Evaluation of supply routes

[DKF12]

I am beginning to think some supply routes use too much fuel to transverse and are not efficient.
The Cape Town to Perth or Darwin routes in particular. How do you go about evaluating this.
Thanks

[btd64]

I am beginning to think some supply routes use too much fuel to transverse and are not efficient.
The Cape Town to Perth or Darwin routes in particular. How do you go about evaluating this.
Thanks

Transfers on that route must include fuel for one thing so you can refuel your ships and leave some behind....GP

[BBfanboy]

Japanese players face similar concerns about getting their supplies to far-flung bases - and they also have to minimize fuel usage. So they do a fuel efficiency calculation: fuel range in hexes divided by the amount of fuel they have at 100%. Do that for each class of ship you will use and you will likely find that the largest xAKs have the best fuel efficiency. They will also have the range to steam to Darwin or Perth and back to CT without refueling.

And if your TF is going to need some fuel from Oz before returning to CT, use the "Minimum Refuel" setting if you are not expecting trouble. If there could be enemy raiders, use "Tactical Refuel" to give some room for a full speed run.

Also bear in mind that if the ship gets most of the way back to CT and runs out of fuel, it can go for quite a few days at one hex per day and the penalty is only System damage. If the System damage does not get to 100%, the ship survives.

[RangerJoe]

Use the shorter ranged ships to travel to closer bases, use the smaller tankers to bring fuel to intermediate stops in the Pacific ocean.

But also remember that if you set the ships to minimum or tactical refueling while hauling the supplies to the bases and only refueling completely at the originating port will keep fuel from being used at the receiving base.

You also need to use the hub and spoke system for supplies . . .

[Chris21wen]

Here's how I'd do it.

Endurance is key but not necesssarily the most fuel/cargo efficient.

A large cargo will usally have no problems making most routes but mixing ship types on the route does cause unnecessary problems. When you put together the TF you will know it's fuel status for the trip. Lets say it's fuel requirements for a trip from SF to Aukland is 340/3320 (160) using Isthmain class. They can make the direct round trip at mission/cruise speed with little fuel to spare, but not enough for my liking because it does not take into account and detours it might have to take or speed increase caused by threats. Nor does it take into account damage that reduces it speed and it currently has no escorts.

If you give a Clenson DD escort fuel goes red at 302/320(160).
If you also add a smaller endurance ship just one, say a Lake class the fuel staus drops further into the red 282/320 (160).

Both of theses two smaller ships will slow the convoy down as they will refuel from the large ships.

Screenshot 2025-04-20 084336.jpg (101.8 KiB) Viewed 583 times

I stress these fuel figures are the the direct route as chossen by the AI. You will nearly alway re-route it and that will nearly allows make the trip longer. Lets say we now set two way points, Chistmas Is (that well know refuelling stop) and Rarotonga (Cook Is) as a waypoint and return same route. The first adds nothing to the fueling problem as it is also a direct route, but the second adds two hexes to the trip 282/322(161).

Here are a few thing you can do but all require fuel at some location so pre-planing is required, either fuel stored or an AO.

Refuel at either waypoint. I normally choose the first (last going back) and load minimal. Minimal fuel loads enough to complete the trip plus 10%. But Tactical refuel might be needed.
Refuel at the destination. This based on whatever TF refuelling instuction is. If you don't want the TF to refuel at its destination then 'do not refuel' must be used. Anything else uses fuel that is needed there. Use minimal if anything.
Use an AO. Let throw in a fuel loaded Petoka AO, fuel status remains at 277/322(161). You need to watch it doesn't unload at destination. Various ways to prevent this but all require micromanagement. If you put it in a replen TF and set to to follow then it won't but you now have keepy uppy problems between TF.

In fact none of these options seem to make any difference to fuel status. This is one of those little quirks in the game. The fuel status calculation does not take into account refuelling. Once the refuel occurs however the status is updated.

By far the simplest is the destination refuelling but the preferred is the waypoint refuelling stop.

Note tankers have less endurance so transporting fuel requires more effort

[Sardaukar]

One can also add fully loaded AO into Transport TF.

It'll refuel ships in TF when needed.

[RangerJoe]

Ships can also refuel from any tankers with fuel as cargo at a base but not while moving at sea. The oilers may take fuel from tankers at a base and then transfer it to ships that need the fuel.

[Mike McCreery]

I use the Capetown - Perth/Adelaide routes for alot of supplies and fuel to Australia.

What I do is separate the really long haul tk's and xak/ak ships capable of making the trip without refuelling.

I think the cutoff is somewhere between 10K&12K for endurance.

Then I set refuelling off and use those to provide supply and fuel from CT without using any of that precious fuel in Australia.

Also, I usually turn off all HI production in Australia on turn one of the game. That burns a huge amount of fuel that is not needed as you can get plenty of supply to the continent without generating it on site.