Supply question

[rossbach451]

How does supply work? I keep getting messages that my boys have no access to supplies, either in the field or in a siege. How does this work? I have looked around, but have found nothing yet.

[Ludens]

Supply is simulated through the trait system. When your general is in friendly territory, he will receive the well-supplied trait, giving troops under his command +1 morale. When he stays in enemy territory he will lose this trait and gain the rationing/belts-tightened/starving-line of traits which gives increasing morale penalties (and a security penalty at high levels too). There is little you can do about this, except making sure that you don't stay too long in enemy territory and only setting out when you have the well-supplied trait. The logistics trait is supposed to slow the accumulation of morale penalties somewhat. I thought you could get it by training your generals in academies, but so-far I haven't seen it in my KH campaign, despite the fact that most of my generals are trained in Athens.

Off course, since captains don't get traits you could use captain-led armies, but this is considered an exploit. Also, you could start your attack with a low-ranking general and as soon as he runs out of supplies send a high-ranking general from friendly territory. The leading general determines the supply situation of the army.

Welcome to the Org, BTW .

[Ravenic]

What was the rationale for the besieging army running out of supplies alongside or at an even faster rate then the besieged in city battles?

Simply coding restrictions?

[Foot]

Um, because people in the cities generally have large granaries that will supply them, whilst those on the field would often suffer at the end of a slash-and-burn policy or someother attempt to limit the amount foraged from the defenders lands.

Oh, and having a general leading the army with high management skills gives you better odds of having a good supply line for longer.

Foot

[Ravenic]

Well, slash and burn wasn't a frequently implemented policy, and if that's an excuse then why is there no serious economic repercussions to the defender later, after the siege?

Also, there is such a thing as supply lines. It's not realistic to think that, otherwise sieges would've never worked. If I were Bagabingawhatsawhatever of the Parthians, and I invaded the territory of 'Bactria', I wouldn't go straight to 'Bactra', some hundred miles or more into the nation from it's border. I'd conquer lesser cities on the way so i'd have supply bases, food to feed my armies.

The current system just poorly reflects that. If your army is already "Rationing" by the time you reach the enemies' city, and sometimes much worse depending on if you need to wait out a large and elite garrison. That's hardly the historical norm.

[Warmaster Horus]

Well, if you only occupy cities, and don't exterminate, you'll see that:
a) conquering a nation takes a lot longer, because
b) the population is immediately unhappy, forcing you to keep your army in the town for a certain time.

[Ravenic]

I don't see how that's relevant.

[Ludens]

Also, there is such a thing as supply lines. It's not realistic to think that, otherwise sieges would've never worked. If I were Bagabingawhatsawhatever of the Parthians, and I invaded the territory of 'Bactria', I wouldn't go straight to 'Bactra', some hundred miles or more into the nation from it's border. I'd conquer lesser cities on the way so i'd have supply bases, food to feed my armies.

The current system just poorly reflects that. If your army is already "Rationing" by the time you reach the enemies' city, and sometimes much worse depending on if you need to wait out a large and elite garrison. That's hardly the historical norm.

Supply is a major problem for armies nowadays, so imagine how much worse it would have been back then, without mechanized transport, conservation technology or (in many cases) an established commisariat. It wasn't that unusual for the besieger to give up because he ran out of food faster than the besieged. A prudent general would establish forward supply bases, but again without refrigerators or freight trucks this only did so much, especially if cities were far apart and roads were bad. So I think the current system is very realistic, within the contratins of the engine.

Well, slash and burn wasn't a frequently implemented policy, and if that's an excuse then why is there no serious economic repercussions to the defender later, after the siege?

It may not have been the norm, but it wasn't the exception either. Yes, there should be economic repercussions, but how do you want to simulate them?

[Ravenic]

If you want to hold up Slash and Burn as a reason for repercussions while besieging, then you naturally need have an equal and opposite reaction to it in the negative field. If this can't be done, then Slash and Burn shouldn't be cited as a reason for poor logistics systems.

Personally, I wasn't aware supply was a huge problem in today's time. Not for countries like America at any rate, I doubt any of the soldier's in Iraq have missed too many meals of late. And if logistics were as bad as EB suggests, Alexander could never have happened. Caesar could've never happened.

I only think there needs to be some discussion towards the current supply system, which I find ahistorical and unrealistic.

[Warmaster Horus]

Well, how about you try to do something about it?

And, Caesar had quite a few supply problems I believe. Especially with Vercingetorix who praticed a Scorched Earth policy, and then against Pompey, before attacking Dyrrachium.

[Ludens]

If you want to hold up Slash and Burn as a reason for repercussions while besieging, then you naturally need have an equal and opposite reaction to it in the negative field. If this can't be done, then Slash and Burn shouldn't be cited as a reason for poor logistics systems.

I don't follow your logic here. The economic system is not as moddable as the trait system, hence one may simulate the effect of warfare on trade as well as one should wish. However, it would be more unrealistic not to include supply problems than it is not to include a penalty for destroyed fields. The latter are relatively easy to replant, provided you have the agricultural expertise. Armies tended not to have that.

Personally, I wasn't aware supply was a huge problem in today's time. Not for countries like America at any rate, I doubt any of the soldier's in Iraq have missed too many meals of late. And if logistics were as bad as EB suggests, Alexander could never have happened. Caesar could've never happened.

I can't think why you are having such trouble. I've been able to go on conquering sprees several times. Yes, occasionally my troops would have to tighten their belts, but that's wasn't unusual even for armies with an organized supply train.

[Ravenic]

Well, how about you try to do something about it?

What do 'ya know? I posted in a thread!

Yes, Caesar had supply problems sometimes. But despite being in essentially hostile to near-hostile territory all the time, he still managed to have a full belly sometimes, and get the nice +1 morale bonus every once in awhile.

I don't follow your logic here. The economic system is not as moddable as the trait system, hence one may simulate the effect of warfare on trade as well as one should wish. However, it would be more unrealistic not to include supply problems than it is not to include a penalty for destroyed fields. The latter are relatively easy to replant, provided you have the agricultural expertise. Armies tended not to have that.

Fields are easy to replant, but what if you had to burn them right during the harvest? It's a whole growing season ruined, and winter's about to come on. It's not always so simple as "We'll just replant them." If you can't accurately portray that because of the game's restrictions, then loosen up on the supply penalties as well.

I can't think why you are having such trouble. I've been able to go on conquering sprees several times. Yes, occasionally my troops would have to tighten their belts, but that's wasn't unusual even for armies with an organized supply train.

I don't generally have trouble. Rather, I massacre the crud out of a city and get rationing, or tightened belts, or whatever taken away and them move on. But then there's those long tracts of desert you need to cross. Or on rare occasions when I'm besieging, say, Antioch and I see those five units of Thoritikai Agyraspidai (rare as they are) and their helpers of 15 various other units are all at 'Rationing' while i'm pushing 'Starving', despite nothing being between my massive empire and the army besieging said city.

[Ludens]

Fields are easy to replant, but what if you had to burn them right during the harvest? It's a whole growing season ruined, and winter's about to come on. It's not always so simple as "We'll just replant them." If you can't accurately portray that because of the game's restrictions, then loosen up on the supply penalties as well.

I disagree. Even if the economic consequences of sieges cannot be accurately portrayed, that is no reason to make the game even less realistic by taking away supply problems.

I don't generally have trouble. Rather, I massacre the crud out of a city and get rationing, or tightened belts, or whatever taken away and them move on. But then there's those long tracts of desert you need to cross. Or on rare occasions when I'm besieging, say, Antioch and I see those five units of Thoritikai Agyraspidai (rare as they are) and their helpers of 15 various other units are all at 'Rationing' while i'm pushing 'Starving', despite nothing being between my massive empire and the army besieging said city.

Well, long stretches of desert ought to be hard on supply. It's true there is no proper way to simulate supply lines, but it's not far-fetched to assume that as long as Antioch is not in your hands there is going to be guerilla activity against your supply train. Hence your army having trouble getting enough food.

[Shifty_GMH]

What does it take to gain the Logistical Skill traits ("Understanding of Logistics", "Logistics Expert", and "Logistician")? Is it just a certain level of academy? If so, does anyone know which one?