At large scale, logistics and supplies tend not to be delivered in a centrally planned fashion. But rather, advance bases are built or lease. Materiel are accumulated. Personnel are placed (after trained). And then it is up to the commander (more like his staff) and the logistics officers to coordinate where to get supply. Supply doesn't just mean fuel and food. It means basic maintenance and repair. Personnel health needs. Personnel training. etc. By commander I don't mean operational command of battle task force either. I mean commander of vessels and any other type of training units.
Ofc it is based on a tier system. Higher tier (e.g. LIONs) base has more facilities and can carry out more types of field activities. The shipment of materials themselves are organized by from at a high level activity type down to at a low level by per kit for a job/type of personnel.
Where in the link do you find splitting supplies impossible?
For example, page 143
The Logistics of Advance Bases where a schedule of general shipment at different time to different types of bases. Throughout the document, you don't see any description of tailoring supply to a particular task force. (Honestly, that seems such an unnatural thing to do unless your whole navy consists of a single tiny task force and operates only once away from home.) The document also describes much learning from RN. That's two big naval users. To expedite the read,
Building the Navy's Bases in World War II describes the components of US continental bases.
The Logistics of Advance Bases describe how the advance bases should collectively provide the same logistic services.
OK, where to start? First of all, I'm not basing my statements on internet articles or even books, I'm basing them on 16 years working in the supply chain of the chemical industry, handling projects and departments that ship hundreds of thousands of tonnes of bulk and packed powder, liquid and frit products globally. Supply direct from supplier to customer became routine in my working life, but was to begin with extremely unusual for a host of reasons.
The articles you link here, though, seem to be discussing something quite different: the rapid deployment of new forward supply bases in wartime. In HoI terms, this would be the rapid building of new ports to serve advanced fleets, including mobile port and repair facilities. This was definitely a thing in WW2; the floating drydocks used by the US Pacific Fleet were a wonder that should be widely celebrated. But that doesn't have much to ay about the day-to-day logistics train management needed to supply the fleet full time (except that such forward bases, once set up, were obviously of use to handle this function). The development of this technology during wartime - note that the scheme went into action only from the start of 1943, really, so late in the war - is definitely something not really covered so far in HoI, and it would be better for the inclusion, but...
Slipways are a part of dockyard facilities. A dockyard is where you assemble the ship and is likely where most of the components are manufactured. That is what HOI4 dockyards are.
That's not the role that HoI dockyards play in the game, though. They provide the IC-days for the ship, rolling the imagined steel and manufacturing the myriad components to build a finished vessel. They don't have any link to the place the ship is launched - as UK, for example, you can have as many dockyards in Alexandria as you like, you can't deploy a new ship there (although you can to a fleet that happens to be docked there, oddly). Slipways define the size and quantity of ships that you can build where; dockyards don't really do this in the game as it stands.
HOI4 naval bases are (commercial/civilian) port + naval supply base.
Yes, agreed. They are the third component, and their establishment ties into the base establishments - such as the LION/CUB/ACORN system used by the USN described in the article you linked.
So technically you shouldn't have ship launches at naval bases but instead at dockyards.
Well, the two are often the same harbour, but yes, ship launches are facilitated by the local slipways, not by the logistical base facilities available locally. In part, that's why I suggest that slipways, repair facilities (representing multiple facilities such as dry docks, component handling hardware, etc.), logistical facilities (cargo handling, berthing, warehousing and much else) and manufacturing facilities (component manufacture and fabrication) should be represented, ideally, by separate game entities. But, as I said, this is an ideal; some abstraction is arguably needed.
Are you suggesting there should be a more realistic simulation of ship launch as opposed to the current appearing from off map to a designated naval base?
Yes. Among other things.
Supply tender is not the same as merchant marine.
That depends on the navy and the time in the game span. For German surface raiders early in the Atlantic campaign, for instance, it actually was merchant marine; German merchant ships that were at sea or overseas when war was declared were ordered to head to and remain in neutral harbours. From these, some were (secretly) given orders to take on supplies procured locally by the logistical services and rendezvous with a raider at a specified location to transfer the supplies, often at sea. Later in the war, US (and UK) fleets had tenders, including fleet oilers, as part of the fleet composition to extend range.
The thing about tenders, though, is that they are - as you mention - mission supply sources. There is a big difference, and it's not really reflected well in the game as it stands, but might not be too hard to add, between a raid or short mission into distant waters and sustaining a fleet permanently on patrol in a sea area. If you have a blockade or permanent patrol, there are only two ways that your ships are going to keep supplied for the longer term; either they have to return to port on a regular basis, or supply vessels need to visit them at sea in the operational area to refuel, resupply, rotate personnel, bring spare parts and so on. This is the sort of supply line - which will generally be routed through one forward base to facilitate its management - that I am thinking of. In the game as it stands you can permanently base a fleet in any sea area that it can reach with its range from any friendly port without any concern for the sea area between the fleet and its "base port". That is not merely unrealistic, it disregards important aspects of naval strategy that could be beneficially included in the game.
Merchant marine are represented by the convoy system in HOI4. They are strained by a larger navy. Just not a lot. And that's devs' design choice. (Try build yourself a 400 ship navy and tune SUPPLY_CONVOY_FACTOR from 0.25 to 0.5. You will see.) The system, sufficient or not, is already there.
Sure, convoys get supplies to the forward bases (whether those swiftly set up under some putative "LION/CUB" scheme or simply comandeered local port facilities). Ships still need to call at this port or receive supply visits from it in the longer term. Which method is used arguably comes from doctrine, but neither method is currently represented in the game, which gives fleets in long-term positions at sea a "free pass" that they really shouldn't have.
Mid-sea supply in order to extend range of vessels during (single) operations requires specialized tender ship. Pending on the missions and the particular navy, tender ships may be used regularly. The home port (ie. base in HOI4) of a vessel taking the supply has not reason to be bound to the port (ie. base in HOI4) that the tender last took supply from. Why should it? In any case, these are for in mission supplies. They are just a tiny part of what supplying a fleet means. Perhaps I shouldn't have mentioned tenders.
But tender should be represented by a logistic tech or something that extends ship range.
See my comments above. Mission supply - fuel to extend range and munitions, plus short-term sustenance supplies - can be taken with the fleet; whether you have specific (military) tenders to do this will vary with naval doctrine, but it's certainly possible to do so. This addresses supply over a single mission - a week or two, say. But it does not address a permanent presence at sea for the purposes of blockade (submarine or surface), convoy protection response, patrol or simple intelligence gathering.
