USA Naval Supply Capacity & A Bottleneck Somewhere

[Pocus]

The distribution, in case of a greater demand compared to availability, or a too small Naval Pool, is probabilistic. But otherwise, if you have a fort with a depot that is never receiving naval supply while some others depots in the same situation but in a difference place are receiving some regularly then there is something amiss.

To be sure, I rechecked the code and added some tracing. I used the initial turn of the 1861 (KY) campaign. Here is what I get from the USA

Naval Pool 1506 Shipping Lanes can transport up to 1210 supply points

then you get the list of harbors with excess:

14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 5 New York, NY has spare supply
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 6 Queens, NY has spare supply
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 87 Rockland, NJ has spare supply
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 88 Essex, NJ has spare supply
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 92 Ocean, NJ has spare supply
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 94 Atlantic, NJ has spare supply
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 97 New Castle, DE has spare supply
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 100 Worcester, VA has spare supply
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 101 Sommerset, MD has spare supply
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 102 Dorchester, MD has spare supply
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 103 Queen Anne's, MD has spare supply
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 106 Baltimore, MD has spare supply
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 107 Anne Arundel, MD has spare supply
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 109 Saint Mary's, MD has spare supply
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 110 Charles, MD has spare supply
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 1084 New England has spare supply
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 1093 Oregon has spare supply
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 1094 California has spare supply
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 1116 Ft Delaware, DE has spare supply

then the list of regions that can potentially receive supply. Note that even regions without an actual need are listed here, but they will be discarded at a later stage, so no bug:

14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 5 New York, NY calling for supply with pull coefficient of 234
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 6 Queens, NY calling for supply with pull coefficient of 84
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 87 Rockland, NJ calling for supply with pull coefficient of 33
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 88 Essex, NJ calling for supply with pull coefficient of 44
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 92 Ocean, NJ calling for supply with pull coefficient of 8
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 94 Atlantic, NJ calling for supply with pull coefficient of 20
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 97 New Castle, DE calling for supply with pull coefficient of 79
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 100 Worcester, VA calling for supply with pull coefficient of 8
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 101 Sommerset, MD calling for supply with pull coefficient of 8
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 102 Dorchester, MD calling for supply with pull coefficient of 8
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 103 Queen Anne's, MD calling for supply with pull coefficient of 8
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 106 Baltimore, MD calling for supply with pull coefficient of 135
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 107 Anne Arundel, MD calling for supply with pull coefficient of 33
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 109 Saint Mary's, MD calling for supply with pull coefficient of 8
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 110 Charles, MD calling for supply with pull coefficient of 9
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 1084 New England calling for supply with pull coefficient of 115
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 1093 Oregon calling for supply with pull coefficient of 68
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 1094 California calling for supply with pull coefficient of 104
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 1102 Ft Monroe, VA calling for supply with pull coefficient of 81
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 1114 Ft Zachary, FL calling for supply with pull coefficient of 27
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 1115 Ft Jefferson, FL calling for supply with pull coefficient of 27
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 1116 Ft Delaware, DE calling for supply with pull coefficient of 27
14:25:58 (Reporting) Region 1118 Ft Pickens, FL calling for supply with pull coefficient of 28

and then the effective distribution

14:25:58 (Reporting) DstRegion 1084 New England receiving 2 ammo from 101 Sommerset, MD Naval Pool at 1208
14:25:58 (Reporting) DstRegion 1094 California receiving 4 ammo from 5 New York, NY Naval Pool at 1204
14:25:58 (Reporting) DstRegion 1115 Ft Jefferson, FL receiving 16 supply from 6 Queens, NY Naval Pool at 1188
14:25:58 (Reporting) DstRegion 1115 Ft Jefferson, FL receiving 4 ammo from 6 Queens, NY Naval Pool at 1184
14:25:58 (Reporting) DstRegion 1114 Ft Zachary, FL receiving 16 supply from 87 Rockland, NJ Naval Pool at 1168
14:25:58 (Reporting) DstRegion 1114 Ft Zachary, FL receiving 10 ammo from 87 Rockland, NJ Naval Pool at 1158
14:25:58 (Reporting) DstRegion 106 Baltimore, MD receiving 2 ammo from 103 Queen Anne's, MD Naval Pool at 1156
14:25:58 (Reporting) DstRegion 1118 Ft Pickens, FL receiving 23 supply from 1093 Oregon Naval Pool at 1133
14:25:58 (Reporting) DstRegion 1102 Ft Monroe, VA receiving 17 supply from 6 Queens, NY Naval Pool at 1116
14:25:58 (Reporting) DstRegion 1118 Ft Pickens, FL receiving 3 supply from 1094 California Naval Pool at 1113
14:25:58 (Reporting) DstRegion 1094 California receiving 2 ammo from 109 Saint Mary's, MD Naval Pool at 1111
14:25:58 (Reporting) DstRegion 1102 Ft Monroe, VA receiving 5 ammo from 94 Atlantic, NJ Naval Pool at 1106
14:25:58 (Reporting) DstRegion 1084 New England receiving 2 ammo from 100 Worcester, VA Naval Pool at 1104

So even Ft Jefferson (that don't have a depot) is receiving supply in this example. Ft Monroe 'pulls harder' but it seems it needs less in the end. Starting with the next beta patch (that should come out soon), you can activate this log by indicating:

Verbosity_Supp = 1 in an .opt file (system.opt or thisismyconfigfile.opt whatever). Run the turn and open the hostlog file, you should get a plentiful of information.

[Carrington]

Pocus,

Thanks for the post, looking forward to seeing the 'verbose' supply in the future.

WAD, IMHO. 1863 is not 1943; the best you can do is moor large vessels and unload at a proper dock or take forever with lighters and skiffs.

Thus an amphibious operation must first seize a major City on the littoral to support operations. Same for riverine attacks. Same for any "Marches to the Sea" or similar plan. Major thrusts need to be supported.

It's off topic, but I'd argue that this point cuts the other way: lighters and skiffs work much better when you don't need to worry about offloading massive quantities of ammunition, gasoline, and heavy equipment. Conversely, we don't see many of the major logistical innovations: bulk packaging, etc. until the late 19th century (in many cases as a result of the Civil War and European conflicts). Pre-1870 the loading was essentially all done with muscle power, whether from quayside or into a skiff so there's not that much room for orders-of-magnitude differences in labor productivity: we're not talking gantries, containers, or even bulk packaging/transhipment.

To be sure, it's a matter of degree -- it doesn't make sense to expect an army of 100,000 to live off a beach in any time period. But the question is whether division-sized (10,000) organizations could operate out of a fort or depot.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[GraniteStater]

Pocus,

Thanks for the post, looking forward to seeing the 'verbose' supply in the future.




It's off topic, but I'd argue that this point cuts the other way: lighters and skiffs work much better when you don't need to worry about offloading massive quantities of ammunition, gasoline, and heavy equipment. Conversely, we don't see many of the major logistical innovations: bulk packaging, etc. until the late 19th century (in many cases as a result of the Civil War and European conflicts). Pre-1870 the loading was essentially all done with muscle power, whether from quayside or into a skiff so there's not that much room for orders-of-magnitude differences in labor productivity: we're not talking gantries, containers, or even bulk packaging/transhipment.

To be sure, it's a matter of degree -- it doesn't make sense to expect an army of 100,000 to live off a beach in any time period. But the question is whether division-sized (10,000) organizations could operate out of a fort or depot.

I don't think this is OT - I play conflict simulations to see if it's a good model, to a large degree.

AACW players should know, really know, that ACW Brigades, Divs and Corps were ad hoc organizations. Sometimes the hoc lasted a year or more, but the unit of organization and administration was the regiment. That's why you and I can pull apart and put together Divs and Corps as we see fit, 'cuz it's WAD, it refects reality. Thus a Div is not necessarily any given size. The admin was eased by Divs and Corps, but still, the admin was mostly regimental.

Gen'l Smith's 'Division' - three Brigades of four Regiments - on paper, 12 Regmts @ 1,000 apiece - 12,000 men plus other branches, auxiliaries, support - IRL, the Regiments were understrength, so there's your "10,000" men.

Do you have any idea how long it would take to offload a dozen regiments with men, horses and equipment from barks, brigs, colliers, etc.? How do you get stuff outta holds and into the lighter, without a cargo net and a dockside crane (both available in 1863)? The answer is slowly and manually.

Ya gotta have NO, Charleston, Savannah, Wilmington - something! You can't support major ops without the support capability of these ports. Beaufort, SC, is not the answer - it's good, 'cuz it has a Harbor & you can dock, but it's a small Harbor. Why did Sherman attack Savannah from the land when we had had forces in the Sea Islands for two years? Lack of support - couldn't do it fast enough and well enough. Think about it - Billy Sherman had to take the place from the interior and we had been in the vicinity for two years.

[Jim-NC]

Pocus,

Is it possible to run the script or whatever for Captain Orso's saved game? That would be interesting. I think the problem may have to do with pulling coefficient.

2 interesting points:
I note that all ocean ports can pull supply from the same pool (including Oregon, and San Francisco). Didn't know that.

Even though there was a high limit of supply capacity available, only a small portion was actually used. Only 75 supply and 31 ammo moved anywhere, out of an available pool of 1210 (from the transports). That is less than 10% usage of the transports.

[Pat "Stonewall" Cleburne]

Even though there was a high limit of supply capacity available, only a small portion was actually used. Only 75 supply and 31 ammo moved anywhere, out of an available pool of 1210 (from the transports). That is less than 10% usage of the transports.

He used the first turn of the 1861 campaign. There aren't many union units asking for supply at that point. I'd like to see it run Orso's game as well.

[Pocus]

Pocus

Would it be much more effort to also "output" the units supply consumption?

Not much of an extra work, but this would use the same function as the one giving you the consumption in the tooltip (unit panel), so is it really that needed? But just ask and you should be served

[Pocus]

Pocus,

Is it possible to run the script or whatever for Captain Orso's saved game? That would be interesting. I think the problem may have to do with pulling coefficient.

2 interesting points:
I note that all ocean ports can pull supply from the same pool (including Oregon, and San Francisco). Didn't know that.

Even though there was a high limit of supply capacity available, only a small portion was actually used. Only 75 supply and 31 ammo moved anywhere, out of an available pool of 1210 (from the transports). That is less than 10% usage of the transports.

1. indeed, this is because in AACW all the sea regions are part of the same theater, called seas. The Naval Pool is the region also used as the US shipping box. The rule is that the Naval Pool can give supply to any region adjacent to one of the region part of the theater it is located.

So as the Naval Pool is part of the theater 'seas' it can give (and only give) only to regions adjacent to one of the region making the theater 'seas'.

2. As said, this is because there was not much supply to move around, because this is the first turn of a scenario and scenarios don't add generally extra supply (in addition to one turn production) to their setup (unless Gray placed extra stockpiles)

[Pocus]

He used the first turn of the 1861 campaign. There aren't many union units asking for supply at that point. I'd like to see it run Orso's game as well.

I did just that and now I understand the problem. A WAD problem ... The two forts are only adjacent to the Miss. mouth, which is part of theater Southwest and not 'seas'. So they are not eligible to receive supply by sea.

The quick fix not involving region cut is to declare the Mississippi mouth as part of the Seas theater, and problem solved...

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Pocus]

Thank you Gray if you can help me on that, this is appreciated!

The regions are blocked, so only local supply can be used. A blocked region can send supply but can't receive any, to prevent a 'sinkhole' / dispersal effect when you play a small scenario and a good part of the map is not playable. Now I think about that, perhaps only the regions permanently blocked should have this restriction... What do you think?

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Jim-NC]

I did just that and now I understand the problem. A WAD problem ... The two forts are only adjacent to the Miss. mouth, which is part of theater Southwest and not 'seas'. So they are not eligible to receive supply by sea.

The quick fix not involving region cut is to declare the Mississippi mouth as part of the Seas theater, and problem solved...

What of the other forts that dot the Conferderate coast? Do they also suffer from not being attached to the "seas" region? If so, that may need to be addressed.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Captain_Orso]

Pocus and Gray you guys are awesome
And to all others who have contributed to this thread, my heart felt thanks
I fell like a spring buck

I didn't know an old bear could still run like that

[Pocus]

We are pleased to please you

[Carrington]

Very nice. But is New Orleans adjacent to a "sea" theater?

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Carrington]

Great stuff Gray.

[Pdubya64]

Good to see the usual suspects still hammering away guys. Although I haven't played in a while, I appreciate the effort. I also feel work such as this cannot help but have a positive impact on AACW2, although it may seem small potatoes to some.

Good luck and good hunting!

[Jim-NC]

Not yet. I'm currently studying/reworking the map layout in lieu of the above information.

edit> Oops spoke too soon. New Orleans already is adjacent to a region defined as a "sea" theatre. (The Koney Island region just to the East and adjacent to Iberville (New Orleans') region to be specific is a "sea" theatre region.)

Not so sure that's historical... I would have thought that New Orleans USA supply would have to come up the Mississippi River itself and not be transported overland from the eastern portion of the Iberville region. In game that would allow an aggressive CSA player to possibly (though unlikely) block off the sea supply from a wimpy USA player with a naval vessel in the Mississippi Mouth or Lower Mississippi River sections just south of New Orleans.

This could be implemented by reworking the 2 river sections mentioned above as part of the "sea" theatre and removing the "sea" theatre designation of the Koney Island region.

Pocus: Does Sea supply trace an actual route (meaning ... Can it be blockaded)? The above rework idea would be moot if not.

.. Thoughts anyone/everyone?

Only if it doesn't effect anything else (the law of unintended consequences and all). It does bring up a point however, that you currently may not be able to block supply to New Orleans by keeping the forts as the CSA. You may by placing a ship somewhere else (as you stated elsewhere). Normally, this isn't a problem as New Orleans generates massive amounts of supply each turn. But if you rework the way supply points are generated, then you have to do something to rework this aspect.

[Captain_Orso]

I agree with Gray here completely. I think the question of Iberville (New Orleans) receiving supply from the Koney Island coastal (sea) region really poses a second question. Does the code take into account whether the adjacent sea region is an harbor exit point?

If the code does take this into account and no more supply could reach Iberville through Koney Island than for example could reach Pee Dee, SC, were a supply train in that region, than that would be fine. Well, maybe not exactly the same amount because they would probably have different 'pull' coefficients, but the principle should be the same.



Even better would be if the code took into account whether supply could reach Iberville through its harbor exit points and if so, simply ignore supply being sent through Koney Island. But if the code will only send a small amount of supply through Koney Island anyway, I think the point is very minor in the overall view of things, especially if Iberville is not blocked from supply and not blockaded, it will probably be producing much more supply than reqesting.

As far as supply being blocked from reaching Iberville through the Mississippi were there CSA navel units present in Lower Mississippi, Mississippi Mouth or even North Mississippi Delta, that is certainly WAI. The Wiki say: "enemy forts and fleets along a river line block supply transport past their position" http://www.ageod.net/aacwwiki/Manual:Supply#Rail.2C_river_.26_sea_transport so supply should be blocked by either of the twin forts or naval units in the afore mentioned location. This is however different than Brown Water Blockading New Orleans which won't work any more than Brown Water Blockading Richmond, Va by blockading James Estuary.

[Pocus]

Naval Interdiction links will prevent supply arrival into a region but on the other hand there is no real pathfinding for the source harbor to the destination region, so the problem exposed by Captain Orso for brown water can also be present here:
"This is however different than Brown Water Blockading New Orleans which won't work any more than Brown Water Blockading Richmond, Va by blockading James Estuary."

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Captain_Orso]

Good grief... How can details like this escape notice for so long?

Because everybody else is faster than me and it never came up before ... ... leure:

If I understand correctly, the 'Naval Interdiction JumpLink' not only prevents travel directly between Iberville and Koney Island by navel units (quite logical), but also prevents naval supply from being transferred from Koney Island and Iberville. That would mean that were one to attack Iberville directly though invasion from Koney Island (leaving Ft Pike in CSA hands), that no supply would be transferred to US supply trains in Iberville via navel supply.

That opens the question, would supply from US transports in Koney Island be forwarded to US units besieging Iberville?

In fact I have and even more rudimentary question. Since supply trains only transfer supply to military units, and not other supply trains, do naval transports transfer supply to supply trains?

If not, then naval transports in Koney Island -- if supply can be transferred from naval transports from Koney Island to Iberville -- could supply military units in Iberville, but the supply trains would eventually be drained of supply.

BTW Just to be clear, what I meant about Brown Water Blockading Iberville is that blockading Mississippi Mouth would not blockade Iberville. One would have to blockade Lower Mississippi to do that.

But independent of the ability -- or lack there of -- to Brown Water Blockade Iberville from Mississippi Mount, if naval supply does not trace a path, this would also mean that to block naval supply to Iberville one would have to put naval units in Lower Mississippi. Owning the twin forts or having naval units in Mississippi Mouth or North Mississippi Delta would have no affect on naval supply reaching Iberville.

Seams a big barrel of pickles I've opened here Anybody got any hot dogs to go with this?

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Pocus]

This was made like that because it was much more complex and slow to have a real pathfinding for these cases. In VGN there are few navigable rivers also, so the problem is less acute.

You can get resupplied from a ship toward a wagon in an adjacent region, even if the link is a naval interdiction link, because here, in the phase called 'resupply' the distribution to units don't do any path checking. Only the first phase, where supply is moved from regions to either regions or units have that. You can have any land stack resupplied by any other adjacent stack this way, provided the giving stack keep at least 50% supply and the receiving stack is below 75% supply.

A naval stack will not get adjacent supply from a land stack though.

[Captain_Orso]

Hi Gray,

Yeah, New Orleans really is about the only exception to being able to ignore a naval supply path, albeit a big one. Just goes to show that you can't foresee everything us buggers can come up with

About blocking supply, looking at the Wiki Manual:Supply I note that the ability to block supply with 'forts' and 'fleets' only apply to the river transportation of supply and probably with 'forts' also 'fortification' are meant, that is, having artillery entrenched to where they could bombard passing naval units.

I'll have to try it out some time, whether naval transports can transfer supply to supply trains. Maybe we'll be in for a surprise

All-in-all it goes to show how difficult it is to get it to work logically in a real-world sense. My hat off to all of you working to make logic reign

I gotta get back to work

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted