Admirals Edition Naval Thread

[Terminus]

Possibly... No further comment.

[Captain Cruft]

Excellent stuff about all the new classes.

Does this mean that only certain types of ships e.g. AO and AE can enable a "Replenish TF at Sea" in game? Or will the ubiquitous facility remain? If it really is restricted that would do much to reduce various unrealities and gameyisms ...

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft

Excellent stuff about all the new classes.

Does this mean that only certain types of ships e.g. AO and AE can enable a "Replenish TF at Sea" in game? Or will the ubiquitous facility remain? If it really is restricted that would do much to reduce various unrealities and gameyisms ...

Underway refueling from carried fuel can only be done by AO and by CVE with fuel cargo capacity (the Sangamon Class rule).
Underway rearming can only by done by AE, and then only late in the war (same dates as WITP).

Additional refueling and rearming can be done at sheltered base anchorages. That is, TFs stopped at a base (the Ulithi rule).
Sheltered base anchorage refueling can be done by TK and YO, and AG with fuel cargo capacity (remember AG is now base ship). TK/YO can also transfer fuel directly to AO.
Sheltered base anchorage rearming can be done by AKE. AKE can also transfer cargo directly to AE.
Plus all underway refueling/rearming ships.

NOTE: Tankers can not refuel ships underway in any circumstances. The famous "never disband TF2" cheat is gone. The ships that were in TF2 are properly classifed as AO to reflect their underway refueling ability.

[Brady]

Given that Japanese Tankers built during the mid to late 30's were required by law to be equiped to act as AO for the fleat in time of war, how is this handled in AE?

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: Brady

Given that Japanese Tankers built during the mid to late 30's were required by law to be equiped to act as AO for the fleat in time of war, how is this handled in AE?

If they are defined in the OOB as AOs, they refuel underway. If the ain't, they don't.

I believe there are quite a number of Japanese ships that were classed as TK in old Scenario 15 and are classed as AO in Admiral's Edition (as AO in AE just didn't look right!).

[spence]

Were Japanese AO's capable of alongside underway refuelling of multiple ships at speed(15 kts)? It is my understanding that the principle manner of refuelling in the IJN was to trail a hose over the stern to the receiving ship - a method which was much slower, both for the transfer of fuel and for the speed of advance of the ships involved in the transfer as well as more suseptible to interruption by poor weather conditions. Not even all oilers in the USN were so capable at the beginning of the war but the practice was being worked out and more modern oilers were.

The procedure as practiced by the USN conferred a level of strategic mobility on the USN that was not duplicated by any of the Axis powers during WW2. I am not saying that the Japanese couldn't refuel at sea - only that they when they did it it took longer (as a game mechanism, used more ops points perhaps); and were much more likely to be prevented by prevailing weather from doing it at all at times they might find operationally convenient.

[Brady]

I can scan some details of Side,trailing and lead refueling tomarow for Japanese AO's if nessary.

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: Brady

I can scan some details of Side,trailing and lead refueling tomarow for Japanese AO's if nessary.

Not necessary I guess. That is a level of detail greater than we go. A ship can perform underway refueling or it can't. We're not going down to method, especially on a ship by ship basis.

[rockmedic109]

The way it is now, fuel can be traded between ships of the same {or different task forces} when the refuel at sea button is hit.  Will this still occur or does it need to be at a base or dot hex?

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: rockmedic109

The way it is now, fuel can be traded between ships of the same {or different task forces} when the refuel at sea button is hit.  Will this still occur or does it need to be at a base or dot hex?

Yes, it is still there and can be done at sea (accumulated ops will reduce movement that turn).

Larger ships frequently did refuel smaller ones in TFs. It is easier probably easier to do in WIPT and AE in real life.

We did look at this, but decided no changes should be made.

[witpqs]

I'm a little confused about this given the info on AO's et al that you outlined a couple of posts back. In my little mind these answers seem like they conflict with other (but I realize they must not) - could you straighten me out? Thanks! [:)]

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

I'm a little confused about this given the info on AO's et al that you outlined a couple of posts back. In my little mind these answers seem like they conflict with other (but I realize they must not) - could you straighten me out? Thanks! [:)]

Sorry, I don't understand the question.

[rockmedic109]

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ORIGINAL: rockmedic109

The way it is now, fuel can be traded between ships of the same {or different task forces} when the refuel at sea button is hit.  Will this still occur or does it need to be at a base or dot hex?

Yes, it is still there and can be done at sea (accumulated ops will reduce movement that turn).

Larger ships frequently did refuel smaller ones in TFs. It is easier probably easier to do in WIPT and AE in real life.

We did look at this, but decided no changes should be made.

So the benefit of an AO is they can refuel a task force without slowing it down?

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ORIGINAL: witpqs
I'm a little confused about this given the info on AO's et al that you outlined a couple of posts back. In my little mind these answers seem like they conflict with other (but I realize they must not) - could you straighten me out? Thanks! [:)]

Sorry, I don't understand the question.

Earlier you went over how only AO's can refuel other ships under way, etc.

quote:
ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft

Excellent stuff about all the new classes.

Does this mean that only certain types of ships e.g. AO and AE can enable a "Replenish TF at Sea" in game? Or will the ubiquitous facility remain? If it really is restricted that would do much to reduce various unrealities and gameyisms ...

Underway refueling from carried fuel can only be done by AO and by CVE with fuel cargo capacity (the Sangamon Class rule).
Underway rearming can only by done by AE, and then only late in the war (same dates as WITP).

Additional refueling and rearming can be done at sheltered base anchorages. That is, TFs stopped at a base (the Ulithi rule).
Sheltered base anchorage refueling can be done by TK and YO, and AG with fuel cargo capacity (remember AG is now base ship). TK/YO can also transfer fuel directly to AO.
Sheltered base anchorage rearming can be done by AKE. AKE can also transfer cargo directly to AE.
Plus all underway refueling/rearming ships.

NOTE: Tankers can not refuel ships underway in any circumstances. The famous "never disband TF2" cheat is gone. The ships that were in TF2 are properly classifed as AO to reflect their underway refueling ability.

But then you say that larger ships can refuel smaller ones.

quote:
ORIGINAL: rockmedic109

The way it is now, fuel can be traded between ships of the same {or different task forces} when the refuel at sea button is hit. Will this still occur or does it need to be at a base or dot hex?

Yes, it is still there and can be done at sea (accumulated ops will reduce movement that turn).

Larger ships frequently did refuel smaller ones in TFs. It is easier probably easier to do in WIPT and AE in real life.

We did look at this, but decided no changes should be made.

I know larger ships did refuel smaller ones, so now argument about authenticity. I'm wondering what are those rules - what larger ships can refuel what smaller ships? CV -> DD; BB -> DD; AP -> DD; AK -> DD; etc. And, is it underway refueling? (I've read that BB's refueled DD's quite a bit, for example.)

[bradfordkay]

Only AOs can refuel other ships from their cargo, but any larger ships can refuel smaller compatriots from their own fuel storage bunkers. Doing so reduces the range of the larger vessel, whereas refueling from an AO does not affect that vessel's own range since the fuel comes from the cargo holds and not the ship's own fuel bunkers.

Does it make sense now?

[witpqs]

Ahhhhhhhhh! [8D]

[UniformYankee]

I learned the "milch cow" tactic from Gen. Hoepner.[&o] It is really cool! You drive an AK out into nowhere ... and then gas up your subs off this ship ... really useful in WPO but not useless in WITP with the shorter ranged boats.

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: UniformYankee

I learned the "milch cow" tactic from Gen. Hoepner.[&o] It is really cool! You drive an AK out into nowhere ... and then gas up your subs off this ship ... really useful in WPO but not useless in WITP with the shorter ranged boats.

But isn't it also historically rediculous? The US established a "forward base" at Midway to "top off" subs going to and from PH..., and the Japanese made similar use of Kwajalein---but I certainly don't remember any "Submarine Support Freighters" wandering about the ocean during the war.

[Terminus]

The Germans did it, but not the USN or IJN.

[hueglin]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

The Germans did it, but not the USN or IJN.

Which brings about the age old debate of historical games - do I only play what was done using the mindset of the nation that I am playing, or do I play what was technically possible. To me its all a matter of gamer preference - do I want to try and recreate history, or do I want to experiment with how things could have gone differently - given different ideas and ways of approaching the problems at hand.