Fuel efficency

[Sun Tempest]

This game is great, despite being dauntingly complex and "unfortunately" highly addicting[:D]
In the last days, I was preoccupied by the problem of transport of oil and fuel from SRA to HI, and the best alternative routes to the highly sub infested route from Singapore to Formosa's ports.
So, what are the most fuel-efficient TKs and especially AKs classes for the transport of oil from SRA to HI?

[KenchiSulla]

I like the + 10.000 capacity tankers. They are fast and get attacked less often.

Ideally you would want ASW Assets (planes and ships) along the entire route to spot subs. If you spot the subs they will attack less often and start sinking them as soon as your boys get some experience.

It is not very efficient to use AK to haul fuel over large distances. Try converting some (june 1942) and perhaps accelerate the build of some tankers if you feel your economy can handle the strain.

[CapAndGown]

ORIGINAL: Cannonfodder

I like the + 10.000 capacity tankers. They are fast and get attacked less often.

These are actually less efficient, as far as fuel consumption goes, than the slower ones. I once did a calculation that showed that the Type 1 T-L was less efficient than the Type 2 T-L. But their other factors to consider besides efficiency. The less time out on the water, the less time you can be shot at by subs and the more deliveries you can make.

[Q-Ball]

Beggars can't be choosers anyway. You need every tanker you can muster, and run them 100% of the time, with the exception of some of the very small TKs, even those I usually have moving stuff around.

I have never reached a point where I don't have a mission for a tanker. I convert all Std-A and Std-B to TK as soon as I can.

[Sun Tempest]

Well, I was planning of using several AK classes to haul fuel, mainly on shorter routes.

[KenchiSulla]

One thing I think is very important is to match speeds in tanker TFs. Dont use the slower ones with faster ones... I know it sounds logical but check your groups ...

Nice to know that those big tankers arent very efficient! But Q-Balls statement +1

[CapAndGown]

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

I have never reached a point where I don't have a mission for a tanker.

How is it you are able to produce more fuel and oil than I am? I have lots of tankers sitting around idle. Did you conquer the Middle East or something?

[CapAndGown]

ORIGINAL: Cannonfodder

Nice to know that those big tankers arent very efficient! But Q-Balls statement +1

To be clear: the big fast ones are not as efficient as the big slow ones.

[Rainer79]

ORIGINAL: cap_and_gown
How is it you are able to produce more fuel and oil than I am? I have lots of tankers sitting around idle. Did you conquer the Middle East or something?

Strange. My experience is the same as Q-Ball's.

Did you repair all damaged oil centers?

[CapAndGown]

ORIGINAL: Rainer79

ORIGINAL: cap_and_gown
How is it you are able to produce more fuel and oil than I am? I have lots of tankers sitting around idle. Did you conquer the Middle East or something?

Strange. My experience is the same as Q-Ball's.

Did you repair all damaged oil centers?

Yup. All repaired. Pumping away like crazy.

[Sun Tempest]

At last, I found a table posted a while ago by a veteran player. As far I can see, the most fuel efficient TKs is Tonan class, while the most fuel efficient Ak is Akasi class

[CapAndGown]

ORIGINAL: Sun Tempest

At last, I found a table posted a while ago by a veteran player. As far I can see, the most fuel efficient TKs is Tonan class, while the most fuel efficient Ak is Akasi class

Cool table. Too bad it does not include the Type 2 TL and none of the Std-* TKs. I do know, however, that the Std-* tankers are less efficient than the purpose built TKs.

ADDED: It also does not seem to include the Type 1 TM tankers.

[Grfin Zeppelin]

ORIGINAL: cap_and_gown

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

I have never reached a point where I don't have a mission for a tanker.

How is it you are able to produce more fuel and oil than I am? I have lots of tankers sitting around idle. Did you conquer the Middle East or something?

Maybe you are playing scen 2 and he scen 1 ? In scen 2 Japan has some extras and even more in the pipe afaik.

[CapAndGown]

ORIGINAL: Gräfin Zeppelin

ORIGINAL: cap_and_gown

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

I have never reached a point where I don't have a mission for a tanker.

How is it you are able to produce more fuel and oil than I am? I have lots of tankers sitting around idle. Did you conquer the Middle East or something?

Maybe you are playing scen 2 and he scen 1 ? In scen 2 Japan has some extras and even more in the pipe afaik.

Actually, it is the opposite: I am playing scen 1, he is playing scen 2.

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: cap_and_gown

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

I have never reached a point where I don't have a mission for a tanker.

How is it you are able to produce more fuel and oil than I am? I have lots of tankers sitting around idle. Did you conquer the Middle East or something?

Playing scenario 2 helps-a lot.

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: Sun Tempest

This game is great, despite being dauntingly complex and "unfortunately" highly addicting[:D]
In the last days, I was preoccupied by the problem of transport of oil and fuel from SRA to HI, and the best alternative routes to the highly sub infested route from Singapore to Formosa's ports.
So, what are the most fuel-efficient TKs and especially AKs classes for the transport of oil from SRA to HI?

It is a VERY big deal for the IJ player to get the Singgers to Port Arthur land route clear. Then you only haul from PA to HI. A very short trip. It cannot be over emphasized how much logistical simplification this makes.

[John Lansford]

(writes down "send subs to patrol off of Port Arthur" on notepaper, for redeployment of Allied subs this afternoon...)

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

(writes down "send subs to patrol off of Port Arthur" on notepaper, for redeployment of Allied subs this afternoon...)

Shallow water all the way will make this very dangerous for your subs. You're sending them into a long, shallow lagoon, surrounded on all sides by angry, well-trained ASW LBA and ASW TFs that know these waters well.

When I first read this thread, I was thinking about retrofitting some ships for fuel efficiency. I'm thinking hybrid Yamato here, folks-like the Prius. Quiet movement too...[:D]

[erstad]

It is a VERY big deal for the IJ player to get the Singgers to Port Arthur land route clear. Then you only haul from PA to HI.

Are you saying you see oil flow from Singers to PA? I've got the entire land route clear, and don't recall ever seeing any movement over that big a distance. Mebbe I'm doing something wrong?

[John Lansford]

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

(writes down "send subs to patrol off of Port Arthur" on notepaper, for redeployment of Allied subs this afternoon...)

Shallow water all the way will make this very dangerous for your subs. You're sending them into a long, shallow lagoon, surrounded on all sides by angry, well-trained ASW LBA and ASW TFs that know these waters well.

When I first read this thread, I was thinking about retrofitting some ships for fuel efficiency. I'm thinking hybrid Yamato here, folks-like the Prius. Quiet movement too...[:D]

Yeah, when I got home last night I noticed all the shallow water. Sent one sub to patrol between Japan and PA, immediately found a convoy and then promptly got depth charged.