Some Conclusions

[Oldguard1970]

We can all drop our jaws in astonishment at what can be done by dedicated men in war.  The military engineers of all services did astonishing things... and still do.  ("Essayons!")
 
"Former member of 36th Engineer Group, US Army"

[AW1Steve]

You can do amazing feats of fast engineering when 1) you don't care about costs 2) you don't have to report to the EPA, unions,state or local governments, 3) Your workers don't have anything else to do 4) The motivation to your people is "as soon as we are done here, you can go somewhere nice! (maybe)". [:D]

[Bliztk]

ORIGINAL: ggm

herwin,

im curious as to what version of rhs your playing. im curious as to how the production system is working. are the allies still repairing their disrupted factories.

ggm

I repaired everything from start. The only thing I do not repair is the Aircraft factories, which I manually turn on every 1st of their month of arrival

What data do you want ?

[ggm]

blitz im curious mostly about the supply situation of the allies. does the oil and industry cause a supply sink. how fast does the supply situation improve. are you hamstrung by resource shipping demands.

lastly how much supply does it take to repair an airplane factory 100 or 1000 supply?

thanx in advance.

ggm 

[ggm]

also how is china holding out? is the supply situation ok is herwin bombing the resources? how many divisions have you transferred from china to seac?

ggm

[engineer]

Back to Herwin's original points on pace and linearity, it seems to me that the linearity (diminishing returns) question can be tackled with programming tweaks.  I think the AE comments suggest that's being done.  Another abstraction in WitP is the absence of stacking:  nearly the same algorithm cover fighting on several thousand square mile land hex as a few square mile atoll.  That's another item that is getting fixed in AE. 
 
I wonder is pacing isn't part of the very ahistorical logistics strategy that almost everyone uses in WitP.  Open almost any game and you see the players setting up "hub and spoke" systems like they're airline operations managers.  That would entail building massive tank farms and warehouses IRL on all those various atolls.  While that's exactly what the USA did in the Marianas and Okinawa, for many of the atolls they simply used merchant shipping as floating warehouses.  The game effectively limits that by giving the Allies only a fraction of the actual shipping deployed in the war so you have to unload it onto depots.  IRL the planning was a lot more complicated to make sure the right stuff was on the supply ships in the right order, but you had a lot of AK's for support on the assorted operations.   

[juliet7bravo]

One piece of the solution IMO; Use port/transportation units to modify the port cargo handling speeds and storage capacities.  Give each port size (based on the size of the base unit present) a baseline cargo loading/unloading speed, ground "diffusion of supplies via roads to connected bases" speed, and fuel/supply capacities, use specialized port/transportation units to increase.   Doesn't matter (up to a point) how many supplies are piled in a base, or on ships in the harbor if you can't move it.  Modifier effect of each port/transportation units could be based on their size and TO&E equipment list.  Realistic, historical, and already doing it with engineer units.
 
Truck transpo units.  Rail.  Stevedoring.  Port units with barges, cranes, and fueling equipment.  Just because there's a road or a rail line in the hex should be relatively meaningless unless you remembered to pack a trucking unit or a rail line unit with track gangs, trains, and rolling stock.  What good's a port without the specialized cargo handlers/equipment?
 
Why not have fuel barges/docks as a special ship class that increases the ports fuel capacity when docked ala repair ships?  Give them a realistic fuel capacity and a speed equivalent to being towed.  How about floating dry docks that increase a ports repair capacity when docked (and can be sunk/damaged)? 

[Oldguard1970]

Hi  juliet7bravo,
 
WITP abstracts the logistics efforts you mention is a broad-brush way.  From what I have read, AE adds a layer of detail to the abstraction by using naval support units and by adjusting the logistical capacities of ports.  We gamers will have to develop a professional focus on logistics that goes beyond the substantial level already demanded by WITP.
 
I assume you were being tongue-in-cheek with your suggestions.  [;)]  Somehow, assigning the 97th heavy truck company to key missions and working hard to develop the experience level of the crane operators in Rabaul just doesn't sound like much of a war game.  (I played Avaon Hill's railroad game, Dispatcher, back when I was a kid.  Tactics II was lots more fun!)

[engineer]

Actually, one of the things I like about WitP is the presence of support squads that actually do something to make the combat arms more effective.  You could probably abstract Juliet7Bravo's suggestion that port functions would depend on the stevedores by coding an interaction of the number of support squads versus the port size.  For example, the speed of loading/unloading a level 1 port might max out with 50 support squads present while a level 10 port might require 3000 support squads. Depending on the level of changes allowed, you could also create a special longshoreman squad that would be more productive than ordinary support squads in this port function operation (like engineer vehicles enhancing engineering work).  Appropriate non-linearity factors would be factored in.  Note that this would probably also require some OOB updates and House Rules so that a portion of the support squads in places like the Home Islands, USA, India, Oz, etc. would be the civilian work force that would be locked in place.  I think it would also simulate the difference between the initial Japanese offensive in 1941/42 that was light on logistics tail and the US 1944/1945 counter-offensive that was carried on a river of logistics. 

In my personal mod, I created 5 knot AR's to simulate the US floating drydocks.  IRL, I think the sectional drydocks gave the US the capability to create, in effect, mobile repair yards.  The way the WitP engine works, you can't do that so you're left with building in a ability for the Allies to bulk up the intrinsic port repair of their facilities.   

[juliet7bravo]

It's a "strategic level war game" covering a war that has been described as a "Battle of Logistics"...kinda oughta actually involve developing a logistics tail.  Boring and non-sexy though that may be.  When I consider some of the really pointless crap we have to micromanage now, making sure that when there was a road/rail/port that the required bodies and hardware were brought along would seem to be a fair trade-off.
 
"a professional focus on logistics"
 
How's that go?  Something like; "Amateurs talk about combat, professionals talk about logistics".
 
"97th heavy truck company to key missions"

 
Hmmmm...I can think of at least 2 instances in my life where I was so happy to see the "truck drivers" with resupply arrive I would have happily performed unnatural acts if they wanted.  
 
"experience level of the crane operators in Rabaul"
 
Ever seen the figures on how many bodies the Japanese had tied up in labor units?  Or how badly their turn-around times in ports suffered when the experienced stevedores were drafted?  How many troops the IJA had tied up in barge units, cargo handling units, and logistics support roles?  Pretty eye-opening, and decidedly "non-trivial".[/align]

[Barb]

Well, without logistic there is no combat (maybe only some limited partisan actions).
Was it Napoleon who said:"An army marches on its stomach".

How I would like to have Air-petroleum, ship-fuel, ammo, general supplies, air-supplies, aircraft-spare parts, repairworkshops, and all the other stuff in game [8D]

[Oldguard1970]

Hi J7B,
 
Yep, logistics matter... and you caught the reason I included the adjective "professional".   My career in the Army provided plenty of experiences to show the importance of log planning and operations.  My subsequent career in the distribution industry plunged me fully into the depths and details of logistics. 
 
Now... how much of that detail do we need in our war game to represent strategic and operational constraints imposed by logistics? The AE team has added more detail to the log side, (naval support units, stacking limits, port loading rates, mine inventory, torpedo inventory).  There are plenty of other non-trivial logistical details that are not going to be modeled directly.  Instead, those elements are part of the general abstractions included in the game.  That makes sense to me.  I imagine I will take delight in wrestling with the log constraints of AE while still taking delight in planning and executing military operations.

[Shark7]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Is this your first experience with WITP, herwin? Also, as far as the increased tempo you're seeing - one of the things that AE seems to have accomplished as far as I can tell is to bring the later war tempo back to a more historical pace.

If anything, the game needs to reward those that do extensive planning. Sounds like AE might do that.

And by extensive planning I mean along these lines:

In my Thunder in the Pacific game, when I finally invaded Java, I did so with 8 divisions, 4 brigades, and numerous tank, artillery, and engineer regiments. The invasion took place in two different areas, effectively trapping half the defenders between my beachheads. I assigned Six BBs, numerous cruisers and the bulk of my Southern Area air power to the attack. My reward was that Java fell easily...the long drawn out seige of Soerabaja was all of 6 or 7 turns. By the way, as my readers know, I actually invaded Java in April, probably a little behind historical shedule.

That is the way it should work. You do the correct prep and things go well, with the occasional surprise thrown in the operation.

[Barb]

Shark7: Well it was not really an economy-of-force operation ... [:D]