Gidoza only want to say, and it mirros in most aspects my opinion, the current system DOESNT represent how supply works as Gazebo tries to claim. IRL a shortage of supplies lead in most cases to 2 paths: 1. The remaining supply is distributed on selected consumers to sustain full functionality (like elite units in WW2) while other units suffer from less supply ore complety cut by any supply. ----- Select the remaining units which can fight and which suffer may be the most realistic way, but cant be coded in civ5. We already have accepted that. 2. The remaining supply is distributed evenly on all consumers, but on lower level. ----- Maintaining the regeneration of all units, albeit to a lesser extent, or losing strength or maximum health would be the most realistic method. No regeneration for all units only by missing a small part of the supply, dont make that much sense: If one horse can support 100% of one horseman. 10 horses can support 10 horseman with 100% If you have 10 horseman with only 50%, realistically, only 5 horses are used. If you are missing 2 horses (= 8 total horses), you still can support the 10 (50%) horses with 3 more horses. Gazebo, why didnt you see it as test run for a new, little mechanic: Every unit with a lack of ressources suffer damage every turn. I would say, the maximum damage (100% ressource missing) is 20. This gives an option to stay alive, if they are placed in city, but makes them completly useless for any fighting. The formula could be: 20 * (Ressource needed / Ressource lacking) I know, no new code. But this would be very interesting gameplay wise and would mirror reality extremly well.