Managing logistics in the grand campaign--how hard?

This new stand alone release based on the legendary War in the Pacific from 2 by 3 Games adds significant improvements and changes to enhance game play, improve realism, and increase historical accuracy. With dozens of new features, new art, and engine improvements, War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
Yaab
Posts: 5041
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2011 2:09 pm
Location: Poland

RE: Managing logistics in the grand campaign--how hard?

Post by Yaab »

Also, the automatic overland movement of supply by the code is quite potent. I have seen 65,000 supplies moved from Manchuria to Port Arthur in one supply phase in AI vs AI game.
User avatar
ny59giants
Posts: 9881
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:02 pm

RE: Managing logistics in the grand campaign--how hard?

Post by ny59giants »

Coal Harbor - Use the supply stockpile option to "Y" to prevent any supplies off loaded here to migrate to Victoria. Use a few small xAKLs from Prince Rupert to bring them every few months.
[center]Image[/center]
User avatar
Zigurat666
Posts: 377
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 11:07 pm

RE: Managing logistics in the grand campaign--how hard?

Post by Zigurat666 »

-

Image
Attachments
cake.jpg
cake.jpg (8.56 KiB) Viewed 54 times
User avatar
Bullwinkle58
Posts: 11297
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:47 pm

RE: Managing logistics in the grand campaign--how hard?

Post by Bullwinkle58 »

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

I find that early in the war the allies have detachments in many pretty much useless places. Rather than worrying about trying to keep flyspeck commands fed, I evacuate them to somewhere useful. Now Coal Harbor does not allow you to ship the detachment out. So make 'em walk. They don't provide you much use where they are , so march them to Victoria where they might actually be some use. The exercise will do them good. [:D]

I use Coal Harbor as both an air and surface ASW base. You guys don't? Hmm.
The Moose
User avatar
AW1Steve
Posts: 14518
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 6:32 am
Location: Mordor Illlinois

RE: Managing logistics in the grand campaign--how hard?

Post by AW1Steve »

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

I find that early in the war the allies have detachments in many pretty much useless places. Rather than worrying about trying to keep flyspeck commands fed, I evacuate them to somewhere useful. Now Coal Harbor does not allow you to ship the detachment out. So make 'em walk. They don't provide you much use where they are , so march them to Victoria where they might actually be some use. The exercise will do them good. [:D]

I use Coal Harbor as both an air and surface ASW base. You guys don't? Hmm.

Not when Victoria in two spaces away. Big bases rule. Later , when big bases are built and more room is needed , sure I'll re-occupy. But early war (till mid 1943) resources are mighty scarce....concentrate what you have , expand when you need to. That's why the Japanese go thru the DEI and Malaya like a hot knife through butter. The forces are scattered. Great as police force , but no way to fight a war. If I had a year to prepare, and 10k in PP's, (say the game began in 1940 , the war started Dec7 , 1941) I would concentrate every unit where it would do the most good in a few big bastions. I honestly feel that if you could put your forces in a better disposition you'd be pretty much able to stop Japan cold. The allies had the forces and resources...but they were in the worst possible location. Just my opinion.[:)]
User avatar
zuluhour
Posts: 5244
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 4:16 pm
Location: Maryland

RE: Managing logistics in the grand campaign--how hard?

Post by zuluhour »

Thanks for the info. I was beginning to believe that base was something "special" included with my edition.[8|]
User avatar
Bullwinkle58
Posts: 11297
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:47 pm

RE: Managing logistics in the grand campaign--how hard?

Post by Bullwinkle58 »

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

I use Coal Harbor as both an air and surface ASW base. You guys don't? Hmm.
Not when Victoria in two spaces away. Big bases rule. Later , when big bases are built and more room is needed , sure I'll re-occupy. But early war (till mid 1943) resources are mighty scarce....concentrate what you have , expand when you need to. That's why the Japanese go thru the DEI and Malaya like a hot knife through butter. The forces are scattered. Great as police force , but no way to fight a war. If I had a year to prepare, and 10k in PP's, (say the game began in 1940 , the war started Dec7 , 1941) I would concentrate every unit where it would do the most good in a few big bastions. I honestly feel that if you could put your forces in a better disposition you'd be pretty much able to stop Japan cold. The allies had the forces and resources...but they were in the worst possible location. Just my opinion.[:)]
Well, I use it right from the start. It's two hexes out and two hexes back closer to the sub transit lanes than Victoria, and that matters a lot for AMs and KVs. All you need is an AG for DC loads and float planes work from a level 1 anything. You've got a lot of float planes on the WC in the first six months, plus the Canucks have a few. I haul some fuel there in an xAk from Seattle, set stockpile, and it's good for months.
The Moose
User avatar
msieving1
Posts: 526
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2007 2:24 am
Location: Missouri

RE: Managing logistics in the grand campaign--how hard?

Post by msieving1 »

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

I use Coal Harbor as both an air and surface ASW base. You guys don't? Hmm.

Not when Victoria in two spaces away.

I haven't used the standard map in a while. On the extended map, Coal Harbour is six hexes from Victoria, about halfway from Victoria to Alliford Bay or Prince Rupert. (According to Google Earth, Coal Harbour is about 210 nautical miles from Victoria as the crow flies.)

I generally find multiple overlapping search zones more effective than running searches from a single point.
-- Mark Sieving
User avatar
zuluhour
Posts: 5244
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 4:16 pm
Location: Maryland

RE: Managing logistics in the grand campaign--how hard?

Post by zuluhour »

Any IJN fan boys want to volunteer their sub hunting zones in NORPAC??? huh? huh??
wdolson
Posts: 7648
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 9:56 pm
Location: Near Portland, OR

RE: Managing logistics in the grand campaign--how hard?

Post by wdolson »

I usually supply the French bases in the South Pac from Brisbane. That's about the shortest haul from a large base.

As for Coal Harbor, I've noticed the draw from Victoria drops off when Victoria thinks it has enough supply. One good thing to keep in mind is that supply also flows between adjacent ports and the amount of supply flow is dependent on the smaller of the two ports. I've found that building up Bellingham and I think Oak Harbor (I think both ports are one hex from Victoria, but I'm not 100% certain) and then maxing out Victoria, Victoria will draw enough from the mainland US via the port to port invisible short haulers that it doesn't draw anything from Coal Harbor anymore.

It takes a while to build up those ports, but I use Victoria for my northern ASW port, so I want to build it up anyway. Bellingham isn't as worthwhile, except to get supply to Victoria.

When I hold on to Sumatra and Java, I do the same thing to the ports on either side of the Sunda Strait. On one side the port can only be built up to a size 4, but it can both be used to load fuel from Palembang and it will slowly shift fuel to Soerbaja across the strait and down the spine of Java.

Bill
WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer
Image
User avatar
zuluhour
Posts: 5244
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 4:16 pm
Location: Maryland

RE: Managing logistics in the grand campaign--how hard?

Post by zuluhour »

Very useful, Thanks Bill. I've had a personal relationship now with Coal Harbor through three allied PBEMs. I use a pair of xAKLs on constant supply there requiring about 10min a week from me. That adds up.
User avatar
Bullwinkle58
Posts: 11297
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:47 pm

RE: Managing logistics in the grand campaign--how hard?

Post by Bullwinkle58 »

ORIGINAL: msieving1
ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

I use Coal Harbor as both an air and surface ASW base. You guys don't? Hmm.

Not when Victoria in two spaces away.

I haven't used the standard map in a while. On the extended map, Coal Harbour is six hexes from Victoria, about halfway from Victoria to Alliford Bay or Prince Rupert. (According to Google Earth, Coal Harbour is about 210 nautical miles from Victoria as the crow flies.)

I generally find multiple overlapping search zones more effective than running searches from a single point.

Yeah, it's not two. I went by memory.
The Moose
User avatar
rustysi
Posts: 7472
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2012 3:23 am
Location: LI, NY

RE: Managing logistics in the grand campaign--how hard?

Post by rustysi »

Yeah, it's not two. I went by memory.

Yup, and therein lies your problem.[:D]
It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb
User avatar
rustysi
Posts: 7472
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2012 3:23 am
Location: LI, NY

RE: Managing logistics in the grand campaign--how hard?

Post by rustysi »

Ok, kidding aside. I haven't gotten to the Allied side of things yet, but what I don't see mentioned here is fuel requirements. I recall reading something a while back where the Allies have to be somewhat more vigilant in this arena. Is that true?

IIRC the thread focused more on getting said fuel from sources to the area of ops.
It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb
User avatar
Bullwinkle58
Posts: 11297
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:47 pm

RE: Managing logistics in the grand campaign--how hard?

Post by Bullwinkle58 »

ORIGINAL: rustysi

Ok, kidding aside. I haven't gotten to the Allied side of things yet, but what I don't see mentioned here is fuel requirements. I recall reading something a while back where the Allies have to be somewhat more vigilant in this arena. Is that true?

IIRC the thread focused more on getting said fuel from sources to the area of ops.

There's no shortage of fuel, ever, universally. But if you look at the OOB and the map you can see how much the Allies have to haul forward over the years. The Japanese map continually shrinks. The Allies' grows. In later 1944 it's always nice to get an in-theater source like Balikpapan. By 1945 fuel shipments on the water at any time are in the several millions. Supply probably more like ten million moving somewhere every day. Multiple 100-ship convoys.
The Moose
wdolson
Posts: 7648
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 9:56 pm
Location: Near Portland, OR

RE: Managing logistics in the grand campaign--how hard?

Post by wdolson »

The big problem with the Allies is having enough tankers to move all that fuel. Especially if they lose some early on. The tanker shortage isn't quite as critical as the Japanese, but there can be localized fuel shortages especially early on.

Bill
WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer
Image
User avatar
Bullwinkle58
Posts: 11297
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:47 pm

RE: Managing logistics in the grand campaign--how hard?

Post by Bullwinkle58 »

ORIGINAL: wdolson

The big problem with the Allies is having enough tankers to move all that fuel. Especially if they lose some early on. The tanker shortage isn't quite as critical as the Japanese, but there can be localized fuel shortages especially early on.

Bill

If I didn't haul at least 50% of my fuel in xAKs in 1942 I'd be sunk.
The Moose
User avatar
ny59giants
Posts: 9881
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:02 pm

RE: Managing logistics in the grand campaign--how hard?

Post by ny59giants »

I use the dual capacity xAK (cargo and liquid) to haul fuel. Especially, the fast ones (16 or 17 knots) with my fast TKs from the very beginning.

As Japan, build up Oosthaven to size 4 port and run small TKs to Batavia with fuel. Meanwhile, load those 7950 capacity TKs (or more of the small 1250) at Palembang to load oil. For some reason loading oil takes a lot longer than fuel and you can have a bottleneck at Palembang if your not careful.
[center]Image[/center]
jmalter
Posts: 1673
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 5:41 pm

RE: Managing logistics in the grand campaign--how hard?

Post by jmalter »

ORIGINAL: Paul Roberts
Suppose I mass infantry units at a significant staging base but manage to under-supply them. Do they wither to nothing, or do they simply suffer temporary penalties that are readily corrected by topping with off with a later supply convoy?
LCUs at an under-supplied base will wither, & airgroups won't be able to conduct ops or repair airframes. Bringing in a load of supplies will stop the bleeding & enable repair.

What do you mean by 'significant staging base'? IMO, it needs portlevel 4 or greater, & some NavSupp. But it needs supply! If under-supplied, it can't defend itself, can't keep itself running, can't expand, can't aid arriving LCUs to recover from their sea-voyage. Nor can it provide supply to units shipping out to the front.
PaulWRoberts
Posts: 901
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2001 8:00 am

RE: Managing logistics in the grand campaign--how hard?

Post by PaulWRoberts »

ORIGINAL: jmalter
ORIGINAL: Paul Roberts
Suppose I mass infantry units at a significant staging base but manage to under-supply them. Do they wither to nothing, or do they simply suffer temporary penalties that are readily corrected by topping with off with a later supply convoy?

What do you mean by 'significant staging base'? IMO, it needs portlevel 4 or greater, & some NavSupp. But it needs supply! If under-supplied, it can't defend itself, can't keep itself running, can't expand, can't aid arriving LCUs to recover from their sea-voyage. Nor can it provide supply to units shipping out to the front.

I was really just asking a question about game mechanics. How quickly do units die if I don't supply them adequately? How much wiggle room do I have in my planning?

This is my essential question in this thread: are logistics in the grand campaign a desperate/frustrating tightrope act, or are they simply (so so speak) a matter of attention and strategy? From the responses here, I'm beginning to think it's the latter, and this makes me happy.


Post Reply

Return to “War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition”