it to, I am content to see how the proposed system plays out.

Hindsight Factor is the beast to be conquered here, and I am trying to keep an open mind on it.

The devs know what we would all like to see, but I am hoping they have solved the problem in a way that feels right within the game, even if it sounds a bit dodgy when written down in a diary like this.

 

[Modestus]

You don`t sent supplies, since you don`t produce supplies. "supplies" are a logistical capacity in current area, and supply consumption is the logistical load on the network.

That seems to be the situation.


In HOI III the logistical capacity of the whole network determined the amount of produced supplies that a Division would actually receive from the capital.


In HOI IV it would appear that rather then receiving supplies it is instead a condition or a state of being in supply which is determined by the localised logistical capacity of a defined area which in turn determines the amount of supplies that this defined area has, effectively your living off the land.


The reason why air supply is still work in progress I suspect is because you have nothing really to fly in, you have actually no real supplies except equipment.

 

[BarrosRodrigues]

effectively your living off the land.

Exactly like in EU IV but in HOI IV we will be able to reduce the enemy ability to live off the land (envelopment, convoy destruction, etc.).

 

[Poh]

Living of the land?
From the DD we can see (i know podcat said we should look too much at the numbers but still)
Out of 60.51 supply only 10 or 16,5% of total supply in the area is something the area itself "produces" the rest are spillover from neighbor area, 21,6% of total supply, and incoming from the homeland 61,8%.
Im not sure how thats living of the land. Even if we do not produce supplies the system still works essentially like the old just without actual supply flowing but its just showing the capacity that can be supported in any given area by calculating the throughput from the "supply" source, including neighboring areas and the areas own production of "supply".

 

[Scuzzar]

Thanks for that DD.

The old supply system was way to often a show stopper in my HOI3 Sessions

I think I like the new systems, but I am not sure, if I understand everything correct:

Basically there is a Flow Network of Supply (misleading name, because it is only used to calculate maximum flows and Bottlenecks , not the Flow of objects. But that is the established term in graph theory) from the Capital with addition of local bonuses (form cityes etc.) If the local requirement for supply extends this value, you are out of supply giving a increasing malus.

Is this correct?

 

[paranoidsteve]

Thanks for that DD.


Basically there is a Flow Network of Supply (misleading name, because it is only used to calculate maximum flows and Bottlenecks , not the Flow of objects. But that is the established term in graph theory) from the Capital with addition of local bonuses (form cityes etc.) If the local requirement for supply extends this value, you are out of supply giving a increasing malus.

Is this correct?

That is my understanding of the DD, I think the malus increases the rate of disorganisation and decreases the rate of supply of replacement equipment due to attrition losses, weakening your division(s) slowly for 30 days then massively weakening the unit(s).

 

[BarrosRodrigues]

Living of the land?
From the DD we can see (i know podcat said we should look too much at the numbers but still)
Out of 60.51 supply only 10 or 16,5% of total supply in the area is something the area itself "produces" the rest are spillover from neighbor area, 21,6% of total supply, and incoming from the homeland 61,8%.
Im not sure how thats living of the land. Even if we do not produce supplies the system still works essentially like the old just without actual supply flowing but its just showing the capacity that can be supported in any given area by calculating the throughput from the "supply" source, including neighboring areas and the areas own production of "supply".

Yes ultimately that is what this seems to be. Those numbers are simply a bunch of modifiers to calculate how many divisions can live off the land in a particular area and give you some penalties (lower combat efficiency, slower reinforcement, higher attrition, etc.) if you go above it. For all practical purposes if you remove the rule that switches off the majority of "supply" when you envelop divisions and/or destroy all convoys all that will be left is the system present in EU IV where supplies as seen in HOI III play no role whatsoever.

 

[Cardus]

Guys this supply system basically is a system without any supply. Who likes realism will dislike it who likes playability is going to love it.

 

[Jazumir]

I think what we really need is an inambitgious flow-chart or sankey-diagram, showing what entities are actually in the game -or at least the economic site of it, sans xp and such- and where they come from and where they go... cause i dont think i get it. Is it like:

a) Supplies need not be produced. The supply-limit of a supply-area just causes additional attrition to the units, if overstepped. Said attritition will have to be countered by sending equipment, basically reinforcements, which travels to the units how exactly? Like light? E.g.: as long as there is a way to get there, it gets there instantly (hey, from the perspective of the photon, this is true, so dont start with c), except for a percentage lost by convoy raiding, if applicable? Or:

b) "Supplies" is a generic entity which can not be stockpiled but needs to be produced, so you need industry for that and fuel it with a fixed mix of ressources. If you cant produce enough, you get a global malus on your supply areas. This is to reflect armed forces to cost maintainance, which is a burden to any nation´s industry on itself. Rest as a). Or:

c) Each general branch of the military (land/air/sea) has its own kind of supplies which can be stockpiled (in the national equipement stockpile), cause it is equipment. Each branches type needs different sort of ressources (which could even be modified by branch composition or other variables : lots of tanks in your ground forces? ground supply oil needs raises by a bit). Units also need these when being produced - they are part of practically any units composition. The supply limit of an area tells you how many of these units in total you can bring to it. If you go beyond that, the units will fight worse, move slower (also in a and b) and other parts of the unit will be consumed by attrition, which is buffered by supplies for units in supply. Or:

d) Something else still. Please explain.
?

 

[Nicolas I]

Guys this supply system basically is a system without any supply. Who likes realism will dislike it who likes playability is going to love it.

Maybe I'm too demanding but I would like a mix of both, realism & playability !

I'm ready to make some concessions, not to forget one or the other.

 

[keynes2.0]

I dont get why people think this is unrealistic. This system will actually change the strategic situation. You can't deploy troops to the ends of the earth willy nilly. The system of imaginary stockpile numbers never changed anything.

 

[RickInVA]

The thing is, you can't compare in game with real life, especially when it comes to stockpiling and supplies/fuel.

We all know in game that if we need an 'x' stockpile, then we are going to have it, we start in 1936 and plan.
So, we need a system that 'cheats' to offset the 'Hindsight' factor, which IS the most crucial element of what breaks the game and separates real life scenarios from in game situation.

There is no point saying things like 'but in real life ammunition and fuel was a situation 'x' faced in 'x' area of the world' as none of us in game would face the same, as we would stockpile to compensate.

So, while I understand the desire to have a workable fuel and supply system that 'feels' right, I am very much aware of the 'hindsight factor', and while I might wish for a perfect system that allows fuel and supply to work as many of us would want it to, I am content to see how the proposed system plays out.

Hindsight Factor is the beast to be conquered here, and I am trying to keep an open mind on it.

The devs know what we would all like to see, but I am hoping they have solved the problem in a way that feels right within the game, even if it sounds a bit dodgy when written down in a diary like this.

The problem I have with that view is that all the major powers did stockpile essential materiel. Germany stockpiled oil and several metals that they did not produce internally. As much as they could afford. When they took over other countries they did take their stockpiles. The problem HOI3 had with stockpiles, IMHO, was two fold. It was too easy to buy on the open market (money was too readily available) and the stockpile maximum sizes were too large.

Trying to say that Germany, of all the countries, had no idea that war was coming and didn't historically stockpile essential resources to the best of their ability is just fantasy. Japan didn't stockpile oil? Same for Great Britain, with the world's largest fleet scattered all over the globe, no need to stockpile oil and fuel?

Additionally one of the ideas of semi-sandbox games like HOI is to do better than history. To not make the mistakes that were made, or if they were not mistakes, but in reality difficult choices, to have those difficult choices presented to the player.

This supply system, with its mysterious fairy dust "supply" that grows on the ground like mana, and its result, that without enough mana that things break and therefore to respond to a lack of supply you provide more equipment, is just...well, I won;'t say what I think it is.

 

[keynes2.0]

The problem I have with that view is that all the major powers did stockpile essential materiel.

And they will in the game. Every country has a behind the scenes stockpile of 30 days. That's about what they stockpiled historically. You just dont have the ability to use metagame knowledge to do more.

 

[BarrosRodrigues]

a) Supplies need not be produced. The supply-limit of a supply-area just causes additional attrition to the units, if overstepped. Said attritition will have to be countered by sending equipment, basically reinforcements, which travels to the units how exactly? Like light? E.g.: as long as there is a way to get there, it gets there instantly (hey, from the perspective of the photon, this is true, so dont start with

IMHO It seems to be a) but add on top of that all the adverse penalties of being out of supply in HOI III

I dont get why people think this is unrealistic. This system will actually change the strategic situation. You can't deploy troops to the ends of the earth willy nilly. The system of imaginary stockpile numbers never changed anything.

If I understood it correctly for the most part the new system should allow more or less what the HOI III supply system allowed in terms of troop movement but with at least one major difference: because "supply" seems instant you can dump a massive army without any logistical thought or preparation in a place 100 provinces away from your capital/local supply origin without the usual massive supply issues that new players experienced in HOI III (and could not fix because they did not know how mostly because the HOI III UI and tutorial were pretty bad). So in HOI IV you should be able to do the opposite of what you´ve said with ease.