Fuel production question

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Fuel production question

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Fuel production question

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Fuel production question - 9/7/2005 3:09:51 AM

Slaughtermeyer

Posts: 156
Joined: 5/10/2002
From: Pennsylvania
Status: offline

I thought about posting this in the bug reporting subforum but I'm hoping that I overlooked something and there's no bug. I have version 1.60. I ran a head-to-head scenario 15 for 1 day as a test, and I found that after 1 day the amount of fuel in Perth and Brisbane remained the same as before, 10K in Perth and 12K in Brisbane. According to the manual, each oil center produces daily "6 oil points that go into storage at that location and 1 fuel point that are added to the base." Therefore, both Perth and Brisbane should have added to their starting fuel quantity. As expected, Perth went from 0 to 300 oil storage and Brisbane went from 0 to 150. However, the amount of fuel remained at its starting level of 10K in Perth and 12K in Brisbane. I thought at first that maybe the extra fuel was moved via the auto movement system, but the amount of fuel requested for Brisbane is 19K so it should not have been moved if it were produced (Perth starts with 9500 fuel requested). Can anyone come up with an explanation?

< Message edited by Slaughtermeyer -- 9/7/2005 3:14:35 AM >

_____________________________

We must not allow ourselves to be drawn into a trial of the causes of the war,for our position is that no grievances or policies will justify resort to aggressive war.It is utterly renounced and condemned as an instrument of policy. R.Jackson,1945

Post #: 1

RE: Fuel production question - 9/7/2005 3:34:44 AM

witpqs

Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

I can only conjecture that it was moved by rail as you suspect. The logistics movement behavior is sometimes really wierd.

(in reply to Slaughtermeyer)

Post #: 2

RE: Fuel production question - 9/7/2005 4:52:39 AM

Slaughtermeyer

Posts: 156
Joined: 5/10/2002
From: Pennsylvania
Status: offline

I did some additional testing to see if indeed the fuel was moved by rail. Only 2 bases had an increase in fuel. Sydney's fuel had increased by 600 to 8600 and Melbourne's by 300 to 8300. Far too much for the 75 (50+25) that Perth and Brisbane are supposed to produce. I then remembered that heavy industry also is supposed to produce 1.33 fuel for every heavy industry point. However, that would mean that Sydney's 600 heavy industry should have produced 798 fuel (600x1.33) and Melbourne 399 (300x1.33).
It appears that fuel produced by heavy industry is actually 1x the number of heavy industry and not 1.33x as stated in the manual. It also appears that oil centers do not produce any fuel at all.
Unless someone can come up with an explanation as to how to reconcile the difference between what the manual says and reality, I will assume that anything the manual says can possibly be false unless it is tested to be true.

_____________________________

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 3

RE: Fuel production question - 9/7/2005 5:14:52 AM

Slaughtermeyer

Posts: 156
Joined: 5/10/2002
From: Pennsylvania
Status: offline

I had a look at some of the Dutch oil centers, and it appears that some oil centers do produce fuel. Palembang's fuel went up from 3000 to 3700, but Soerabaja's fuel remained at 240,000. Maybe oil centers with not very much fuel will produce fuel, while those with very much fuel will not produce any fuel. If this theory is true, then what exactly is "very much" needs to determined by exhaustive testing. In the case of Perth, it would mean that 10K of fuel is enough fuel to cause fuel production to shut down.

_____________________________

(in reply to Slaughtermeyer)

Post #: 4

RE: Fuel production question - 9/7/2005 11:12:00 AM

MarcA

Posts: 1181
Joined: 3/2/2005
From: England
Status: offline

Slaughtermeyer

I have checked this out previously as have many others. The oil centres do produce fuel as they should though they produce at x1 as you discovered not x1.33, a well known mistake in the manual. As for fuel levels at specific bases unfortuntely you will need to monitor all bases in Australia to gain an idea of what is going on, as fuel is distributed between all of them almost constantly. Just watching the levels at one or two bases does not give the full picture. You will also need to account for any refueling of ships during the monitoring period as well.

As for Perth requiring 19000 fuel, other bases have minimum requirements as well so they also need fuel. I think this is common sense, would you rather fuel up Perth to 19000 first before any is shipped to Brisbane or Sydney where your fleets are, I know I wouldn't.

_____________________________

(in reply to Slaughtermeyer)

Post #: 5

RE: Fuel production question - 9/7/2005 1:13:22 PM

Slaughtermeyer

Posts: 156
Joined: 5/10/2002
From: Pennsylvania
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mantill
The oil centres do produce fuel as they should though they produce at x1 as you discovered not x1.33, a well known mistake in the manual.

If it's so "well known" how is a person who bought the game about a week ago supposed to know this? Does Matrix expect people who buy the game to read every post in the forum since the game came out over a year ago to find out what mistakes the manual has? I don't think it would have been too hard for Matrix to change the 1.33 into a 1 in the manual file that people get when they download the game. Or at least mention it in the FAQ.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mantill
As for fuel levels at specific bases unfortuntely you will need to monitor all bases in Australia to gain an idea of what is going on, as fuel is distributed between all of them almost constantly.

Maybe I didn't make it sufficiently clear in my post, but that's exactly what I did, I checked the fuel level of all the bases in Australia, and only Sydney and Melbourne had a gain in fuel. There are no task forces that exist or are in a position to use fuel in Australia during the first two days, so there still is no explanation of what happened to the 75 that Perth and Brisbane should have produced.

_____________________________

(in reply to MarcA)

Post #: 6

RE: Fuel production question - 9/7/2005 1:44:40 PM

MarcA

Posts: 1181
Joined: 3/2/2005
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Slaughtermeyer

If it's so "well known" how is a person who bought the game about a week ago supposed to know this? Does Matrix expect people who buy the game to read every post in the forum since the game came out over a year ago to find out what mistakes the manual has? I don't think it would have been too hard for Matrix to change the 1.33 into a 1 in the manual file that people get when they download the game. Or at least mention it in the FAQ.

This point has been brought up a few times as well. As far as I know Matrix have no intention of correcting the manual. There are quiet a few mistakes in it but generally it should guide you well. Some guys got together and started to write there own manual based on the wikpedia model for this same reason. I am sure some kind sole will post the link for it.

Before you ask, no one has compiled a list of these mistakes. Or they didn't when I asked about 6 months ago

quote:

Maybe I didn't make it sufficiently clear in my post, but that's exactly what I did, I checked the fuel level of all the bases in Australia, and only Sydney and Melbourne had a gain in fuel. There are no task forces that exist or are in a position to use fuel in Australia during the first two days, so there still is no explanation of what happened to the 75 that Perth and Brisbane should have produced.

What can I say, I got the equations to balance. Typically I have overwritten my notes from the testing I did but I seem to remember at Perth the fuel didn't move out often at the beginning so you could watch it accumulate over a few turns at the appropriate rate

_____________________________

(in reply to Slaughtermeyer)

Post #: 7

RE: Fuel production question - 9/7/2005 2:13:40 PM

WhoCares

Posts: 653
Joined: 7/6/2004
Status: offline

Optionally, you might also check the Link: WitP Wiki

E.g. the Wiki: Economy Flowchart

Of course, everybody is strongly encouraged to add more such useful content, as it is the philosophy of such a Wiki

_____________________________

(in reply to MarcA)

Post #: 8

RE: Fuel production question - 9/7/2005 3:34:26 PM

tsimmonds

Posts: 5498
Joined: 2/6/2004
From: astride Mason and Dixon's Line
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Slaughtermeyer

quote:

ORIGINAL: mantill
The oil centres do produce fuel as they should though they produce at x1 as you discovered not x1.33, a well known mistake in the manual.

If it's so "well known" how is a person who bought the game about a week ago supposed to know this? Does Matrix expect people who buy the game to read every post in the forum since the game came out over a year ago to find out what mistakes the manual has? I don't think it would have been too hard for Matrix to change the 1.33 into a 1 in the manual file that people get when they download the game. Or at least mention it in the FAQ.

This isn't really as big a deal as it might seem. Except for the occasional local shortage, you should never really have any fuel problems, as there is scads of it everywhere.

Soerabaja may be maxxed out on fuel storage for its size. There is a certain maximum level of fuel and supply storage possible at a given base, determined by its size. Beyond this maximum storage level, fuel and supplies evaporate rapidly.

I can confirm that all oil centers definitely do produce fuel, 1 fuel point per 1 undamaged oil center per turn. The only exception would be an oil center without at least a size 1 port.

< Message edited by irrelevant -- 9/7/2005 3:36:09 PM >

_____________________________

Fear the kitten!

(in reply to Slaughtermeyer)

Post #: 9

RE: Fuel production question - 9/8/2005 5:25:49 AM

Slaughtermeyer

Posts: 156
Joined: 5/10/2002
From: Pennsylvania
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

quote:

ORIGINAL: Slaughtermeyer

quote:

ORIGINAL: mantill
The oil centres do produce fuel as they should though they produce at x1 as you discovered not x1.33, a well known mistake in the manual.

If it's so "well known" how is a person who bought the game about a week ago supposed to know this? Does Matrix expect people who buy the game to read every post in the forum since the game came out over a year ago to find out what mistakes the manual has? I don't think it would have been too hard for Matrix to change the 1.33 into a 1 in the manual file that people get when they download the game. Or at least mention it in the FAQ.

Soerabaja may be maxxed out on fuel storage for its size. There is a certain maximum level of fuel and supply storage possible at a given base, determined by its size. Beyond this maximum storage level, fuel and supplies evaporate rapidly.

Yes, spoilage can account for the apparent lack of production that I'm seeing, but in that case the forumla for spoilage in the manual appears to not be accurate. Spoilage would occur at Soerabaja as called for in the manual if the formula was accurate, which would make it appear that Soerabaja is not producing when it actually is. However, spoilage should not occur at Perth or Brisbane if the formula was accurate because the amount of fuel there is well below the spoilage threshold as defined by the formula.

_____________________________

(in reply to tsimmonds)

Post #: 10

Page: [1]

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Fuel production question

Page: [1]