-
Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.
"This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.
Logistics in strategy games?
- Thread starter Arbiter
- Start date
luj1
You're all shills
Shadow Empire has a logistics system
The Brazilian Slaughter
Arcane
Earth 2150 had units needing resupply, you had to build units which came to resupply yours when your ammo ended and such.
Silva
Arcane
Most strategy games I can think of use logistics, with some degree of abstraction. Maybe a better question is what strategy games are devoid of logistics?
I was just checking on Ultimate General: American Revolution today and it apparently has logistics well represented. Manufacturing/sourcing weapons, powder, shot, etc. and then getting it to your men.
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2018
- Messages
- 1,788
Most RTS games do not represent logistics. They represent an economy, but not really the challenges of operating far away from your base. Troops don't require resupply of ammunition and such. Reinforcements, sure, but that's about it.
Nutmeg
Arcane
In terms of RTS, both Rise of Nations and Rise of Legends abstract logistics with borders, attrition and supply units. The latter basically just extend a radius within which other units will not take attrition damage anywhere they are on the map, which is, IMO, a missed opportunity to require players to set up chains of these supply units. Even then, I remember reviewers and players, including people I knew personally, complaining about the need to have a supply unit at all.
If you count Civ's unit support, that translates well to how pop-cap works in many RTS, but IMO both are a stretch.
In Company of Heroes territories must be connected to your base in order to receive their resources. It's quite a common and valid tactic to decap a key node from the opponent and thus give them a dearth of income as the territories are no longer connected.
MCVs and building chaining rules in the C&C series are pseudo logistics systems.
The Novus faction in Universe at War builds a power grid which is essentially a unit and harvester super highway, out of individual nodes, which can be individually destroyed to wreck havoc on the network.
Outside of RTS, hero chains in HoMM3 are the first thing that comes to mind. Units are kind of ammo in that game after all.
I am also playing a Western Daisenryaku-like called Order of Battle at the moment and that has a pretty cool supply chain abstraction. Basically hexes can be neutral or owned by one player or the other. Players gain ownership by moving units through hexes or through ZoC rules. Certain hexes (or units) on the map act as supply sources and any hex connected to those by player owned hexes are "supplied". Each unit within some supplied territory eats some supply from the total, and each supply source adds to the total. If total supply drain exceeds supply, all units will take efficiency penalties each turn, depending on the size of the deficit.
I know Unity of Command has something similar too.
All Advance Wars games have units running out of fuel and ammo, which you must then resupply with special supply units. I am not certain right now, but I seem to recall a few Daisenryaku titles take a similar approach.
If you count Civ's unit support, that translates well to how pop-cap works in many RTS, but IMO both are a stretch.
In Company of Heroes territories must be connected to your base in order to receive their resources. It's quite a common and valid tactic to decap a key node from the opponent and thus give them a dearth of income as the territories are no longer connected.
MCVs and building chaining rules in the C&C series are pseudo logistics systems.
The Novus faction in Universe at War builds a power grid which is essentially a unit and harvester super highway, out of individual nodes, which can be individually destroyed to wreck havoc on the network.
Outside of RTS, hero chains in HoMM3 are the first thing that comes to mind. Units are kind of ammo in that game after all.
I am also playing a Western Daisenryaku-like called Order of Battle at the moment and that has a pretty cool supply chain abstraction. Basically hexes can be neutral or owned by one player or the other. Players gain ownership by moving units through hexes or through ZoC rules. Certain hexes (or units) on the map act as supply sources and any hex connected to those by player owned hexes are "supplied". Each unit within some supplied territory eats some supply from the total, and each supply source adds to the total. If total supply drain exceeds supply, all units will take efficiency penalties each turn, depending on the size of the deficit.
I know Unity of Command has something similar too.
All Advance Wars games have units running out of fuel and ammo, which you must then resupply with special supply units. I am not certain right now, but I seem to recall a few Daisenryaku titles take a similar approach.
Last edited:
Harthwain
Magister
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2019
- Messages
- 4,807
Hearts of Iron IV is your best bet.
Other than that:
- Unity of Command 1 & 2. The supply system is simple, but it simulates logistics (and how it impacts your operations) very well. This is one of my favourite series.
- Men of War series has supply replenishment simulated to details, although the earlier titles (I think anything below Men of War: Assault Suquad 2) required you to micromanage your soldiers. Call to Arms - Gates of Hell: Ostfront is the latest title from these guys (digitalmindsoft).
- Shadow Empire requires of you to keep in mind you logistical network and supply chain.
laclongquan
Arcane
Romance of Three Kingdom 10.
Your armies must carry their 30 days ration on the campaign trail. In battlemap, tehre's a tile dedicated to their supplies, and if it get destroyed, its gone and affecting morale, and duration of that battle. Reinforcement will bring their supplies to add to the existing camp and can lengthen the duration if calculation allow.
In cities, food will feed the population, as well as decide the duration of defensive battles. Food can be grown by farmers of that city, or bring elsewhere, or trade, magically, with market's merchants. City food aspect is a bit too broken, since if you are city commander you can do quest to invest in merchant's trade and get back lots of food, magically.
But over all I think ROTK10 is the best in term of battle logistic.
Your armies must carry their 30 days ration on the campaign trail. In battlemap, tehre's a tile dedicated to their supplies, and if it get destroyed, its gone and affecting morale, and duration of that battle. Reinforcement will bring their supplies to add to the existing camp and can lengthen the duration if calculation allow.
In cities, food will feed the population, as well as decide the duration of defensive battles. Food can be grown by farmers of that city, or bring elsewhere, or trade, magically, with market's merchants. City food aspect is a bit too broken, since if you are city commander you can do quest to invest in merchant's trade and get back lots of food, magically.
But over all I think ROTK10 is the best in term of battle logistic.
Nutmeg
Arcane
That reminds me. Koei's much older Gemfire made food determine the turn limit for the tactical battle when you'd invade a province. Before the battle, you'd choose how much food to send from the province, and soldiers would eat food at some ratio of units of food per soldier each turn. Don't really know what happens when it runs out (I guess the battle finishes, or maybe some kind of attrition kicks in) as I always brought more than enough food. Food had other uses too, at the strategic level (e.g. trading it for gold to then recruit soldiers, or giving it to the people for increased loyalty).
MadMaxHellfire
Arcane
no offense, but it's a rather dumb question. at the very least, most of the paradox games have logistics, one way or another. and those are far from being the true hardcore warfare simulations. does your best friend live in a pineapple?
Silva
Arcane
KOEI series seem to have the most interesting food logistics among the more "generalist" strategy games I've seen, combining relative depth with simplicity/easy of use.
Most Paradox games (especially the EU series) don't simulate anything, they're highly abstract number stacking games.
laclongquan
Arcane
I think Dynasty Warriors 5 Empire (and Sengoku Warriors 2 Empire)try a logistic feature. Each gate you defeat must have a logistic line linking back to your base, or that gate wont become yours. And the more lines that gate has, 3 top, the stronger your gate defenders are. Same feature on both player and AI side.
It is pretty interesting, that feature~
It is pretty interesting, that feature~
Wyatt_Derp
Arcane
Most AGEOD strat games do logistics pretty well. Too well, in fact. Leave a unit in enemy territory without fully occupying it and your soldiers go bye bye. AGEOD is one of the few devs who actually implement unit COHESION into the core game strategy.
The Civil War game Grand Tactician also uses logistics pretty well. You need to have your units on or near supply depots when moving into hostile territory. You can also subsidize logistic reforms to get cheaper supplies as the war goes on.
The Civil War game Grand Tactician also uses logistics pretty well. You need to have your units on or near supply depots when moving into hostile territory. You can also subsidize logistic reforms to get cheaper supplies as the war goes on.
La vie sexuelle
Learned
Victoria 3 is theoretically based on logistics and economic balance, although the game's approach to these issues is quite surreal.
Many wargames (Operational Art of War, Gary Grigsby: World at war, most Ageod's games, Hegemony: Rome/Ancients/Greece ...) do simulate logistics, with units getting huge penalties when out of supplies. But depending on the game, it can range between just being able to trace a line to a given spot, or some also have you move your supply poinys.
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2006
- Messages
- 395
Distant Worlds and Distant Worlds 2 simulate every unit from over 20 different resources, from extraction to the freighters moving those resources across the galaxy. You have to build refueling stations for your ships, those stations have to be resuplied by gas mining stations, you have to eliminate pirates so they don't disrupt your freighters, etc
spectre
Arcane
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2008
- Messages
- 5,427
Well, a strategy game worth its salt will typically at least pay lip service to the concept, otherwise it often devolves into snowballing galore,
as many casual titles are wont to.
If we're discussing Civilization games, it's not just about unit support, but the whole system of unit transportation via railroad, airdrops, etc.
Basically, one part of logistics is supplying and equipping troops (and units requiring specific resources to build also plays into this,
btw., there were different approaches to the concept if we were to examine various games in the franchise as well as the different mods and spin-offs),
but also being able to deploy them where needed and on time.
And there's also the thing about units not being able to replenish outside own borders.
Out of the classics, the Panzer General games had a very, very simplified logistics system.
As in: it sorta works most of the time, you basically use up an action every now and then, until you get cut off and it doesn't,
or in some scenarios where it was called to simulate, say, desert conditions.
It was most noticeable for air units (and this approach is what I'd consider paying lip service to the concept).
And you also get the really simplified stuff like Total War which has reduced replenishment and attrition
depending on where the stack stands. Logistics here is mostly about upkeep cost vs. income and
the ability to move stuff to the frontline meatgrinder, but you could argue that's just basic gameplay
you expect in the genre.
But there are a precious few games which try to make it an important part of the gameplay, and I think
Knights and Merchants deserves a mention, one of the rare rts to do meaningful logistics, but it could be argued
that the original Settlers series also made an effort to show the network of interconnected industries required to field a soldier.
as many casual titles are wont to.
If we're discussing Civilization games, it's not just about unit support, but the whole system of unit transportation via railroad, airdrops, etc.
Basically, one part of logistics is supplying and equipping troops (and units requiring specific resources to build also plays into this,
btw., there were different approaches to the concept if we were to examine various games in the franchise as well as the different mods and spin-offs),
but also being able to deploy them where needed and on time.
And there's also the thing about units not being able to replenish outside own borders.
Out of the classics, the Panzer General games had a very, very simplified logistics system.
As in: it sorta works most of the time, you basically use up an action every now and then, until you get cut off and it doesn't,
or in some scenarios where it was called to simulate, say, desert conditions.
It was most noticeable for air units (and this approach is what I'd consider paying lip service to the concept).
And you also get the really simplified stuff like Total War which has reduced replenishment and attrition
depending on where the stack stands. Logistics here is mostly about upkeep cost vs. income and
the ability to move stuff to the frontline meatgrinder, but you could argue that's just basic gameplay
you expect in the genre.
But there are a precious few games which try to make it an important part of the gameplay, and I think
Knights and Merchants deserves a mention, one of the rare rts to do meaningful logistics, but it could be argued
that the original Settlers series also made an effort to show the network of interconnected industries required to field a soldier.
Last edited:
In Battle Isle and MAX, you had to send resupply vehicles to reload ammunitions and fuel. Both were rather accessible games (Battle Isle was Advanced Wars, but with supplies and fog of war, so actually good, and Max was a RTS made into TBS).
Nutmeg
Arcane
Advance Wars has fog of war and supply rules too tho.
Perhaps you are thinking of Nectaris, which Battle Isle was a direct clone of.
Mitleser2020
Scholar
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2020
- Messages
- 1,444
The Murican faction also has transmission towers in order to supply buildings across the map with energy because they are less advanced than the Moonies and have a more centralized energy production than the Eurasians.
baturinsky
Arcane
Simple, yet effective way to represent logistics is to make units only heal at your home territory/cities.
Blutwurstritter
Learned
If you count transport of units themselves as part of logistics, then Supreme Commander deserves a mention. The ferry system and the option to have air transporters support factories makes it possible to transport land units efficiently to the front line, even on large maps. It handled this problem graciously, while transports are usually a hassle to use in most rts games.
As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.