RE: Logistics 101 (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition



Message


Yaab -> RE: Logistics 101 (4/15/2014 6:47:26 AM)

A question concerning LCU supply cost.

"(D.1) LCU supply cost

Most players emphasise the Assault Value (AV) of a LCU instead of the combat firepower of the unit which is a much more useful measure. The merits of the two measures is however a discussion best left to another day. What players do generally tend to pay little attention is the cost of maintaining a unit out in the field.

The average size of a fully built up Allied division is about 450 AV. A fully equipped Chinese LCU could be double this but they tend to lack access to the necessary supply. A division of about 450 AV, which is not engaged in combat will consume approximately 1500 supply points monthly, or 50 daily. A brigade of approximately 150 AV not engaged in combat will consume approximately 500 supply points monthly".



So, if a fully equipped Chinese LCU corps (consuming 1500 supplies monthly) is parked in an empty base, the base tries to stockpile 3 x 1500 supplies ( three times than what is required by the corps ). If the LCU upkeep cost is monthly,then the base is stockpiling a three months reserve of supplies. This means there is almost no point in parking LCUs in bases in supply-poor environment like China since you dramatically reduce the number of free supplies available to units in the field, where LCUs carry only their monthly allotment of supplies instead of quarterly allotment.




jmalter -> RE: Logistics 101 (4/15/2014 9:21:53 AM)

hi Yaab,

I don't understand your question. LCUs will spend supply for upkeep on a near-daily basis, drawing that supply from whatever source is available. Units in a non-base hex will draw from available bases, even if those bases are set to stockpile supplies.

In China, one must use air transport to bring supply to the theater, & rely on the game-engine to transport that supply to where it is needed. It's a very ineffeicient process, as the air-transport groups also use supply.




Yaab -> RE: Logistics 101 (4/15/2014 9:49:56 AM)

In a supply-scarce environment such as China, the idea of bases hoarding three times the required supplies seems excessive. I can park a corps with a monthly upkeep of 1500 supply points in a non-base hex next to Changsha for the total monthly cost of 1500 supply points, or I can park the same corps in Changsha for the monthly cost of 1500 supply points + 3000 additional supply points tied to Changsha. Since bases can only export surplus supply above x 3 requirement, then it is very hard to justify parking Chinese corps in bases, because very little supply is exported from bases to units in field.

It would be much better if bases only collected twice the supplies required instead of thrice.




Lokasenna -> RE: Logistics 101 (4/15/2014 1:40:21 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yaab

A question concerning LCU supply cost.

"(D.1) LCU supply cost

Most players emphasise the Assault Value (AV) of a LCU instead of the combat firepower of the unit which is a much more useful measure. The merits of the two measures is however a discussion best left to another day. What players do generally tend to pay little attention is the cost of maintaining a unit out in the field.

The average size of a fully built up Allied division is about 450 AV. A fully equipped Chinese LCU could be double this but they tend to lack access to the necessary supply. A division of about 450 AV, which is not engaged in combat will consume approximately 1500 supply points monthly, or 50 daily. A brigade of approximately 150 AV not engaged in combat will consume approximately 500 supply points monthly".



So, if a fully equipped Chinese LCU corps (consuming 1500 supplies monthly) is parked in an empty base, the base tries to stockpile 3 x 1500 supplies ( three times than what is required by the corps ). If the LCU upkeep cost is monthly,then the base is stockpiling a three months reserve of supplies. This means there is almost no point in parking LCUs in bases in supply-poor environment like China since you dramatically reduce the number of free supplies available to units in the field, where LCUs carry only their monthly allotment of supplies instead of quarterly allotment.


I've actually been thinking about this a lot lately. I think you are right.




Bullwinkle58 -> RE: Logistics 101 (4/15/2014 1:46:21 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yaab

A question concerning LCU supply cost.

"(D.1) LCU supply cost

Most players emphasise the Assault Value (AV) of a LCU instead of the combat firepower of the unit which is a much more useful measure. The merits of the two measures is however a discussion best left to another day. What players do generally tend to pay little attention is the cost of maintaining a unit out in the field.

The average size of a fully built up Allied division is about 450 AV. A fully equipped Chinese LCU could be double this but they tend to lack access to the necessary supply. A division of about 450 AV, which is not engaged in combat will consume approximately 1500 supply points monthly, or 50 daily. A brigade of approximately 150 AV not engaged in combat will consume approximately 500 supply points monthly".



So, if a fully equipped Chinese LCU corps (consuming 1500 supplies monthly) is parked in an empty base, the base tries to stockpile 3 x 1500 supplies ( three times than what is required by the corps ). If the LCU upkeep cost is monthly,then the base is stockpiling a three months reserve of supplies. This means there is almost no point in parking LCUs in bases in supply-poor environment like China since you dramatically reduce the number of free supplies available to units in the field, where LCUs carry only their monthly allotment of supplies instead of quarterly allotment.


I've actually been thinking about this a lot lately. I think you are right.


I believe the real issue is tangential to this point. It has long been recognized that LCUs in the field are often easier to keep in supply than those in bases. This is less due to the factor you cite, and more--and I believe this was proven years ago in the game's lifespan--that LCUs in the field will draw from ALL bases in supply range, while an LCU in garrison will only draw from the base it's in. So in a base-dense region like China, unless Japan owns everything in supply range of a field LCU, it will trickle supply in when its in-base brother starves as that base is trying to feed the whole resident stack.

IOW, if you want the Chinese to eat, get them out in the bush, in many cases.




czert2 -> RE: Logistics 101 (6/4/2014 7:40:12 PM)

Any idea how to quickly count dayily supply comsuption for whole bases ? Which is more accurate, counting whole AV or by looking at requred supply ?
At that base AC is 397 and supply needed 1552.

From that post i deducted that AV/9 gives you aproximate dayly supply needed, but how to do math for supply needed ? Since units like AA/ENG have manytimes very low/zero AV, but they need supply to live.




Lokasenna -> RE: Logistics 101 (6/4/2014 8:07:15 PM)

I did a rundown on this. My conclusion is that, in general, you should look at the "supply required" amount for the base. That is a monthly amount. It can vary day-to-day. If there is no activity that consumes replaces, just feeding the LCUs and whatnot, then it will burn that amount divided by 30 per day. Roughly. Very roughly.




SqzMyLemon -> RE: Logistics 101 (6/4/2014 9:19:56 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yaab

In a supply-scarce environment such as China, the idea of bases hoarding three times the required supplies seems excessive. I can park a corps with a monthly upkeep of 1500 supply points in a non-base hex next to Changsha for the total monthly cost of 1500 supply points, or I can park the same corps in Changsha for the monthly cost of 1500 supply points + 3000 additional supply points tied to Changsha. Since bases can only export surplus supply above x 3 requirement, then it is very hard to justify parking Chinese corps in bases, because very little supply is exported from bases to units in field.

It would be much better if bases only collected twice the supplies required instead of thrice.


I realized this years ago and mentioned it in an AAR of mine, but no discussion ever developed further. The 3x supply at bases contributes to China being almost indefensible as you can't get the supply forward if garrisons are hoarding all the supply. I keep my rear Chinese bases almost empty of troops, but still defend against paratroops.




Yaab -> RE: Logistics 101 (3/14/2015 11:38:04 AM)


Is there any upper limit to supply/fuel/resource/oil movement per day per hex? I have just had the code move 500,000 supplies in one turn over MINOR RAILROAD in RHS mod in a game vs AI. I went to check my old Tracker files for some stock campaigns, and I found out that San Francisco received 100,000 supplies + 265,000 fuel in one turn by MAIN ROAD/MAIN RAILROAD. Where is the upper limit? Are road/railroads capacities cumulative? Does code treat national capitals differently and allows for bigger,unrealistic capacities then anywhere else on the map?

Below is the supply jump at Trincomalee from turn 2 to turn 3:

[image]http://s23.postimg.org/mum1ys1vv/Supply_push_RHS_mod.jpg[/image]




Anthropoid -> RE: Logistics 101 (3/14/2015 5:00:04 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: CaptDave

Great report!  Should probably be added to the Wiki, as well.  With your permission, Alfred, I'll make that happen.


Is this what you are referring to Capt? War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition Wiki.

That is about all I'm coming up with from my googling and I'm curious if that is the most complete and up to date repository of information?




Yaab -> RE: Logistics 101 (10/31/2015 2:40:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

(C.1) Spoilage

Bases whose combined airfield and port levels amount to less than 9 can suffer spoilage of their supply (and fuel) stockpile.

Spoilage will occur if the following base thresholds are exceeded:

•Size 8 – above 197k supply (129k fuel)
•Size 7 – above 152k supply (99k fuel)
•Size 6 – above 113k supply (73k fuel)
•Size 5 – above 80k supply (51k fuel)
•Size 4 – above 53k supply (33k fuel)
•Size 3 – above 32k supply (19k fuel)
•Size 2 – above 17k supply (9k fuel)
•Size 1 – above 8k supply (3k fuel)

Note that the check for spoilage is made for each stockpile. A Size 8 base with 154k supply plus 83k fuel will not suffer spoilage. It will suffer supply spoilage if it has 204k supply plus 22k fuel.

Dot bases can store up to 5k supplies and 1k fuel before suffering spoilage.



Not sure If I got it right.

If I have a base size 2 holding 27,000 supplies and zero fuel, I suffer no supply spoilage at the base? And if the same base holds 27,000 fuel and zero supplies, I suffer no fuel spoilage?






witpqs -> RE: Logistics 101 (10/31/2015 3:11:09 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yaab

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

(C.1) Spoilage

Bases whose combined airfield and port levels amount to less than 9 can suffer spoilage of their supply (and fuel) stockpile.

Spoilage will occur if the following base thresholds are exceeded:

•Size 8 – above 197k supply (129k fuel)
•Size 7 – above 152k supply (99k fuel)
•Size 6 – above 113k supply (73k fuel)
•Size 5 – above 80k supply (51k fuel)
•Size 4 – above 53k supply (33k fuel)
•Size 3 – above 32k supply (19k fuel)
•Size 2 – above 17k supply (9k fuel)
•Size 1 – above 8k supply (3k fuel)

Note that the check for spoilage is made for each stockpile. A Size 8 base with 154k supply plus 83k fuel will not suffer spoilage. It will suffer supply spoilage if it has 204k supply plus 22k fuel.

Dot bases can store up to 5k supplies and 1k fuel before suffering spoilage.



Not sure If I got it right.

If I have a base size 2 holding 27,000 supplies and zero fuel, I suffer no supply spoilage at the base? And if the same base holds 27,000 fuel and zero supplies, I suffer no fuel spoilage?




The thresholds are individual: one for supply and one for fuel. In your example of a combined size 2 base, exceed 27k supply and there is a penalty on the supply. Exceed 9k fuel and there is a penalty on the fuel.




Yaab -> RE: Logistics 101 (10/31/2015 3:20:41 PM)


Yep, I misread the base list. Alfred gave the example of base size 8 with 154k supply plus 83k, while I was looking at base size 7 storage limits.




cohimbra -> RE: Logistics 101 (1/17/2016 5:30:41 PM)

up




Yaab -> RE: Logistics 101 (9/18/2017 2:29:11 PM)

If I set two adjacent bases with ports i.e Lae and Salamua to stockpile supply, will this setting override the section 9.3.3.3 AUTOMATIC TRANSFER OF BULK CARGO BETWEEN ADJACENT PORTS of the manual?




BBfanboy -> RE: Logistics 101 (9/18/2017 5:23:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yaab

In a supply-scarce environment such as China, the idea of bases hoarding three times the required supplies seems excessive. I can park a corps with a monthly upkeep of 1500 supply points in a non-base hex next to Changsha for the total monthly cost of 1500 supply points, or I can park the same corps in Changsha for the monthly cost of 1500 supply points + 3000 additional supply points tied to Changsha. Since bases can only export surplus supply above x 3 requirement, then it is very hard to justify parking Chinese corps in bases, because very little supply is exported from bases to units in field.

It would be much better if bases only collected twice the supplies required instead of thrice.


I realized this years ago and mentioned it in an AAR of mine, but no discussion ever developed further. The 3x supply at bases contributes to China being almost indefensible as you can't get the supply forward if garrisons are hoarding all the supply. I keep my rear Chinese bases almost empty of troops, but still defend against paratroops.



Not so. The problem is that supply flows out of bases to units in the field as a priority, even if the units at the base are starving. Many times I have had to swap starving troops out of a Chinese base with troops in supply in the adjacent hex.




witpqs -> RE: Logistics 101 (9/18/2017 8:11:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yaab

In a supply-scarce environment such as China, the idea of bases hoarding three times the required supplies seems excessive. I can park a corps with a monthly upkeep of 1500 supply points in a non-base hex next to Changsha for the total monthly cost of 1500 supply points, or I can park the same corps in Changsha for the monthly cost of 1500 supply points + 3000 additional supply points tied to Changsha. Since bases can only export surplus supply above x 3 requirement, then it is very hard to justify parking Chinese corps in bases, because very little supply is exported from bases to units in field.

It would be much better if bases only collected twice the supplies required instead of thrice.


I realized this years ago and mentioned it in an AAR of mine, but no discussion ever developed further. The 3x supply at bases contributes to China being almost indefensible as you can't get the supply forward if garrisons are hoarding all the supply. I keep my rear Chinese bases almost empty of troops, but still defend against paratroops.



Not so. The problem is that supply flows out of bases to units in the field as a priority, even if the units at the base are starving. Many times I have had to swap starving troops out of a Chinese base with troops in supply in the adjacent hex.

There is another factor. Units outside a base may receive supply from any base within supply range (and in accord with the game's supply algorithm), but units inside a base may only receive supply from THAT base and no other.




wegman58 -> RE: Logistics 101 (2/1/2018 3:58:58 PM)

Bump




btd64 -> RE: Logistics 101 (6/12/2019 2:42:13 PM)

Bump....GP

It seems to have come up again............................




Korvar -> RE: Logistics 101 (6/12/2019 5:12:15 PM)

This is one of those threads that needs no explanation for being bumped every now and then... anyone who hasn't read the OP should do so and bookmark it for future reference.




USSAmerica -> RE: Logistics 101 (6/12/2019 7:22:27 PM)

I read this thread about every 6 months! [8D]




geofflambert -> RE: Logistics 101 (6/12/2019 9:03:04 PM)

More could be said about how supply is expended. Also, what is relevant to stock is greatly altered in DBB-C, which I believe ought to be the stock form. Let me try a list:
In the field, fortifying, repairing/expanding airfields, repairing/expanding ports, and repairing refineries/oil fields can soak up a lot of supply.
Repairing/expanding industry, both heavy and light can eat up a lot.
Industry includes aircraft/engine factories, both repair and production.
Many, many procedures cannot occur if there are not adequate supplies present. For instance, replacements will arrive quicker at well supplied units.
In DBB-C overstack consumes an incredible amount of supply, in both, fortifying to level 7-9 uses a very large amount of supply.
Attacking as well as defending eat up supply.
Creating torpedo inventories expend supply, as well as bombing campaigns and the like.
Bombardments, especially by the likes of BBs and CAs consume supplies.

I've just spent 5 minutes on this, much more can be said.




Yaab -> RE: Logistics 101 (4/24/2020 11:45:39 AM)

Alfred, what about command HQs?

They attract 20k supplies to themselves at all times.

Consider. Jap player puts a command HQ in northern Burma in a non-base hex. There are Jap LCUs in adjacent non-base hexes. Can they draw supplies from the command HQ supply stash or do they have to be in the same hex with the HQ in order do get the supplies?

Basically, is command HQ a kind of movable base which can distribute supplies further to LCUs in absence of any elligible base?




Ian R -> RE: Logistics 101 (4/24/2020 12:08:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yaab

Alfred, what about command HQs?

They attract 20k to themselves at all times.

Consider. Jap player puts a command HQ in northern Burma in a non-base hex. There are Jap LCUs in adjacent non-base hexes. Can they draw supplies from the command HQ supply stash or do they have to be in the same hex with the HQ in order do get the supplies?

Basically, is command HQ a kind of movable base which can distribute supplies further to LCUs in absence of any elligible base?

quote:

e the stock form. Let me try a list:
In the field, fortifying, repairing/expanding airfields, repairing/expanding ports, and repairing refineries/oil fields can soak up a lot of sup


Interesting question ...

Did you edit your post? There seems tom be more verbiage in there.





ITAKLinus -> RE: Logistics 101 (4/24/2020 12:08:43 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yaab

Alfred, what about command HQs?

They attract 20k to themselves at all times.

Consider. Jap player puts a command HQ in northern Burma in a non-base hex. There are Jap LCUs in adjacent non-base hexes. Can they draw supplies from the command HQ supply stash or do they have to be in the same hex with the HQ in order do get the supplies?

Basically, is command HQ a kind of movable base which can distribute supplies further to LCUs in absence of any elligible base?




Was wondering the same. I don't think so to be honest, but I has only very random examples from the Chinese front with command HQs.

I do believe, though, that's very beneficial to put a command HQ in a forward Burmese base. I have no clear calculations for that, but consistent and constant results from the practice over the course of years.




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
3.417969E-02