Possible Brain Cramp

[dtravel]

Mr.Frag, stop making the other children cry.

[foliveti]

I like to use the resource hub concept in the DEI as allies if I can get away with it. Use the 9k tankers to pick it up in the smaller ports where the oil is produced and dump it in Soerobaja or Batavia for the 18K tankers to haul to OZ or India. I have not played as Japan, so I do not know if they have different size tankers which would cause this to make sense as well.

[2ndACR]

1 9,000 capacity tanker with 4 escorts per oil base in the southern DEI. They go to Manila and off load it. I build it up to size 9, so loading and unloading is pretty quick.

From there 2-3 16,000 capacity tankers with 8 heavy ASW escorts and a CS escort it to Japan.

Same for all resources. Only their convoys are even bigger. But not as well protected, I need oil more than resources.

[rtrapasso]

Are resources supposed to have the same load value as supplies?

If you believe chart in manual 6.1.19 "Loading and Unloading transports" - supplies and resources have same value.

I've noticed that if you load both supplies and resources into the same ship, only resources shows up on the screen. So, you might have a 7000 ton AK registering 1000 tons resources but being shown at 100% capacity. The rest is probably in supplies (unless you also have troops or planes).

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Personally, I've never understood the purpose of loading a ship only to unload it to load it again to unload it when it gets where you really wanted it in the first place ... just wastes time with the extra load/unload.

Maybe it's just me [:D]

Only done by players using CS convoys because of the tragic inability of the auto convoy system to do any aspect of its' designed function adequately. In real life it would be ridiculous but with WITP's ridiculously fast logistical model, time is not an issue anyway.

I suppose just pooling resource/oil convoys at hubs (all ships have a "do not unload" order in place) and then merging them into larger ones for final destination would work. Brutal player overload but WTF.

[Bradley7735]

Manila has one or two manpower, doesn't it?

[tabpub]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Hah, vindicated.

Only partly, it only happens at bases that do not have anything in the first place. You can do this as long as it is a base that already has some form of industry so it's never been a high priority.

Well, perhaps it just doesn't work at some locations, but I find that Tjilijap works for me. Perhaps I did the proper qyrations and incantations before starting the scenario....

[freeboy]

is there a problem with not using cargo and only using transport tf's? I do not see one.. ??
I just steam down pick up the poop and steam back.. Ron what is the proble.. didn't you know that you set the convy to retirement allowed and change the base back and forth between the destination to get and to give whatever item ?

[ChezDaJez]

I've been using Palau as a supply hub. Japan feeds Palau, Palau feeds Truk and Singapore, Truk and Singapore feed their respective bases. I also use CS supply to move them. This way I can concentrate on just the supplies located on the battlefront.

I do this for 3 reasons.

1. It allows me to keep the faster transports near the front. Having faster transports help their survivability.

2. It greatly reduces the number of convoys leaving Japan, thereby reducing the effectiveness of subs. True, these do tend to be large convoys, but it also allows me to use more escorts with each convoy. Allows better detection of them. So far, I've only lost 11 ships to Allied subs (late Nov 42, scen 15).

3. I typically have large supply stocks at each hub (100,000+). I can quickly reroute supplies to where they are needed during critical operations such as when the Allies launch an offensive. I was able to move additional supplies very quickly to Rabaul and Guadalcanal from Truk when the Allies went for Guadalcanal.

I don't use autoconvoys anymore, not only due to their bad and predictable (for the enemy) pathfinding, but mostly because I can't prioritise any bases or change the amount a base requests. You end up with situations like it sending a full 7000T AK to Wakeand a half empty 3500T AK to Truk (if it goes at all) because there wasn't enough available. Plus all autoconvoys must leave from Osaka, draining its supply and making it useless as a repair base. CS convoys can leave from any port.

Chez

[pry]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

I live off CS convoys as I absolutely refuse to use the AI if I don't have to. Yes, ifthis is the case, the ability to run CS convoys carrying resources and oil is a basic "must have". I will never play Japan if this is not possible.

There is not CS-Commodities option Ron. CS is Fuel/Supplies only, not Oil/Resources.

It's on the wish list somewhere.

Yep I put it on the list a loooonnngggg time ago... Still got my fingers crossed [:D]

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: pry

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

I live off CS convoys as I absolutely refuse to use the AI if I don't have to. Yes, ifthis is the case, the ability to run CS convoys carrying resources and oil is a basic "must have". I will never play Japan if this is not possible.

There is not CS-Commodities option Ron. CS is Fuel/Supplies only, not Oil/Resources.

It's on the wish list somewhere.

Yep I put it on the list a loooonnngggg time ago... Still got my fingers crossed [:D]

Cool. Testing Allies mainly,I did not notice this early on.

[Charles2222]

ORIGINAL: ChezDaJez

I've been using Palau as a supply hub. Japan feeds Palau, Palau feeds Truk and Singapore, Truk and Singapore feed their respective bases. I also use CS supply to move them. This way I can concentrate on just the supplies located on the battlefront.

I do this for 3 reasons.

1. It allows me to keep the faster transports near the front. Having faster transports help their survivability.

2. It greatly reduces the number of convoys leaving Japan, thereby reducing the effectiveness of subs. True, these do tend to be large convoys, but it also allows me to use more escorts with each convoy. Allows better detection of them. So far, I've only lost 11 ships to Allied subs (late Nov 42, scen 15).

3. I typically have large supply stocks at each hub (100,000+). I can quickly reroute supplies to where they are needed during critical operations such as when the Allies launch an offensive. I was able to move additional supplies very quickly to Rabaul and Guadalcanal from Truk when the Allies went for Guadalcanal.

I don't use autoconvoys anymore, not only due to their bad and predictable (for the enemy) pathfinding, but mostly because I can't prioritise any bases or change the amount a base requests. You end up with situations like it sending a full 7000T AK to Wakeand a half empty 3500T AK to Truk (if it goes at all) because there wasn't enough available. Plus all autoconvoys must leave from Osaka, draining its supply and making it useless as a repair base. CS convoys can leave from any port.

Chez

I don't know if I'll ever play this game again due to the spawning rule, but I do have a question which your post brought to mind. If you're playing the AI, either side, have you ever done much of sending convoys to a spot instead of going directly to the destination? It would seem to me that this would result in lower losses, because if you sent convoys from a pretty popular route, such as Tokyo to Palau, that the AI subs will concentrate on getting on that path. Not conveniently plotting to Palau should make your journey unpredictable. Of course if the AI has no way of knowing, be it before the game begins or learning it later, of that one path from Tokyo to our example Palau, it would be pointless anyway.

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: Charles_22

ORIGINAL: ChezDaJez

I've been using Palau as a supply hub. Japan feeds Palau, Palau feeds Truk and Singapore, Truk and Singapore feed their respective bases. I also use CS supply to move them. This way I can concentrate on just the supplies located on the battlefront.

I do this for 3 reasons.

1. It allows me to keep the faster transports near the front. Having faster transports help their survivability.

2. It greatly reduces the number of convoys leaving Japan, thereby reducing the effectiveness of subs. True, these do tend to be large convoys, but it also allows me to use more escorts with each convoy. Allows better detection of them. So far, I've only lost 11 ships to Allied subs (late Nov 42, scen 15).

3. I typically have large supply stocks at each hub (100,000+). I can quickly reroute supplies to where they are needed during critical operations such as when the Allies launch an offensive. I was able to move additional supplies very quickly to Rabaul and Guadalcanal from Truk when the Allies went for Guadalcanal.

I don't use autoconvoys anymore, not only due to their bad and predictable (for the enemy) pathfinding, but mostly because I can't prioritise any bases or change the amount a base requests. You end up with situations like it sending a full 7000T AK to Wakeand a half empty 3500T AK to Truk (if it goes at all) because there wasn't enough available. Plus all autoconvoys must leave from Osaka, draining its supply and making it useless as a repair base. CS convoys can leave from any port.

Chez

I don't know if I'll ever play this game again due to the spawning rule, but I do have a question which your post brought to mind. If you're playing the AI, either side, have you ever done much of sending convoys to a spot instead of going directly to the destination? It would seem to me that this would result in lower losses, because if you sent convoys from a pretty popular route, such as Tokyo to Palau, that the AI subs will concentrate on getting on that path. Not conveniently plotting to Palau should make your journey unpredictable. Of course if the AI has no way of knowing, be it before the game begins or learning it later, of that one path from Tokyo to our example Palau, it would be pointless anyway.

Hey,Charles. I'll do a quickie optional spawning scenario. Wont work for the AI but works fine PBEM...assuming you are not an AI only guy.

[Charles2222]

Unfortunately, so to speak, I am an AI-only guy. Thanks though.

[Charles2222]

No sorry, I placed this comment in the wrong forum. I must be insane today.

[Mr.Frag]

I must be insane today.

Well, hopefully you'll find the cure tomorrow. Then you can tell the rest of us insane types. [:D]

[Charles2222]

Yes church is saner than work (which is where I'm at now).

[dtravel]

ORIGINAL: Charles_22

Yes church is saner than work (which is where I'm at now).

Well, religion must not be having much of an effect on you if you're busy typing away in this forum during services. [:'(]

[Charles2222]

ORIGINAL: dtravel

ORIGINAL: Charles_22

Yes church is saner than work (which is where I'm at now).

Well, religion must not be having much of an effect on you if you're busy typing away in this forum during services. [:'(]

No, no, no. Tomorrow is the Church, today was the work. The bit in parenthesis was supposed to be working off the last word in the sentence, though I do admit I didn't word it as clearly as I would desire.

[dtravel]

Spoilsport. You've ruined a perfectly good mental picture of a WiTP addict now. [:D]