The return of tristanjohn

Gary Grigsby's strategic level wargame covering the entire War in the Pacific from 1941 to 1945 or beyond.

Moderators: Joel Billings, wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami

User avatar
Mr.Frag
Posts: 11195
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2002 5:00 pm
Location: Purgatory

RE: The truth about supply

Post by Mr.Frag »

As a practical matter no such rebuild will occur and only tweaks are going to even get to the debate stage.

Nice to see there are some folks with some common sense still. [;)]

Re: your 3 options: PvP only really ... no way the AI is going to be reprogrammed to deal with those kinds of restrictions. Ai would just ignore them.

#1 - major rewrite ... not tracked currently in a manner that would allow ops points for port

#2 - simple enough ... rule already exists to blow up stuff when a base is captured ... you are just asking for a Random(% stocks) + 5000 instead of the current Random(% stocks)

#3 - why not just increase all heavy bomber supply use across the board? rule already exists in the code for this, simple change. Ships, thats a tough one due to all the special rules for tenders.

User avatar
Mr.Frag
Posts: 11195
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2002 5:00 pm
Location: Purgatory

RE: The truth about supply

Post by Mr.Frag »

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Ron, why don't you simply eliminate all manpower and resource locations that are not in Japan or India or USA? Add a little to make up for those removed. Problem solved.


So, what would be the point of invading anywhere?


Victory Points ... You can't win the game without getting VP ... leaving unsecured bases in your back yard would not be a real good idea ...
User avatar
Ron Saueracker
Posts: 10967
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 10:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece

RE: The truth about supply

Post by Ron Saueracker »

ORIGINAL: Mogami
ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker
In fact supply can be called "War Material" because that is what it truely is

OMGawd, Magnum! I think you now understand the basis of my arguement. Supply has to be war materiel in the game because there is no other function for it...no civilian economy. Therefore, given the design of the logistics/supply model, this war materiel should not be found all over the place in universally usable caches at every base. Moses makes it quite clear above if I have not already.

Hi, Never mind I'm wasting my time here. Do what you will and call it what you will. I'm not worried I'm not playing the mod.

I'm on the other side of the fence as are alot of others. As such, I don't play the stock but I still HAVE TO live with the add water and stir supply at bases. That being the case, why not make the supply/resource/fuel/oil ratios adjustable and independent of each other using the editor? Hell, you guys bent over backwards developing a PDU feature which suddenly nobody in their right mind will use (edit...unless accompanied by a large set of house rules) then added a toggle to again satisfy the crowd, why not make this simple adjustment that they will use en masse?
Image

Image

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan
moses
Posts: 2252
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2002 3:39 am

RE: The truth about supply

Post by moses »

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag
As a practical matter no such rebuild will occur and only tweaks are going to even get to the debate stage.

Nice to see there are some folks with some common sense still. [;)]

Re: your 3 options: PvP only really ... no way the AI is going to be reprogrammed to deal with those kinds of restrictions. Ai would just ignore them.

#1 - major rewrite ... not tracked currently in a manner that would allow ops points for port

#2 - simple enough ... rule already exists to blow up stuff when a base is captured ... you are just asking for a Random(% stocks) + 5000 instead of the current Random(% stocks)

#3 - why not just increase all heavy bomber supply use across the board? rule already exists in the code for this, simple change. Ships, thats a tough one due to all the special rules for tenders.


Across the board would workfor bombers . It would be nice to do it for ships as well because at the same time it makes all those worried about constant heavy BB bombardments a little happier.

You might look at the suggestions in my previous post as well. Especcially #2 about toggles for productionin cut off areas.


User avatar
Ron Saueracker
Posts: 10967
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 10:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece

RE: The truth about supply

Post by Ron Saueracker »

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Ron, why don't you simply eliminate all manpower and resource locations that are not in Japan or India or USA? Add a little to make up for those removed. Problem solved.


So, what would be the point of invading anywhere?


Victory Points ... You can't win the game without getting VP ... leaving unsecured bases in your back yard would not be a real good idea ...

This would further reduce the need for merchants aside from amphib duty which would further skew the situation would it not? Guess we need to remove 90% of the merchants and 90% of the subs to compensate.
Image

Image

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan
Banquet
Posts: 1190
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2002 9:04 pm
Location: England

RE: The truth about supply

Post by Banquet »

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker
Hell, you guys bent over backwards toggling a PDU which suddenly nobody in their right mind will use

I use it! <----
User avatar
Skyros
Posts: 1576
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Columbia SC

RE: The truth about supply

Post by Skyros »

I think to help the situation you could put a restriction on ammo for DD and larger at level 5 or 6 ports, or require an AE (give it value early in game) in the port. This would defeat the BBs etc. rearming on just captured and small bases. We can tweak the port size to make it work.
User avatar
Ron Saueracker
Posts: 10967
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 10:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece

RE: The truth about supply

Post by Ron Saueracker »

These tweaks are all very simple. Hell, the code already exists for somethings like port restrictions on mines torpedoes etc.
Image

Image

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan
User avatar
Mr.Frag
Posts: 11195
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2002 5:00 pm
Location: Purgatory

RE: The truth about supply

Post by Mr.Frag »

This would further reduce the need for merchants aside from amphib duty which would further skew the situation would it not? Guess we need to remove 90% of the merchants and 90% of the subs to compensate.

Not at all, you still need to hump supply and fuel all over the place ... the dribs of supply and resources in the SRA do not really amount to a hill of beans in the greater scheme of things. All that would happen is subs move closer to the front line to hunt where there is probably less air cover which means you'd complain less about ASW [:'(]

The way you talk about the amount of supply in the SRA, you'd think it was taking 100 ship convoys to haul it all away. [:D]
User avatar
Bradley7735
Posts: 2073
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2004 8:51 pm

RE: The truth about supply

Post by Bradley7735 »

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag
The way you talk about the amount of supply in the SRA, you'd think it was taking 100 ship convoys to haul it all away. [:D]

The amount of supply in the SRA is vast. Tobali alone produces enough supply to keep at least 5 divisions in great condition. So, you have tons and tons of war materiel being produced right next to the front lines. Now all you need is one ship to load supply from Tobali and offload in Singapore or Rangoon.

IRL, you'd need a ship to load resources, haul it all the way through sub infested waters to japan (consuming fuel and escorts on the way), wait for said resources to produce real life war materiel, then finally load it up and take the long trip back to Singapore to deliver said war materiel. (going back through sub waters and using fuel and escorts.)

The amount of supply that is produced outside of Japan, US, Aus and India is staggering and unrealistic. It would be better if resource centers produced zero supply and HI produced twice as much.

I do agree to some extent the way oil centers produce fuel. It's not as much as the resource/supply thing, and fuel is fuel is fuel. (works in all ships the same way.)
The older I get, the better I was.
moses
Posts: 2252
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2002 3:39 am

RE: The truth about supply

Post by moses »

The amount of supply that is produced outside of Japan, US, Aus and India is staggering and unrealistic. It would be better if resource centers produced zero supply and HI produced twice as much.

This has been proposed many times by many people and would solve a lot of problems. Total supply remains exactly the same no the change could have no effects which unbalance the game. Japan would need to use more ships to move everything about and they wouldn't get so much free supply at the front line.
User avatar
Nikademus
Posts: 22517
Joined: Sat May 27, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Alien spacecraft

RE: The truth about supply

Post by Nikademus »

I must be doing something wrong then because i am not swimming in supply and have to ship supply in to the SRA to keep my garrisons comfortable. I still want to see the AAR. [:D]
moses
Posts: 2252
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2002 3:39 am

RE: The truth about supply

Post by moses »

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

I must be doing something wrong then because i am not swimming in supply and have to ship supply in to the SRA to keep my garrisons comfortable. I still want to see the AAR. [:D]

No nothings wrong. In the long term this issue is of no importance. whether you run out of supply or not depends entirely on how you use it. In fact the increase in starting pace of operations probably causes greater long term supply shoprtages then would otherwise be the case.

The issue is local and involves only the period of rapid expansion.

But when you are in the act of invading something its sure nice to have 20,000 sp just sitting there in the enemy supply depot waiting to be converted into zero's.

User avatar
mogami
Posts: 11053
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2000 8:00 am
Location: You can't get here from there

RE: The truth about supply

Post by mogami »

Hi, I can't believe this. If your not talking about ships tanks and airplanes then the SRA before, during, and after the war produced more "supply" then Japan did. The SRA still produces more of that then Japan does. When Japan lost access to the "supply" from the SRA she began to starve.

Toboali does not produce enough to support 5 divisions unless they are doing nothing.

No one can say before the SRA is taken by Japan what it will produce.

You must get over this one way viewing of supply.

Supply is used 3 ways (basic,combat,equipment
Supply is produced 3 ways (stuff that can be used as found without the need for conversion, manufactured consumables like munitions and AV gas, and all the equipment that is found in pools before it transfers on map is supply)(If Japan has 3000xA6M2 in pool then they do not exist unless 36,000 supply also exists on map)

It seems unless every item is it's own data point and the players have to track everything people will be unable to follow the logic.

It makes sense to me and I prefer the simple path rather then the complicated. But if you required me to load X amount of 81mm mortor rounds and transport them I would have more supply where I needed it then you would. I don't understand why the "civilian" economy needs to be mentioned. Everything you get on map is what is left over. Niether econmy (Allied or Japanese) includes what is required for or produced by the non military economy. When the military production collapses so does the civilian. (If you can't feed your troops the civilians have already been going hungry)
Image




I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
User avatar
Nikademus
Posts: 22517
Joined: Sat May 27, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Alien spacecraft

RE: The truth about supply

Post by Nikademus »

All i know is, when i invaded....i needed mucho outside supply.....now after a "year" of peace, i'm still shipping in supply to keep my garrisons comfortabley padded. They are in no shape of the word, "self sufficient"
User avatar
Tristanjohn
Posts: 3027
Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 4:50 am
Location: Daly City CA USA
Contact:

RE: The truth about supply

Post by Tristanjohn »

ORIGINAL: moses

I would prefer your definition as "war material" over "transport space" although both are essentially correct. Transport space is a little more abstract then needed.

Well, just to be accurate, I think the term you're searching for there is "materiel." But no matter. We're still just playing with words, as the system still fails to convince.
So supply is basically anything until it is converted into something concrete like planes, pt boats, bombs for aircraft, unit replacements, or combat supply (food and ammo),etc. This definition helps explain the minor issue with captured and locally produced supply.

I see nothing "minor" about that aspect of play.
Its easy to accept that the supply brought in to a location is fully convertable to anything.

I find it rather difficult to accept. The easy manner in which all this happens only worsens the case.
Presumably these things are planned in advance by the staffs and they know what they are likely to need.

That's a "presumption" which often fails in actual play.
Captured and locally produced supply is a little different. Out of the 20,000sp captured at Kendari and the 600 per day you get from the local economy you start producing zero's???? Main gun ammo for the big BB's????

Being able to use this supply in this way gives Japan a little extra help in the first couple months. Its not a huge issue and it pretty much goes away after the first months. But there it is.

A couple things that might help if anyones interested:
1.) Half of captured supply is immediately destroyed (or some other apropriate %).
2.) Allow the allied player some method to toggle off or disable production centers which are cut off. So you have fewer instances of bases being captured with huge stockpiles of supply. As a side benifit the allies could turn off oil production in some of the sites which currently get captured with HUGE oil and fuel stockpiles.

As I said several times this is a not a gamebreaker IMO and I am hapily playing the game as is. Just clarifying what the issue is and why it might merit some attention.

Right. You're just happily playing the game. Let's not make any waves. [8|]
Regarding Frank Jack Fletcher: They should have named an oiler after him instead. -- Irrelevant
User avatar
mogami
Posts: 11053
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2000 8:00 am
Location: You can't get here from there

RE: The truth about supply

Post by mogami »

Hi, TJ I'll change my screen name to Bruckner if you change yours to Hanslick.
Image




I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
User avatar
Bradley7735
Posts: 2073
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2004 8:51 pm

RE: The truth about supply

Post by Bradley7735 »

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

I must be doing something wrong then because i am not swimming in supply and have to ship supply in to the SRA to keep my garrisons comfortable. I still want to see the AAR. [:D]

Are you surprised that you have to ship in supply? I didn't say that the SRA will support all units in and around it with the supply produced locally. But, I bet at least 50% of the supply used in and around the SRA is supported by locally produced supply. Probably more if combat ops are low.

It's too much. In a perfect game, a little bit of supply would be made in the SRA (food, timber, etc). But, most of the supply used by Infantry, aircraft and ships needs to come from HI produced supply.

Shipping in supply because you are not swimming in it does not mean a problem does not exist.

I feel that the SRA should produce a lot less supply and that HI should produce more. then you'd have to move it around by ship. Really move it around. Not just move it from Sumatra to Singapore.
The older I get, the better I was.
User avatar
mogami
Posts: 11053
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2000 8:00 am
Location: You can't get here from there

RE: The truth about supply

Post by mogami »

Hi, I'll take that bet and send you the game file to prove it. But to be historically correct most of the food Japan consumes (military units and civilian in real life) was imported from the SRA and it rarely gets it in WITP. But it does not matter. The SRA will be the scene of most of the Japanese cargo transit missions.
Image




I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
User avatar
Nikademus
Posts: 22517
Joined: Sat May 27, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Alien spacecraft

RE: The truth about supply

Post by Nikademus »

Are you surprised that you have to ship in supply?

No, in fact thats my point. It is being claimed that Japan is "swimming" in supply in the SRA and other outside areas. I interpret that as "well i don't need to import supply for my troops they can take care of themselves" From my own PBEM experience I agree with Mog and Moses, this is not a serious issue. I'm also having to ship serious supply points to Rangoon to keep Burma in shape (and stock Burma has a good number of resource centers as well.)
Post Reply

Return to “War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945”