...that is, every city produces supplies...
Actually, that is not quite accurate, eveyr city "has access too" supplies. Supplies are Ammo produced at military goods facilities and fuel is from petroleum facilities or either can be bought on the market. The supply model is merely a delivery system. To change this we would have to track where every barrel of oil and ton of MGs is located.
OK, but if every city "has access too" supplies, how can it be possible on an encircled city? I (and others) have tried to completely cut off a city from supplies but the units inside just keep fully supplied??
I would suggest to define supplies as a mix of water/food/mil_goods (since there is already a fuel stat). Lets say: 40% water / 40% food / 20% mil_goods. Whenever one of these is not directly available, there would be a proportional penalty for the units.
PS - I also don't know if lack of fuel affects just the units move or also its fighting capability. I think that it should also affect the units performance fighting. After all, a tank out of fuel is a sitting duck!
-- Temp occupied land. A strange thing happened to me once when I was playing Barcelona and at war with two bordering coutries (Paris and Marseille). The two countries had no pact between each other, they just happened to be at war with me. I attacked Paris and occupied most of it southern region. Suddenly Marseille attacked me on the former Paris region and it occupied Paris region. So, in the end, Marseille ended up occupying Paris territories, even though they were not at war. I would suggest creating a new concept: temporarily occupied territory. These would be all regions occupied to the enemy while in war. After a peace agreement all these regions would revert to regular land. In my example, this would prevent Marseille from entering Paris territory (even though occupied by me) since they lack any alliance or mutual defence treaty.
-I dont really agree on this.I would more like to return hexes to nation or give/sell them.If they are in allaince they will end up each others teritories against enemy.
I don't know if I completely understood your commnet, but the problem is when the countries are not allied! In my example Paris and Marseille are not allied, just both in war with me. And Marseille ended up ocupying territory from Paris.... it just doesn't make sense!!
-- Reduced supply across rivers if there is no bridge. I couldn't test this one, but I think rivers do not influence supply.
-Oh really? Without road u have less supplies,Without road on river (aka bridge) it would be same.
Yes, but what I was saying is: there is still supply across rivers with no bridge. I would suggest that rivers would completely block (or drastically reduce) supplies if no bridge is present.