Matrix Games Forums

Setting up fuel hubs across the Pacific is my verison of some peoples' pilot training. I'd rather watch grass grow. (As I am now, rather than mowing it. Hi, hon.)

It matters which era you're talking about, but I'm finding, in my second pass through a GC, that the ASW picture off the WC hasn't changed much from Patch 1 days. The USN has virtually no ASW ships to spare, those they have are rated "2", and tankers are lunchmeat for Japanese subs anywhere on the southern US coastline. I'm still moving the majority of my fuel off-map.

FWIW, I'm experimenting with Port Stanley. It's pretty small for loading, but it's "safe" for launching long-haul westbound fuel. You can safely resupply it from Balboa off-map, and Balboa from the East Coast. It takes awhile to fill up the pipeline with two off-map routes, but once you do it might be a bridge for 1942 until I can clean out Tarawa. Just an experiment. Most is still going EC to CT to Perth/Colombo, and Abadan--Colombo.

As for those who like Abadan--Perth, just wait. Don't say I didn't warn you![:)]

What's the Oz HI good for? It just consume 2 fuel to produce 2 supply? Why don't you just turn off the HI and hauling more supply instead? The xAKs are plenty while tankers are precious.

ORIGINAL: jay102

What's the Oz HI good for? It just consume 2 fuel to produce 2 supply? Why don't you just turn off the HI and hauling more supply instead? The xAKs are plenty while tankers are precious.

For me . . . .

It's because I think that an order for the government to stop the production of war materials during wartime is insane.

The game rules might not adequately reflect this requirement, but I have a personal "house rule" - even against the AI - against turnng off the production of military equipment during wartime.

Yes. I know that fuel is an important war material as well and people have to make choices. However, one of those choices is, by 1941, Australia was seriously lamenting the fact that it did not have the ability to manufacture its own guns and ammunition to arm its troops and had to import those materials. Australia wanted a war industry.

I even have to try to get oil to Australia where possible.

But that's just me.

ORIGINAL: jay102

What's the Oz HI good for? It just consume 2 fuel to produce 2 supply? Why don't you just turn off the HI and hauling more supply instead? The xAKs are plenty while tankers are precious.

Do you really think that if it could be turned off we would leave it on?[8|]

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

Setting up fuel hubs across the Pacific is my verison of some peoples' pilot training. I'd rather watch grass grow. (As I am now, rather than mowing it. Hi, hon.)

It matters which era you're talking about, but I'm finding, in my second pass through a GC, that the ASW picture off the WC hasn't changed much from Patch 1 days. The USN has virtually no ASW ships to spare, those they have are rated "2", and tankers are lunchmeat for Japanese subs anywhere on the southern US coastline. I'm still moving the majority of my fuel off-map.

FWIW, I'm experimenting with Port Stanley. It's pretty small for loading, but it's "safe" for launching long-haul westbound fuel. You can safely resupply it from Balboa off-map, and Balboa from the East Coast. It takes awhile to fill up the pipeline with two off-map routes, but once you do it might be a bridge for 1942 until I can clean out Tarawa. Just an experiment. Most is still going EC to CT to Perth/Colombo, and Abadan--Colombo.

As for those who like Abadan--Perth, just wait. Don't say I didn't warn you![:)]

Why ship to Balboa and then to Port Stanley? Just ship from EUSA to Port Stanley directly. Using Cristobal is better, it can be built to a size 7 port and has 50 Naval Support permanently assigned ( the NS will not help with fuel but supply ).

ORIGINAL: jay102

What's the Oz HI good for? It just consume 2 fuel to produce 2 supply? Why don't you just turn off the HI and hauling more supply instead? The xAKs are plenty while tankers are precious.

Unlike Japan, an Allied player cannot turn off industrial production.

The only way the Heavy Industry in Australia would not produce supplies is if it lacks the raw materials. There is a surplus of resources there but a shortage of oil -> fuel so not transporting fuel to Australia would severely curtail (but not completely stop) the running of Heavy Industry. However you have to import huge quantities of fuel to Australia otherwise your navy runs dry quite quickly. The player has no power to stop fuel, earmarked for navy consumption, from being hijacked to feed the Heavy Industry.

In any case, all those xAKs you intend to send to Australia with supplies can also carry fuel to Australia, either as 100% of their cargo, or for the long legged xAKs, as a small additional component.

Alfred

ORIGINAL: Alfred

ORIGINAL: jay102

What's the Oz HI good for? It just consume 2 fuel to produce 2 supply? Why don't you just turn off the HI and hauling more supply instead? The xAKs are plenty while tankers are precious.

Unlike Japan, an Allied player cannot turn off industrial production.

The only way the Heavy Industry in Australia would not produce supplies is if it lacks the raw materials. There is a surplus of resources there but a shortage of oil -> fuel so not transporting fuel to Australia would severely curtail (but not completely stop) the running of Heavy Industry. However you have to import huge quantities of fuel to Australia otherwise your navy runs dry quite quickly. The player has no power to stop fuel, earmarked for navy consumption, from being hijacked to feed the Heavy Industry.

In any case, all those xAKs you intend to send to Australia with supplies can also carry fuel to Australia, either as 100% of their cargo, or for the long legged xAKs, as a small additional component.

Alfred

Sorry I forget Allied player cannot turn off HI. But you can still use Noumea as fuel depot to support your SOPAC operation. The Oz heavy industry should shut off without fuel anyway.

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

Most is still going EC to CT to Perth/Colombo, and Abadan--Colombo.

How many ships do you use for your off-map convoys? Tankers, or xAKs?

BTW, according to the manual, the UK base is closer to Capetown than Eastern USA (152/170 hexes). UK doesn't produce much fuel though (500/day), but as long as there's a stockpile you can save a couple of days.

ORIGINAL: jay102

What's the Oz HI good for? It just consume 2 fuel to produce 2 supply? Why don't you just turn off the HI and hauling more supply instead? The xAKs are plenty while tankers are precious.

If you know a way to turn it off, please, please post it.

ORIGINAL: Nomad

Why ship to Balboa and then to Port Stanley? Just ship from EUSA to Port Stanley directly. Using Cristobal is better, it can be built to a size 7 port and has 50 Naval Support permanently assigned ( the NS will not help with fuel but supply ).

I hadn't tried or checked on this. I had assumed that, like trying to go Aden--CT or EC--San Diego (you can't), you needed the interim base in the path. I'll have to re-look at the off-map grid in the manual. If it can be done then yes, going through the Canal Zone is dumb. I'm pretty good at that.

Although the range from EC to Port Stanley might require all long-legged ships. Hmm.

ORIGINAL: jay102

Sorry I forget Allied player cannot turn off HI. But you can still use Noumea as fuel depot to support your SOPAC operation.

If you're coming from the east, yes. There are several options for fuel dumps westbound--NZ, Suva, Noumea, Tasmania for several. But if you're coming from CT, running it to Noumea not only burns up a lot of the effort fueling the ships, but the AI runs LOTS of subs into the channels near Adelaide, Melbourne, and Tasmania, and you don't have ASW to do anything about them in 1942. Running the fuel into Perth "wastes" a lot of it in HI production, but the ships are mostly safe, and they can turn around for another run weeks earlier than if they had to run the gauntlet to Noumea.

I personally don't like running fuel from the west coast to SOPAC becasue I don't want to hassle with fuel way-stations, plus, the subs near southern California eat up tankers in early 1942, even when they're escorted. In my first game I lost a bunch of early tankers that way, and I never stopped regretting it. I like off-map better. But it's personal preference.

ORIGINAL: VSWG

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

Most is still going EC to CT to Perth/Colombo, and Abadan--Colombo.

How many ships do you use for your off-map convoys? Tankers, or xAKs?

BTW, according to the manual, the UK base is closer to Capetown than Eastern USA (152/170 hexes). UK doesn't produce much fuel though (500/day), but as long as there's a stockpile you can save a couple of days.

I'm still in mid-January 1942 and tweaking/repositioning. I'd say I have 50-60 or so big ships building up CT now, and about 20 hauling to Perth/Colombo. The first numbered convoy to CT has come and gone, and it helped a lot. Most of that fuel is headed east to Perth and Colombo already.

I use all the long-range tankers I have and got out of the DEI/PI, plus most of the 9000 ton-and-above xAKs. I leave the smaller xAKs and xAKLs in Perth to run supplies around the coast, especially to Darwin through fall 1942, then see where I am.

In my first game I ran UK dry without noticing it, trying to supply CT from there. There's about 150k in the UK I think, but as you say it doesn't build very fast. Going through there you save some hexes, but you incur a one-time cost of an extra off-load time as you fill up the snake. I prefer the KISS principal and just go EC to CT with CS convoys. Sometime in mid-1942 I'll look at xAK damage/upgrades and see where the numbered convoys have left me in CT. At that point I'll probably move most of the long-leg xAKs to Sydney to support the Solomons fight.

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: Nomad

Why ship to Balboa and then to Port Stanley? Just ship from EUSA to Port Stanley directly. Using Cristobal is better, it can be built to a size 7 port and has 50 Naval Support permanently assigned ( the NS will not help with fuel but supply ).

I hadn't tried or checked on this. I had assumed that, like trying to go Aden--CT or EC--San Diego (you can't), you needed the interim base in the path. I'll have to re-look at the off-map grid in the manual. If it can be done then yes, going through the Canal Zone is dumb. I'm pretty good at that.

Although the range from EC to Port Stanley might require all long-legged ships. Hmm.

Range doesn't matter for off map only movement. It is assumed that the ships can refuel off map. I use the short legged TKs to run fuel from EUSA to CT with no problems. I think I tried using xAKLs with only 4000 endurance and they made it fine. Note that ships with a cruise speed of 10,11,12,13 will all take the same amount of time moving off map. They will all move 6 "hexes" per turn. Ships with a cruise speed of 14+ will move at 8 "hexes" per turn. So I use my slow, short legged xAKs and TKs for off map movement. If they are going to enter the map, then I use the faster, longer ranged ships.

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: VSWG

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

Most is still going EC to CT to Perth/Colombo, and Abadan--Colombo.

How many ships do you use for your off-map convoys? Tankers, or xAKs?

BTW, according to the manual, the UK base is closer to Capetown than Eastern USA (152/170 hexes). UK doesn't produce much fuel though (500/day), but as long as there's a stockpile you can save a couple of days.

I'm still in mid-January 1942 and tweaking/repositioning. I'd say I have 50-60 or so big ships building up CT now, and about 20 hauling to Perth/Colombo. The first numbered convoy to CT has come and gone, and it helped a lot. Most of that fuel is headed east to Perth and Colombo already.

I use all the long-range tankers I have and got out of the DEI/PI, plus most of the 9000 ton-and-above xAKs. I leave the smaller xAKs and xAKLs in Perth to run supplies around the coast, especially to Darwin through fall 1942, then see where I am.

In my first game I ran UK dry without noticing it, trying to supply CT from there. There's about 150k in the UK I think, but as you say it doesn't build very fast. Going through there you save some hexes, but you incur a one-time cost of an extra off-load time as you fill up the snake. I prefer the KISS principal and just go EC to CT with CS convoys. Sometime in mid-1942 I'll look at xAK damage/upgrades and see where the numbered convoys have left me in CT. At that point I'll probably move most of the long-leg xAKs to Sydney to support the Solomons fight.

Why move fuel from CT to Colombo? You have 15,000 fuel per day piling up at Abadan that can be used for India and Colombos needs. Fuel at CT needs to go to Australia.

ORIGINAL: Nomad

Range doesn't matter for off map only movement. It is assumed that the ships can refuel off map. I use the short legged TKs to run fuel from EUSA to CT with no problems. I think I tried using xAKLs with only 4000 endurance and they made it fine. Note that ships with a cruise speed of 10,11,12,13 will all take the same amount of time moving off map. They will all move 6 "hexes" per turn. Ships with a cruise speed of 14+ will move at 8 "hexes" per turn. So I use my slow, short legged xAKs and TKs for off map movement. If they are going to enter the map, then I use the faster, longer ranged ships.

You are correct, of course. I had forgotten this because for about the last eight months of real time I had been running off-map to Aden and then continuing with the same ships to Colombo and Rangoon, so range was a factor. I'll need to re-jigger some of those fairly useless TAN tankers.

And thanks for the heads-up on EC to Port Stanley. I had overlooked that as I never really did anything with PS before. I was sure you needed to route through a closer off-map base like the Canal Zone.

ORIGINAL: Nomad

Why move fuel from CT to Colombo? You have 15,000 fuel per day piling up at Abadan that can be used for India and Colombos needs. Fuel at CT needs to go to Australia.

I don't have enough hulls in the Abadan region to supply Colombo, and those I have are mostly hauling supplies to support auto-convoy formation. I have eight AC convoys sitting empy, formed but unable to load. I've also decided to try to hold Rangoon, and it only has 35, 000 supply right now. I also am burnng a lot of fuel in the evacuation of Singapore. I'm flying small chunks of everything to Medan, converting them to Strat., training them to Sabang, and sending 1-AP TFs (many, many) to pick them up and run them to Colombo. I'm racing LBA (so far I've managed to keep the AI looking, and bombing, Port Blair, but that won't last) so I'm takling a lot of round trips getting Aussie, British, Indian, and Dutch cadre out of Singapore.

Perth fuel can wait. I have at least two months before I'll need much fuel in that theater. I have 2-CVs and 4 BBs in Brisbane and Sydney with mostly full bunkers if there's an emergency.