convoy, big or small?

[Spidery]

Does fuel suffer spoilage on moving?

From the beta notes:

"95. Gameplay Change: Removed the wastage of resources/oil/fuel during overland
movement."

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Spidery

Does fuel suffer spoilage on moving?

From the beta notes:

"95. Gameplay Change: Removed the wastage of resources/oil/fuel during overland
movement."

I'm the wrong guy to ask what this note means.

Alllllfffffrrreeeeddddd!!!!

[Lokasenna]

ORIGINAL: Spidery

Does fuel suffer spoilage on moving?

From the beta notes:

"95. Gameplay Change: Removed the wastage of resources/oil/fuel during overland
movement."

Whoa! Whoa! Alright then. Magic Coast Road...you will be my b*tch.

From my AI game, I'm not sure that it's capable of hauling everything. I know that Fuel and Oil have been flowing from Singapore, but there are still several hundred thousand there and it doesn't seem to be going down anymore. Resources are minimal, so those are all flowing OK.

[Spidery]

(I know these ships don't have to haul replacement aircraft, guns, tractors, or any of the other stuff that magically appears as replacements)

They sort of do in that supply is needed to create replacements. However, in some scenarios and some places, the local supply generation exceeds demand so in that case there is no need to ship it.

[jeffk3510]

ORIGINAL: obvert

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

You are probably seeing the effects of the Magic Resource Highway in the game. JFBs speak of it in hushed tones. "Stuff" flows overland from Malaysia-ish to Korea-ish without needing to go on the water. Some Japanese players report in the forum they don't use it and instead do the historical thing and put it all on ships, especially tankers. If they don't it's impossible to wage even a semblance of the USN's submarine war and the Japanese player has lots of merchants to spare for late-war troop retraction, even if they, as most report they do, turn off merchant construction pretty early.

Doesn't work so well, and there don't seem to be any hushed tones in the Japanese AARs that talk about it. Check my Wild Sheep Chase sometime in 42 and there is a long drawn out attempt to make this work, which ended in complete failure by the way. I don't think it's possible to move all of that stuff over land, and if it was the fuel is still subject to spoiling. Maybe it works against the AI, but not in a PBEM?

So I shipped all of the oil/fuel from the DEI and a lot of resources, plus shipping a lot of supply/troops back down. A lot of players do this, but there is still a surplus of ships and that is probably due to the ones in the standard game scenarios having a bit too much cargo capacity. Babes have limited the capacity of all ships in some of their mods. In game I'm also pretty sure Japan doesn't have to haul everything they had to in the war. (I know these ships don't have to haul replacement aircraft, guns, tractors, or any of the other stuff that magically appears as replacements).

Now this is also true for the Allies. Look at the glut of ships after about mid-43. Suddenly you're swimming in them. Well, there are some things the Allies hauled that aren't in game as well. At the time there was seen to be a need for all of those ships. If there is no need in the game, then we are missing some of the 'stuff' that was hauled in the war.

Can't argue with that.

[Cribtop]

It is also unclear the extent to which the civilian economy is modeled for either side. If most of your hulls are needed just to feed the people, there would not be a lot left to move war material. Obviously at some point you prioritize the war effort, but go too far down this road and everyone is starving, which assisted in German defeat in both wars and Japanese defeat in the PTO.

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

OK, I did go read a bunch of your AAR. Began in June and read/skimmed through page 25 just about into October 1942. Other than brief mentions of the attempt in June where it was pointed out that a lone Chinese unit controlled a hexside on the path so it wasn't open, I didn't see a long discussion. There was some exchange with Squeeze about using loading takers to "goose" flows into Fusan from possibly Chinese sources, and speculation that the large fleet withdrawals at Singers was keeping flows from exiting there that month, but I didn't see other. Was it later?

Aside, I had never read the China negotiation portion of either of you two's AARs. Without commenting on the strat bombing ban (!!) I did think your map of potential Allied 4E bombing from Ledo was pretty creative. Not only the assumed ranges (Ledo to Canton!) or that you left out minor industrial centers like Shanghai and Port Arthur, but that you tried to argue that 4Es would fly 20 hexes from Ledo into CAP. Ever. I can't get mine to fly into air superiority from ten hexes.

It's kind of a sporadic discussion, but certainly not 'hush hush.' [;)]

Here is one of the major posts with replies on and off down that page:

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=3062465


I aso admit I have learned a lot during this game, my first real PBEM, and so my thinking about a lot of things has changed.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: obvert

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

OK, I did go read a bunch of your AAR. Began in June and read/skimmed through page 25 just about into October 1942. Other than brief mentions of the attempt in June where it was pointed out that a lone Chinese unit controlled a hexside on the path so it wasn't open, I didn't see a long discussion. There was some exchange with Squeeze about using loading takers to "goose" flows into Fusan from possibly Chinese sources, and speculation that the large fleet withdrawals at Singers was keeping flows from exiting there that month, but I didn't see other. Was it later?

Aside, I had never read the China negotiation portion of either of you two's AARs. Without commenting on the strat bombing ban (!!) I did think your map of potential Allied 4E bombing from Ledo was pretty creative. Not only the assumed ranges (Ledo to Canton!) or that you left out minor industrial centers like Shanghai and Port Arthur, but that you tried to argue that 4Es would fly 20 hexes from Ledo into CAP. Ever. I can't get mine to fly into air superiority from ten hexes.

It's kind of a sporadic discussion, but certainly not 'hush hush.' [;)]

Here is one of the major posts with replies on and off down that page:

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=3062465


I aso admit I have learned a lot during this game, my first real PBEM, and so my thinking about a lot of things has changed.

Dan Nichols in Post 408 after the June 1 turn post: "Are you completely sure that you "own" all of the hexes on the rail line/major road network? In your May 25 screen shot there is a Chinese unit sitting on the rail line to the Southwest of Changsha. "

You said next post: "Good question Dan. That may have affected things up to now I realize thinking about the sequence of things.

That little guy has been given a great big shove off the rail by and armored car unit. It's the Lusu War Area that starts in the swamp near Nanking. Not sure how it's lasted this long. I let it wander hoping it would just evaporate, and then it just kept getting in the way. So now it is off the track and won't be causing any more problems.

All of the rail is now clear."

I had to find it so could be sure I wasn't dreaming. I read the thread pretty early in the AM.

I took it to mean any data from before the last week of May was questionable about the Highway, and then there wasn't another discussion about it through October when I stopped reading.

Not a big deal, but others have reported it does work. I don't know what the betas have done. Of course, all the POL from Soerbaja, Borneo, the small sources around NG, etc. has to go by sea. But other players have reported dumping the Medan lot onto Malaysia to flow to Singers and then east, as well as the Burma stuff. I've seen discussion that it takes awhile to build, but it works pretty well by 1943.

I don't really care as I understand how complex the flow models already must be, plus knowing the Highway is there makes it a target for coastal severing later on. I was mostly responding to Spence's point about ships in port. As a submarine guy I wish it were possible to see more of how the anti-commerce sub war played out.

[mind_messing]

Only problem is that it was critical. It was critical from the 1st day of the war. It was short by a million tons to meet Japan's peacetime needs: in peacetime though, merchies from other countries could fulfill those needs. A few captured merchies didn't come close to making up for the rest of the world's merchant fleets deciding they didn't want to work for Japan anymore. Every loss made a critical situation worse.

The key phrase is peacetime needs. People don't need cars and other consumer goods when there's a war on.

If the Japanese Player is using convoys of multiple merchies plus escorts and such a convoy is spotted the system should report it just as the commander of the sub was required to do (that is best estimate of number of ships, course, and speed). I think it is a game mechanics/system problem that such reports are not forthcoming. And recon aircraft routinely finding scores of merchies sitting in harbor is not the same as scouting out the IJ "convoy routes".

The game already does this. I used it last turn in a PBEM. A sub detected a transport task force, and a SCTF intercepted it the next turn. It's not a problem with the game.

Assuming you're not 90 years old and since convoy operations have not been right at the forefront of academic/military studies for 20 odd years or so perhaps you'd like to enlighten the community here about your qualifications to dismiss the study of so many of the Naval Professionals who set their pens to paper in the past.

It was more your invalid comparison with WW1 than my flagrant disregard for obviously correct academic work.

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: obvert

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

You are probably seeing the effects of the Magic Resource Highway in the game. JFBs speak of it in hushed tones. "Stuff" flows overland from Malaysia-ish to Korea-ish without needing to go on the water. Some Japanese players report in the forum they don't use it and instead do the historical thing and put it all on ships, especially tankers. If they don't it's impossible to wage even a semblance of the USN's submarine war and the Japanese player has lots of merchants to spare for late-war troop retraction, even if they, as most report they do, turn off merchant construction pretty early.

Doesn't work so well, and there don't seem to be any hushed tones in the Japanese AARs that talk about it. Check my Wild Sheep Chase sometime in 42 and there is a long drawn out attempt to make this work, which ended in complete failure by the way. I don't think it's possible to move all of that stuff over land, and if it was the fuel is still subject to spoiling. Maybe it works against the AI, but not in a PBEM?

So I shipped all of the oil/fuel from the DEI and a lot of resources, plus shipping a lot of supply/troops back down. A lot of players do this, but there is still a surplus of ships and that is probably due to the ones in the standard game scenarios having a bit too much cargo capacity. Babes have limited the capacity of all ships in some of their mods. In game I'm also pretty sure Japan doesn't have to haul everything they had to in the war. (I know these ships don't have to haul replacement aircraft, guns, tractors, or any of the other stuff that magically appears as replacements).

Now this is also true for the Allies. Look at the glut of ships after about mid-43. Suddenly you're swimming in them. Well, there are some things the Allies hauled that aren't in game as well. At the time there was seen to be a need for all of those ships. If there is no need in the game, then we are missing some of the 'stuff' that was hauled in the war.

I don't know what you did differently than the other folks in the past who have spoken of this working. There's no reason it shouldn't work. Individual "slugs" of fuel or resources aren't labeled with their point of origin. I doubt the game has memory to spare to ever try to do that. All the game knows is the quantities in the nodes each base can see. Then it applies the spinners and the stockpile settings and it hauls. The point about spoilage is a good one, however.

The Allies don't haul a lot of RL stuff just as Japan does not. Years ago I posted here a link to an article about Port Hueneme and all the construction supplies loaded and shipped from there for use by the Seabees. It was over 20 million tons and 200,000 men.

Exactly. There's no requirement (yes, it's very handy) to ship fuel to places like New Zealand and Austrailia, allowing the heavy industry to grind to a halt.

[spence]

The key phrase is peacetime needs. People don't need cars and other consumer goods when there's a war on.

Absolutely correct...except that practically none of the Japanese people had cars or significant quantities of consumer goods before the war. They did have to eat though. Do you know any really good recipes for grass? The Times of Tokyo does. Perhaps you can get them to dig out some back issues and translate them into English (or whatever is convenient).

[mind_messing]

ORIGINAL: spence

The key phrase is peacetime needs. People don't need cars and other consumer goods when there's a war on.

Absolutely correct...except that practically none of the Japanese people had cars or significant quantities of consumer goods before the war. They did have to eat though. Do you know any really good recipes for grass? The Times of Tokyo does. Perhaps you can get them to dig out some back issues and translate them into English (or whatever is convenient).

So did Japan magically lose control of the famously fertile Chinese lowlands before 1944? What about Formosa or Korea, which were all sending food to Japan?

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: obvert

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

OK, I did go read a bunch of your AAR. Began in June and read/skimmed through page 25 just about into October 1942. Other than brief mentions of the attempt in June where it was pointed out that a lone Chinese unit controlled a hexside on the path so it wasn't open, I didn't see a long discussion. There was some exchange with Squeeze about using loading takers to "goose" flows into Fusan from possibly Chinese sources, and speculation that the large fleet withdrawals at Singers was keeping flows from exiting there that month, but I didn't see other. Was it later?

Aside, I had never read the China negotiation portion of either of you two's AARs. Without commenting on the strat bombing ban (!!) I did think your map of potential Allied 4E bombing from Ledo was pretty creative. Not only the assumed ranges (Ledo to Canton!) or that you left out minor industrial centers like Shanghai and Port Arthur, but that you tried to argue that 4Es would fly 20 hexes from Ledo into CAP. Ever. I can't get mine to fly into air superiority from ten hexes.

It's kind of a sporadic discussion, but certainly not 'hush hush.' [;)]

Here is one of the major posts with replies on and off down that page:

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=3062465


I aso admit I have learned a lot during this game, my first real PBEM, and so my thinking about a lot of things has changed.

Dan Nichols in Post 408 after the June 1 turn post: "Are you completely sure that you "own" all of the hexes on the rail line/major road network? In your May 25 screen shot there is a Chinese unit sitting on the rail line to the Southwest of Changsha. "

You said next post: "Good question Dan. That may have affected things up to now I realize thinking about the sequence of things.

That little guy has been given a great big shove off the rail by and armored car unit. It's the Lusu War Area that starts in the swamp near Nanking. Not sure how it's lasted this long. I let it wander hoping it would just evaporate, and then it just kept getting in the way. So now it is off the track and won't be causing any more problems.

All of the rail is now clear."

I had to find it so could be sure I wasn't dreaming. I read the thread pretty early in the AM.

I took it to mean any data from before the last week of May was questionable about the Highway, and then there wasn't another discussion about it through October when I stopped reading.

Not a big deal, but others have reported it does work. I don't know what the betas have done. Of course, all the POL from Soerbaja, Borneo, the small sources around NG, etc. has to go by sea. But other players have reported dumping the Medan lot onto Malaysia to flow to Singers and then east, as well as the Burma stuff. I've seen discussion that it takes awhile to build, but it works pretty well by 1943.

I don't really care as I understand how complex the flow models already must be, plus knowing the Highway is there makes it a target for coastal severing later on. I was mostly responding to Spence's point about ships in port. As a submarine guy I wish it were possible to see more of how the anti-commerce sub war played out.

Not quite sure what your real point is. [;)]

First it was seemingly that moving resources overland from Singers to Fusan is all secret, and that may be a reason for seeing fewer ships in use. I simply was saying it's not a secret if you read several Japanese AARs, and that there are also other reasons ships are in port. That point is made as the discussion is there over several areas of this AAR that I linked. Also in Mike Solli's, SqzMyLemon and probably others.

Ok. So then you change the direction of your next comments to how it doesn't work and why it didn't for me? But that was not the point I responded to in your first post, which was that Japanese players are ostensibly using the 'hushed up' Magic Resource Highway to avoid convoys (the OP) and Allied subs, thus freeing up their ships.

Because I'm not able to make it work by mid 42 (probably my own inadequacy, as you're so happy to point out [:)]), I chose to use the convoy system. I didn't want to ruin my game waiting for the stuff to suddenly move overland, and I listened to vets like Mike Solli who doesn't use it because he thinks the IJ would have been hard pressed to move even a small portion that distance overland, (most likely true).

I still found great success moving stuff up to the HI in convoys in spite of Allied efforts with subs. That is the point. You don't need the land highway. Just pay attention to how you structure convoys, routes, Allied sub activity, and use a lot of air ASW to support those convoys. It's a fun part of the game. The glut of ships is due to other things not being moved that were moved in the war AND the fact that Allied subs can be neutralized more easily than was possible in the war.

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

ORIGINAL: spence

The key phrase is peacetime needs. People don't need cars and other consumer goods when there's a war on.

Absolutely correct...except that practically none of the Japanese people had cars or significant quantities of consumer goods before the war. They did have to eat though. Do you know any really good recipes for grass? The Times of Tokyo does. Perhaps you can get them to dig out some back issues and translate them into English (or whatever is convenient).

So did Japan magically lose control of the famously fertile Chinese lowlands before 1944? What about Formosa or Korea, which were all sending food to Japan?

The most productive areas in China, including Henan province, had massive famines in the middle of the war. Partly due to devastation caused by opening of the dams to halt the Japanese advance and resulting flooding. Partly due to weather.

As the war went on though even short trips from Asia would be subject to sub and mine warfare.

[Feltan]

As the Allies, and all things being equal, I prefer smaller convoys. "Small" being supply/cargo of about 20-30K tons (4-6 cargo ships), and fuel/tanker convoys of 20-40K tons (2-3) tankers.

One escort per convoy for ASW. As the Brits found out -- any escort is better than no escort, so I don't get animated about having the best escorts, just something that can keep up with the cargo ships and keep subs from getting too randy.

The Pacific war forces the Allies to embrace a number of smaller and more rudimentary ports. While we would all like the San Francisco to Sydney route, more often you'll need to dump the load in Pago Pago, or Suva or Noumea early in the game, and other secondary or tertiary ports later in the game. Having a cloud of smaller convoys, while more difficult to manage, gives you inherent flexibility on final destinations once the largest part of the crossing is complete. Smaller supply convoys load/unload faster and free up dock space. And, if one small convoy gets whacked by surface forces or the KB, you don't have to cry in your soup.

Amphibious TF's get much larger, but I don't consider them "convoys" in the truest sense.

Regards,
Feltan

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: obvert

Not quite sure what your real point is. [;)]

First it was seemingly that moving resources overland from Singers to Fusan is all secret, and that may be a reason for seeing fewer ships in use. I simply was saying it's not a secret if you read several Japanese AARs, and that there are also other reasons ships are in port. That point is made as the discussion is there over several areas of this AAR that I linked. Also in Mike Solli's, SqzMyLemon and probably others.

Ok. So then you change the direction of your next comments to how it doesn't work and why it didn't for me? But that was not the point I responded to in your first post, which was that Japanese players are ostensibly using the 'hushed up' Magic Resource Highway to avoid convoys (the OP) and Allied subs, thus freeing up their ships.
Because I'm not able to make it work by mid 42 (probably my own inadequacy, as you're so happy to point out [:)]), I chose to use the convoy system. I didn't want to ruin my game waiting for the stuff to suddenly move overland, and I listened to vets like Mike Solli who doesn't use it because he thinks the IJ would have been hard pressed to move even a small portion that distance overland, (most likely true).

I still found great success moving stuff up to the HI in convoys in spite of Allied efforts with subs. That is the point. You don't need the land highway. Just pay attention to how you structure convoys, routes, Allied sub activity, and use a lot of air ASW to support those convoys. It's a fun part of the game. The glut of ships is due to other things not being moved that were moved in the war AND the fact that Allied subs can be neutralized more easily than was possible in the war.


[/quote]

My point was to respond to Spence on why a lot of ships might be in port. If the Highway is used extensively it saves hundreds of loads, at least.

"Secret" was a poor choice of a word. What I meant was the mechanism is a very large non-historical tactic that Japan players don't like to wave around as it makes the naval game much easier and different than history. Not that you can't find discussion of it.

If it didn't work well enough for you that's fine, but it has for others. And even when Japan goes the way you did it requires further non-historic tactics such as you employed. Massive investments in air ASW primarily (which your opponent has spoken to many, many times.) I have my own feelings on the submarine portion of the game, but I've related them elsewhere. Even with the investments you made there would not have been the huge number of sinkings you've achieved.

And I also pointed out that using the Highway is not cost-free. It requires a pristine route be maintained for several thousand miles. That works for the mid-game but it offers the Allies a new set of pressure points in the end.

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58


My point was to respond to Spence on why a lot of ships might be in port. If the Highway is used extensively it saves hundreds of loads, at least.

"Secret" was a poor choice of a word. What I meant was the mechanism is a very large non-historical tactic that Japan players don't like to wave around as it makes the naval game much easier and different than history. Not that you can't find discussion of it.

If it didn't work well enough for you that's fine, but it has for others. And even when Japan goes the way you did it requires further non-historic tactics such as you employed. Massive investments in air ASW primarily (which your opponent has spoken to many, many times.) I have my own feelings on the submarine portion of the game, but I've related them elsewhere. Even with the investments you made there would not have been the huge number of sinkings you've achieved.

And I also pointed out that using the Highway is not cost-free. It requires a pristine route be maintained for several thousand miles. That works for the mid-game but it offers the Allies a new set of pressure points in the end.

Got it.

I would still disagree that there are a lot of players using this resource highway and trying 'not to wave it around.' Who are these players that it worked for not waving? Pax is the one I know of who can make it work regularly. I'd love to see how someone else worked it out in a PBEM game and how that went, simply so I can understand the game mechanics better. I am now committed to shipping for myself. It's one of those things that I just think is right, and it's also a lot of fun to manage.

I just find these comments suprising from someone who advocates so strongly using the game as the designers constructed it. These things are in game right? The same as so many non-historical things that are more often talked about.

The non-historical ASW air coverage I've used has been used by most other Japanese players and is also part of game design. I think subs should be less easily hit by ASW air from both sides. They should be less vulnerable to Japanese DCs. Radar should work to get the sub under before it's nailed. But it doesn't.

The game is abstract. As you've stated, you either have HRs and battle over the lines drawn, or you don't and you both trust the design as created and use it as you wish. Right?

[AW1Steve]

"Secret" was a poor choice of a word. What I meant was the mechanism is a very large non-historical tactic that Japan players don't like to wave around as it makes the naval game much easier and different than history. Not that you can't find discussion of it.

And of course it, like a lot of other points in the game, makes it a more "balanced" game and gives the JFB's less claim that "the game is so slanted in favor of the allies".

Once again , a paraphrasing of the famous quote comes to mind ..."a game designed by geniuses to be played by.....well , let's just say Non-geniuses". [:D]

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

"Secret" was a poor choice of a word. What I meant was the mechanism is a very large non-historical tactic that Japan players don't like to wave around as it makes the naval game much easier and different than history. Not that you can't find discussion of it.

And of course it, like a lot of other points in the game, makes it a more "balanced" game and gives the JFB's less claim that "the game is so slanted in favor of the allies".

Once again , a paraphrasing of the famous quote comes to mind ..."a game designed by geniuses to be played by.....well , let's just say Non-geniuses". [:D]

No one here is claiming "the game is so slanted in favor of the allies."

This is a discussion about convoys and shipping. Why there is so much sitting around.

I for one who play the Japanese side in PBEM, the Allied side against the AI (so far) think it's interesting that there is a glut of ships. Also that the Babes have addressed this with limited cargo capacity. Obviously they felt it to be an issue, and I do as well.

I think it would be more interesting for Japanese and Allied players to have the constriction of being at the limits of resource hauling ability (maybe only in the beginning for the Allies) with the fleets so it would put more demands on industry, escorting and other logistical planning factors. This would take some of the extremes out of the game for both sides. It would be harder for the Japanese to extend the Empire to unhistorical levels like India. It would be harder to convoy effectively with the dearth of escorts early for both sides. it might push the Allied advance back to later dates with the difficulty getting enough supply, units and fuel to the South Pacific and beyond.

Hopefully that would lead to even more understanding of the situation each side faced in the war while keeping the game challenging and letting each player find solutions to the problem. Maybe even what you term balance.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: obvert

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58


My point was to respond to Spence on why a lot of ships might be in port. If the Highway is used extensively it saves hundreds of loads, at least.

"Secret" was a poor choice of a word. What I meant was the mechanism is a very large non-historical tactic that Japan players don't like to wave around as it makes the naval game much easier and different than history. Not that you can't find discussion of it.

If it didn't work well enough for you that's fine, but it has for others. And even when Japan goes the way you did it requires further non-historic tactics such as you employed. Massive investments in air ASW primarily (which your opponent has spoken to many, many times.) I have my own feelings on the submarine portion of the game, but I've related them elsewhere. Even with the investments you made there would not have been the huge number of sinkings you've achieved.

And I also pointed out that using the Highway is not cost-free. It requires a pristine route be maintained for several thousand miles. That works for the mid-game but it offers the Allies a new set of pressure points in the end.

Got it.

I would still disagree that there are a lot of players using this resource highway and trying 'not to wave it around.' Who are these players that it worked for not waving? Pax is the one I know of who can make it work regularly. I'd love to see how someone else worked it out in a PBEM game and how that went, simply so I can understand the game mechanics better. I am now committed to shipping for myself. It's one of those things that I just think is right, and it's also a lot of fun to manage.

I just find these comments suprising from someone who advocates so strongly using the game as the designers constructed it. These things are in game right? The same as so many non-historical things that are more often talked about.

The non-historical ASW air coverage I've used has been used by most other Japanese players and is also part of game design. I think subs should be less easily hit by ASW air from both sides. They should be less vulnerable to Japanese DCs. Radar should work to get the sub under before it's nailed. But it doesn't.

The game is abstract. As you've stated, you either have HRs and battle over the lines drawn, or you don't and you both trust the design as created and use it as you wish. Right?

Sorry I messed up the Quote brackets in the other. I try to trim; Usenet habit. This forum software makes it about as hard as possible to selectively quote.

The Highway IS a part of the design and I do advocate playing the design. Where I get irritated is when players (both sides) demand "historical" game play in opponent wanted ads, and then use things like the Highway. That part of the design is not mandatory. It's not like, say, naval targeting, where there is one way to do it (the code's way) and even if it might not always match history that's the way it goes. Players have the option, as you did, to put fuel and resources on the water as Japan had to do in RL. Moving mega-tons of oil across even RRs of the time was impossible. Moving ore by donkey cart, as some of that route would have required, even more so.

But if you play the game to win, as I do, and the Highway is there, go for it. That distinction was in my mind, but I didn't put it in my pos.t I realize you can't read my mind.

As for ASW, it and several other naval model behaviors stem from the utter reliance on DL in the models. It's what GG went with so long ago. It works to an extent, but IMO it under-recognizes the true value of wartime advances in sensors that favored the Allies by orders of magnitude. I've read post-war intel team reports on what they found when they tore into IJN ASW suites on their escorts. The disparities with the USN's equivalent systems were stark. In the game the DL can spike from a single air ASW hit and it stays spiked for a phase. In RL it would be minutes, as the circle of probable error spread geometrically with the sub submerged. If there were a modification to the DL code allowing for different behavior for subs versus surface ships it would help, but that's a WITP2 issue. If that one ever comes I hope some sensor modeling could be included. It was really, really important, air, surface, and submerged all three.

In the AE air and surface models sensors don't make or break the on-map behavior of the assets. In the sub war they do IMO. I have never seen an AAR that describes sub victory totals of even half of what was achieved in RL. In some games it's 10%. On balance subs were far more important to the victory than was carrier air, and certainly LBA. But in the game many players treat them as a bother.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: obvert

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

"Secret" was a poor choice of a word. What I meant was the mechanism is a very large non-historical tactic that Japan players don't like to wave around as it makes the naval game much easier and different than history. Not that you can't find discussion of it.

And of course it, like a lot of other points in the game, makes it a more "balanced" game and gives the JFB's less claim that "the game is so slanted in favor of the allies".

Once again , a paraphrasing of the famous quote comes to mind ..."a game designed by geniuses to be played by.....well , let's just say Non-geniuses". [:D]

No one here is claiming "the game is so slanted in favor of the allies."

This is a discussion about convoys and shipping. Why there is so much sitting around.

I for one who play the Japanese side in PBEM, the Allied side against the AI (so far) think it's interesting that there is a glut of ships. Also that the Babes have addressed this with limited cargo capacity. Obviously they felt it to be an issue, and I do as well.

I think it would be more interesting for Japanese and Allied players to have the constriction of being at the limits of resource hauling ability (maybe only in the beginning for the Allies) with the fleets so it would put more demands on industry, escorting and other logistical planning factors. This would take some of the extremes out of the game for both sides. It would be harder for the Japanese to extend the Empire to unhistorical levels like India. It would be harder to convoy effectively with the dearth of escorts early for both sides. it might push the Allied advance back to later dates with the difficulty getting enough supply, units and fuel to the South Pacific and beyond.

Hopefully that would lead to even more understanding of the situation each side faced in the war while keeping the game challenging and letting each player find solutions to the problem. Maybe even what you term balance.

I agree and why my next PBEM will be a DBB variant. In early 1942 I'm a little pressed for hulls, or hulls in the right places. After about 120 days? Never again.