Ceylon and Autoconvoy

[RogerJNeilson]

I have reached a point where it would be nice to get the computer to do a lot of the supply work for areas that are long now pacified. All is going fine except when I look at Ceylon none of the bases there are able to be set to auto supply? Is this WAD?

Roger

[Chris21wen]

ORIGINAL: Roger Neilson 3

I have reached a point where it would be nice to get the computer to do a lot of the supply work for areas that are long now pacified. All is going fine except when I look at Ceylon none of the bases there are able to be set to auto supply? Is this WAD?

Roger

Colombo, like SF is a base for autosupply ships. As all the other ports in Ceylon are connected by rail I suspect it was thought they do not need to be in the list. The same for any port connected by rail/road in the US.

[RogerJNeilson]

I get the logic of that, but how does it get its supply as its an island and had no supply to be the hub for autosupply - so you need, on that basis to run supply in from elsewhere which kind of defeats the auto convoy system I think?

Is this a hangover from when it existed as the edge of the world port? MY memory is a little dim on that one though?

Roger

[BBfanboy]

As I understand it most players don't use the Auto-convoy system because of its constraints. They just set up a convoy hauling supply from a base that has lots to a base that needs lots, then switch it to continuous supply (CS). The computer will keep it going to destination and back, reload and send it again. I think you have to monitor once in a while for damage. Not sure how refuelling is handled.

[RogerJNeilson]

Yes I have been using CS convoys, but as the enemy 'reach' is so limited now I am able to switch to autoconvoy for vast areas of the map - its Nov 1944 and there's enough to do so was just looking at a way of simplifying my own moves. Its working fine for me from SF and it really means that its a lot less of the hauling beans stuff to worry about - even though it is probably inefficient - on the other hand as I am the Allies I don't need to worry about supply inefficiency in the grand scheme of things.

I just really need to know if this is an error of the way it is intended to be - and will then spend a few hours setting up CS convoys instead....

Roger

[Disco Duck]

I seem to recall an old thread on why the developers set up Colombo as the the auto supply . I don't remember the reasoning though. I have played with it some and you have to set up a CS to Colombo to keep it supplied and then run auto convoy.

[RogerJNeilson]

Yes I can see the method to use, it just seemed odd to me. Aden or Cape Town would have been better for auto-supply hubs


Roger

[Chris21wen]

ORIGINAL: Roger Neilson 3

Yes I can see the method to use, it just seemed odd to me. Aden or Cape Town would have been better for auto-supply hubs


Roger

They are off map. I suspect autoconvoys don't work from them.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Roger Neilson 3

Yes I can see the method to use, it just seemed odd to me. Aden or Cape Town would have been better for auto-supply hubs


Roger

Those two would have been very poor choices. Any off-map route that begins or ends on-map uses fuel. It doesn't use the auto-magic refueling routine that off-map to off-map routes do. In either bases' case, only the very longest-range ships would be able to reach many of the auto-convoy bases on the western map. You'd also have the issue of the auto-convoy ships being tied up while in the wormhole. About a month round trip. As it is now, the auto-convoy allocations are available for emergency use immediately at Colombo and SF.

I believe WITP used Karachi for the auto-convoy hub, from memory. It got overland supply, sort of. But it was a long way from places like the DEI as well. My understanding is that Colombo was substituted in very late in development. A few places in the manual still say Karachi I think, and the Return to Base button for many ships, those that don't use Pearl, still says Karachi.

Michael long ago patched in an East/West split in the auto-convoy system, defining which bases draw from each hub. This makes it easier to allocate the proper number of ships, range of those ships, and to better control the driving-through-dangerous-waters issue. As you say, the key is still always carefully enable those bases you know are safe transits. And then allocate enough escorts for the subs.

As far as Colombo's supply, in the era you're in Aden should have many millions of supply from the CD convoys. Just set up a couple of 50-xAK TFs with a couple of DEs, set CS control to Colombo, and forget them. If you want to do auto-convoy fuel (I rarely do as tankers are too valuable to make robots), you can do the same from Abadan.

Auto-convoy is actually more efficient and less wasteful that the oft-praised CS system. The demand function is based on the target base's support requirement algo, which, as we've discussed in other threads this past month, uses a roughly month-long smoothing algorithm to forward predict base needs. An auto-convoy TF is only dispatched when this number calls for a trip, so there should never, or almost never, be any spoilage. The CS system most players use just dumps, and dumps, and dumps onto the target, spoilage be damned. The Allies can afford that in most cases, but it's not efficient.

[RogerJNeilson]

Thanks Bullwinkle, most carefully argued.

Roger

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Roger Neilson 3

Thanks Bullwinkle, most carefully argued.

Roger

Us auto-convoyers have to stick together. [:)]

[Disco Duck]

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: Roger Neilson 3

Thanks Bullwinkle, most carefully argued.

Roger

Us auto-convoyers have to stick together. [:)]

+1[:D]