LOGISTICS AND SUPPLY LINES

darksoulshin

Sergeant at Arms
WBNWVC
Best answers
0
INTRODUCTION:
As someone has pointed out, it happens in M & B that entire armies of a faction turn their attention to a small castle of an opposing faction located on the opposite side of the world just because its garrison is with few men, perhaps in relation to some recent evidence which has decreed this condition.
It is clear that a large army or more armies must move along the map and therefore must bring food for humans.
At stake, in a few words, we fill the food inventory and then we start with the attack.
This leads the enemy to defend himself in his territory by coming to us from the front, or, if he can avoid us, to go to our territory to create problems.
But it is difficult to happen because since we started a lot ahead of them, we could have time to do what we have to and get back in time to stop them.
In reality, the armies that march on the front must have a constant supply line of provisions, weapons and more.
So I thought: why not make sure that a LINE OF SUPPLY is established between the point in the map where you are and the last place visited?

HOW THE IDEA IS IMPLEMENTED
(help me to improve it if you like it, in this way, even if in the original game there is not because the times do not allow it, some good soul of a modder, can resume the idea and make the game more strategic even in the campaign map.)

Imagine the game map in which you move the horse with your pg and around you have the towns / villages / castles and in sight you pass the npc or groups of them, which leave their tracks.
in short .. the usual screen!
enter the city and exit.
go on for a few seconds and you will see behind you a trail that connects you to the city you left behind.
That's your supply line!

Now that you have a clearer picture, let's go specifically.

The strength of this line depends on the place you left behind and allows you not to use the food in the inventory or slow down the consumption, which without the line, suffers quite heavily. (Clearly are parameters to be evaluated, I give only the qualitative idea).
It also affects the MORALE OF THE BATTLE and the QUALITY OF TROOPS.

In this way, an attacking army is forced to attack from several fronts to cover a larger area and prevent the enemy from circling the army to hit the supply line and prevent the advance.

On the other hand, the attacker will also hit the enemy supply line to benefit from the advantages.
one steals part or all of the booty.
Specifically, I would tie this result to the type of attack that is performed.
If you damage the places where these resources are stored.
For example, the use of flaming arrows is likely to cause a chariot to fire.

DEEPENING THE APPEARANCE OF THE SUPPLY LINES:
This paragraph takes into account the appearance of the line in the campaign map and a qualitative feedback of the same.
the support line itself is not a real line, but of the caravans of goods that travel, so do not confuse the line itself with its appearance.

The support capacity(goods/ day or goods/week or goods/month and boost of morale) depends on the color of the line and its length, depending on the last place visited and the distance from it.
- Better is the city / castle / village left behind, more towards red is the color of the line, which symbolizes the ability to support.
- the greater the distance from the city that has been left, the longer the line will be and its color will turn towards a colder color.
as with the tracks on mount & blades that turn from red to blue.
A less warm color leads to a less efficient line, due to the difficult management of the supply, given the distance.
We see the line, but not the enemy, at least not seeing the conveyor belt along it (with the spotting ability).
tracking and spotting skills here play a nice role for the enemy.
(EDIT: ON SCOUTING skill and his perk)
the quality of the line increases the likelihood that it will be discovered even if no wagon runs through it if the enemy has enough high tracking ability.
clearly the choice of colors depends on the developers and your feedback. The colors I used are examples.
Also the type of feedback, which doesn't necessarily have to be exclusively visual, so if you find a better way to describe it or if the developers find it, all the better.
you can hover your mouse over the line to see some features (like the ones above).
If you want more information or want to prepare an order letter (mechanics that I will explain in the appropriate section) you have to go to the menu for these things (at the moment the caravans are located on the "clan" section so at the moment it is there, even the I would also include generic information and the same methods of acting in the party menu).

HOW TO MAKE THE LINE IN PRACTICAL TERMS?
The reference city has a warehouse with goods, depending on its economy,that can empty or falls below a threshold such that the city decides to interrupt the line.
clearly there are the caravans escorted by the guards, who transport the goods.
So we can use wagons for supply lines.

COSTS:
The wagon has its own cost, and the guy who guides it wants to be paid weekly, in addition the wagon must be escorted.
So the general costs are: purchase price, daily cost of the driver, and the soldiers escorting the wagon, which must be taken from your party.
Clearly the costs will affect the convenience in having 1, 2 or more carts or the number of forts / camps / outposts.

The appearance of these wagons on the campaign map must depend on the number of wagons and on the number of soldiers in charge of their defense.
Thus a heavily defended wagon designed to form the support line will be clearly distinguishable from a common wagon for trade.
Clearly player can choose to put fewer defense men to make it look like a trading wagon, but clearly this exposes it to various risks.

HOW MUCH NEED TO TRANSPORT?
These goods reintegrate those in the inventory (food and ammunition).
But clearly travel can not be done to transport the right (which is equal to the consumption of resources between a caravan and the next) and leave half empty wagon, so the player should be given the choice of the amount of goods between discrete values (therefore dimensions of the small / medium / large style wagon or how you prefer to break them down).
So you can choose if you get more than necessary or less than necessary, or at least manage the number of party members to stay on the value you prefer.
The higher the quality of the goods and the quantity, the greater will be the men involved in escorting the caravan.
The amount of excess food involves a boost of morale, even if that food is not present in the inventory.
Also the amount of arrows and darts in excess involves a boost in morale.
If it is smaller, nothing strange happens, it simply consumes part of that inventory.
In this regard, clearly every commodity is exhaustible, as well as arrows and darts.
the caravans travel along the line until they reach the prefix destination (the party, passing from one camp to another).


DESTINATION and ROUTE
-we can choose the destination. the route in automatically setted
we can choose between "our party" by selecting it as a destination from the campaign map, or by selecting something else as a destination (another party or a city)
-we can choose the route,drawing it on the campaign map and passing it between the desired destinations where you can rest and buy food for the caravan itself (which therefore carries what it has to give to us and what it needs)
if the caravan encounters an enemy that cannot be confronted or frightened, then it leaves the route to escape and possibly flees towards the destination.
If it escapes the enemy, it returns to the path that was assigned to it by returning through a second path that was automatically created.

DEPARTURE TIME
Player can choose WHEN the wagons will departure.

PERIODICITY
Does the caravan bring us the supply weekly? or daily? or maybe monthly?
This is to be decided, I would like to leave this choice to the player.
So the player can have several options.
Having the caravan system in bannerlord, it is possible to select the ones we want to act as support lines.
We can therefore set how often we want resources to arrive.
Specifically times go according to this scale:
- X JOURNEIS (if x equals 3, after the 3rd trip the caravan will not travel and will stop where we ordered it to stop)
-PERIODICALLY (as soon as possible) -> (1 load every X days / weeks / months).
Clearly if the caravan making up the line cannot arrive on time, the option will go from (1 load every X days) to (as soon as possible). Once the load has been left it will return to the place where the goods are loaded and the option will return a (1 load every x days / weeks / months).

BEHAVIOUR ORDERS:
An additional option would be to enter non-direct commands.
of the type: if the caravan does not arrive on time at its destination -> (order to be executed):
- "return to the city and re-run the route"
- "continue the journey"
- "go to the nearest camp or to the nearest allied city, then return"
and other orders.
These orders relating to times and behaviors must be given directly to the master caravan, therefore to give them you must "send someone to bring them" if the caravan is not with us.



So all this information (destination, departure time and periodicity, behavior orders, etc.) form an order that is delivered to the master caravan by one of our men sent to deliver it to him.
Clearly, this order only contains the information we have entered there.
So if we only changed the periodicity, there is no trace of the destination, behavior and departure time in the order.

The ability to change the departure times of the wagons means that attacking them while traveling, for the enemy is more difficult because he can not know these times without some features that allow it.
So I think that the change in timing should take time(since the order has yet to be delivered) and money ( since the change of "program" involves a change of organization that costs money), as well as the possibility that this schedule of change of timing is discovered by the enemy.

INTERCEPTION ORDERS AND QUESTS

Assuming that someone has to carry the order, in the form of a mission
, if he is caught by enemy explorers, the risk is that the timing change does not happen and that the next load is likely to end up in enemy hands.
-Or a spy can take the place of the messenger
-or the same messenger can betray his faction and deliver a fake order or gave the true order to the enemy.

So you need to choose if entrust one of your companion(and their character is predictable since you know them) with this mission,then depriving yourself of a companion for some time , or gave the mission to a simple messenger (whose reliability you do not know (which depends on the character traits, randomly generated) but which I would also link to the "leadership" and "charm" skill and to the "renown", which can contribute to making even a "dishonest" messenger "be so fascinated by you that you give up being so unhelpful).
All missions that could also be entrusted to us if we are vassals or mercenaries of some lord, or that we could create if we are that lord and we have the runners to do these jobs, if circumstances permit.
so we could be the messenger or the eavesdropper, or the spy on behalf of the enemy.

REST

These caravans are however managed by people and as such they must also go to rest once tired .. they can not always stay awake, or am I wrong?
But we can not make them camp in the middle of the road they travel, as they risk being attacked by bandits or being intercepted by the enemy and have no defense.
let's be clear, they can do it, if there is no safer place to rest in their range.
In support of this line the camps / outposts come into play.

OUTPOSTS/CAMPS:
THEREFORE the support line(his defense) must be built while traveling, practically building small temporary outposts (like camps).
We spend money,time and resources (wood and other stuff).
Maybe these camps can have different levels, so as to change their defenses and adapt them to different situations.
On construction time I can not say, maybe the different levels of camp can affect this variable.
The caravans can rest in these camps and then resume their journey to the next one, up to the destination, so that the goods, during the journey, is defended.
The camp that will hold the stocks will be chosen by the player.
It will also be able to divide them into percentages among the various camps instead of assigning them all to the camp closest to the front and the army (in case it is lost).
Each camp has therefore a warehouse that can be filled up to a certain point.

WARFARE


ATTACK ON A SUPPLY LINE
:

IN OPEN FIELD:
the attack on a supply line in the open field, where there are no camps, requires a short time, such as to allow a defense attempt only to nearby armies arriving in time.

The attacker attacks the supply line, which is damaged until it is interrupted or until the defender fails to defend it.

HOW DOES THIS COME?
the attacker with his party goes to the transporter and starts the classic battle.
BUT THERE IS A TIMER as a function of the nearest defensive unit that in the map approaches the cart intended to protect it.
(it is not said that we can see the timer, but there is the same).
once the time has expired, the enemy appears on the battlefield at the point where he "should have come" and clearly the choice of what will happen depends on the player.
He can stay and fight or escape.
Depending on how damaged the goods and killed the guards will depend on the amount of the booty.

The attacker can decide whether or not to damage the goods based on the type of actions he takes.
if he throws a forest of burning arrows on the wagons, he risks burning everything (it will take many arrows, because it does not have to be easy).
He can also do it and then escape from the battle and slip away.
Strategic choices.

IN OUTPOSTS/CAMP:
attacking a supply line in an outposts / camp is different than attacking it in an open field.
It works similarly to a siege, with difficulty level depending on the garrison and the level of defenses.
In addition, the time timer granted before reinforcements from the map is shorter than in the open field.
clearly the goods are protected by a structure, so it is not damaged / obtainable without first conquering the place.


SUPPLY LINES IN RELATION TO RELATIONSHIP/FRIENDSHIP WITH TOWN/CASTEL/VILLAGES AND THEIR OWNER
as the user Terco_Viejo has suggested, the granting of permission to establish the line, or the efficiency of the same, must be linked to the relationship between the PG and the city / village / castle in question.
he also objected to the fact that castles and villages should provide such support, so I thought to make the optional thing through a screen where you decide to which place or TYPE OF PLACE ASK FOR AUTOMATIC support.
so for example you can exclude villages and castles, except someone selected by us
It is clear that the support depends on the type of place, its economy and the relationship.
In this way my proposal binds to his objection without limiting any of the two.

the granting of the line as well as the relations with the places, I think the geopolitical condition must also be linked.

-if we are not part of any faction, then it all depends on how much we and the city of reference are friends, and clearly friendship must be high and the faction will evaluate our relationships with other factions and our social rank before to grant us this support.
-We could also not exclude the fact that the city of reference is so friendly that it gives us support even if the head of the faction is in disagreement, because maybe his relationship with the city is not the best ...
-In short, the conditions for preparing a revolt are within reach, if we are the one who receives the support.
-And if we are the king and someone is acting in that sense, then we must keep our eyes open on the city of reference and on those who make requests to it.
-If you are part of a faction that is at war with another faction and you go to a neutral faction city to buy goods or to establish a support line, then the neutral faction's response should depend on the relationships it has and who wants to establish two warring factions with her.
-Allies help us and allow us to establish support lines.
-Those who want to improve relationships with our enemies will deny us such support.
-The choice should depend on the decisions of the faction (depending on the political system adopted by that faction), but also on the local holder of the city / castle / village, who may decide to help us but taking responsibility for contravening an order from its faction leader ,and should also depends on our charm skills.

So we too could set which cities should / can provide support and to whom to provide it.
This can lead to improved relationships between the 2 factions.
A refusal instead leads to a worsening of relationships.
If a city has few supplies and goods and provides a support line beyond what it can guarantee, this will over time lead to discontent and the relationships between us and the following subjects: (city, city owner, and king if he comes and know ) will get worse.
If the owner continues, he risks being removed for inefficiency or if nobody intervenes the risk is that of having a hungry people who rebels.
If you rebel the support line ceases to be provided.

It is clear that each army will have its support line and it is clear that the city itself may not be able to meet the needs of many armies for a long time.
Assuming that there are 2 lines for 2 different armies and one of them loses its own, the latter can hook to that of his ally of the same faction going into one of the camps built by the latter (clearly consuming resources faster) .


The user "DreamySky" has provided several suggestions that I consider useful and inherent in the context, so I insert them in the thread as part of the same, so as to have a clearer view of everything without obliging you to scroll through the comments.
Here is my model:

* There will be caravans going between friendly settlements and the war parties. On the way to the war party, the caravan would carry food, ammunition, and other equipments in good shape, (and money). On the way back to the settlement, the caravan would carry battle loots, equipments in bad shape, (and money).

* The caravan may belong to either the settlement, or the war party.

- If the caravan belongs to the settlement:
It will be a trade when the war party and the caravan meet. The caravan would try to make some profit for themselves and make the price based on how scarce the supplies are, and how dangerous it is for them. This costs the wealth of the war party. The caravan may not depart if they see it as dangerous or not profitable, and may demand higher pay for better protection and/or for more expensive supplies.

- If the caravan belongs to the war party:
It departs from the war party, taking some troops, money, equipments (intended to be repaired), and loots (intended to be sold). The caravan go to friendly settlement(s) and make the trade(s), then go back to the party when they finish the objective, or they fail as they run out of money. When the caravan returns to the war party, they will merge the troops and inventory (including money).

* The caravan is visible and can be attacked on the campaign map.
(And as mentioned, the supplement would fail (or much more expensive) if the supplying settlement is destroyed/disrupted).

The reinforcement should be another feature of the game, where reinforcement wait time is bases on distance(route) on the campaign map, instead of only one chance for joining if the war party is close enough like in Warband.

* As the player:
- Can attack enemy's caravan.
- Do a quest for a war party leader to give him/her the supplement. The quest would be to bring the necessary items in time, regardless of where the player get them.
- Trade with war parties for cheap loots.
- Do a quest for a settlement to be their caravan (carry the goods to the destinated war party).
- Request a settlement to send a caravan to the player.
- Dispatch a caravan from the player's party. But it's a tricky how to give order to that player's caravan, like at what price they would sell, what price they would buy, what time they should prioritize returning. I myself don't bother to have detailed options. However, do you have any idea of how to keep it both neat and good?
SHELTER OR OUR BASE
In case you are not part of any faction and you are against someone, then an important role could take place in the "viking conquest" style shelter, evolving in base camp and maybe in castle / city, according to how the developers can decide to exploit it.
In short, an anchorage point to start from, to return to, to improve, to defend and keep an eye on.
The smaller it remains and the less it is followed, the less likely it is discovered.
It works like a mini-city and from there it is established a supply line with the same methods described above.
In this way even those who are not part of a faction can create an infrastructure that supports it but must also be defended or kept hidden.

IF WE ARE POOR
If we have no possessions, nor a shelter, which in effect can evolve to become a city / castle, then it will be the FORAGING ability to limit the consumption of food in the inventory to the constant number of party members reintegrating a part of the missing one.

These are all operations that do not take a long time, but that greatly influence the strategy on the game map, making cities, castles and villages much more important and their economies very important in order to support an army to invade a border territory .
In addition, the importance of a "marching formation" of the armies, which must protect the line or the lines, must also march trying to cover them and defend them from possible assaults on the shoulders or on the sides.


CONCLUSION and REFERENCES
GitiUsir user has provided these 2 videos that help better understand how to make the system.
There are good ideas here. This is just to give more ideas on the subject.
Last three notes to add:
These 3 points, together with the system described above, also serve to balance the game, reducing the "snowball effect"
1) more bounty hunters are needed to patrol the streets.
2) diplomacy: alliances, truces, claims, casus belli,non-aggression pact , commerce ecc...
3) exhaustion from war.
The third point could be related to the cohesion of an army in being at war for too long.
The morale remains high for longer and the soldiers will tire of following the army less quickly.

I thank you for your attention, I hope you will continue this discussion in order to improve the system suggested here.
If so, when you answer, copy in your reply the parts that you share and then implemented with a spoiler style tab is what you want to change, and your change itself, so that those who want to read your arguments, will immediately to compare the change with the original and evaluate which one is more suitable.

ECONOMIC and LOGISTICS megathrad with poll link
 
Last edited:

Phalnax811

Sergeant
WBWF&SVC
Best answers
0
Honestly don't have time to read it all right now but I like the idea of logistics.  In the RTS games 'Hegemony' people couldn't grasp the concept of the supply lines and hated it. I didn't mind it. If non-tedious form of it can be added, sure, but just don't want it to delay release!
 

darksoulshin

Sergeant at Arms
WBNWVC
Best answers
0
Phalnax811 said:
Honestly don't have time to read it all right now but I like the idea of logistics.  In the RTS games 'Hegemony' people couldn't grasp the concept of the supply lines and hated it. I didn't mind it. If non-tedious form of it can be added, sure, but just don't want it to delay release!
It's an idea for modders, not just for developers.
At most they can take it into consideration and keep it for the next title.
the whole system is described and whoever wants can add his own.
No one is required to read it all right away.
I have divided it into sections where I answer obvious questions about the system, so you can proceed by section when you want to read a part of it.
 

DreamySky

Regular
Best answers
0
I like that idea. In fact, I had a similar idea and I found this topic as I checked whether there's a topic about it.

Here is my model:

* There will be caravans going between friendly settlements and the war parties. On the way to the war party, the caravan would carry food, ammunition, and other equipments in good shape, (and money). On the way back to the settlement, the caravan would carry battle loots, equipments in bad shape, (and money).

* The caravan may belong to either the settlement, or the war party.

- If the caravan belongs to the settlement:
It will be a trade when the war party and the caravan meet. The caravan would try to make some profit for themselves and make the price based on how scarce the supplies are, and how dangerous it is for them. This costs the wealth of the war party. The caravan may not depart if they see it as dangerous or not profitable, and may demand higher pay for better protection and/or for more expensive supplies.

- If the caravan belongs to the war party:
It departs from the war party, taking some troops, money, equipments (intended to be repaired), and loots (intended to be sold). The caravan go to friendly settlement(s) and make the trade(s), then go back to the party when they finish the objective, or they fail as they run out of money. When the caravan returns to the war party, they will merge the troops and inventory (including money).

* The caravan is visible and can be attacked on the campaign map.
(And as mentioned, the supplement would fail (or much more expensive) if the supplying settlement is destroyed/disrupted).

The reinforcement should be another feature of the game, where reinforcement wait time is bases on distance(route) on the campaign map, instead of only one chance for joining if the war party is close enough like in Warband.

* As the player:
- Can attack enemy's caravan.
- Do a quest for a war party leader to give him/her the supplement. The quest would be to bring the necessary items in time, regardless of where the player get them.
- Trade with war parties for cheap loots.
- Do a quest for a settlement to be their caravan (carry the goods to the destinated war party).
- Request a settlement to send a caravan to the player.
- Dispatch a caravan from the player's party. But it's a tricky how to give order to that player's caravan, like at what price they would sell, what price they would buy, what time they should prioritize returning. I myself don't bother to have detailed options. However, do you have any idea of how to keep it both neat and good?

* For the NPC:
THIS IS THE BIGGEST PROBLEM!

It's totally possible to make rules, but AI may not be good at handling them. It's very hard to make AI know when it's best to send a caravan, how many troops it needs, what a war party would do if their caravan is attacked, how far should they dive into the enemy's territory, etc.

There have to be a lot of calculation. I'm not sure if deep learning can be applied for this. Deep learning can do very well for AI vs AI, but they wouldn't have enough examples from human players. NPC war parties may be bullied by the player for that.
 

GreenLight7

Veteran
Best answers
0
I suggest like this,supply line from safest village,town or castle,where's safest road.caravan with guards,not little,go time to time,also can be mercenary caravans,King,lord have scouting parties,that unseen on map,on some range,but enemy force,small part,have chance to encounter them,optional-you can make scouting mission for player-encounter scouts with limited amount of men,battle starts and you surround them,and scouts trying to run/retreat,if succeed,and no army on returning road-scouting succeed,if present-repeated trigger chance,but for encountered army.

That scouts can inform,if any army attacking supply line/caravans,in that case part of army goes back,scouting on your supply line-Very High chance,if supply line is long,player can build small fortification,usually wooden,maximum half stone half wood,based on engineering skill,enemies do that automatically,and supply line goes from settlement to fort,from fort to army,forts guaranteeing some safe distance for caravan,and scouting distance if not besieged.Lords have traits in party,not as lord only,like companions in players party,but without them,and it depends on chance and money,if much money spent chance more to 20%,if very greedy chance-20%,on battles after battles such traits as tactics,looting etc,have chance to change,higher chance to decrease than increase,presuming tactician and looter,etc will fight in battle.
Forts automatically dissolve,after some empty time.
 

darksoulshin

Sergeant at Arms
WBNWVC
Best answers
0
DreamySky said:
I like that idea. In fact, I had a similar idea and I found this topic as I checked whether there's a topic about it.

Here is my model:

* There will be caravans going between friendly settlements and the war parties. On the way to the war party, the caravan would carry food, ammunition, and other equipments in good shape, (and money). On the way back to the settlement, the caravan would carry battle loots, equipments in bad shape, (and money).

* The caravan may belong to either the settlement, or the war party.

- If the caravan belongs to the settlement:
It will be a trade when the war party and the caravan meet. The caravan would try to make some profit for themselves and make the price based on how scarce the supplies are, and how dangerous it is for them. This costs the wealth of the war party. The caravan may not depart if they see it as dangerous or not profitable, and may demand higher pay for better protection and/or for more expensive supplies.

- If the caravan belongs to the war party:
It departs from the war party, taking some troops, money, equipments (intended to be repaired), and loots (intended to be sold). The caravan go to friendly settlement(s) and make the trade(s), then go back to the party when they finish the objective, or they fail as they run out of money. When the caravan returns to the war party, they will merge the troops and inventory (including money).

* The caravan is visible and can be attacked on the campaign map.
(And as mentioned, the supplement would fail (or much more expensive) if the supplying settlement is destroyed/disrupted).

The reinforcement should be another feature of the game, where reinforcement wait time is bases on distance(route) on the campaign map, instead of only one chance for joining if the war party is close enough like in Warband.

* As the player:
- Can attack enemy's caravan.
- Do a quest for a war party leader to give him/her the supplement. The quest would be to bring the necessary items in time, regardless of where the player get them.
- Trade with war parties for cheap loots.
- Do a quest for a settlement to be their caravan (carry the goods to the destinated war party).
- Request a settlement to send a caravan to the player.
- Dispatch a caravan from the player's party. But it's a tricky how to give order to that player's caravan, like at what price they would sell, what price they would buy, what time they should prioritize returning. I myself don't bother to have detailed options. However, do you have any idea of how to keep it both neat and good?

* For the NPC:
THIS IS THE BIGGEST PROBLEM!

It's totally possible to make rules, but AI may not be good at handling them. It's very hard to make AI know when it's best to send a caravan, how many troops it needs, what a war party would do if their caravan is attacked, how far should they dive into the enemy's territory, etc.

There have to be a lot of calculation. I'm not sure if deep learning can be applied for this. Deep learning can do very well for AI vs AI, but they wouldn't have enough examples from human players. NPC war parties may be bullied by the player for that.

DreamSky great suggestions.
I note that you focused more on the economic side than on the military side.
When in the post I talk about "support line", the line itself is not something that can be attacked.
What can be attacked are the wagons that run through it.

Every city / village / castle has its own economy, so the number of wagons that can depart for the various trade routes and for the various support lines must depend on the strength of that economy.
the more resources you have, the more carts you can "pay weekly" to carry the stuff wherever you need it to go.

PRIVATE wagons and PUBLIC wagons:
The wagons of the cities that are not part of the support line (whose purpose is PRETTY MILITARY), and which are therefore private citizens who trade in long and wide, can serve as itinerant traders, as you suggest, with the ways in which you have described it (which can be summarized on the basis of how much it suits him to undertake the trip for the danger or how much it suits him based on the gain).
The PUBLIC tanks belong to the STATE, which in this case is the kingdom or faction, and therefore follow the trade route as established by the ruler of the city / castle / village.
PRIVATE wagons belong to private citizens who simply trade.
Public wagons must be purchased and maintained (weekly), private ones depend on the strength of the economy and the type of economic system adopted (more or less statist).

It would not be a bad idea to have a public resource exchange system and a private one (modifiable through political reforms in the event of a kingdom, in order to choose whether to have a more statist, centralized, or decentralized system with a private economy that is managed by itself).

In the first case, the number of trade routes would depend heavily on the relations between the kingdoms and the individual lords.
In the second case much less, so it would allow to have more trade routes available.

On the other hand a war also causes the enemy to attack such trade routes and this has different effects depending on the type of economy.
Since a more statist system on a social level would be less affected, given that it was not the private citizen who thought about his business that he had been attacked because of a war made by his country but to which he never wanted to take part, but a trade route that belongs to everyone has been attacked, because it is public and of the state, so the people, even if they lose wealth and food, blame it more on the enemy than on their own ruler.
Conversely, in the case of a non-statist or less statist system, where a private cart is attacked, the blame for the loss of wealth clearly falls on those who do not carry out the war (therefore hatred goes both to the enemy and to his own incompetent ruler).

between a statist economic system and a neoliberal system, in between there is everything else.

In the case of PARTY:
In the last town where the party lord resided with the army, in order to create the support line, he bought wagons.
The wagon has its own cost, and the guy who guides it wants to be paid weekly, in addition the wagon must be escorted.
So the general costs are: purchase price, weekly cost of the driver, and the soldiers escorting the wagon, which must be taken from your party.

Clearly the costs will affect the convenience in having 1, 2 or more carts or the number of forts / camps / outposts.
 

GreenLight7

Veteran
Best answers
0
darksoulshin said:
DreamySky said:
I like that idea. In fact, I had a similar idea and I found this topic as I checked whether there's a topic about it.

Here is my model:

* There will be caravans going between friendly settlements and the war parties. On the way to the war party, the caravan would carry food, ammunition, and other equipments in good shape, (and money). On the way back to the settlement, the caravan would carry battle loots, equipments in bad shape, (and money).

* The caravan may belong to either the settlement, or the war party.

- If the caravan belongs to the settlement:
It will be a trade when the war party and the caravan meet. The caravan would try to make some profit for themselves and make the price based on how scarce the supplies are, and how dangerous it is for them. This costs the wealth of the war party. The caravan may not depart if they see it as dangerous or not profitable, and may demand higher pay for better protection and/or for more expensive supplies.

- If the caravan belongs to the war party:
It departs from the war party, taking some troops, money, equipments (intended to be repaired), and loots (intended to be sold). The caravan go to friendly settlement(s) and make the trade(s), then go back to the party when they finish the objective, or they fail as they run out of money. When the caravan returns to the war party, they will merge the troops and inventory (including money).

* The caravan is visible and can be attacked on the campaign map.
(And as mentioned, the supplement would fail (or much more expensive) if the supplying settlement is destroyed/disrupted).

The reinforcement should be another feature of the game, where reinforcement wait time is bases on distance(route) on the campaign map, instead of only one chance for joining if the war party is close enough like in Warband.

* As the player:
- Can attack enemy's caravan.
- Do a quest for a war party leader to give him/her the supplement. The quest would be to bring the necessary items in time, regardless of where the player get them.
- Trade with war parties for cheap loots.
- Do a quest for a settlement to be their caravan (carry the goods to the destinated war party).
- Request a settlement to send a caravan to the player.
- Dispatch a caravan from the player's party. But it's a tricky how to give order to that player's caravan, like at what price they would sell, what price they would buy, what time they should prioritize returning. I myself don't bother to have detailed options. However, do you have any idea of how to keep it both neat and good?

* For the NPC:
THIS IS THE BIGGEST PROBLEM!

It's totally possible to make rules, but AI may not be good at handling them. It's very hard to make AI know when it's best to send a caravan, how many troops it needs, what a war party would do if their caravan is attacked, how far should they dive into the enemy's territory, etc.

There have to be a lot of calculation. I'm not sure if deep learning can be applied for this. Deep learning can do very well for AI vs AI, but they wouldn't have enough examples from human players. NPC war parties may be bullied by the player for that.

DreamSky great suggestions.
I note that you focused more on the economic side than on the military side.
When in the post I talk about "support line", the line itself is not something that can be attacked.
What can be attacked are the wagons that run through it.

Every city / village / castle has its own economy, so the number of wagons that can depart for the various trade routes and for the various support lines must depend on the strength of that economy.
the more resources you have, the more carts you can "pay weekly" to carry the stuff wherever you need it to go.

PRIVATE wagons and PUBLIC wagons:
The wagons of the cities that are not part of the support line (whose purpose is PRETTY MILITARY), and which are therefore private citizens who trade in long and wide, can serve as itinerant traders, as you suggest, with the ways in which you have described it (which can be summarized on the basis of how much it suits him to undertake the trip for the danger or how much it suits him based on the gain).
The PUBLIC tanks belong to the STATE, which in this case is the kingdom or faction, and therefore follow the trade route as established by the ruler of the city / castle / village.
PRIVATE wagons belong to private citizens who simply trade.
Public wagons must be purchased and maintained (weekly), private ones depend on the strength of the economy and the type of economic system adopted (more or less statist).

It would not be a bad idea to have a public resource exchange system and a private one (modifiable through political reforms in the event of a kingdom, in order to choose whether to have a more statist, centralized, or decentralized system with a private economy that is managed by itself).

In the first case, the number of trade routes would depend heavily on the relations between the kingdoms and the individual lords.
In the second case much less, so it would allow to have more trade routes available.

On the other hand a war also causes the enemy to attack such trade routes and this has different effects depending on the type of economy.
Since a more statist system on a social level would be less affected, given that it was not the private citizen who thought about his business that he had been attacked because of a war made by his country but to which he never wanted to take part, but a trade route that belongs to everyone has been attacked, because it is public and of the state, so the people, even if they lose wealth and food, blame it more on the enemy than on their own ruler.
Conversely, in the case of a non-statist or less statist system, where a private cart is attacked, the blame for the loss of wealth clearly falls on those who do not carry out the war (therefore hatred goes both to the enemy and to his own incompetent ruler).

between a statist economic system and a neoliberal system, in between there is everything else.

In the case of PARTY:
In the last town where the party lord resided with the army, in order to create the support line, he bought wagons.
The wagon has its own cost, and the guy who guides it wants to be paid weekly, in addition the wagon must be escorted.
So the general costs are: purchase price, weekly cost of the driver, and the soldiers escorting the wagon, which must be taken from your party.

Clearly the costs will affect the convenience in having 1, 2 or more carts or the number of forts / camps / outposts.
In reality warlord carry some caravan with him,and that caravan usually can last from half month to half month.In warband they do one thing wrong-war is costly thing,there you can declare war,assemble army and go,but not everything that easy,supply,money to families of soldiers,siege equipment cost,broken ammunition cost,bolts,arrows.disease.
I suggest like this cost for caravans,king can not pay money at all,he can give order and caravans gofrom towns castles,to last supply point,including forts as i said,that costs trader relation and people relation,minus to economy,and he can select pay only to traders,people relation,economy decrease little much,pay only to people,trader relation,economy decrease much more,and pay to all,not negative effects,if money last,maximum one,two dept without negative effects,lets say week,but not negative if you later pay.Modders can do amount of money paid.
Than when relation decreases of traders risk of rebelling,marcenaries,maube with your enemy,and small part of people,when with people-risk of uprising and lowered morale of soldiers.
War party have their caravan that follows them.Caravans from cities and one-two supply roads.Player can choose where.Spoils of war can remain in war caravan,or if money last depart some to country.
If supplies stopped and last major deserting and low morale,vastly decreasy continuation of war,also they can add war exhaustion to country.
 

viocult

Regular
WF&SWBNWVC
Best answers
0
I never took a town or castle by siege, only by assault, so this brilliant idea is new to me (though some only need the blood of their war pony for nourishment).

Of course, if strongholds didn't automatically go back to 30 days provisions (Viking Conquest corrects this, but doesn't tell you some hidden quartermaster will change that 0 days supply to a week supply over a much more reasonable time) and it was up to the new owner to correct this (chances are the last guy destroyed the food supply knowing how the battle was going to go), such a supply line might be necessary.
Assuming one's allies have not burned the villages, it is reasonable that the enemy's villages will provide food for your men (taking silver is always better than giving blood). How much food would the villagers be willing to sell to the enemy might be a relations question or fear(renown vs, renown), since it looks awfully suspicious when villagers who have acquired a lot of silver have to up their food stocks.

you pass the npc or groups of them, which leave their tracks.
in short .. the usual screen!
enter the city and exit.
go on for a few seconds and you will see behind you a trail that connects you to the city you left behind.
That's your supply line!

Now that you have a clearer picture, let's go specifically.

The strength of this line depends on the place you left behind and allows you not to use the food in the inventory or slow down the consumption, which without the line, suffers quite heavily. (Clearly are parameters to be evaluated, I give only the qualitative idea).

It seems easiest to appoint a member of your party a quartermaster general to give the order of which city  the wagons will be provided from. I don't think there should be a penalty to change cities because it is reasonable that there would be a plan already in place for alternative cities to provide supplies (though with the distance that requires such supply, it will be a minor variation to what the line looks like from the changing of cities).

These goods reintegrate those in the inventory (food and ammunition).

Two other categories that might need to be supplied: metal weapons and armor without protective oil that have endured wet weather would have a chance to need replacing and weapons stolen from your troops when they were asleep and sold by their comrades (there are always a couple of bad apples). The less equipped soldiers can still fight just not as effectively. Hunting and battles might lose arrows, but if you control the battlefield you can restock your ammunition, though some arrows will now be inferior from use.

We spend money,time and resources (wood and other stuff).

Troops travelling and building camps might require twice the amount of food, so their caloric intake matches their caloric outtake. Cold weather would double it as well.

The caravans can rest in these camps and then resume their journey to the next one, up to the destination, so that the goods, during the journey, is defended.

The camps could have fresh horses for the wagons, which could double (or more) their movement distance for the day by a relay system.

 

FBohler

Knight
WBNWWF&S
Best answers
0
There's no need for abstract supply lines because there are already actual ones.
If the caravans aren't able to reach you, you're going to be out of supplies unless the new fief is able to keep it by itself.
 

darksoulshin

Sergeant at Arms
WBNWVC
Best answers
0
FBohler said:
There's no need for abstract supply lines because there are already actual ones.
If the caravans aren't able to reach you, you're going to be out of supplies unless the new fief is able to keep it by itself.
the "abstract" support line is not the true support line, but only a "graphic account" of how the support line is being set up, which is however made up of traveling carts.
If the line is attacked (ie a chariot is looted by the enemy), once the time in which the chariot should have arrived, the color of the line changes from a bright red (for example) to orange, to symbolize that the support line has been somewhat less effective.
- The bandits may have attacked one or two carts.
- the enemy attacked one or two wagons.
- Or the city from which the line of supplies is being sieved by an enemy army that has made the large circle and has not been sighted, has been put under siege, until going to besiege the city tied to the supply line, blocking it.

Let us remember that the game must be "usable intuitively", so some data must be made evident that otherwise we should write in real time on a sheet of paper and it would be annoying.

It is not that you can be every second to count the carts that pass by on the street, distinguishing them from those of other cities or nations, following the path and seeing where they arrive and with what load, because in doing this, the enemy will be passing where you do not look.
In reality, the commander or at least the council of war, reports arrive and probably also have a map on the table inside the tent where the council meets, designed with all the lines that it needs and with all the pieces on it, in order to have an idea where it is and who does what.

To remedy the tedious situation in which you draw the entire map with supply lines on paper (but to do this you should let time flow to see the trajectory of the wagons, which prevents you from looking elsewhere, and which therefore makes 3-4 minutes of real time, in a month in the game ... as if to draw a map it took a month), this work is done by the game on the screen where a line is drawn that "gives you information" on your support line ( and at this point you call it the support line).

The support line is updated at each estimated time a wagon should arrive (with an associated error).
 

Alpacambo

Recruit
Best answers
0
While this is a cool idea, it's basically an entire game in and of itself. Making it would take forever to implement.

I propose a much simpler implementation that uses an already existing feature (morale) to achieve the desired goal:
Make enemy things harder to capture if they are farther away from friendly things.

The most basic idea is:
Let any town / settlement have a radius. Within that radius you are "supplied" and take no penalties to morale in (siege)battles.
If you fight outside that circle, you take increasingly heavy penalties to morale based on distance.

Alternatively this could be implemented on a node basis, meaning you can only attack the closest enemy castle/town without penalties.

However I'm afraid such a system would lead to turteling and a grindingly slow battle of attrition. Would make for cool optional gameplay though.
 

GitiUsir

Sergeant
WB
Best answers
0
There are more calculations needed for this design:
How much food produces a region, how much is comsumed by 1 man or animal per day, how much can be foraged or requised in different terrains...
How much food can be carried by men, animals or carts...
The distance traveled by men on foot or on horseback, by mule trains or by oxen carts per day...
The difference between one day march and a forced march...
The difference between recruits and veterans in endurance and distance traveled...

If anyone is inclined to research. No need to be very detailed, just the broad numbers that make sense.