CS-Continuous Supply question (Full Version)

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



Message


Dili -> CS-Continuous Supply question (6/24/2020 11:50:13 PM)

Is it possible to make it take resources in return trip? instead of sending a convoy with supplies and another to take resources?




Nomad -> RE: CS-Continuous Supply question (6/25/2020 12:03:16 AM)

Yes. On the TF screen after you set up the CS convoy on the right side there is a return cargo selection. It can be either fuel or resources for a cargo TF.




Dili -> RE: CS-Continuous Supply question (6/25/2020 12:26:54 AM)

Ok, it seems it is in Automatic Convoy which does not work




Nomad -> RE: CS-Continuous Supply question (6/25/2020 12:36:26 AM)

I have never really tried auto convoy, only use the CS convoys.




kbfchicago -> RE: CS-Continuous Supply question (6/25/2020 1:32:15 AM)

I have not used Auto-Convoy for awhile and went back to look at it. Suspect the key difference here is Auto Convoy is selected via the "base", using the menu from the for Auto-Convoy from the top of the screen you're selecting the base that will participate in and receive auto-convoy support, then adding a pool of ships to support these bases. Unlike CS-Convoy which is selected by TF, allowing you designate a specific origination & destination port to include return trip cargo.

Since auto convoy is a general pool vs. specific action there is no option to provide specific return cargos. So to do what you'd like to you'll need to setup specific CS-convoy routes vs use the general auto convoy pooling.

My 2 cents...not a feature I use but that's my read on it.

Kevin




CaptBeefheart -> RE: CS-Continuous Supply question (6/25/2020 2:06:25 AM)

I tried auto-convoy early on and it wasn't so good. It would send small TFs without escort all over the place, including within range of Betties. To me, the CS system is great. It's not too hard to set CS convoys up and then forget about them until there's a raid in the area.

Cheers,
CB




Alfred -> RE: CS-Continuous Supply question (6/25/2020 3:24:31 AM)

I am certain that all the criticism made over the years re the Auto Convoy system is due to simply not using it properly.

1.  You have to nominate which bases are within the system.  Why would you put any base within range of enemy aircraft?  Doing so is just not smart play.

2.  The routes from the supply source to the nominated bases will take the shortest route possible, taking into account known enemy air concentrations.  Again why would you put a base into the system where the route to it will pass through potential enemy air concentrations?  It isn't difficult to see what hexes will be traversed.

3.  Ships have to be specifically allocated to the system.  That means not just merchantmen but also escorts.  If you put too few escorts into the system, of course there are going to be some convoys without escorts.  Whose fault is that?

The auto convoy system is intended to service the area way behind the frontline, where no enemy activity is expected.  The continuous supply convoy system, with its ability to incorporate player designed waypoints precisely because enemy activity is possible, is designed for logistical operations closer to the frontlines.

Alfred




RangerJoe -> RE: CS-Continuous Supply question (6/25/2020 3:41:49 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

I am certain that all the criticism made over the years re the Auto Convoy system is due to simply not using it properly.

1.† You have to nominate which bases are within the system.† Why would you put any base within range of enemy aircraft?† Doing so is just not smart play.

2.† The routes from the supply source to the nominated bases will take the shortest route possible, taking into account known enemy air concentrations.† Again why would you put a base into the system where the route to it will pass through potential enemy air concentrations?† It isn't difficult to see what hexes will be traversed.

3.† Ships have to be specifically allocated to the system.† That means not just merchantmen but also escorts.† If you put too few escorts into the system, of course there are going to be some convoys without escorts.† Whose fault is that?

The auto convoy system is intended to service the area way behind the frontline, where no enemy activity is expected.† The continuous supply convoy system, with its ability to incorporate player designed waypoints precisely because enemy activity is possible, is designed for logistical operations closer to the frontlines.

Alfred


In other words, you have to be smarter than what you are working with. Correct?

That said, I have never used the auto convoy system.




Alfred -> RE: CS-Continuous Supply question (6/25/2020 5:23:08 AM)

I wouldn't say that.  Rather one needs to properly understand what it is one is doing.

Both the Auto Convoy and Continuous Supply systems are in the game primarily to reduce the micromanagement aspect of the game.  Players who aren't fuzzed by the micromanagement workload can not employ either system.  Those who want to reduce micromanagement can employ either or both systems.

Auto convoy has the advantage over continuous supply of not wasting supply or fuel.  This is because it is entirely driven by demand factors hence it only visits participating bases which have a supply/fuel shortfall.  As the participating bases should be well away from the frontlines they will be occupied by few units and their supply/fuel demands will not result in spoilage.

Continuous supply convoys are not demand driven.  They will continue to dump supply/fuel, without regard to the spoilage limit, essentially until the player stops the operation.

It is the responsibility of the player to understand the ramifications of their actions.  This is always the case, not just with regard to auto convoy or continuous supply.  Just because these two features do not generate boomskis is no reason to misuse them.  Its like players who don't bother understanding that in AE aircraft can only have one device attached to their centreline hardpoint, then complain when they discover the Vildebeest drop tank device and torpedo device are centreline attached, hence one can have one device but not both.

Alfred




rockmedic109 -> RE: CS-Continuous Supply question (6/25/2020 5:51:12 AM)

I tried using the Auto Convoy at first and I found it was more work than it was worth. I play allied side and find myself swimming in supplies so it is easy to dump a years supply at all the backwater bases and not bother to look at it for several months. The CS convoys are easier, more intuitive and my only problem was setting one up for a island that was taken and having a couple of xAKs sail obliviously into an enemy harbor. Lesson learned.

CS convoy is just easier for me to wrap my pea-sized brain around...and I like easy.




kbfchicago -> RE: CS-Continuous Supply question (6/25/2020 12:04:19 PM)

In my case, I used it early on but found I enjoyed the level of control that comes from manually setting up supply routes or using the more targeted CS convoys. Appreciate the reinforcement of the concept Alfred, perhaps it's time I give it another shot. Now that I've got significantly more experience with the game am likely to better exploit this feature.




Alfred -> RE: CS-Continuous Supply question (6/25/2020 1:43:25 PM)

To remover any doubt, I am not advocating one way or the other as to whether Auto Convoy or Continuous Supply should be utilised.  There are pros and cons for their use.  All I am saying is unless either system is properly set up, sub optimal results ensue.  To date almost all commentary regarding Auto Convoys emanates from players who do not set it up properly.

Alfred




Dili -> RE: CS-Continuous Supply question (6/25/2020 2:02:21 PM)

But you can't still take resources back with auto convoy.




Alfred -> RE: CS-Continuous Supply question (6/25/2020 2:18:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

But you can't still take resources back with auto convoy.


Who said that. It certainly wasn't me. More importantly it is contrary to what Don Bowen posted.

It really shouldn't be left to me, 11 years after the game was released, to have to correct patently false information. Especially when the correct information is very easily found on the forum.

Alfred




Nomad -> RE: CS-Continuous Supply question (6/25/2020 3:55:55 PM)

I want to state that I was not disparaging the auto-convoy system. I have not really used it because I do not feel it fits my play style( and my desire to micromanage ), not that there is anything wrong with it.

The OP's title asked about CS convoys, not auto-convoys. I have no idea if the auto-convoy system will allow the return of resources or not.




Lowpe -> RE: CS-Continuous Supply question (6/25/2020 11:54:19 PM)

The documentation in the manual on auto convoys isn't all that helpful, to be honest.

Takes a fair bit of experimentation to use...I think speed is very important in task force selection.



[image]local://upfiles/44178/7447A465D6664D34B5DC6ED2B69BC058.jpg[/image]




RangerJoe -> RE: CS-Continuous Supply question (6/26/2020 12:20:02 AM)

Just think of all of the changes done after the manual was made.

My OCB says that I should do all the convoys myself, even if they are CS convoys.




Dili -> RE: CS-Continuous Supply question (6/26/2020 5:33:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

But you can't still take resources back with auto convoy.


Who said that. It certainly wasn't me. More importantly it is contrary to what Don Bowen posted.

It really shouldn't be left to me, 11 years after the game was released, to have to correct patently false information. Especially when the correct information is very easily found on the forum.

Alfred


I said and i maybe wrong but until now i haven't found any information to contradict it.




Lowpe -> RE: CS-Continuous Supply question (6/26/2020 6:49:27 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili



I said and i maybe wrong but until now i haven't found any information to contradict it.



Says it clearly in the manual, for Japan at least.




Dili -> RE: CS-Continuous Supply question (6/26/2020 8:24:24 PM)

Yes it says there but it is not working.

It is sending TF's to collect resource without supply and sending TF's with supply.




Nomad -> RE: CS-Continuous Supply question (6/26/2020 8:32:19 PM)

I think it works as intended, but you have to carefully read the manual:

15.5 AUTOMATIC CONVOYS
By using the Automatic Convoys system, players can select certain ship types (AKís, TKís, and
certain escort supply ships) to be placed into a computer controlled system that will attempt
to keep bases supplied with needed supplies and fuel, and for the Japanese, will attempt to
pick up resources and oil to return them to Japan for production. Ships are put into this system
by the player at Osaka, San Francisco, or Karachi, and bases must be specifically set to be
included in the system to receive supplies/fuel or have resources picked up (do this by pressing
on the Auto Convoy System button at the top of the main game screen; bases may also be
added into the Auto Convoy system from the Base orders screen).

The important word is OR in the highlighted portion. It does not say it will deliver supplies and return resources with the same TF. It says it will send a TF to deliver supplies or fuel or it will send a TF to pick up resources.




BBfanboy -> RE: CS-Continuous Supply question (6/26/2020 8:36:46 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

Yes it says there but it is not working.

It is sending TF's to collect resource without supply and sending TF's with supply.

With CS convoys you have to start them and home-port them in the port where they will load their main cargo, and then after that you can specify a return cargo from the destination port. I don't use autoconvoy, but I would expect the same - no going out to "pick up" the main cargo. You cannot introduce a third port into the CS route except as a refueling waypoint - i.e. you can't deliver your original cargo to the destination port and then divert to another port for the return cargo. I expect the same for autoconvoy.




Dili -> RE: CS-Continuous Supply question (6/27/2020 12:31:30 AM)

Thanks i have found that in Continuous Supply you can do that, the button is available to be clicked.




Alfred -> RE: CS-Continuous Supply question (6/27/2020 12:42:09 AM)

TFs created under the Automatic Convoy system have always, subject to certain conditions, been capable of†returning back to San Francisco, Colombo or Osaka, with raw materials.† This state of affairs has always been obvious from:

(a) s.15.5 of the manual
(b) posts dated 19 July 2009 and 8 August 2010 from Don Bowen
(c) post dated 2 January 2011 from michaelm75au
(d) patch #6, code change fix #71
(e) January 2011 explanation from michaem75au in various posts regarding the circumstances which led to (d) above
(f) players posting their Operations Reports which list specific TFs loading resources

Up to a point, I can understand players who aren't interested in using the Auto Convoy system not doing any of the above homework but where is the excuse for those actually interested in the system to not do their research.† There is no compelling reason why I should do their work, especially when zero facts have been provided to support the assertion that raw materials are not carried on the return trip.


For the benefit of those who have tried to be helpful in this thread, I will point out the following pertinent conditions.

1.† The Auto Convoy system is entirely operated by the computer.† The only human input is in selecting the participating bases and providing the ships.

2.† Based on demand, processed goods (supplies/fuel) are carried on the outward trip to participating bases.† For the return trip from that base, the same TF may load raw materials (resources/oil) under certain circumstances.

3.† Only those raw materials surplus to local requirements are potentially available to be loaded for the return trip.† Before you ask, no I won't state how the surplus is determined.† The devs have had many opportunities to disclose that threshold if they were inclined to do so.

4.† Loading of any return cargo is dependent on the TF being actually docked.† As the system is operated by the computer the standard rules for auto docking apply, the player cannot manually force docking.

5.† Originally whether a return cargo was taken on board was dependent solely on checks at that base.† The patch #6 change introduced a further check to take into account the raw material stocks held at the originating†base (that is San Francisco, Colombo or Osaka) as appropriate.† If a bug has been introduced, you can thank the Allied players who convinced michaelm75au that San Francisco did not need the delivery of raw materials.

6.† Irrespective of whether a†base has surplus raw materials, or the TF can dock at the port, not all bases qualify to provide a return cargo.† Qualification is dependent on regional location.††† Again, before you ask, no I won't state how the qualification is determined.† The devs have had many opportunities to disclose the regional boundaries if they were inclined to do so.

7.† Finally there is the obvious point that the returning TF must contain ships possessing appropriate cargo holds which can carry the surplus raw materials.



With zero facts provided, I see absolutely no bug being in play.† Merely the appropriate conditions not being met.

Alfred

Edit: oops, corrected an important typo in point 2 above re what constitutes raw mat4rials.




RangerJoe -> RE: CS-Continuous Supply question (6/27/2020 1:12:09 AM)

As I previously stated, you have to be smarter than what you are working with. If you do not do the research as to what can be done and how, then don't complain if it does not work the way that you want it to work.




Zorch -> RE: CS-Continuous Supply question (6/27/2020 1:19:01 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

TFs created under the Automatic Convoy system have always, subject to certain conditions, been capable of†returning back to San Francisco, Colombo or Osaka, with raw materials.† This state of affairs has always been obvious from:

(a) s.15.5 of the manual
(b) posts dated 19 July 2009 and 8 August 2010 from Don Bowen
(c) post dated 2 January 2011 from michaelm75au
(d) patch #6, code change fix #71
(e) January 2011 explanation from michaem75au in various posts regarding the circumstances which led to (d) above
(f) players posting their Operations Reports which list specific TFs loading resources

Up to a point, I can understand players who aren't interested in using the Auto Convoy system not doing any of the above homework but where is the excuse for those actually interested in the system to not do their research.† There is no compelling reason why I should do their work, especially when zero facts have been provided to support the assertion that raw materials are not carried on the return trip.


For the benefit of those who have tried to be helpful in this thread, I will point out the following pertinent conditions.

1.† The Auto Convoy system is entirely operated by the computer.† The only human input is in selecting the participating bases and providing the ships.

2.† Based on demand, processed goods (supplies/fuel) are carried on the outward trip to participating bases.† For the return trip from that base, the same TF may load raw materials (resources/fuel) under certain circumstances.

3.† Only those raw materials surplus to local requirements are potentially available to be loaded for the return trip.† Before you ask, no I won't state how the surplus is determined.† The devs have had many opportunities to disclose that threshold if they were inclined to do so.

4.† Loading of any return cargo is dependent on the TF being actually docked.† As the system is operated by the computer the standard rules for auto docking apply, the player cannot manually force docking.

5.† Originally whether a return cargo was taken on board was dependent solely on checks at that base.† The patch #6 change introduced a further check to take into account the raw material stocks held at the originating†base (that is San Francisco, Colombo or Osaka) as appropriate.† If a bug has been introduced, you can thank the Allied players who convinced michaelm75au that San Francisco did not need the delivery of raw materials.

6.† Irrespective of whether a†base has surplus raw materials, or the TF can dock at the port, not all bases qualify to provide a return cargo.† Qualification is dependent on regional location.††† Again, before you ask, no I won't state how the qualification is determined.† The devs have had many opportunities to disclose the regional boundaries if they were inclined to do so.

7.† Finally there is the obvious point that the returning TF must contain ships possessing appropriate cargo holds which can carry the surplus raw materials.



With zero facts provided, I see absolutely no bug being in play.† Merely the appropriate conditions not being met.

Alfred

Thor has spoken! The game is working as designed.

[image]local://upfiles/34241/9D292BD0D11344689A4924D4CAF5B906.jpg[/image]




Lowpe -> RE: CS-Continuous Supply question (6/27/2020 2:14:10 AM)

I don't normally put bases in that have resources or oil to be brought back to Osaka, but will do so to see what happens...

I tend to set up the Japanese Islands around Osaka and then I pretty much simply forget about it, only checking every now and then to make sure there are escorts with the convoys once some Allied subs show up in the area.

I also tend to use low vp ships like xakls trading the added fuel cost for less clicks but also to make use of the smaller ports better.

Ok, not the best example but the convoy to Naha is picking up resources. It is not taking supplies there, since there is 50K supplies already there and just two JNAF air base units there, plus a small construction engineer unit and the small cd unit at Naga plus 20 or so planes.

Interesting to note that the tanker convoy is small enough to dock at a level 1 port, but isn't docked at Koshiki. 1,550 tons to dock at a port level 1 (6,000 ton capacity).





[image]local://upfiles/44178/E1184DEB726C42F2A1645AC56CFC7F38.jpg[/image]




jdsrae -> RE: CS-Continuous Supply question (6/27/2020 2:38:00 AM)

Iíve noticed that even if they are small enough, TFs donít auto dock at size 1 or 2 ports.
I think they do at size 3+ so Iíve expanded a few ports to size 3 to avoid having to keep checkin those TFs.




Lowpe -> RE: CS-Continuous Supply question (6/27/2020 12:12:08 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jdsrae

Iíve noticed that even if they are small enough, TFs donít auto dock at size 1 or 2 ports.
I think they do at size 3+ so Iíve expanded a few ports to size 3 to avoid having to keep checkin those TFs.


I never paid that much attention to this before. The system worked for what I wanted it to...but I think I will play around a bit more with it.

The biggest problem with auto convoy for Japan I think is the wasted fuel going to Osaka I think, making it less than ideal for resource convoys, but an ok trade off for supply convoys, imo.






Dili -> RE: CS-Continuous Supply question (6/28/2020 2:57:00 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

As I previously stated, you have to be smarter than what you are working with. If you do not do the research as to what can be done and how, then don't complain if it does not work the way that you want it to work.


Why you doing statements about what you don't know about?

1 -The auto convoy is sending on propose convoys to bring resources, it goes to that port - which btw have no industry - and takes them to Osaka

2- the auto convoy is also sending TF's to that port with supply. They don't bring resources back.






Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.0390625