Why You Don't Want "Realistic" Logistics In A Wargame

[@TheD3trax]

I would like to see more "wargaming sim" genre with more focus on logistics. Even it makes everything over complicated, but fueling fronts, managing whole logistics dimension of war is entertaining by itself

[@antwarior]

same here, i wish combat mission games would adopt logistics and become more like call to arms conquest mode with troop management systems

[@PredatorPeyami]

@@antwarior nah

[@antwarior]

@@PredatorPeyami yeehhh, im already b ored of the game and does not have nothing else to offer uther than the same mission that has already been complete, needs more substance, resources to fight over, airbases to capture, people to save on a grand scale

[@PredatorPeyami]

​@@antwarior people prefer operational or strategical level wargames for these things, it's out of scope of the combat mission(tactical) and if you try to implement those things to combat mission you will have circus freak (or call to arms) in your hand.

[@antwarior]

@@PredatorPeyami i rather have those things emplemented along with the current content for those of us that needs more of a realistic free feeling experience instead of being lead down the path the devs wanted to go down, i want to manage my own troops, why would i want the computer to just hand me troops? wheres the fun in that? i want to fight viciously over map resources becuase wheres the fun in just making a vs map without a reason to go to war with the other side besides just wanting to smash some tanks together

[@dennissvitak148]

In the barracks, me and four friends played eight full turns of Campaign for North Africa. It wasn't fun, and we said eff this, and went back to Advanced Squad Leader, and Panzer Leader/Blitz. Fully 45 years ago.

[@kondor99999]

Sounds like me and my son after 2 turns of OCS Case Blue

[@armchairdragoons]

Campaign for North Africa made a lot of people say "eff this"

[@mekosmowski]

You're talking about tabletop games, but there's a computer game Shadow Empire, that I think provides a decent abstraction of logistics. It's a hybrid wargame / empire builder, so it's more operational with grand strategic elements. The logistics side is mostly about the capacity to move stuff (replacements, food, fuel, water, ammunition and energy) from production sites, to central storage, to drop-offs along the logistics network (roads, rail) where combat unit logistical teams take over. The combat unit logistics are pretty much fully abstracted, except that combat unit zones of control are able to inderdict supply ability. Otherwise, it's pretty much that different unit movement types receive a lowered percentage of requested supplies if they're too far from a civilian logistical network (depending on terrain type). No map presence other than building the hubs to provide supply capacity.

[@armchairdragoons]

it's more complicated than just moving stuff, as we discuss here www.armchairdragoons.com/articles/columns/logwar/ and yes, a computer does give you the ability to factor in a greater number of variables, but the underlying planning & execution in parallel with the kinetic ops are almost an entirely separate game

[@frankwalder3608]

I tried to incorporate many of the things you mentioned in this video, especially the consumption units, maintenance and engineering units. I quickly discovered that I needed an entire other army to support the army I had in the field. The extensions my friends and I added gave a deep appreciation of why interdiction is so important to guard against. As the battalion commander of a Dark Templar Marine unit, I spent far more time engaging in traffic control of nearly continuous convoys in both direction, than shooting at anything. That was before I did any moving or shooting. Trying to engage in combat proved so complicated that we considered have two individuals for each side, so one could fight, and the other could control logistics. Otherwise, a day of battle could take an entire weekend to resolve.

[@armchairdragoons]

Wow! Thanks for taking the plunge on trying to incorporate these concepts into your game. It sounds like you guys experienced first-hand why the logistics component of combat can be so complex and why most (successful) militaries have a parallel leadership structure focused just on that side of the war. It would be very interesting to hear some more details about how you tried to implement the log play into the base rules you were working with, so please feel free to reach out to us directly if you'd like (best way is to ping the mods in our forums on our site)

[@hdavies0]

Eye opening, surprisingly interesting subject, and now a regular wargame will seem artificial without logistics. Thanks so much, this was a great video. Hollandspiele and White Dog, there's some great ideas for a game here!

[@armchairdragoons]

Thanks for the kudos :) Keep in mind that this is in no way a fully robust model of logistics in a war, but just one very simple facet of it that shows how little we deal with it in our wargames.

[@manuelkong10]

for a TACTICAL game I can see this being true....but if you're running a corps in N Afrika I think it NEEDS more realistic logistics than just "tracing supply off the edge of the board" Logistics has usually been Badly ignored by people who make games....its not "sexy" or something because it's not combat Likewise road capacity is almost always ignored

[@armchairdragoons]

the challenge comes in deciding what you mean by "logistics" in a wargame, as there's much more than just consumption rates longer breakdown here www.armchairdragoons.com/articles/columns/logwar/

[@MrProsat]

@@armchairdragoons Without logistics in an operational game - say, running a corps in N. Africa - you completely miss what Rommel had to face. Not just consumption rates but also setting the pace or tempo of an offensive. Otherwise, you have units constantly attacking. And units simply wear out without replacements.

[@armchairdragoons]

@@MrProsat There's a difference between "no logistics" and "realistic logistics" and the levels of abstraction in between. To put a comparable level of operational logistics play into a game that matched the level of "kinetic" play in a game at that scale would be an entirely separate, parallel game. There need to be some reasonable log-driven constraints put on the actions available to the player, certainly. But the details of planning and executing those log missions would bog down almost any 2p game, and many 4-6p games. (Keep in mind that we've got a pair of folks on our staff that have done this for real, too)

[@MrProsat]

@@armchairdragoons I agree with you, no one wants to play "staff officer" in these games. No logistics is an issue for me. So it is interesting for me to see how different games tackle the problem. Some are done very well and straightforward, like the 194x games (Normandy, Ardennes, Holland, North Africa, Stalingrad) where you have to accumulate supply points to attack or use artillery. But it is not onerous.

[@anab0lic]

@@MrProsat Are you familiar with the logistic mechanics of Multiman publishing's OCS series?

[@RiccardoMasiniWLOG]

Great video about the invisible levels in wargaming. Thanks for making this presentation and putting it online.

[@manuelkong10]

it's So gratifying to see the map with all these things you've added....it begins to look, Realistic

[@petrinieminen2771]

Thanks DC, I am part of a team working on a similar scale computer game to LnL's marvellous WaW'85 series. Some food for thought for sure!

[@armchairdragoons]

FWIW, the Flashpoint Campaigns computer games are very much a W@W85 counterpart

[@anathardayaldar]

The Battlefield series of board games (and their computer versions) have supply wagons. If not close to them, fighting units run out of ammo real fast. And those wagons are the slowest. And they can be captured and used by the enemy. And they can go empty eventually.

[@Kallistosprom]

Be interesting to read on the development of logistics throughout history, especially what was changed because of a war like WW2.

[@BartJBols]

All i took from this is that this needs to be a game...

[@anathardayaldar]

gamer: But that would really limit my options :( real military: yeah. Aggravating, isn't it?

[@futuregenerationz]

This is the difference between HOI4 and Darkest Hour. I WANT realistic logistics in a wargame. I just don't want to have to manage them, or pick some AI to manage them.

[@armchairdragoons]

logistics as a limiting factor to rein in how hog-wild the player goes with their operations isn't inherently bad but can vary in how it's applied

[@walleras]

Tf yes I do. I want to lose a battle because I forgot a zero in my math for how many cans of beans I carried. I want to have to follow the wagon equation LET ME MICROMANAGE THE AVERAGE OSLODIERS PACKS!~

[@ryanmichael1298]

Cans of beer too, lol.

[@anathardayaldar]

If I won the lottery, I would like to take courses in computer game making. THen I would make my own war game with the level of logistics I would like. Daydreams I've had were a logistic unit that had a number for "supply". Logistic Units were small, medium, large. Player had to move them from supply center to their armies. They can go empty and be captured. They automatically release supply (lower the number) to any nearby armies. And automatically resupply (raise the value) when next to a supply center. Supply centers can be small, medium, large or infinite (harbor or captiol) Supply centers have to be resupplied themselves by mobile units. When an army's supply number goes to zero, it can't fight or move. There are more details but I don't want to bore anyone who read this far.

[@lastburning]

Logistics can be abstracted. There's always a level of abstraction in games. It doesn't make them less realistic.

[@armchairdragoons]

abstraction is the exact opposite of realism! You are correct in that the **constraints & effects** can be realistic even if the model is abstracted.

[@deatlilies7927]

You could probably make a game that is ONLY about logistics and have something approaching a realistic level of detail. This video is very good.

[@edmundcowan9131]

I was a his cdr. An S1 but you left out the Bn XO who has a role in logistics. As well as company Xo a supply sgt and nbc / armor etc Bn co and tk co. But very good brief accurate.

[@armchairdragoons]

can't hit 'em all! but yes, the idea was just showing how much busier the map gets with "everything else" on it even if they don't play much of a role in the battle

[@davidconklin9552]

But I am entertained by logistics! Put in on a spreadsheet for a computer!

[@edmundcowan9131]

Usually the company tank puller is located in cbt trains with the cbt medics.

[@ashley-r-pollard]

I agree that campaigns is where wargame logistics make sense, and possibly could be an USP.

[@RHampton]

Fantastic briefing. Thank you.

[@joelhart4027]

Very interesting presentation

[@armchairdragoons]

Thanks to those of you that gave it a thumbs-up!

[@edmundcowan9131]

And it makes a difference if on offense or defense.

[@lineofdeparture3584]

Title should have been: "Why you really want "realistic" logistics in wargames"

[@silverrockhound4701]

Avalon Hill 3rd Reich, That is the teeth cutter for wargames IMHO

[@VrilWaffen]

Everything about logistics gets me half-hard

[@cwcsquared]

Need more artillery than that

[@armchairdragoons]

A tank-heavy task force doesn't get their own artillery battalion subordinate to them. They might get priority of fire from the brigade DS arty bn, but their only organic fires are their mortar platoon. A cav squadron will have their own howitzer battery, but they'll also have 2-3x the frontage of a line battalion b/c it's a different mission.

[@onri_]

Foxhole has logistics

[@armchairdragoons]

yes, but when you say "logistics," what exactly are you putting in the wargame? www.armchairdragoons.com/articles/columns/logwar/

[@deatlilies7927]

I'm rather late to join this conversation but from the outside looking in logistics is the most hated aspect of foxhole. Tediously long, complicated, and all your hours of progress can be undone by one ape camping a bridge or something. I don't mean to say I don't want logistics or even that foxhole's model is unappealing to me. The only thing I want to say is that the video author is correct in this assertion: the average player does not find logistics fun or exciting. We, the people that enjoy logistic simulations, are the abnormality here.

[@MrProsat]

Logistics more properly belong in operational level games. Say a game that scale goes several weeks, perhaps battalion or regiment level. Otherwise, it is too onerous and makes little sense worrying about this.

[@armchairdragoons]

Not disagreeing, but they can be relevant below that. The key is that much of the logistics fare is almost a separate game between the battles that is rarely accounted for.

[@v44n7]

then you have foxhole were logitstics are great /jk

[@gryphonprovenzano3156]

But one exists though sea creek 5 so counterpoint?

[@armchairdragoons]

"sea creek 5" ?

[@gryphonprovenzano3156]

Naval warGame that takes hours to play that simulated realistic naval combat, including damage control ammo and logistics if there is something on the ship that they have it’s taken into account in this game. Look it up

[@gryphonprovenzano3156]

I misspelled it it’s called SeeKrieg 5