(8-44) azum4roll's Unit Supply Rework

Status
Not open for further replies.

Recursive

Already Looping
Moderator
Supporter
Joined
Dec 19, 2017
Messages
6,088
Location
Antarctica
Host Notes: This proposal was originally made in Session #7 in this discussion thread. I decided to code it as a modmod (which you can download here or on the OP of the 4.11 release thread) so that the community could playtest the changes before voting on them.

As the work is essentially done and the unit supply system is largely independent of civilization balance, this is one of the two non-4UC votes for this session. You may make counterproposals to this proposal (as an exception to the general rule) provided they are lesser or roughly the same in scope as this proposal.

If this proposal passes and (8-16) 4UC France (or any other proposal which retains France's +25% supply from population bonus), the supply bonus will be lowered to +15%.



Original proposal text from @azum4roll:

Current supply cap formula:
Flat supply = (Total of all flat sources) / (1 + X * tech progress)
Supply from population = (City 1's supply from population% * City 1's population + City 2's supply from population% * City 2's population + ...) / (1 + Y * tech progress)
Supply from difficulty = Z - (number of era passed)
Supply from general/admiral = number of generals/admirals expended

Clarifications
- Puppet cities provide half as much supply from population (except for Venice, which gets the full amount)
- When starting later than the Ancient Era, base supply from difficulty is increased by (2 * # of eras after Ancient), which is equivalent to +1 per era due to tech penalty


Total supply cap = (Sum of the above) * (1 - penalty from War Weariness)

Currently, X = 5/6, Y = 7, Z = 10 in Settler, 7 in Emperor, 6 in Deity

There are issues on supply cap balance between tall and wide, as well as the problem of having too much supply in the lategame. This proposal plans to rectify them.

Proposal part 1: reduce supply numbers over the board
Base VPTweakedWhy?
Flat Supply Divisor1 + 83% * tech progress1 + 100% * tech progressKeeping both divisors the same makes balancing easier.
Supply from Population Divisor1 + 700% * tech progress1 + 100% * tech progressKeeping both divisors the same makes balancing easier. Also, the supply from population divisor is so high that all sources from that barely matter after the early game.
Difficulty Flat Supply Bonus10 (Settler) to 6 (Deity), AI and City-States have 8+2 to the current number+1 supply in the capital to compensate the loss of supply per city.
Additional +1 to compensate the empire size penalty for having a capital.
Difficulty-based Supply from Population35% (Settler) to 15% (Deity), AI and City-States have 25%All 20%AI already gets a food bonus. They naturally have higher population than human players and don't need a higher supply from population %.
Base Supply per City+1 Supply0 SupplyYou shouldn't be allowed to just plop down a new city and magically gain supply out of it. Build some infrastructure!
Lighthouse (+ Runestone)+1 Supply0 SupplyThe supply was given to support coastal cities. But it turns out nobody builds ships either way and it is used for land units instead.
Harbor+2 Supply+1 SupplyYou may start to have a couple of Caravels and Galleasses, but never 2 per coastal city.
Seaport20% Supply from Population10% Supply from PopulationWith the tech divisor lowered to 100%, supply from population % should be heavily toned down.
Stable (+ Ducal Stable)10% Supply from Population+1 Flat SupplyProduction bonus for mounted melee obsoletes in the lategame. It's more thematically fitting to have a non-scaling supply bonus.
Walls, Castle, Bastion Fort, Arsenal, Military Base's Supply from Population (+ Walls of Babylon, Ostrog)10%/10%/10%/10%/20%All 5%With the tech divisor lowered to 100%, supply from population % should be heavily toned down.
Bastion Fort's New Change (+ Ostrog)0 Supply+1 Flat SupplyThe Navigation tech signals the age of sail. Corvettes and Frigates are both dominant combat ships and coastal cities need to have naval defense.
Parthenon+10% Supply from local Population0%Why should a random culture wonder give supply?
Royal Guardhouse (from Tradition Justice)20% Supply from local Population+10% Supply from Population in all CitiesWith the tech divisor lowered to 100%, supply from population % should be heavily toned down.
This one's made global to encourage Tradition players to grow their other cities, not just their capital.
Dominance (from Authority)+10% Supply from local Population+5 Flat SupplyEarly policy trees should have more immediate bonuses instead of scalers.
United Front (from Autocracy)+50% Supply from Population in all Cities+25% Supply from Population in all CitiesWith the tech divisor lowered to 100%, supply from population % should be heavily toned down.
France UA25% from Population in all Cities15% from Population in all CitiesWith the tech divisor lowered to 100%, supply from population % should be heavily toned down.

Other sources like Barracks are unchanged.

This reduces overall supply, still won't solve the above problems. Wide will continue to have more supply per city than tall, and lategame population still outgrows the tech penalty, despite exponential cost of growing.
Another variable is needed.

Part 2: add empire size penalty
Introducing the new Empire Size penalty: similar to Tech and Policy modifiers, you need +5% of supply per non-puppet city to reach the same supply count, just like how you need 5% more Science per non-puppet city to research a tech.

For example, if you have 4 cities, every 1.2 Flat Supply and Supply from Population will count as 1 Supply. Assuming NO researched tech and ignoring supply from difficulty/generals/admirals, a 20-city empire with 60 Flat Supply and 120 Supply from Population would have 180 / (1 + 5% * 20) = 90 supply cap.
This penalty stacks multiplicatively with the tech divisor. Which doesn't really violate the "all modifiers must stack additively" rule - all three of these are divisors, not modifiers!

The objective:
1. Tall should have higher supply per city than wide. This cannot be done with the current formula regardless of number changes (wide just has too much population per city right now), so an empire size penalty is needed.
2. Hopefully the lategame supply bloat can be addressed with the correct numbers. I expect no significant supply growth post-Industrial for the average player given the same amount of cities. Which is why I prefer keeping the tech divisor, since population still grows non-stop.

Possible questions:

Q1. Won't this make tall better than wide in warring?
A1. My aim is to make them equal assuming players evenly place their units at their borders, i.e. the supply cap to border length ratio (NOT land area; you don't need to defend the a city deep within your empire) is equal for both tall and wide. Neither should have the initial advantage, but the side with the better unit production should eventually have the upper hand, all other factors being equal.

Q2. How moddable is this?
A2. The empire size penalty per city will be yet another Defines value. Numbers can be tweaked however you want. Clarification: I implemented it as a column in the Worlds table (so it can be different on different map sizes, if desired).
 

Attachments

  • azum4roll's Unit Supply for VP.zip
    5 KB · Views: 32
Last edited:
This makes it hard for Polynesia players, as they need to maintain armies/navies everywhere around... Maybe buff them a little bit by giving a civ-specific supply bonus?
 
I was playing Songhai recently and i was able to fight three fronts war in Renascence, i doubt i would be able to do something alike with this tweak, all i see right there is a massive nerf for Domination nations for no apparent reason, nerfs are so high i doubt that any early wars gonna be possible. I would try this as a mod right now but i don't have any hopes looking at these numbers.
 
This makes it hard for Polynesia players, as they need to maintain armies/navies everywhere around... Maybe buff them a little bit by giving a civ-specific supply bonus?
Spamming cities everywhere should be discouraged. They can make groups of cities instead in 1-2 island chains.
I was playing Songhai recently and i was able to fight three fronts war in Renascence, i doubt i would be able to do something alike with this tweak, all i see right there is a massive nerf for Domination nations for no apparent reason, nerfs are so high i doubt that any early wars gonna be possible. I would try this as a mod right now but i don't have any hopes looking at these numbers.
We do need to tune the starting supply numbers (from difficulty).
 
I was playing Songhai recently and i was able to fight three fronts war in Renascence, i doubt i would be able to do something alike with this tweak, all i see right there is a massive nerf for Domination nations for no apparent reason, nerfs are so high i doubt that any early wars gonna be possible. I would try this as a mod right now but i don't have any hopes looking at these numbers.
I can confirm that in ~renaissance I can fight on two fronts if both AI's have mediocre armies but in a 2v1 against two of the biggest armies I am not loving it and am struggling to push effectively.

I like this, I would add a few more units maybe but it's in a good place so far.
 
I'm obviously biased towards having less supply but everything sounds great, especially the divisors, simplicity itself has value. One minor question, does the supply from GG/GAs get affected by the empire-size modifier? Could be better to keep them unaffected (even though it goes against simplicity). If needed, the same can be done with the supply from domination-focused wonders to provide another small boost to Dom civs. Honestly we can go as far as making all flat supply unaffected by the empire-size modifier, thus providing more value/supply to Barracks line. This also "feels" better for user-experience purposes, a flat supply should do just that, but of course that would also boost wide. Just spitballing
 
Maybe we should start with a minimum of 10 units supply for everyone at every difficulties. So it is not possible to be under 10 at any point of the game, and help early low supply.
 
One minor question, does the supply from GG/GAs get affected by the empire-size modifier? Could be better to keep them unaffected (even though it goes against simplicity).
No, they aren't supposed to be affected by anything.
 
My personal bias:

I like building a huge empires and this change will make this near impossible because you need huge supply to defend it.

Also I don't like to always babysit diplomatic relations and even when you do, almost always when you are close to winning everyone will gang upon you. At that point defending on multiple fronts means I need a large supply and able to have my cities all pumping out units without having to risk to go over supply.

I do see that the mechanic is a bit useless or broken. up to mid game it's often too low, late game it doesn't matter anymore.

The only reason we likley even need supply is to limit deity AI not to fill the map with units? Shouldn't I be able to just build as much units as I want without impact except on gold?

Couldn't we instead of penalizing food and production simply increase gold costs? Then the impact of going over supply is reduced and if I can afford it I don^t need to care about it.
 
Couldn't we instead of penalizing food and production simply increase gold costs? Then the impact of going over supply is reduced and if I can afford it I don^t need to care about it.
But getting over supply line implies that the player has enough gold to afford it, i think we should rather nerf base city's hp and hp gained per citizen and increase supply divisor to 200% and return supply from lighthouse, i think this is a better solution. And yeah, i agree that reducing supply with empire size modifier is quite silly, we should get rid of it too
 
Excellent idea.
As far as I'm concerned there are way to many units on the map making it less of a strategy and more of an arcade game. Reducing supply would make every unit's positioning much more important. Since we have no Corps and Armies like in Civ6 I'm all for it...

E: @beginner_
Shouldn't I be able to just build as much units as I want without impact except on gold?
You know that IRL units come from population instead of being produced in a national mint, right?
I like building a huge empires and this change will make this near impossible because you need huge supply to defend it.
No, because AI would get less supply as well. Let's say you have a supply of 200 and AI of 400. The ratio is 2:1 in favor of AI. Now let's assume we nerf supply by half. Now you have a supply of 100 and AI of 200. The ratio stays 2:1. If defending your empire gets harder it's only because of no longer being able to spam units and of poor troops positioning.

E2: @Pipiskus & @beginner_
I'm sorry but when I read what you both wrote I get a feeling you simply need to lower the difficulty you play on for yourselves and not for everybody else.
 
Last edited:
I'm still unsure why technology is used as a variable at all in these equations. It seems to create an artificial suppressant on supply which then spends the rest of the system trying to correct. I think the goal is so you can't sit on a stable amount of supply without building bottom-tech buildings?

Also, what are the penalties for going over supply, can those be listed? My general suspicion is that warmongers or those fighting multi-front wars should just be okay with pushing over-supply when they need to to stay alive or complete an objective. If the first tier (or the penalty formula, if it's a scale) is too punishing, we should ease it up a bit.
 
Also, what are the penalties for going over supply, can those be listed? My general suspicion is that warmongers or those fighting multi-front wars should just be okay with pushing over-supply when they need to to stay alive or complete an objective. If the first tier (or the penalty formula, if it's a scale) is too punishing, we should ease it up a bit.
Penalties to growth and production by 5% for 1 supply i think
 
E2: @Pipiskus & @beginner_
I'm sorry but when I read what you both wrote I get a feeling you simply need to lower the difficulty you play on for yourselves and not for everybody else.
Yeah, sure mate, its only my soyboy opinion, nothing is wrong with this mod
1720502198144.png
1720502116648.png
 
I'm still unsure why technology is used as a variable at all in these equations. It seems to create an artificial suppressant on supply which then spends the rest of the system trying to correct. I think the goal is so you can't sit on a stable amount of supply without building bottom-tech buildings?

Also, what are the penalties for going over supply, can those be listed? My general suspicion is that warmongers or those fighting multi-front wars should just be okay with pushing over-supply when they need to to stay alive or complete an objective. If the first tier (or the penalty formula, if it's a scale) is too punishing, we should ease it up a bit.
IRL usually the more educated people are the less willingly they want to put their lives at a stake fighting in a war.
I believe that for "staying alive" supply limit could be eased up while being in a defensive war.
@azum4roll what do you think about adding flat supply bonus for being in a defensive war (kind of patriotic fervor)?

@Pipiskus Now, when you attach that I can understand the problem and may actually agree that decreasing HP for cities by a small amount while decreasing supply limit could be somewhat beneficial.
 
Sure, but you're also trying to say that tanks take the same amount of "supply" (whatever that's supposed to be in the real world) as archers with this current system. I think trying to chase this down as a "realistic" portrayal is just foolhardy, and will lead to arguments like "economies of scale make it cheaper" versus "coordinating a lot of people costs more overhead, not less". That's not something I really care about diving deep on, honestly, I just want a supply system that adds some level of strategy and tactics to army building.

Just pick some simple numbers that make the game play best, without trying to pretend like it's anything more than approximations in a game, for fun.

As for the tech question, I just don't get why we're bleeding out supply as the game goes on, just to fill it back up as buildings like walls are built. The only explanation I see is that we're trying to enforce "you must build all defensive buildings in all of your cities", without regard for whether you think that city strategically needs those defenses. I would personally favor a system that does away with forcing defenses in "safe" cities, if for no other reason than it adds a level of risk+reward you may opt into in an effort to save hammers in some cities. You are then rewarded for having strong border towns that protect specialized undefended cities, and if your outer shell gets cracked, you might lose more than you bargained for. That's more interesting than every city automatically being a siege, no matter how you play.
 
Each defensive building is only +1 supply per 20 population, and that's before the tech penalty. You can get the same amount from Barracks for a 20-pop city.

It's the happiness system that forces you to eventually build the defensive buildings everywhere.

The tech penalty exists to balance population growth with tech/game progress. No tech penalty = we can't put supply from population on buildings = we can't balance tall/wide.
 
This looks like it will reduce supply for all era. Late game supply is too high, so the proposal should seek to adjust that, not take a sledge hammer to domination/wide as a whole. I could barely field 10 units at turn 150 with walls up (epic speed) playing domination. How will I ever get enough supply to get the domination hammer bonus? Domination play had seen nerf after nerf, I think this is too much.

For me, in a normal game by the time cannons come around I field around ~40-50 units: 12 siege, 30melee, 10mounted/ranged for defense, not counting ships. I find that's a minimum amount if I want to really push someone. the 30 melee is a must because you need your infantry rotating 1-2 lines deep. Any less and war became an absolute slog where you plink away at the AI turn after turn. Better to amass a large force to smash into them before they can recover.
 
This looks like it will reduce supply for all era. Late game supply is too high, so the proposal should seek to adjust that, not take a sledge hammer to domination/wide as a whole. I could barely field 10 units at turn 150 with walls up (epic speed) playing domination. How will I ever get enough supply to get the domination hammer bonus? Domination play had seen nerf after nerf, I think this is too much.

For me, in a normal game by the time cannons come around I field around ~40-50 units: 12 siege, 30melee, 10mounted/ranged for defense, not counting ships. I find that's a minimum amount if I want to really push someone. the 30 melee is a must because you need your infantry rotating 1-2 lines deep. Any less and war became an absolute slog where you plink away at the AI turn after turn. Better to amass a large force to smash into them before they can recover.
I think all that's needed is a slight buff to early game/base supply and then it's perfect. I'm in early industrial as warmonger Zulu and I'm loving the supply cap (I have not popped any great generals/admirals).

I agree though, domination has seen more than it's fair share of nerfs recently. I've had to drop down from immortal to emperor.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom