quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs
You guys are wrong. Doing so is very situation dependent.

These two statements are in opposition.

Supply is "destroyed" by use.
No to both. In this situation it's the wrong call, and supply is consumed by use, not destroyed.

All I'm arguing is to secure production right here, with no time lag, where possible, while the supply pile is un-used by combat . . yet.

I wouldn't repair LI in Melbourne. I would in HK.

In Hong Kong you can set supply to stockpile and it will only leave the base to supply units within range. As an aside, that might be what Dan wants at the time. I really doubt that he will have so little transit able to bring supply to the China coast that his units there will starve.

Here is a key point: any supply generated by repaired LI will also be pulled out to nourish nearby Chinese Army units. Bases do not retain any supply in the face of starving LCU calling for supply. At one time they did but they do not any longer. That change was made a long time ago.

Before this fades into the AAR mists . . .

Yeah, I beat them horses. Especially dead ones. At the risk of hijacking, a few more thoughts. This stuff might be better on the main, but I think CR likes to let the AAR go off track a bit, and this doesn't risk exposing a supply discussion to John. It's also pretty esoteric; after eight years those of us here from the beginning have beat most topics to death.

Above, my choice of phrase "supply is 'destroyed' by use" was on purpose. The quote indicates I know it's not destroyed, but I could have worded it better. I meant it's not available for any other purpose. Not that its consumption has no utility.

A supply pile at a base, say, here in China, has several uses. It can gross up the garrison LCUs' internal supply to required + 20 (where it stops.) It can fund combat operations in up to three dimensions (air, land, naval.) It can flow to neighboring bases. It can supply LCUs in the field. (You pointing this out was something I had not overtly considered.) It can build infrastructure. Or it can repair damaged industry.

So, control now. Some of these paths can be stopped. Some can be regulated. Some are wide open and automatic. Flowing to field LCUs is the last, but only after other, earlier checked, uses for supply are satisfied. A garrison will take on supply before a distant field LCU so far as I know. I think an AF will be expanded first too. Not as sure of that. But ultimately, if there's enough supply, field LCUs--Chinese units here--will dip in.

That can be a good thing or a bad thing, depending on the player's plans and the overall status of the theater. But I think it's true that the only way to prevent or minimize that flow to distant LCUs is to either burn up the supply 1) fighting with the garrison (or flying missions, or supplying TFs if a port), 2) building infrastructure, or 3) encapsulating 1000 points of supply per day in future industrial outflows, such as LI supply repair. Repairing LI captures supply in a very overt way and holds it local, to be used over the rest of the campaign. The ROI is bad, yes. But it's positive. Sending that 1000 supply to Chinese Corps X 30 hexes away (and losing some in transit) might be a better use, or it might not, depending on circumstances.

Now, as I said to CR in another post, I'm under no illusions what local LI can do. The vast majority of Allied supply will come from far away, by ship. But local LI is an insurance policy. It doesn't need time, or fuel, or escorts, or player management to happen. In most cases it won't be damaged and it will produce by itself. It can't be turned off. If it is damaged usually it's only partly. If the damage is minor against the total it might not be worth repairing. And if the LI is located somewhere that shipborne supply is easy and safe, then the ROI takes precedence. But IMO it's incorrect to say "never repair LI." Sometimes you should.

It's also important to point out that not everywhere with LI is China. LI production on Java or Sumatra, for example, is a different set of variables. Self-funding Java after it is taken makes a fair bit of sense, from a shipping POV as well as player task overhead.

As an aside, outside LI repair, the questions of whether to repair other types of damage are even more interesting. For example, I would argue that without exception an Allied player should instantly repair any and all Shipyard damage, no matter location and no matter size. The ROI is instantaneous and significant, even if the yard can only fix subs and DDs. The question of repairing Oil or Refineries is more difficult. I would not repair Oil on Boela, for example. Northern Borneo? Probably yes, in 1944-45. The ROI on the supply is fairly nonsensical there. It's apples to oranges. The fleet freedom bought with a drink at Miri can't really be weighed against the supply lift equation from CONUS. They're measured in different units.

Anyway, LI repair.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

John is also playing the clock. That route for your convoys plus the need to pull back major carrier assets to escort them chews up additional time. If you get sloppy trying to save time - well, how many VP for a 100 Liberty ships and/or Victory ships? Add a bunch of LCU to that. John can only threaten that extended SLOC with a navy. If and when he gives battle any sort of victory will make things easier and quicker for you.

The clock. The clock. I hate the clock!

You're right.

With the purchase CR has in various places there is a lot less of a need to haul log from PH or CONUS. One reason to focus on HK, and to a lesser extent, Canton. Max Manila's supply production, and the rest of the PI. Repair if needed. The Allies don't need to worry about LI breakeven. The repair investment can be made up in 1945 easily with fetched supply if it's critical. Right now supply on point is far more important than ROI by August 1945 on industry repair.

And the best way to get the KB to behave is to weld it to the pier. Take the rest of his fuel out in a concerted bombing effort.

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Spot on. From "Intruder in the Dust" CR laments that young people today don't know about Pickett's Charge and it is true. But then again, I don't think many young people read Faulker either. That is even more of a tragedy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

John is also playing the clock. That route for your convoys plus the need to pull back major carrier assets to escort them chews up additional time. If you get sloppy trying to save time - well, how many VP for a 100 Liberty ships and/or Victory ships? Add a bunch of LCU to that. John can only threaten that extended SLOC with a navy. If and when he gives battle any sort of victory will make things easier and quicker for you.

The clock. The clock. I hate the clock!

You're right.

With the purchase CR has in various places there is a lot less of a need to haul log from PH or CONUS. One reason to focus on HK, and to a lesser extent, Canton. Max Manila's supply production, and the rest of the PI. Repair if needed. The Allies don't need to worry about LI breakeven. The repair investment can be made up in 1945 easily with fetched supply if it's critical. Right now supply on point is far more important than ROI by August 1945 on industry repair.

And the best way to get the KB to behave is to weld it to the pier. Take the rest of his fuel out in a concerted bombing effort.

I've thought about this and come to the simple conclusion that it's still not worth repairing.

The reason being that if you spend 1000 supplies repairing a point, that's 1000 supplies you don't have. Doesn't matter that you can bring in more. If I'm actually short on supplies, I'd rather have the 1000 supplies today than the 90 supplies over the next 3 months and 1000 more 3 months from now.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Bullwinkle is right: tangential discussions are welcome here!

Aspects of this supply/LI discussion is a bit over my head. I feel like I'm in 10th grade physics again, sometimes grasping what's being taught but knowing that I'll need to buckle down at home and really learn it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Am I missing something or does LI generate 1 supply per day per LI point?

Edit to add: I am asking just to make sure I am on track, nothing you wrote.

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Good discussion. Dead horse? This pony runs!

Not sure if supply will ever go directly to a unit 30 hexes away considering the terrain cost of supply movement (max 100).

I picked 30 hexes from a dark place.

Remember to stockpile supply and it will not leave the base to go to another base. Don't want it to supply planes? Don't fly them or take replacements. Don't want it to expand the base? Don't expand the base. Don't want it to rearm ships? Don't rearm ships. Don't want it to buy replacements for LCU? Turn off replacements for units in the base or within range. Same for repairing anything you don't want to repair.

The only use of supply that I can think of which is out of your easy control is supply for LCU within range (including inside that base but excluding those inside other bases). You can turn off replacements in those LCU but their daily usage of supply (including for combat) can result in them drawing supply from the base in question.

Yes, you can turn off replacements. I was envisioning more LCUs arriving battered from combat or the field, and drawing their internal, organic supply up to required +20. Depending on their size and number this can be a fair bit of supply. You can't turn that feature off.

Supply can also be destroyed by enemy action. Presuming the base is safe from capture, that means air or naval bombardment. Converting that supply to LI does not make it safe.

No, but it makes it safer. Supply is the easiest thing to destroy in a base by air or naval attack. Easier than Fuel. LI in comparison is very robust.

Even if LI is harder to hit from the air (I'm not certain about that but it does seem tough in my experience) each hit wacks 1,000 supply used for the repairs minus whatever was yielded up to that time. If you have adequate AA and/or CAP to protect the LI, then you also have adequate AA and/or CAP to protect the raw supply, yes?

Neither protects from naval bombardment. And it's incredibly rare to have a large supply pile at a forward base and no CAP. Theoretical, but not usual.

Provided that you take the steps to keep the supply in the base in question, repairing the LI is a marginal call at best.

I'd go better than "marginal.": Maybe to "thoughtful." [:'(]

And supply produced by the LI will also go to LCU in the field with none held in reserve. In other words, when units in the field need supply, the base will give up all it has if that much is needed, bringing the base to 0 on hand. Consider what that does to CAP flying and AA firing before you decide to store that supply in LI.

As above, if supply goes to zero you've got bigger problems. I've never seen a base's supply sucked to zero by field LCUs. Not even Chungking in 1942. Maybe the reason is so many bases can contribute, and there aren't any geographies, or many, where there's only one base to draw from. If my field LCUs were pulling so much out that I couldn't defend my main operating base(s), I'd move some LCUs farther away and starve them before I'd lose a major VP base. In that case combat would be so intense that LI production would be #10 on a list of the top five problems to worry about.

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Emmylou vs Ronstadt is close but goes to Emmylou because she is a songwriter as well as a great singer.

Joan over Stevie for the same reason, and because in the early 1970s I went to a concert of her's at Cole Field House at the University of Maryland. At the time she refused to allow the promoters to charge more than $2.50 for a ticket. God bless her.

Emmylou vs Joan is no contest though. I have had a crush on Emmylou ever since I discovered her and Graham Parsons while listening to progressive radio in 1973 during the summer break from Maryland when I worked for the Praise the Lord Decorating Company. That in itself is another tale for another day. [;)]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58


As above, if supply goes to zero you've got bigger problems. I've never seen a base's supply sucked to zero by field LCUs. Not even Chungking in 1942. Maybe the reason is so many bases can contribute, and there aren't any geographies, or many, where there's only one base to draw from. If my field LCUs were pulling so much out that I couldn't defend my main operating base(s), I'd move some LCUs farther away and starve them before I'd lose a major VP base. In that case combat would be so intense that LI production would be #10 on a list of the top five problems to worry about.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Emmylou vs Ronstadt is close but goes to Emmylou because she is a songwriter as well as a great singer.

Joan over Stevie for the same reason, and because in the early 1970s I went to a concert of her's at Cole Field House at the University of Maryland. At the time she refused to allow the promoters to charge more than $2.50 for a ticket. God bless her.

Emmylou vs Joan is no contest though. I have had a crush on Emmylou ever since I discovered her and Graham Parsons while listening to progressive radio in 1973 during the summer break from Maryland when I worked for the Praise the Lord Decorating Company. That in itself is another tale for another day. [;)]

Linda Ronstadt is also a songwriter, and helped the Eagles get their start by letting them record "Desperado". I like the clarity of her voice over the smoky, husky tones of Stevie Nix.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

Headed for CR's wheelhouse now.....

"Iron Dawn...The Monitor, The Merrimack and the Civil War Sea Battle that Changed History" by Richard Snow

I'm now about 2/3 in and it is March 8, 1862 in Hampton Roads. This is my first book on these two ships exclusively. I would recommended it as its been a good balance of supposed first hand accounts of those involved in development of both sides. Interesting to hear some guns are by shell weight (32-pounder) or gun barrel (8 inch).

Any other good books on just the naval side of Civil War??

quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

Headed for CR's wheelhouse now.....

"Iron Dawn...The Monitor, The Merrimack and the Civil War Sea Battle that Changed History" by Richard Snow

I'm now about 2/3 in and it is March 8, 1862 in Hampton Roads. This is my first book on these two ships exclusively. I would recommended it as its been a good balance of supposed first hand accounts of those involved in development of both sides. Interesting to hear some guns are by shell weight (32-pounder) or gun barrel (8 inch).

Any other good books on just the naval side of Civil War??

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

Headed for CR's wheelhouse now.....

"Iron Dawn...The Monitor, The Merrimack and the Civil War Sea Battle that Changed History" by Richard Snow

I'm now about 2/3 in and it is March 8, 1862 in Hampton Roads. This is my first book on these two ships exclusively. I would recommended it as its been a good balance of supposed first hand accounts of those involved in development of both sides. Interesting to hear some guns are by shell weight (32-pounder) or gun barrel (8 inch).

Any other good books on just the naval side of Civil War??

The title of that book turns me off - the Merrimack was the wooden version of that ship, but was the CSS Virginia when rebuilt as an ironclad.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

8/15/44

Thanks for contributing a lot of information about light industry and supply. I've learned a lot.

Thanks for participating in the quarterfinals of the Notable Women Singers event. I enjoyed the comments and insights. It was more fun than "Ginger or Mary Ann?"

I noted Makee Learn's suggestion for an index of some kind. Good idea, though I don't know if I have the patience to try it. This dadgum AAR is now at 361 pages.

But I did think of Makee Learn (and a certain proclivity of his, involving Google images) when I saw this ship on the list of new arrivals. For those of us of a certain age, the name will remind us of something noteworthy.

[image]local://upfiles/8143/D5413B6B8DAA4142AC1AC883A199DCCF.jpg[/image]

quote:

I noted Makee Learn's suggestion for an index of some kind. Good idea, though I don't know if I have the patience to try it. This dadgum AAR is now at 361 pages.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

Headed for CR's wheelhouse now.....

"Iron Dawn...The Monitor, The Merrimack and the Civil War Sea Battle that Changed History" by Richard Snow

I'm now about 2/3 in and it is March 8, 1862 in Hampton Roads. This is my first book on these two ships exclusively. I would recommended it as its been a good balance of supposed first hand accounts of those involved in development of both sides. Interesting to hear some guns are by shell weight (32-pounder) or gun barrel (8 inch).

Any other good books on just the naval side of Civil War??

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lovejoy

A lot of times, the old name for the CSS Virginia (Merrimack) gets used when referring to it. I think this is because most of the official records of the U.S Navy Department (I don't know if the South's Navy Department records survived the war) refer to it as the "Merrimack" as the US Navy didn't really care what the Southerners wanted to call it. To be honest, I'm not even sure if they knew what it had been renamed. Likely as not, the author decided to stick to using the name that the U.S Navy used when referring to it simply for the ease of fitting his primary research into place. A lot of the books I've read have referenced the CSS Virginia as the "Merrimack".

Not to get too far into the legal niceties of 19th Century international law, but as the U.S refused to recognize the South as a independent nation, official recognition of its warships might have constituted recognition, and as such, the US Navy Department may have felt compelled to do as much as they could to avoid according Southern warships the distinction as warships of a nation-state, in this case by refusing to recognize the right of the South to renamed a ship lawfully belonging to the US Navy.

Of course, I could be reading way too much into it! Sorry for the thread hijack, Civil War Naval History is a passion of mine.