logistic analysis
Moderators: wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami
-
el cid again
- Posts: 16984
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:40 pm
logistic analysis
The pace of operations is too great re history. Thus the campaign in Malaya took exactly 100 days - yet in WITP it takes a couple of weeks at most. Hong Kong fell on Christmas day, but it falls in 2-5 days in WITP. The logistic situation when Singapore fell was so desperate that Yamashita was considering suspending operations, but in WITP the more of Malaya you take, the better off your supply situation becomes - so by the time Singapore falls you may be in very good shape and by no means forced to consider not attacking anything in sight.
The root of this problem seems to be in the supply point system. It may be it is too abstract. By lumping all forms of supply together, when you really get lumber and food from a place, you can convert it to the ammunition and avgas you need for military operations. I like that China and Malaya (and other places) produce things - because it is quite true - and much of the point of colonies was economic (although in the event they rarely were run profitably from the point of view of the colonial power). Yet there are wierd exceptions - mineral rich New Caledonia - the major source of antimony vital to world military powers (you need it to harden the lead in shot and for specialty steels) as well as many other metals - is given NO production value at all. Japan SHOULD not only want to take recources from New Caledonia, it SHOULD want to leave the mines in bad shape if the allies retake it - but no such strategy appears in WITP because it has NO resources at all.
I do not understand the system well enough to fix this problem yet - and I fear it might not be fixable without a significant change in code - more than just data may be needed to fix it. But clearly the pace of operations - even under the AI - is related to ahistorical logistics. SOME of that is the fuel problem - which I have figured out and which can be corrected by data entry.
Sid
The root of this problem seems to be in the supply point system. It may be it is too abstract. By lumping all forms of supply together, when you really get lumber and food from a place, you can convert it to the ammunition and avgas you need for military operations. I like that China and Malaya (and other places) produce things - because it is quite true - and much of the point of colonies was economic (although in the event they rarely were run profitably from the point of view of the colonial power). Yet there are wierd exceptions - mineral rich New Caledonia - the major source of antimony vital to world military powers (you need it to harden the lead in shot and for specialty steels) as well as many other metals - is given NO production value at all. Japan SHOULD not only want to take recources from New Caledonia, it SHOULD want to leave the mines in bad shape if the allies retake it - but no such strategy appears in WITP because it has NO resources at all.
I do not understand the system well enough to fix this problem yet - and I fear it might not be fixable without a significant change in code - more than just data may be needed to fix it. But clearly the pace of operations - even under the AI - is related to ahistorical logistics. SOME of that is the fuel problem - which I have figured out and which can be corrected by data entry.
Sid
- jwilkerson
- Posts: 8255
- Joined: Sun Sep 15, 2002 4:02 am
- Location: Kansas
- Contact:
RE: logistic analysis
Welcome to WITP !!!
[:)]
[:)]
WITP Admiral's Edition - Project Lead
War In Spain - Project Lead
War In Spain - Project Lead
RE: logistic analysis
Things should be slowed down through some mechanism. But I guess some people prefer the rapid IMO non-historical, non-plausable pace.
I would think it would be simple to for example:
1.) Cut ship transport capacities in half.
2.) Remove most rail hexes or at least disallow rail movement while in the ZOC of enemy units.
3.) Cause bombers to be 100% damaged upon transfer to any airfield below say level six. Then you cannot take a base and the next day operate 100 Betties from there.
4.) Any base with supply greater than 50,000 should lose 1% per day to wastage.
Lots of other ways to slow down the pace. But I don't see much interest.
I would think it would be simple to for example:
1.) Cut ship transport capacities in half.
2.) Remove most rail hexes or at least disallow rail movement while in the ZOC of enemy units.
3.) Cause bombers to be 100% damaged upon transfer to any airfield below say level six. Then you cannot take a base and the next day operate 100 Betties from there.
4.) Any base with supply greater than 50,000 should lose 1% per day to wastage.
Lots of other ways to slow down the pace. But I don't see much interest.
- jwilkerson
- Posts: 8255
- Joined: Sun Sep 15, 2002 4:02 am
- Location: Kansas
- Contact:
RE: logistic analysis
Some people like too fast - some people want to slow it down - one issue is - not sure we can have both - maybe for somethings via scenarios - but I certainly wouldn't vote for 2 versions of the code ...
WITP Admiral's Edition - Project Lead
War In Spain - Project Lead
War In Spain - Project Lead
RE: logistic analysis
the campaign in Malaya took exactly 100 days - yet in WITP it takes a couple of weeks at most.
Try PBEM[;)]
But I agree with you about the supply situation. Try one of Pry's scenarios; they are much more challenging as far as supply is concerned.
Fear the kitten!
RE: logistic analysis
ORIGINAL: moses
[snip other good suggestions]
2.) Remove most rail hexes or at least disallow rail movement while in the ZOC of enemy units.
I like this idea a lot. Maybe we can convince Andrew Brown to make all railroads hidden roads in his next map update, like he did already in China.

- jwilkerson
- Posts: 8255
- Joined: Sun Sep 15, 2002 4:02 am
- Location: Kansas
- Contact:
RE: logistic analysis
Rail in Japan and India might need to stay. Rail in China can mostly go - I haven't tried Andrew's latest map yet - but I'm using one version back and even in that version without the fictitious rail in Oz, the Allies are still basing main attack out of Darwin [&:]
WITP Admiral's Edition - Project Lead
War In Spain - Project Lead
War In Spain - Project Lead
- Gen.Hoepner
- Posts: 3636
- Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: italy
RE: logistic analysis
IMHO the main problem concerning supplies is the fact that resources centers produce supplies. PI,Malaya,Burma,DEI and SRA are all self sufficient in supply . That's why most of jap players supply the whole western part of the map simply using Palembang,Kendari,Balikapan and Tarakan as supplies centers. I've managed to put more than 300k supplies from these places to Darwin in one of my pbem campaign, while in RL those ammos,food,weapons etc should all come from Japan!
So i think it would be a better solution to stop the resources centers from producing supplies and relies only on the HI+RES+OIL as supply producing system ( maybe we'd need in this optic to let the HI produce more supplies).
BUT, but...if we assume that Japan MUST have more supplies problem, the same can be said for the allies. SF and KARACHI are an infinite source of supplies....too much IMHO. The allies in Eastern India can have 1000k of supplies stocked by the end of March...that's simply unhistorical. In RL they had so many problems on that front that they couldn't even think about an offensive before mid-43...not our case as we know. in WITP you can counterinvade Burma from Bangladesh by mid 42
So i think it would be a better solution to stop the resources centers from producing supplies and relies only on the HI+RES+OIL as supply producing system ( maybe we'd need in this optic to let the HI produce more supplies).
BUT, but...if we assume that Japan MUST have more supplies problem, the same can be said for the allies. SF and KARACHI are an infinite source of supplies....too much IMHO. The allies in Eastern India can have 1000k of supplies stocked by the end of March...that's simply unhistorical. In RL they had so many problems on that front that they couldn't even think about an offensive before mid-43...not our case as we know. in WITP you can counterinvade Burma from Bangladesh by mid 42
- jwilkerson
- Posts: 8255
- Joined: Sun Sep 15, 2002 4:02 am
- Location: Kansas
- Contact:
RE: logistic analysis
While I substantially agree for PBEM, we may break AI by doing this ( eliminate all supply generation by resource centers ). So if this were ever to happen, might have to be a "switch" ( enable/disable resource center supply generation ).
Also, in my most advanced PBEM ( Jun 43 ) I am finally having to import some supply into the area, but in this game the resource centers are more beat up. In a second PBEM, resource centers are less beat up and SRA is even supplying CENPAC !
As to too much Allied supply, CHS has been trying to deal with this - but there hasn't been enough time since last CHS release to determine effects - and again - what are effects on AI for substantially reducing Allied supply ? We may not know until we try and that takes time.
It has been proposed to have a version of the game that does not support AI - but my impression is there are too many people playing AI games - and that we cannot avoid to drop AI. Also, I find AI useful testing tool.
Also, in my most advanced PBEM ( Jun 43 ) I am finally having to import some supply into the area, but in this game the resource centers are more beat up. In a second PBEM, resource centers are less beat up and SRA is even supplying CENPAC !
As to too much Allied supply, CHS has been trying to deal with this - but there hasn't been enough time since last CHS release to determine effects - and again - what are effects on AI for substantially reducing Allied supply ? We may not know until we try and that takes time.
It has been proposed to have a version of the game that does not support AI - but my impression is there are too many people playing AI games - and that we cannot avoid to drop AI. Also, I find AI useful testing tool.
WITP Admiral's Edition - Project Lead
War In Spain - Project Lead
War In Spain - Project Lead
-
Yamato hugger
- Posts: 3791
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 5:38 am
RE: logistic analysis
Ahhh, there we go again. The left side of the "supply pendulum". Soon the right side of the "supply pendulum" will start up. The right side being "I dont have enough supply to fix stuff" or "I dont have enough supply to build stuff".
300k supply would take 240k resource centers. There are a total of 5670 resource centers total in the SRA (counting Malaya).That is 42 days of full production assuming not 1 center was damaged when you captured it. Not 1 center was damaged by allied bombing. AND assuming that your troops, ships, and planes in the area didnt consume even 1 supply point. Now you didnt say how long of a period it took to move these 300,000 supplys to Darwin.
Supplies in the game represent food, bullets, gas, lightbulbs, coffee, bandages and anything else you can name except fuel oil. Some of these supplies are manufactured goods such as artillery shells and these of course would have to come from some sort of factory, and amazingly factories in the game make supplies. Some of these supplies grow on trees such as bananas. There are also cities, towns, villages, hamlets, ect that make stuff. Maybe not on a grand scale, but Mom and Pops tailor shoppe on the corner of some island and main street makes thread for repairing uniforms, this is supply also.
Please explain to me why you think rice can be only be made in Japan?
Now seems to me your REAL complaint is that they didnt break these 2 type of supplies into 2 or possibly more groups. No amount of tweeking in the game is going to accomplish this. Play the game the way it is or make your own. All the crying in the world isnt going to make this happen in this game.
ORIGINAL: Gen.Hoepner
I've managed to put more than 300k supplies from these places to Darwin in one of my pbem campaign, while in RL those ammos,food,weapons etc should all come from Japan!
300k supply would take 240k resource centers. There are a total of 5670 resource centers total in the SRA (counting Malaya).That is 42 days of full production assuming not 1 center was damaged when you captured it. Not 1 center was damaged by allied bombing. AND assuming that your troops, ships, and planes in the area didnt consume even 1 supply point. Now you didnt say how long of a period it took to move these 300,000 supplys to Darwin.
Supplies in the game represent food, bullets, gas, lightbulbs, coffee, bandages and anything else you can name except fuel oil. Some of these supplies are manufactured goods such as artillery shells and these of course would have to come from some sort of factory, and amazingly factories in the game make supplies. Some of these supplies grow on trees such as bananas. There are also cities, towns, villages, hamlets, ect that make stuff. Maybe not on a grand scale, but Mom and Pops tailor shoppe on the corner of some island and main street makes thread for repairing uniforms, this is supply also.
Please explain to me why you think rice can be only be made in Japan?
Now seems to me your REAL complaint is that they didnt break these 2 type of supplies into 2 or possibly more groups. No amount of tweeking in the game is going to accomplish this. Play the game the way it is or make your own. All the crying in the world isnt going to make this happen in this game.
RE: logistic analysis
Soon the right side of the "supply pendulum" will start up. The right side being "I dont have enough supply to fix stuff" or "I dont have enough supply to build stuff".
This was the cry of commanders throughout the war![:D] This would make the game much more realistic (as far as pace goes) if more frustrating.
The two sides continue to struggle over control of the pendulum...

-
el cid again
- Posts: 16984
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:40 pm
RE: logistic analysis
Rail in Japan and India might need to stay. Rail in China can mostly go -
It is true that rail in China was in pretty awful shape. Japan actually took the entire rail link to Viet Nam in 1945 - and it mattered not a whit - it was not functional - although it had long been a strategic goal. The rail link to Burma functioned for a year and a half - sort of - and it is not even present in the game! The rail in ALaska is wierd - it only goes from south of ANchorage to Fairbanks - but that is not how the game has it. I suspect the rail in Australia is equally fictional - my rail atlases show no such rail lines in the NOrth. The rail line in Viet Nam worked - and also in Thailand - but the Thai lines are mostly absent - and they do NOT connect to Viet nam as shown on the map. Wierd wierd wierd.
-
el cid again
- Posts: 16984
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:40 pm
RE: logistic analysis
So i think it would be a better solution to stop the resources centers from producing supplies and relies only on the HI+RES+OIL as supply producing system ( maybe we'd need in this optic to let the HI produce more supplies).
THis is very good. It is fair simulation. Move resources (and oil) to the HI and THAT produces the finished goods. ONLY to the extent the colonies have HI can they make supply points. Very good idea.
-
el cid again
- Posts: 16984
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:40 pm
RE: logistic analysis
SF and KARACHI are an infinite source of supplies....too much IMHO. The allies in Eastern India can have 1000k of supplies stocked by the end of March...that's simply unhistorical.
Very correct. India underwent a famine because there was not enough shipping to feed it and the war effort. THis is a big deal in INdian politics and meant the colony MUST go free sooner than otherwise might have happened. The Brits had to send 160 battalions to India to prevent a wartime rebellion - Congress Party was all in prison no less - and it was a unified party INCLUDING Muslims then - for demanding promises re independence. Where are those 160 battalions? And why is there no risk of rebellion? This was fed in large measure during the war by SEVERE logistic problems - a crop failure and the refusal to allocate ships meant there must be widespread starvation. [Not the way history is usually taught in Western high school books]
-
el cid again
- Posts: 16984
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:40 pm
RE: logistic analysis
Please explain to me why you think rice can be only be made in Japan?
While the question was not addressed to me, I will answer it. The problem is not that local food and timber (and gravel or even cement) cannot be useful to occupation forces. The problem is that vacuum tubes, large caliber gun ammunition, refined aviation spirit, and lots of other things can NOT be produced by the local colonial economies on any scale. The game system converts the timber and food to WHATEVER you need it to be to support a major military unit - wether it be a tank unit or a naval vessel or an air unit. IF we must go with this abstract supply system, it is more true to say supply only comes from manufacturing centers than it is to say it comes from both them and resource centers. I recommended a system of fuel (INCLUDING avgas and vehicle fuels), ammunition and general supplies - but it was rejected in favor of the fuel (EXCLUDING avgas and vehicle fuels) and everything else. What would work with the present system is to remove resource centers from making supply points - but you could give some cities small amounts of heavy industry to reflect small local production. [The idea there is NO industry in Rangoon boggels the mind. Obviously whoever thinks that never visited the place, or studied it in the 1930s. There is also a shipyard at Wuhan - its 75th anniversary was this year - and I have yet to figure how to get ships there if I put it there? Ships can sail the Yangze as far as Wuhan. I DID fix the Columbia river error - sort of - by turning Fort Stevens into the Columbia River Ports. One can do a lot to reflect real local industry IF only it wasn't producing finished supply points at resource centers.]
-
el cid again
- Posts: 16984
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:40 pm
RE: logistic analysis
The rail link to Burma functioned for a year and a half -
Actually, I didn't say this perfectly. The rail link to Burma is HALF in the game. What is shown is the RR about as it is today - to just short of the Two Pagadoas Pass. The rest of the route is now under water or otherwise demolished. But it WAS completed ALL THE WAY to Burma and then operated - and never actually shut down - by the Japanese. It didn't operate very efficiently however, for lots of reasons, including being under bomber attack (not sabatoge a la Bridge on the River Kwai), limited resources, and, putting it politely, a less than wholly motivated work force. Nevertheless, what IS on the map IS a big change from what really existed in 1941.
What I would like is some way to turn a trail into a road into a railroad. IF you invest in it.
-
Yamato hugger
- Posts: 3791
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 5:38 am
RE: logistic analysis
ORIGINAL: el cid again
While the question was not addressed to me, I will answer it. The problem is not that local food and timber (and gravel or even cement) cannot be useful to occupation forces. The problem is that vacuum tubes, large caliber gun ammunition, refined aviation spirit, and lots of other things can NOT be produced by the local colonial economies on any scale. The game system converts the timber and food to WHATEVER you need it to be to support a major military unit - wether it be a tank unit or a naval vessel or an air unit. IF we must go with this abstract supply system, it is more true to say supply only comes from manufacturing centers than it is to say it comes from both them and resource centers.
I guess you didnt read the part where I said: " Now seems to me your REAL complaint is that they didnt break these 2 type of supplies into 2 or possibly more groups." It was the very next line after the one you quoted. A little UNDER 50% of the Jap supplies in the game come from the supplies generated at resource centers. I read somewhere once that the amount of supplies for a US soldier in WWII was something like 26 tons of supplies per month IIRC. Jap supply/troop wasnt near this high (about 6 tons/month?), and I would estimate that number is so low because nearly 1/2 of the Jap supplies were indeed food and/or "local commodities" which would be adequately represented by the current game system.
Now I have to admit, from the few posts you have made thus far you seem to be a "there wasnt a rice paddy in this hex" type of guy. 99% of us arent. The game isnt history. I dare you to find one thing about this game that actually does reflect history. I serously dont understand your nit-picking. Dont get me wrong, not ment as a personal attack, just an observation.
I recommended
Recommend all you want, isnt going to happen. Design your own game, produce it, and see how easy it is to impliment all you recommend.
Go back and read the forum. Hardly a week goes by that someone doesnt make a comment about some aspect of the supply system. It isnt perfect. We all know and understand that. The question isnt "does this part of the game work right". If you are going to pick 1 aspect of the game and put it under a microscope, then of course it doesnt work right. The question is "does the game work as a whole". And by and large, yes it does.
"Baseball is a game. Games are ment to be fun" - Tom Selleck from "Mister Baseball". Play the game or dont.
WitP is a game. Games are ment to be fun - Yamato hugger [:D]
-
Yamato hugger
- Posts: 3791
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 5:38 am
RE: logistic analysis
ORIGINAL: el cid again
What would work with the present system is to remove resource centers from making supply points - but you could give some cities small amounts of heavy industry to reflect small local production. [The idea there is NO industry in Rangoon boggels the mind.
One can do a lot to reflect real local industry IF only it wasn't producing finished supply points at resource centers.]
Industry centers in the game not only make supplies, but HI points as well. The proposal you submit would "break" this aspect of the game. Industry centers in the game require oil. Not all manufacturing plants do. The plan as you submit would require an increace in oil production to offset these "non-historical" oil costs that you would add to the Jap player.
Resource centers in the game can be bombed and destroyed to prevent them from producing supplies. I guess I dont understand what it is you are complaining about. Seems to me the current system reflects reality better than your proposed system.
Edit: seems to me the supplies generated at resource centers are the "local industry" that you claim isnt there.
- Kereguelen
- Posts: 1474
- Joined: Wed May 12, 2004 9:08 pm
RE: logistic analysis
ORIGINAL: el cid again
Where did you get this figure[&:]. It's plain wrong - apart from the fact that the UK did not possess that many battalions to simply send them to India. It's possible to backtrack the location of every Indian (and British stationed in India) battalion for the whole war. There was never such a massive effort during the war. For most of the duration of the war there were about 40-45 battalions stationed on the NW border (in what is now Pakistan), but this was due to general unrest among the border tribes and not a result of WW2 (that is, the unrest in that area started much earlier). Sometimes there was not even a single British battalion stationed there (only Indian, Gurkha, and Nepalese troops). There were some uprisings that required massive military committments to subdue in 1942 (in Sind), but those rebellions were subdued by May 1943. And there was an uprising in Delhi that was ended by Gurkha paratroopres in 1943. But most Indian/British formations were used for coastal defense, only some battalions were used for internal security duties in Bengal in 1942.
There was major dissent between the Muslim and Hindu factions, and this eventually resulted in the creation of Pakistan.
See above...
While this statement is true for the most part (famine), it was simply not necessary to employ military formations to deal with the problems coming with this. There were sizeable police formations that were able to deal with it (army formations were only used when they were in the area).
Supplies in the game only represent "military" supplies and shipping to India is not represented (or only by automatic supply generated at Karachi and Bombay).
The Brits had to send 160 battalions to India to prevent a wartime rebellion
Where did you get this figure[&:]. It's plain wrong - apart from the fact that the UK did not possess that many battalions to simply send them to India. It's possible to backtrack the location of every Indian (and British stationed in India) battalion for the whole war. There was never such a massive effort during the war. For most of the duration of the war there were about 40-45 battalions stationed on the NW border (in what is now Pakistan), but this was due to general unrest among the border tribes and not a result of WW2 (that is, the unrest in that area started much earlier). Sometimes there was not even a single British battalion stationed there (only Indian, Gurkha, and Nepalese troops). There were some uprisings that required massive military committments to subdue in 1942 (in Sind), but those rebellions were subdued by May 1943. And there was an uprising in Delhi that was ended by Gurkha paratroopres in 1943. But most Indian/British formations were used for coastal defense, only some battalions were used for internal security duties in Bengal in 1942.
- Congress Party was all in prison no less - and it was a unified party INCLUDING Muslims then - for demanding promises re independence.
There was major dissent between the Muslim and Hindu factions, and this eventually resulted in the creation of Pakistan.
Where are those 160 battalions? And why is there no risk of rebellion?
See above...
This was fed in large measure during the war by SEVERE logistic problems - a crop failure and the refusal to allocate ships meant there must be widespread starvation. [Not the way history is usually taught in Western high school books]
While this statement is true for the most part (famine), it was simply not necessary to employ military formations to deal with the problems coming with this. There were sizeable police formations that were able to deal with it (army formations were only used when they were in the area).
Supplies in the game only represent "military" supplies and shipping to India is not represented (or only by automatic supply generated at Karachi and Bombay).




