castor troy
Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004 From: Austria Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Nemo121 Can you provide links to tests which show supply not being used to repair bases? I am very curious as it really does appear to be used and the manual does make it clear that supplies are used to effect repairs ( yeah I know the manual is FUBAR but when it says what you seem to see you tend to believe it ). As to supplies not being a problem. Well, if 80,000 tons doesn't get spoiled the other 320,000 tons he lands DOES. So if 80% wastage isn't a problem for you then that's fine. I would detest 80% wastage and view it as a significant planning error personally - not one which would interfere with the mission's success but one which would rob me of my enjoyment of the operation as I play not to win but to put together knife-edge, succesful operations and the finer the margin the more I enjoy the op. 80% wastage in a succesful operation means, to me, that I could have run 4 more concomittant, succesful, operations and thus, actually, it just proved that I over-committed and wasteful -- essentially a failure.I know others don't share that approach but that's where my comments come from. Also I'd point out that with a single-engined plane costing about 20 tons of supply to "spawn" on Iwo the loss of 50 planes will cost 1000 tons in terms of respawning. Still, the fact that repairs don't cost supply does change the arithmetic a bit alright. I think that while Iwo's position is strong you guys are both being FAR too blase about the problems. 80% spoilage is horrific. I always do the math to ensure there is NO spoilage. I even dock ships and leave them there until the base has used up enough to let them unload without causing spoilage. There ARE areas there which a Japanese player can capitalise on. I don't think John will do so succesfully but that's no reason not to point them out. Overall what Japan SHOULD do is simply interdict the supply runs to Iwo using KB and rely on LBA to blunt further advances. This would be the indirect approach and would be asynchronous enough to gain some useful advantage. John isn't an indirect thinker though so it won't happen and he's limited to optimising his force on force attritional engagement. Accepting 80% spoilage is completely outside of my mindset though. OUCH !!! A Japanese player who accepted 80% inefficiency in his operations would go down to defeat in no time at all - and deservedly so. I´m sorry, the search function didn´t bring up a result, but AndyMac just recently confirmed that repairs don´t need any supplies, only building. Same was just confirmed by Kereguelen. About the spoilage: yes, you are correct, would 320.000 supplies (sorry, I´ve misread your first post, I read 40.000 supplies) spoil it would be a problem, BUT spoilage doesn´t mean that 320.000 supplies would just vanish in a couple of days. I have never really tested it but it would take an eternity to really see the effect of spoilage and until then, the base will be big enough. And if you are really concerned about spoilage, the easiest way would be to just not unload more than 150.000 and keep the rest on the ships set to "do not unload". Voila, no spoilage at all, unload more supply when needed. It doesn´t matter if there are 30 big AKs parked at Iwo (30x7000 =210.000 if the big AKs have that capacity in BigB mod). Really, spoilage IMO will be the smallest problem for the Allied at Iwo. But again, I´ve got no idea what Canoerebel really brought in terms of eng, supply, flak, etc. Of course, the Allied supply line from Midway would be in danger of being raided by KB, but to interdict it? I would just use a carrier TF to escort huge supply or troop convoys. Of course, steady, smaller convoys can be interdicted, but if supply ever gets low, just put up a 100 AK convoy, escort it with 7 fleet carriers and I would be glad to meet KB...
< Message edited by castor troy -- 5/30/2008 10:24:29 PM >
_____________________________
|