Trying to Wrap my Arms Around Logistics

[squatter]

Thanks a lot Loki - it must be rather frustrating for you guys having to explain this stuff over and over.

But I'm afraid I still have questions regarding your points:

The big overall question I still have is:

This depot has capacity of 30k, yet it is only receiving 14k, why?

No part of my network reporting over capacity - the main line Vishni Volochek is coloured yellow, which suggests it is using at most 50% of its capacity.

So why is my rail network reporting slack, yet my depots (well connected on double lines) are not receiving their capacity of freight? How can I diagnose/understand/remedy this?

Also, regarding the 'rail usage' number each hex displays. So this is a penalty to the current turn's capacity that is reducing the capacity on the current turn? ie the capacity on my double line this turn is 30k minus the 2.3k rail usage hanging over from last turn? I would like to ask for some context on this 2.3k - is this a relatively big or small number? Is this good or bad for me? I have no idea.

[Repsol]

A question about the rail usage as shown in the manual on page 130...Why is the rail section around Schigry coloured orange and the other parts of that
railline is yellow ? According to the manual it is because of the high supply need of the airbase...
According to the picture Schigry itself has no depot...Wouldn't that mean that the freight would first need to be moved to the closest depot and from there back to the airbase via trucks or horses.
Why then is not the entire railline to the closest depot coloured orange (or yellow)...The way the picture shows it the trains seems to have 'teleported' to the hex next to Schigry...moved to
Schigry and then dissapered. The sections of the rail on either side of Schigry is showing yellow and Schigry is showing orange. Why ?
Isn't the freight transported to the closet depot...and thereby forced to use the entire railline up to that depot equally much ? Is stuff being unloaded at the airbase ? If so...how did the trains get there ?
As both sides of Schigry shows yellow...That is LESS usage the Schigry itself...Does enemy airattack have anything to do with these hexes being of different colour then the rest of that line ? Or have simply the rail usage of those two hexes not been reduced as much as the surrounding hexes in the logistics phase ?

[loki100]

I do wish the game had different terminology in a few places as I think that is part of the problem. Its like the concept of 'National Morale' after 10 years of the WiTx series being played that still causes problems of misinterpretation as to what it actually models - but it runs so deep across the game code it'll never get renamed.

Here I think it doesn't help we use the term rail capacity to mean 2 different things ... [:'(]

So here's my personal terminology. Railyards produce trains (& rolling stock), railways allow those trains to move from a to b.

Both of those are limited goods in the terms of the game model, at a given spot you can only have as many trains/rolling stock as there is unused rail yard capacity in 30 hexes. So that sets one input number - how much freight you can load onto trains.

Railways have an ideal operating capacity at a given point (early in the alpha I went off and dug out a load of academic articles on the issues around capacity and constraints and what could cause blockages - och we had fun [&:]). That and more sane contributions were laid over the basic dual/single track concept to come up with the 40% capacity for single track rails.

The other side of this, is your depots set a level of demand and its not impossible that you are demanding too much (across the wider system).

You are saying that your railways are fine, your depot is under-used so there are one of 2 residual issues. One is that the sum demand of your wider depot system is too much, so that even a #4 depot doesn't get its needs or there are not enough trains to bring that freight to the depot.

Now you can do something about this. Put a NKPS on the depot and don't move it. It then says to system treat this depot as a priority over and above its notional valuation.

You can see it here:



that Soviet network has 4 functioning priority 4 depots, they are all roughly the same capacity but one has filled up nearly as much as it can - that has a NKPS/HQ combination. In effect its pulled freight from its peers - if I recall my next move was to move it to Torun so the freight was stored where it could supply the coming cross-Vistula offensive.

Final bit

Also, regarding the 'rail usage' number each hex displays. So this is a penalty to the current turn's capacity that is reducing the capacity on the current turn? ie the capacity on my double line this turn is 30k minus the 2.3k rail usage hanging over from last turn? I would like to ask for some context on this 2.3k - is this a relatively big or small number? Is this good or bad for me? I have no idea.

existing usage just sits there, so as opposed to starting with 0 usage you start with 2,000. As you add to that usage the SMP cost/hex goes up - see 38.7.7. Up to 10,000 there is no extra cost then it starts to bite. What that does is to make your trains move more slowly, ie cover less ground or you need more trains to deliver the same volume of freight.

So if was seeing <3,000 it wouldn't overly worry me, if it was in the 5-8,000 range I'd be aware that much usage would start to incur penalties, over 10000 and worth thinking about not using for unit moves.

But to go back to my eg above, the rail to my main depot is orange (& that'll be the residual amount), so by definition I have less train stock elsewhere simply due to that congestion. Well that was a price I was prepared to pay - I really wanted that Soviet Front well resourced, not just to land a powerful opening blow but then to be able to sustain operations for 2-3 weeks even if it outran the depot system.

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: Repsol

A question about the rail usage as shown in the manual on page 130...Why is the rail section around Schigry coloured orange and the other parts of that
railline is yellow ? According to the manual it is because of the high supply need of the airbase...
According to the picture Schigry itself has no depot...Wouldn't that mean that the freight would first need to be moved to the closest depot and from there back to the airbase via trucks or horses.
Why then is not the entire railline to the closest depot coloured orange (or yellow)...The way the picture shows it the trains seems to have 'teleported' to the hex next to Schigry...moved to
Schigry and then dissapered. The sections of the rail on either side of Schigry is showing yellow and Schigry is showing orange. Why ?
Isn't the freight transported to the closet depot...and thereby forced to use the entire railline up to that depot equally much ? Is stuff being unloaded at the airbase ? If so...how did the trains get there ?
As both sides of Schigry shows yellow...That is LESS usage the Schigry itself...Does enemy airattack have anything to do with these hexes being of different colour then the rest of that line ? Or have simply the rail usage of those two hexes not been reduced as much as the surrounding hexes in the logistics phase ?

I think I have an answer and it lurks in the statement "Here the Soviet rail net around Kursk is heavily used
due to a build up of forces".

We took most of the images from real games as that (I think) puts stuff into context better.

I'd just moved a tank army by rail to the sector around Kursk as part of a major build up (also judging by the image, more was still being railed in - that artillery division would have demanded a lot). That most definitely left the rail lines all red and it takes a fair few turns (4-5) for that to work out the system. Such a heavy usage, combined with normal freight usage, can really distort the paths that the routines use, so you get black spots (or orange spots) where usage spiked and is being slower to clear.

The other possible explanation is that most of that sector is on the yellow/orange boundary (esp for the single track stages) and its not actually as different as it appears at first glance.

You're right that Schigry as such has no depot so its getting its freight from one nearby.

If I recall my logistics on that sector when that image was taken was in a total mess

[Repsol]

thanks [:)]

[squatter]

Thanks again Loki, you have admirable patience in dealing with us newcomers!

A couple more (!) questions off the back of your reply:

You say: "at a given spot you can only have as many trains/rolling stock as there is unused rail yard capacity in 30 hexes. So that sets one input number - how much freight you can load onto trains."

Q: Where can we see what this trains capacity per hex listed?

You say: "your depots set a level of demand and its not impossible that you are demanding too much (across the wider system)."
Q: How can I tell at a glance that my total depot demand exceeds my capacity to meet that demand?

[squatter]

One of the things about the logistics system for me, is that sadly it is completely unintuitive. Things you see with your eyes often don't equate to what your intuition would be.

An example: a 'green' rail line in the logistics info overlay doesn't necessarily mean 'good'. Sometimes it means good (ie track isn't overloaded). But often it means really bad (ie not many supplies flowing on this route). Hmmm.

Another example that's just hit me:

I was under the assumption that the size of the coloured bars above depots provide an at-a-glance summary of the amount of supplies that depot can/is handling, and that the size of these bars tell you approx what the numbers involved are, ie if the size of your green 'received' bar is the same size as your red 'sent' bar, you can assume the amount received and the amount sent are broadly similar.

Now I realise this is not the case (unless I'm very mistaken)

Take the two depots in the below image with the yellow arrows.

The size of all their bars is comparable. This leads one to assume the numbers within the depots will be comparable.

They are not... (cont)

[squatter]

Here's the southerly depot's numbers.

What surprises me here are the received/stored/sent numbers are 8k vs 19k vs 4.5k yet the three bars are the same size?

That leaves me slightly dumbfounded and confused. (cont...)

[squatter]

Now to the northerly of the two depots.

What jumps out here is that ok, the black capacity bar here and with the southerly depot are pretty much the same size, and both depots are around 30k capacity, so that makes sense.

However... as you can see the received/stored/sent bars again don't match the numbers involved, both internally within this depot, and when compared to the size of the bars/numbers in the other depot.

At this point I am totally confused and don't know really where to start in trying to understand what is going on here. It's really quite demoralising tbh that the intuition level is so low in the way the game feeds back to the new user. I mean isnt the blue bar below meant to be around 1% the size of the black bar?!

But then hopefully I'm just being thick and there's strong logic behind all this..!

[Repsol]

Good points, squatter...This indeed seems less then ideal [&:]

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: squatter

Thanks again Loki, you have admirable patience in dealing with us newcomers!

A couple more (!) questions off the back of your reply:

You say: "at a given spot you can only have as many trains/rolling stock as there is unused rail yard capacity in 30 hexes. So that sets one input number - how much freight you can load onto trains."

Q: Where can we see what this trains capacity per hex listed?

You say: "your depots set a level of demand and its not impossible that you are demanding too much (across the wider system)."
Q: How can I tell at a glance that my total depot demand exceeds my capacity to meet that demand?

first is my mistake, I should know by now not to say something without double checking - what comes up is the SMP penalty to load unload, so in the 2 images below Danzig is cheaper as its a bigger railyard





so its a manual estimation I'm afraid

the other you can't, so again you are back to judgements and a feel.

I'll leave your next 2 posts to Red Lancer as he's more aware of what is being captured there, but again the bars are incremental and pretty broad brush.

I can understand the frustration in that this is important and a good grasp underpins wider game play. Its just that in the end the system is so complex that it defies being pinned down (& its dynamic too) - thats not an opt out, just that since the logistics phase happens out of sight its so hard to determine every aspect.

[M60A3TTS]

It's indeed a valid point and I think the simple answer is scaling. A National Supply Source with 2 million tons represented by the blue bar. The amount received, represented by the green bar could be in the single or double digits. So clearly trying to scale those numbers visually would be impossible. The blue bar might have to be 2 or 3 feet tall to represent 2 million.

It is what it is. The key takeaways are do you see something in the blue bar showing the depot has supplies, and are the black bars closer to the front lines somewhat taller, indicating extended capacity is available, likely because a HQ is sitting on it. The red and green bars you can largely ignore.

[squatter]

Thank you Loki - your patience and willingness to help is truly appreciated.

Also, am I right in thinking the manual is your work? FWIW I don't think I've ever seen such a clearly written manual, especially given the size and complexity of the game. Outstanding job.

I hear what you're saying about the logistics in the game. I think a lot of this is down to expectation management. I - and imagine many others - come to this expecting that they will be able to one day understand exactly what is happening in the logistics model. Clearly this is not the case, that it is too complex, too opaque and too dynamic to be quantified exactly. I'm beginning to understand that the player needs to understand the broad strokes of the system - where best to put depots/roughly how many depots is necessary/drop hqs on depots/use RR units etc - and at a certain point stop trying to really understand exactly what is going on under the hood. In essence, the player needs to have faith that the system works, some 'experience' and 'feel' for what's good and what aint, and just go with it!

Perhaps managing players' expectations from the outset will prevent a certain amount of the frustration that comes with digging only to realise that no matter how much you dig, you'll never be able to codify exactly what's going on in the system at any given point in time. Some kind of disclaimer perhaps!

[squatter]

ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS

It's indeed a valid point and I think the simple answer is scaling. A National Supply Source with 2 million tons represented by the blue bar. The amount received, represented by the green bar could be in the single or double digits. So clearly trying to scale those numbers visually would be impossible. The blue bar might have to be 2 or 3 feet tall to represent 2 million.

It is what it is. The key takeaways are do you see something in the blue bar showing the depot has supplies, and are the black bars closer to the front lines somewhat taller, indicating extended capacity is available, likely because a HQ is sitting on it. The red and green bars you can largely ignore.

Thanks M60.

It's rather disappointing to learn that these bars - one of my favourite parts of the GUI because they purport to impart lots of key info in an elegant non-verbal way, like any good GUI - are in fact something of a mirage.

I can understand the need for scaling, but I'm pretty sure most players come to the game (as I did) and see those bars, and assume they represent absolute and comparable amounts. Perhaps the way these bars are displayed could be looked at? You could have everything to scale up to, say, 40k tonnes, and any bar that represents more than this has a + sign above it, or something.

Also, I repost one of my previous images here:

The green/blue/red bars in this depot are all the same size. Yet green represents 26%, blue represents 63%, and red represents 18%.

Yet they are all the same size.

Now I am not a programmer, but I would have assumed getting bars to display at relatively correct proportions according to a percentage wouldn't have been that difficult?! But then that's probably why I'm not a programmer!

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: squatter

....
I hear what you're saying about the logistics in the game. I think a lot of this is down to expectation management. I - and imagine many others - come to this expecting that they will be able to one day understand exactly what is happening in the logistics model. Clearly this is not the case, that it is too complex, too opaque and too dynamic to be quantified exactly. I'm beginning to understand that the player needs to understand the broad strokes of the system - where best to put depots/roughly how many depots is necessary/drop hqs on depots/use RR units etc - and at a certain point stop trying to really understand exactly what is going on under the hood. In essence, the player needs to have faith that the system works, some 'experience' and 'feel' for what's good and what aint, and just go with it!

...

yes, I think this is right, in the end you have this vast moving system somewhat out of sight and a number of discrete tools you can access.

I think that players coming from WiTW might find this a wee bit easier in that there you got used to rough and ready rules but in a much smaller environment - not so many units (even after June 1944), less space and so on. While the actual model is a significant rework of WiTW, the 'input' elements are not that wildly different

as to the manual thanks, but not just me. Red Lancer set up the core framework and all the one page guides, Joel was patience personified in going over sections to get them technically right and a lot of the alpha testers did superb work on helping with the final edits. And to Matrix for being prepared to accept that it was as short as we could make it - sounds a wee bit like an oscar speech but in truth its the product of many people (with a shared view that we wanted to make this game accessible),

[M60A3TTS]

ORIGINAL: squatter

Thank you Loki - your patience and willingness to help is truly appreciated.

Also, am I right in thinking the manual is your work? FWIW I don't think I've ever seen such a clearly written manual, especially given the size and complexity of the game. Outstanding job.

I hear what you're saying about the logistics in the game. I think a lot of this is down to expectation management. I - and imagine many others - come to this expecting that they will be able to one day understand exactly what is happening in the logistics model. Clearly this is not the case, that it is too complex, too opaque and too dynamic to be quantified exactly. I'm beginning to understand that the player needs to understand the broad strokes of the system - where best to put depots/roughly how many depots is necessary/drop hqs on depots/use RR units etc - and at a certain point stop trying to really understand exactly what is going on under the hood. In essence, the player needs to have faith that the system works, some 'experience' and 'feel' for what's good and what aint, and just go with it!

Perhaps managing players' expectations from the outset will prevent a certain amount of the frustration that comes with digging only to realise that no matter how much you dig, you'll never be able to codify exactly what's going on in the system at any given point in time. Some kind of disclaimer perhaps!

This is pretty much spot on. Loki and I have differing views on how to prioritize depots but at the end of the day it really is not important because we both know how to make the supply system sing. It took me a couple playthroughs of the Stalingrad to Berlin scenario to truly "get it". I still can't answer some of these forum logistics questions off the top of my head as Loki can, but I don't have to, I'm experienced enough to know what is needed to make it all work. This is something that everyone can do as well, but it requires practice.

Reading the manual is like the reading the one for your automobile. It will tell you how to start the car, operate the radio and open the trunk but doesn't tell you how to drive. You have to learn that part.

[squatter]

Yes I can accept the game and the logistics system as it is. It's clearly something of unfathomable complexity that perhaps not even its designer any longer knows *exactly* what is happening at any given juncture.

As I mentioned before, perhaps the way you 'package' it to the player in terms of expectations would help. ie: The logistics system creates a realistic, complex, dynamic and realistic simulation of how supply is shipped to units. You the player will have an overall understanding and influence over what is going on and a set of tools to manipulate the system to your ends. But just like the experience of an actual supreme commander you will not be able to diagnose every individual fault or quirk that presents itself. Your job will be to employ the tools you have to achieve your aims and trust the system will respond in a realistic way. Your job is not to master every cog in the machine of the logistics system, as it is simulating something that one person could not actually ever comprehend in its entirety and multitude of variables.

And I'm fine with that, personally - assuming the code simulating everything is robust!

The thing I'm not fine about is the size of the bars on the depot icons!!!!!

[Zemke]

Thanks, Loki for the detailed explanations. I do have a much better understand now, and in my current game, I understand the why and how "better", and I am seeing what is going on based on what you have stated...better.

HOWEVER....I agree with Squatter, "One of the things about the logistics system for me, is that sadly it is completely unintuitive. Things you see with your eyes often don't equate to what your intuition would be."

This game and other frankly other Grisby titles flood you with tons of data, which is good. In a real US Army unit or NATO Unit or Command staff, the Commander is not given rems of data to sort through, (Staff Officer's sort through reams of data), the Commander is shown, usually in a visual format, graph or bullet points of the bottom line, at whatever level of Command he is at. This takes place today, in every US Army HQ from Battalion to the Pentagon. Commanders do not see the "data", they see a chart, so they can make a decision (if needed), based on the information. That is what this game and the previous WitE, WitW, and WitP: AE all do not have for the most part. You are forced to dig through the information up and down the chain of command to find critical information. The one thing that could be done better, and frankly is far more realistic, (if we are acting as Commanders), is to present the information simply, and charts are simple. The production graphs are a good start, but I would suggest expanding that concept throughout. I have no idea what programming that would take, but it would certainly make the player's job a lot easier, and save him lots of time.

I am certain 2by3 has access to either some of the designers or playtesters who have served as Staff Officers who would be more than happy to show examples. For Example, I could walk onto the TOC (Tactical Operations Center of my HQ, and see at a glance, Unit Strength, Ammo, Critical Equipment/Weapons status, Main Supply Route Status (MSR), and so on, and it was usually very simple. One way is the "Bubble Chart", showing a particular functional area as either Green, Yellow, Red, or Black. You never wanted to see red or black...bad.

This could be done for every single HQ in the game. Click on the HQ, and you could then click a "Critical Status Chart" or something like that. I can then see at a glance, and if there are issues, and work to fix them, perhaps with even a Recommendation. Commanders always ask their staff, "What is your recommendation" or How do we fix it!" I have heard both statements many times. Currently, you have to dig, and read, and click here, then there.

Not trying to be critical, I think the ideas behind the logistical system are good, and other details, I love the detail. I just don't like having to dig around and find info, that as a real commander I should have in a very easy quick format that anyone understands. The game should not be about who can master the data dig, it should be about making decisions based on easy-to-access information or a picture of what that information represents, ie the "bubble chart" so decisions can be made.

I am adding this: On a Staff, (every staff in the West anyway), the primary functional areas are broken into the big four, (there are other Staff Positions, but these are the main ones), G-1 Personal, G-2 Intelligence, G-3 Operations and G-4 Logistics. Usually, each will give a very short Situational Brief and have usually a couple of slides showing the relevant information for that functional area, (data). This could be done historically and I would expect they would be, given the level of detail. I am not exactly sure of the Soviet organization, but for the Germans, Operations was the Ia, Supply was the Ib, IIa was Personnel and Intelegence was the Ic

[Zemke]

Last question, why do units get their supplies at the depot? Not exactly sure about German WW II doctrine, but I think it the same as the modern Army today, which is a Division does not send trucks to a depot to get supplies, they either go to the Corps "trains" or Corps Depot, or their requests are pushed to them by Corps to their location. Units stationed at bases are different, I am talking about in the "field", at war.

A more realistic flow would be National Supply Source-Depot/Port-Depots up the chain and -Corps HQ-Unit. Also, priority units are getting supplies pushed to them, they are not going and getting them.

[carlkay58]

Zemke - a depot with an HQ on it is that level of supply depot. The depot has a truck pool that will transfer supplies out to the combat units. If the combat units still do not have enough supply, they can send some of their trucks back to the depot to help transfer supply to itself. Note that sometimes these trips are pretty long as they may be going to a depot further back than the local one. When the combat unit uses its own trucks it will take a MP hit for the turn - sometimes a very substantial one.

So the short of it is that the combat units have the supplies arrive at their locations. But if there is not enough supply and you have a group of empty trucks, you ship those trucks off to 'salvage' some supply in the rear. There were times in the Battle of Smolensk where some of the panzer divisions were sending trucks back to Germany itself for supplies.