Result of the supply cut

hammerfist
Staff Sergeant
Posts: 82
Joined: Sat 31 Aug 2013 05:08
Contact:

Result of the supply cut

Postby hammerfist » Thu 28 Nov 2013 08:33

Eugen's original intention to induce players to establish supply lines,

by means of cutting available number of supply trucks per deck and deck number,

warped in its effect by making the overall game more static.

Lack of mobile supply, and buff in FOBs resulted in the following unfavorable results.



1. Increased penalty to maneuvering tatics


While Eugen intended to make players establish supply lines, its measures promoted exactly the opposite

Without adequate number of trucks, it is almost impossible to establish a constant supply line.



Even in defensive positions, where supply lines are short, it is very hard to supply them constantly,

because some trucks have to remain near defending units. This alone takes more than half a card of trucks!

With meager number of readily available trucks, both the defender and the attacker faces a much longer

time gap between supply, faced with status of depleted ammo and fuel. Trucks are too slow to arrive in time.



This actually brings more penalty to attacker who is risking points that could have otherwise been used to maintain

fortified position, in high-risk high-return tactical maneuvering. With longer supply lines, and more demand in fuel,

shells, repair, and high grade ammunition(missiles), they run out of supply much, much faster. It is a matter of time before

any spearhead forces' maneuver ends in a dull confrontation with the defender's army, who have economized

supply lines and use of fuel, ready to counterattack the already exhausted attacker.



This results in a more static game, somehow resembling WW1 era fronts. What only differs is that, this time, lack of mobile supply

at hand takes the place of the lack of instantaneous communication and coordination of attack in WW1. Nobody would want that!



2. Increased difficulty in supporting missile based AAs


With longer terms between supply, missile based, and even some autocannon based AAs with high ROF keeps running out of ammo.

As stated in previous topics, those in need of no supply(Airspam users) gains an advantage combined with buffed bombers!!

It is also hard to repair such AA units which are otherwise priority targets for artillery and bombing.




3. Farewell to mobile heavy artillery and rocket artillery tactics


Users who loves maneuvering heavy or medium propelled artillery cannot supply the cannons in time, as all supply trucks'

capacity to supply is likely saturated by the demands of the frontline troops.


For fear of counter battery and bombing, many supply trucks are essential in sustaining and making the best use of

MOBILE ARTY's MOBILITY
(Why of course, that the reason they're self propelled!!), and now, it is impossible!!!

Few barrages and everything runs dry for about 5 or full 10 minutes!! It is frustrating.


Supply is a bigger challenge to heavy mlrs users(Smerch, MLRS) where reloading time itself is long.

Huge ammo consumption of rocket launchers, coupled with bigger ROE used to force users to maneuver them

as close as possible to the enemy to unleash an effective barrage. Now with less trucks, utilizing the power of

such heavy rockets is out of the question. When close to FOB, larger ROE results in an ineffective barrage.

When supplied by trucks, after displaying an impressive barrage, they all become useless forever, because of too

large a gap in supply time and fast depletion of meager supply brought to them.


When considering the opportunity cost for the supply used for rockets and cannons,

it is much better to fix all of them to FOB.

This doesn't seem tactical. Presenting vulnerable artillery to easily predictable area cannot be tactical.

Enlarged FOB on the other hand promotes artillery trolling and spam, wiping out any possibility for arty spam

users to ever think of launching an effective attack.



Therefore, Eugen's measure had the result of grounding artillery to FOBs, without giving options for players

to make use of their mobility.




4. FOB itself becomes the liability

With meager number of trucks, good player could still maneuver them from danger.

FOB CANNOT. Being a fixed target, a well placed strike disables a swopping 16000L of fuel.

Without them, no defense or attack can take place.



I cannot think of an instantaneous solution to make users to take care of their supply lines,

while eliminating the problems mention at the same time.

However, the result of the supply nerf is straightforward.

More Arty spam, More Air spam, Grounded artillery, Less tactical maneuver.


I look forward to hearing any ideas to overcome such side effects of this patch
Image

VenerableSteele
Sergeant First-Class
Posts: 108
Joined: Fri 15 Jun 2012 19:18
Contact:

Re: Result of the supply cut

Postby VenerableSteele » Thu 28 Nov 2013 09:08

1. Increased penalty to maneuvering tatics


not so much, the maps are not as big as in EE where you needed supply.
it is still managable, you could put two FOB's in your deck if you wished.

Without adequate number of trucks, it is almost impossible to establish a constant supply line.


i dont think one should be babysitting each individual unit and keeping them supplied to the max, that would be draining, by forcing you to concentrate on your heavy hitting units only that you would restock, and ignoring those marines in the far left side of the map where 8/12 LAW rockets are left, and no enemy has been seen in a while, is a good thing.

this is war, you cant get all your troops fully supplied all of the time.
you have to choose and make compromises, and complete your mission with the resources you have.

this is, at best a minor complaint. (i doubt its a problem anyway.)

2. Increased difficulty in supporting missile based AAs


this would then require people to buy more air superiority fighters and invest in better recon, I dont see to much of a problem here either, its a change of strategy that players have to adjust to, change is as good as a holiday.
use your air superiority fighters wisely, and air spam shouldnt be a problem.
and, a anti air only airspam is no problem anyway to your ground forces.

this therefore requires a change in strategy, not a game-breaking thing.

3. Farewell to mobile heavy artillery and rocket artillery tactics


see first counter, its the same, make use of arty better, with fewer usage choices, you'd be doing less arty camp sniping, and more ground forces suppression/anti AA unit sniping / supporting the front lines. no problems here either. it encourages better use of arty, and more mobile play.

4. FOB itself becomes the liability


as its not moving, players have to defend it better, and hold the front line. I see no problem here.

More Arty spam


I dont see how this comes in? at the FOB? this was effectively the same then as before.
If you can't accept other people's opinions being different from yours, you're very qualified to participate on any internet Forum. - DeuZerre

User avatar
triumph
Major
Posts: 1830
Joined: Sun 31 Jul 2011 20:12
Contact:

Re: Result of the supply cut

Postby triumph » Thu 28 Nov 2013 09:13

Just post a replay pack of how the game has become boring as a direct result.
Image
Transcend Excellence

User avatar
Brutoni
Colonel
Posts: 2916
Joined: Wed 27 Mar 2013 19:44
Contact:

Re: Result of the supply cut

Postby Brutoni » Thu 28 Nov 2013 09:29

hammerfist wrote:1. Increased penalty to maneuvering tatics
While Eugen intended to make players establish supply lines, its measures promoted exactly the opposite

Without adequate number of trucks, it is almost impossible to establish a constant supply line.


Use Helicopters to set up forward logistics points that units can fall back to repair. Rotate SAM's etc so that your front ADN units can resupply from the helicopters. Meanwhile use your trucks for ATGM/Fuel on the front line where a helicopter would be vulnerable


Even in defensive positions, where supply lines are short, it is very hard to supply them constantly, because some trucks have to remain near defending units. This alone takes more than half a card of trucks! With meager number of readily available trucks, both the defender and the attacker faces a much longer time gap between supply, faced with status of depleted ammo and fuel. Trucks are too slow to arrive in time. This actually brings more penalty to attacker who is risking points that could have otherwise been used to maintain fortified position, in high-risk high-return tactical maneuvering. With longer supply lines, and more demand in fuel, shells, repair, and high grade ammunition(missiles), they run out of supply much, much faster. It is a matter of time before any spearhead forces' maneuver ends in a dull confrontation with the defender's army, who have economized supply lines and use of fuel, ready to counterattack the already exhausted attacker. This results in a more static game, somehow resembling WW1 era fronts. What only differs is that, this time, lack of mobile supply at hand takes the place of the lack of instantaneous communication and coordination of attack in WW1. Nobody would want that!


You mean that a push that breaks through becomes vulnerable to counter attack like in real life? You mean that you have to think 2-3 minutes ahead instead of just clicking logistics to the point in the map resupplying and then sending the empty trucks as a troll for locating enemy positions? Again helicopters are very useful. Failing that set up a relay run of supplies with your trucks. Besides that this is just life... launching an attack for real takes considerable risk and planning. It also requires thought in logistics. You never have enough logistics if your army is large enough to meet the opponent. Just seems to be a fact of life. Boys on the ground always want more :D :D :P



2. Increased difficulty in supporting missile based AAs

With longer terms between supply, missile based, and even some autocannon based AAs with high ROF keeps running out of ammo.
As stated in previous topics, those in need of no supply(Airspam users) gains an advantage combined with buffed bombers!! It is also hard to repair such AA units which are otherwise priority targets for artillery and bombing.


As a British user your going to get little sympathy from me here. Use fighter jets on well managed rotations to always have 1/2 protecting your forces with 1/2 of the faster ones on standby to plug gaps. Position forward recon with helicopters early in the game (hills are good places as well as unsuspecting bushes!) to get early warning so you can scramble jets to reply. Support your own pushes with your own fighters. Use Autocannon vehicles and numerous "cheap MANPADS" with less accuracy on Helicopters that have no ECM and are vulnerable to attack for longer. Rush isolated gunships/helos with lots of APCS to bring them down. Use artillery on them to stun and allow autocannon units to close for the kill. All this saves your SAMs to fight jets. Position some units as bait (cheap units or tough ones) to draw enemy fighters into predetermined kill zones that will swat them from the sky.

Rotate your ADN so your SAMs can resupply in safety while fresh units are able to continue firing (quite critical with RAPIER due to the rate of fire. A good way to keep a constant whittling of the enemy force). I could go on... but I've learnt to deal without BUK, HAWK, ROLAND etcetc and their lovely range, good availability and easy of supply. Irony.


3. Farewell to mobile heavy artillery and rocket artillery tactics
Users who loves maneuvering heavy or medium propelled artillery cannot supply the cannons in time, as all supply trucks' capacity to supply is likely saturated by the demands of the frontline troops.

For fear of counter battery and bombing, many supply trucks are essential in sustaining and making the best use of MOBILE ARTY's MOBILITY(Why of course, that the reason they're self propelled!!), and now, it is impossible!!! Few barrages and everything runs dry for about 5 or full 10 minutes!! It is frustrating. Supply is a bigger challenge to heavy mlrs users(Smerch, MLRS) where reloading time itself is long. Huge ammo consumption of rocket launchers, coupled with bigger ROE used to force users to maneuver them as close as possible to the enemy to unleash an effective barrage. Now with less trucks, utilizing the power of such heavy rockets is out of the question. When close to FOB, larger ROE results in an ineffective barrage. When supplied by trucks, after displaying an impressive barrage, they all become useless forever, because of too large a gap in supply time and fast depletion of meager supply brought to them. When considering the opportunity cost for the supply used for rockets and cannons, it is much better to fix all of them to FOB.

This doesn't seem tactical. Presenting vulnerable artillery to easily predictable area cannot be tactical. Enlarged FOB on the other hand promotes artillery trolling and spam, wiping out any possibility for arty spam users to ever think of launching an effective attack.


Therefore, Eugen's measure had the result of grounding artillery to FOBs, without giving options for players to make use of their mobility.


No sympathy for artillery spam users. Quite frankly if you spam one type of unit then you pay the price. Don't understand why I should feel sorry for artillery spam in general. A few points

1) MLRS, Heavy Rockets, Heavy artillery are all operational weapons. They shouldn't be used over and over with no thought because in real life they 100% DO drain supplies like a thirsty camel. They move around at the back and when a weak point is identified for break through "BAM" you strike. MLRS barrage away, smoke from medium artillery and push with your main force. Heavy Artillery targets SAM's, entrenched positions that need to be removed and clusters of HVU/MCU's. Helicopters roll in punishing with further attacks (ATGM/Rocket depending on enemy force composition). Then the tanks and IFV's push through. Mechanised infantry roll up behind the push securing flanks and eliminating resistance in towns etc. Point is MLRS, Heavy Rockets, Heavy artillery shouldn't be spammed... As you said earlier. This game isn't about WW1.



4. FOB itself becomes the liability
With meager number of trucks, good player could still maneuver them from danger. FOB CANNOT. Being a fixed target, a well placed strike disables a swopping 16000L of fuel. Without them, no defense or attack can take place.


Again little sympathy. Authentic and realistic. A truly clever opponent will ensure he doesn't really have to fight you to win the game and simply move you around, exhaust you and knock out your supplies so you can't fight effectively. A certain Chinese man had appreciation of this hundreds of hundreds of years ago. Wargame is an authentic experience (if not realistic) and quite frankly the supply issues you are facing are nothing compared to what a fleet or army experiences in the field and what a force experiences on the operational level!!! Assign 2 SAMs and a few recon elements. Ultimately if you let your opponent get to your back door then GOOD ON HIM/HER.



I cannot think of an instantaneous solution to make users to take care of their supply lines, while eliminating the problems mention at the same time. However, the result of the supply nerf is straightforward.

More Arty spam, More Air spam, Grounded artillery, Less tactical maneuver.
I look forward to hearing any ideas to overcome such side effects of this patch



Less arty spam. You simply have less supplies to do it with :)
Artillery isn't grounded with prior thought
Tactical maneuver is very possible. Instead of arty spam lets use it to create more efficient break through. Place units with more forward thought so the move around less and be aware of fuel consumption and supply. When the thrust comes think ahead a couple of minutes and have a couple of trucks supported by a few SPAAGs and a recon element to come along behind the main thrust. Have cheap truck infantry roll in and bolster the flanks to create a "supply tunnel".

There is more air spam. As I said I have little sympathy because it affects me less than you due to it being a major issue for me all along. It has simply got a little worse for me. Other nations are now going to have to use all those tricks I suggested and not rely on super SAM as a crutch. I do however have a few suggestions and agreements

I think all nations need helicopter supply of some point. At this stage we don't want a revert so even a copy and paste will do.
Helicopters should be able to resupply trucks (apparently they cant?) like in EE. To allow them to form an intelligent "shorten the supply line"
Fighters should carry more missiles/be more lethal to bombers. As such I think medium missiles (ie not IR ones that can engage helos) should be more lethal
Perhaps a "immediate evacuation/return to base" critical should be considered for planes??
ImageImage

User avatar
molnibalage
General
Posts: 6700
Joined: Thu 1 Aug 2013 22:54
Location: Hungary
Contact:

Re: Result of the supply cut

Postby molnibalage » Thu 28 Nov 2013 10:25

Therefore, Eugen's measure had the result of grounding artillery to FOBs, without giving options for players

to make use of their mobility.


I have to say you are wrong... Have you ever tried supply helos? Much faster than trucks and can fly very quickly even on 10 vs 10 map to FOBs of other players.

User avatar
Gryphon
Master Sergeant
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon 27 Feb 2012 16:10
Contact:

Re: Result of the supply cut

Postby Gryphon » Thu 28 Nov 2013 13:08

Actually I would have to disagree here. While I haven't run in the dreaded air spam yet, I was playing the war out in a slightly more realistic manner, pulling back damaged units and delegating them to flank defence as well as recon and calling in new units and keeping crucial systems supplied.

My findings were that mobile artillery can be easily supplied with supply helicopters (you could use this for long range SAMs behind the front line as well, although I stopped using these systems because they are not realistic in this scope). Furthermore, supply trucks can be used to supply critical low supply systems such as an OSA-AKM, Tunguska, Roland or something front critical ATGMs (as the situation dictates).

The past few games have been more dynamic as a result and I found myself moving a lot more, attempting to gain more ground while denying the enemy bringing in trucks to the front line. I beat a Soviet heavy tank force with all the heavies you can imagine with my crappy British deck and to be honest, we had a blast (as air support I only used 2 Jaguars with ATGMs, 2 harriers Gr3 and 4 Sea Harriers). My tanks were mostly Mk5 and Mk10 Chieftains with some Scorpions thrown in :) All in all, a challenging game I really enjoyed.
Image

User avatar
Brutoni
Colonel
Posts: 2916
Joined: Wed 27 Mar 2013 19:44
Contact:

Re: Result of the supply cut

Postby Brutoni » Thu 28 Nov 2013 14:20

Gryphon wrote:My tanks were mostly Mk5 and Mk10 Chieftains with some Scorpions thrown in :) All in all, a challenging game I really enjoyed.


Ah but SCORPIONS are beasts now with increased availability AND accuracy lol. If I could find a team willing to cover certain holes in the gap then I would love to see what an armoured deck with 32 hardened SCORPIONS could do supported by CHALLENGERS and WARRIORS. :lol:
ImageImage

User avatar
monochromatic
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 563
Joined: Sun 19 May 2013 16:05
Contact:

Re: Result of the supply cut

Postby monochromatic » Thu 28 Nov 2013 14:37

I will say it again in this thread:

1. Not enough supply trucks? take more cards. This is a new strategic layer, and I like that it's not a no-brainer anymore.

2. Your opponent has the same trouble you have. Therefore, complaining it's hard to do this or that simply doesn't cut it since the guy at the other side is having the same problems, that you can also exploit. Adapt.

3. I love that arty spammers/heavy MLRS users can't spam anymore.

Loving the supply changes so far, sorry.

User avatar
raventhefuhrer
Colonel
Posts: 2949
Joined: Wed 15 May 2013 08:47
Contact:

Re: Result of the supply cut

Postby raventhefuhrer » Thu 28 Nov 2013 15:05

I haven't been dissatisfied with the new system yet. Still, getting used to it.

Though, I wish Fobs cost a bit less personally, and maybe if supply vehicles came in a bit more per card.
My YouTube Channel is Raven Wargaming. Message me to request videos on certain topics.

User avatar
QuakeRiley
Lieutenant
Posts: 1316
Joined: Sat 18 May 2013 02:01
Location: England
Contact:

Re: Result of the supply cut

Postby QuakeRiley » Thu 28 Nov 2013 15:44

A few nations have suffered because of the change in supply lines, Sweden being the major one as their supply helos don't have amazing supply load and compared to other nations a lot of their units having pretty crummy autonomy but I expect these to be fixed in later patches.

monochromatic wrote:3. I love that arty spammers/heavy MLRS users can't spam anymore.


Have you ever used 203mm artillery? Their usefulness has be severely nerfed as the price for a barrage is high and their real role in ALB is to snipe static units, not at all spam.
Image
"...In their Centurions, the 8th Hussars have evolved a new type of tank warfare. They taught us that anywhere a tank can go, is tank country: even the tops of mountains."

Return to “Wargame : AirLand Battle”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 33 guests