AKE ships

[Arigoth]

If I put the Japanese AKE in a port does that increase the ability to the port to rearm shipping?

[treespider]

Yes but you have to insure the AKE is loaded with supplies when you disband it in the port.

[Arigoth]

Thanks. Does it actually increase the size of the weapons that can be rearmed also?

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: Arigoth

Thanks. Does it actually increase the size of the weapons that can be rearmed also?

Check out the manual...specifically the last sentence of page 284.

[Sredni]

To help clarify, just consider the ake or ae's supply capacity to be it's rearm cost capacity. For instance C2 Lassen Class AE has a cargo capacity of 5400, which means it can reload anything except for the yamato's 18 inch guns (if the allies had 18 inch guns heh), which require a rearm cost of 6440. I'm not sure if they can reload torpedoes or not... but I think they should be able to.

So the C2 Lassen with it's 5400 capacity can reload 16 inch guns (rearm cost of 5400). However the Harriman Tender class AKE with it's supply capacity of 4200 cannot. It is however good for smaller guns like the secondary 5" guns or all the aa guns.

These ships operate independently of the port they're in. And I don't think you need to dock the combat ships at the port to reload there. I've got some ake's in balikpapan that I use to reload a big surface TF from time to time. The TF is much to big to dock there, but I can reload it's guns there without docking. I just can't take on any fuel without splitting up the TF to dock individually.

edit: oh and AE's and AKE's are treated as functionally the same type of ship until late war (44 and later I believe) when AE's gain the ability to reload ships at sea.

[Numdydar]

The AKE has to have supply loaded before it can rearm? Does any one else realize how stupid that is? From page 284 in the manual:
 

Ports that are normally too small to rearm certain weapons may do so if an appropriate tender is at anchor in the Port. The weapon Rearm Cost must be "less than or equal to" the tender "cargo capacity".
 
If I have an AKE that has a cargo capacity of 5,500 it can rearm anything exect the Yamoto class regardless of the size of the port according to the table in the manual, correct? If I have a 25K of supplies at a lv1 port why would I need to take the AKE, put it in a TF, load supplies (which are already at the port), wait till its full, and then disband it just so I could ream a ship? Is somehow loading the existing supplies at the port magically converts them to Naval AP shells?
 
If the supplies are already at the port and the AKE is also in the Port (i.e not docked or at sea) it make no sense to force the player to do the above just to rearm.
 
Unless of course my understanding of how AKE's work is incorrect (which is the most likely explaination, lol)

[Don Bowen]

The general usage of AKEs is to pick up ammo at one place and move to another for rearming. Something like loading up at Pearl and then rearming ships at Ulithi. If the AKE can dock at the local facilities but the BB can not, then NO, it is not stupid to force the transfer of the ammo from the port to the AKE and then the AKE to the BB. If the port had enough facilities, it could transfer directly. If there is anything "a-historical" here is it allowing the AKE to reload the ammo at a port where the BB can not dock - but then the game could never go to the depth of detail to track ability to handle 16-inch shells. So supply is supply is ammo is spare parts is gas is construction materials is food is toilet paper....

[Numdydar]

So the AKE is nothing more that a giant lighter ship then.
 
While I now understand the process the game uses much better, the mechnics still leave a lot to be desired. In other words imho, if an AKE is present (with or without supply on board) it's very presence should allow rearming to occur (assuming enough supplies at the port) rather than force the player to add another layer of complexity on by requiring the AKE to actually be carrying supplies.
 
Now I have to make sure all my AKEs actually have supplies on them and are in a TF, lol.

[Don Bowen]

Sorry, I have to disagree with your laughter. The process does emulate the use of ammo ships to rearm ships at small ports. I honestly believe allowing it to load supplies at the port and then rearm using them (i.e. the lighter comment) is wrong but there is no way we could reasonably limit it with code.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


Sorry, I have to disagree with your laughter. The process does emulate the use of ammo ships to rearm ships at small ports. I honestly believe allowing it to load supplies at the port and then rearm using them (i.e. the lighter comment) is wrong but there is no way we could reasonably limit it with code.

I look at it as I look at ASes loading fish or ADs the same. There's more to loading ordnance than having the ammo. There's slings, special tools, safety observers, other training, etc. Having torpedoes in a warehouse isn't going to get them down in the torpedo room. Support ships bridge this gap.

Such suspension of disbelief can go a long way in the game to adding spice. I'm sure you have RL images in your mind of ammo on-loads as I do of torpedo and missile loads. (OK, I guess you have missle laods too. [:)]) Those who were never in a navy don't have those images.

[Bradley7735]

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


Sorry, I have to disagree with your laughter. The process does emulate the use of ammo ships to rearm ships at small ports. I honestly believe allowing it to load supplies at the port and then rearm using them (i.e. the lighter comment) is wrong but there is no way we could reasonably limit it with code.

I'm not a programmer, so I would defer to Don on the wisdom. But, I wonder if it would be easy to limit loading of AKE and AE ships to size 7 or larger ports.

That way, you could supply BB's at size 1 ports. But, when your AE ran out of supply, you'd need to send it to the main port to load again. Then again, some would complain that the 5" ammo could be loaded in a size 5 port. Or, 6" ammo could be loaded in a size 6 port. Oh well....

I'm sure this isn't as easy as my brain thinks it is......[;)]

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: Bradley7735

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

Sorry, I have to disagree with your laughter. The process does emulate the use of ammo ships to rearm ships at small ports. I honestly believe allowing it to load supplies at the port and then rearm using them (i.e. the lighter comment) is wrong but there is no way we could reasonably limit it with code.

I'm not a programmer, so I would defer to Don on the wisdom. But, I wonder if it would be easy to limit loading of AKE and AE ships to size 7 or larger ports.

That way, you could supply BB's at size 1 ports. But, when your AE ran out of supply, you'd need to send it to the main port to load again. Then again, some would complain that the 5" ammo could be loaded in a size 5 port. Or, 6" ammo could be loaded in a size 6 port. Oh well....

I'm sure this isn't as easy as my brain thinks it is......[;)]

One problem is that you then limit the smaller AKE's in their effort to rearm smaller ships. Would that cure be worse than the problem?

[Bradley7735]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ORIGINAL: Bradley7735

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

Sorry, I have to disagree with your laughter. The process does emulate the use of ammo ships to rearm ships at small ports. I honestly believe allowing it to load supplies at the port and then rearm using them (i.e. the lighter comment) is wrong but there is no way we could reasonably limit it with code.

I'm not a programmer, so I would defer to Don on the wisdom. But, I wonder if it would be easy to limit loading of AKE and AE ships to size 7 or larger ports.

That way, you could supply BB's at size 1 ports. But, when your AE ran out of supply, you'd need to send it to the main port to load again. Then again, some would complain that the 5" ammo could be loaded in a size 5 port. Or, 6" ammo could be loaded in a size 6 port. Oh well....

I'm sure this isn't as easy as my brain thinks it is......[;)]

One problem is that you then limit the smaller AKE's in their effort to rearm smaller ships. Would that cure be worse than the problem?

Well, those smaller ships could rearm their weapons at the smaller ports anyway. Would there be a benefit to the small AKE's loading supplies at smaller ports? If you had a size 3 port, they could rearm the AA ammo anyway. I'm looking at the issue of loading AKE's at size 3 ports to load 16" ammo.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: Bradley7735

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ORIGINAL: Bradley7735



I'm not a programmer, so I would defer to Don on the wisdom. But, I wonder if it would be easy to limit loading of AKE and AE ships to size 7 or larger ports.

That way, you could supply BB's at size 1 ports. But, when your AE ran out of supply, you'd need to send it to the main port to load again. Then again, some would complain that the 5" ammo could be loaded in a size 5 port. Or, 6" ammo could be loaded in a size 6 port. Oh well....

I'm sure this isn't as easy as my brain thinks it is......[;)]

One problem is that you then limit the smaller AKE's in their effort to rearm smaller ships. Would that cure be worse than the problem?

Well, those smaller ships could rearm their weapons at the smaller ports anyway. Would there be a benefit to the small AKE's loading supplies at smaller ports? If you had a size 3 port, they could rearm the AA ammo anyway. I'm looking at the issue of loading AKE's at size 3 ports to load 16" ammo.

The dynamics is what you are missing. 8" guns, for just one example, could be rearmed by AEs/AKEs at ports too small to do so (maybe even dot bases). But then, under your proposal, the AEs/AKEs would have to go find a port capable of rearming 16" guns to load more supplies just to reload 8" guns, 6" guns, or whatever.

It's true that the current code provides a limited modeling of the real situation. By definition all models have limitations and thereby problems. What you propose would also be limited and probably no better, actually maybe even worse than the current code.

[Bradley7735]

I understand what you're saying. But, my point is....

Lets assume we're talking two ports. Perth and Exmouth. Exmouth is a level 4 port. Perth is a level 7 (I don't know what they are in game, just bear with me..)

Perth can load all ammo. Exmouth can load up to 5" ammo. AKE's are located at Exmouth for the heavies (BB's and CA's or whatever.)

If the CA's can't load ammo at Exmouth, then the AKE's shouldn't be able to load supply at Exmouth and resupply the CA's.

Let's say Exmouth is a level 6 port, and Derby is a level 3. Now, the AKE's would have to travel to Perth to reload, not Exmouth. This is where your point comes into play. The AKEs should be able to load 8" ammo at Exmouth (assuming size 6 port), but will now need to go to Perth (7).

So, what is better? AKE's loading at Derby (3) and reloading everything? Or AKE's loading at Perth (7) and making it difficult to deal with 6" and 8" guns (cause Exmouth (6) is closer and a possibility.)

I don't know. It's just a point to discuss. Of course, it's a coding change, so unless it's super easy, Michael isn't doing it in the next patch. [:)]

[FatR]

ORIGINAL: Numdydar
Now I have to make sure all my AKEs actually have supplies on them and are in a TF, lol.

AKEs don't have to be in a TF to do their job. In fact, I pretty sure they only work when disbanded in a port. This actually slows the rearming process down, if it consumes large portions of an AKE's load (you'll need to put the AKE in a TF for a turn, so it can load more supplies).

[witpqs]

Right. And with a Central Pacific offensive (depending upon who owns what) you could easily have all the AEs/AKEs needing to trudge back to Pearl Harbor as the closest safe passage.

I would like to add that if ammo were modeled in some historical way I would be fine with that. But, that's a major change that obviously isn't in the cards. Just as well, because it would require quite a code infrastructure to help the players manage it or else the game would be unplayable.

What we have now does have limitations, but it's pretty good.

[Rainer]

I pretty sure they only work when disbanded in a port

No. When AKE is in a TF in port the TF to be resupplied must be so by "replenish at sea" (even if the whole procedure is going on at port).
If the AKE is disbanded you use "replenish from port".

[Arigoth]

I love a good can of worms! I seemed to have opened up a great one here.

[Numdydar]

Me too lol.
 
So let's see if my understanding of AKEs based on this thread is even close to how they actually work in the game.
 
1. AKEs must have supply on board (regardless of where the supply actually came from) to rearm a ship.
2. The AKEs must be at either a dot base or port (regardless of port size) to rearm.
3. If the AKE is in a TF, the TF that needs rearming should use the 'Replinsh at sea' function
4. If the AKE is disbanded in a Port (again regardless of size), the rearming TF will need to use 'Replinish at Port' function
5. The size of shells that can be rearmed is based on the cargo size of the AKE. Obviously the bigger the better.
6. Only the Allies can rearm 'at sea' (i.e. a non-port hex of any kind) and then only sometime in '44.
 
Did I miss anything?
 
What's funny is that until this thread popped up, I just let all my AKE sit in ports empty as Japan. I figured that just having them there (empty of course) was good enough. When certain ships would not ream, I figured that the AKE needed a combination of Port size AND size of the AKE. So I would just send the ships back to JApan as I KNEW they could rearnm there lol.
 
Thanks everyone for the education. I hope I passed [&o]