A few good ideas (separate):
Have truck pieces and supply pieces. Each costs 1 IPC. For every 3-5 ground units (haven’t decided) (including AAA) in a territory there has to be a supply piece there every turn which is consumed. Territories with less than 3-5 units do not need supplies, but they need to have an unbroken connection to a supply hub (the supply hubs are what you designated)
Truck pieces move supply pieces, can move two territories a turn, cannot attack, cannot defend (if found in an otherwise empty territory it’s destroyed automatically like AAA) but can be taken as casualties if there are other units with a combat value.
If units haven’t been supplied for a turn, they get attrition like you showed.
At sea, two supply pieces can take up one transport slot (can replace the infantry) and have to be resupplied every turn.
Because of the fact it’s only required for bigger groups of units, most Pacific islands won’t need resupply but will slow down the Allies in France.
Supply units can be unloaded from transports. Only one can be unloaded or loaded if wanted.
If a territory only has supply units (or with other units that don’t have a combat value) they are automatically destroyed. Supply units cannot be taken as casualties.
Groups of units that number less than 3-5 overseas will be considered supplied if they can trace a path through friendly sea zones to a supply hub (those sea zones can contain friendly warships or no warships, but must not contain enemy warships, transports don’t count).
We can add a Russian Winter effect where on round 3 all Axis units in original Soviet territories need two supply units to sustain the same number of troops or else they get attrition.
The massive problem with this rule is that it necessitates tons of new pieces.
Another idea would be to simply have units be supplied if they have a connection to the supply hub.
At the beginning of each turn (let’s call it the Resupply Phase), check which units can trace a path to the supply hub. If they are, they’re resupplied and can attack normally. For units on islands or overseas a second option, to be able to trace a line through friendly sea zones, is also possible. A combination of tracing through friendly sea zones and territories is allowed.
I think this would make the Baltic and Black seas more useful, being able to resupply even when cut off.
Once you know which units can’t be resupplied after the phase, those units will get attrition like you outlined.
We can add a Russian Winter effect where on round 3 all Axis units in original Soviet territory get attrition.
@superbattleshipyamato said in G40 - Supply Hubs and Line of Supply:
Another idea would be to simply have units be supplied if they have a connection to the supply hub.
At the beginning of each turn (let’s call it the Resupply Phase), check which units can trace a path to the supply hub. If they are, they’re resupplied and can attack normally. For units on islands or overseas a second option, to be able to trace a line through friendly sea zones, is also possible. A combination of tracing through friendly sea zones and territories is allowed.
I think this would make the Baltic and Black seas more useful, being able to resupply even when cut off.
Once you know which units can’t be resupplied after the phase, those units will get attrition like you outlined.
We can add a Russian Winter effect where on round 3 all Axis units in original Soviet territory get attrition.
Sounds like a much more refined, simpler way of implementing the supply system which I like. I think that there should be a limit with the supply hubs for example having 3 land territories maximum the supply hub could trace (infinite in sea zones but if coming from land to sea to land then the counting will resume.) They can still be bombed and stuff. Added supply hubs will be maybe Novgorod, Romania, Moscow, and Volgorad.
Soviets will get “strategic movement” meaning they are always in supply as long as they are in their home territory.
Supply hubs can be built costing maybe 15 IPC’s for the Allies and 30 IPC’s for the Axis after round 3.
Maybe there should be a fortress unit giving some dice rolling at 4 that the Soviets can build in important places
I think that it’s overall a good idea, although I think it’s not historically accurate and too biased for the Soviets to have fortresses. Can you please expand on this specific concept?
Thanks for all the support!
@superbattleshipyamato
I should have said Fortifications lol. The Axis are much stronger than the Allies in this game. Most players will retreat to Moscow and then by around round 6 the Germans take it unless they royally screw up. If the Allies can threaten the German logistics and the Russians can actually hold a line of defense, this game would be much cooler.
I agree, but…
I really want the Axis to win.
Some questions:
How much do fortresses cost?
Do they improve infantry defence power like The Captain’s rules or do they defend as an individual unit?
@superbattleshipyamato I don’t know… I suppose a “fortification” would cost 5 infantry in that territory or something… (technically converting those 15 ipcs into an engineer unit of sorts and then dying off after creating reinforcement that turn)
Yeah instead of infantry rolling defense on @2 it is at @3
if enemy goes into a fortification the fortification is removed and will have to be rebuilt.
Fortifications can be bombed like this:
for every tactical bomber (1 point) it will take 8 points to destroy fortification (separate than combat, also does not count as strategic bombing raid) So you need 8 tactical bombers to destroy a fortification.
I’m just guessing here.
Can strategic bombers bomb them too? I assume there’s AAA defence.
@superbattleshipyamato Strategic bombers were good for bombing cities and large-scale infrastructure. Tactical bombers make more sense. Fortifications would be very OP with AAA capabilities so I did not include that.
True. Okay then, looks good. I also assume that the bombing would occur before combat.
