DEI: Use of the KB in the first 6 months

This new stand alone release based on the legendary War in the Pacific from 2 by 3 Games adds significant improvements and changes to enhance game play, improve realism, and increase historical accuracy. With dozens of new features, new art, and engine improvements, War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
KenchiSulla
Posts: 2956
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 3:19 pm
Location: the Netherlands

RE: DEI: Use of the KB in the first 6 months

Post by KenchiSulla »

So, how about the middle way? Use KB to secure Singapore and a couple of forward bases and perhaps Palembang quickly. After that LBA takes over and KB moves to greener pastures.....
AKA Cannonfodder

"It happened, therefore it can happen again: this is the core of what we have to say. It can happen, and it can happen everywhere.”
¯ Primo Levi, writer, holocaust survivor
User avatar
rustysi
Posts: 7472
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2012 3:23 am
Location: LI, NY

RE: DEI: Use of the KB in the first 6 months

Post by rustysi »

Too many JFBs want to use CVs to do Port/Land attacks.

[:-]
Losing one good CV pilot to land based AA is one pilot too many

Yep.

Japanese carrier based air assets with limited exceptions should be for naval use only. That is JMHO.
It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb
Numdydar
Posts: 3271
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:56 pm

RE: DEI: Use of the KB in the first 6 months

Post by Numdydar »

ORIGINAL: Cannonfodder

So, how about the middle way? Use KB to secure Singapore and a couple of forward bases and perhaps Palembang quickly. After that LBA takes over and KB moves to greener pastures.....

No No and NO!

Do you REALLY want to lose 80+ experienced CV pilots to ground based AC AND AA? Really?

You will need to use these pilots to hurt the Allies in CV versus CV battles. NOT bombing LCUs, ports, airfields, etc.

When you come back from Pearl, you should park the KB somewhere out of Allied search range and SIT. Use subs and LR patrol planes to find the Allied TFs and THEN decide what to do.

Do you have any idea of the amount of fuel the KB will use to go from Pearl, to the DEI and then back to Rabael/Truk? All to lose pilots to the Allies?

Having this powerhouse just sit when there are so many other things that seem to be fun to try and do seems so wrong. But it is the best thing Japan can do. When you get to '43 you will realize a lot better why this is the 'smart' move for Japan.

Of course if a juicy target shows up .... [:)]
User avatar
Shark7
Posts: 7936
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 4:11 pm
Location: The Big Nowhere

RE: DEI: Use of the KB in the first 6 months

Post by Shark7 »

ORIGINAL: Cannonfodder

So, how about the middle way? Use KB to secure Singapore and a couple of forward bases and perhaps Palembang quickly. After that LBA takes over and KB moves to greener pastures.....

This is a good way to annihilate your Val and Kate squadrons. Flak at Singapore is too think, I've tried this vs the AI and lost 50-60 of the Vals and Kates in 1 turn.

The PH strike works because of the Dec 7 surprise hard coding. By the time you get KB from there to Singapore, that advantage is gone, and you will pay dearly for trying it. It *might* work if you send KB to Singapore on turn 1, but I'm not sure you gain anything doing that. Reward is definitely not worth the risk attacking Singapore with KB. But that is just my opinion of course.
Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'
JocMeister
Posts: 8258
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:03 am
Location: Sweden

RE: DEI: Use of the KB in the first 6 months

Post by JocMeister »

I think you guys misunderstand CF....
Image
User avatar
Shark7
Posts: 7936
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 4:11 pm
Location: The Big Nowhere

RE: DEI: Use of the KB in the first 6 months

Post by Shark7 »

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

I think you guys misunderstand CF....

More likely its just a typical WiTP forumites getting off topic thing. Happens all the time. [;)]
Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'
User avatar
Justus2
Posts: 800
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 11:56 pm

RE: DEI: Use of the KB in the first 6 months

Post by Justus2 »

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

I think you guys misunderstand CF....

I agree, I think Cannonfodder meant using KB in the DEI to isolate/support Singapore and Palembang, attacking shipping in the DEI area, not use it for actual port/AF attacks on Singapore.
Just when I get the hang of a game, I buy two more... :)
User avatar
KenchiSulla
Posts: 2956
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 3:19 pm
Location: the Netherlands

RE: DEI: Use of the KB in the first 6 months

Post by KenchiSulla »

Joc and Justus2 are right, for the first couple of months KB is about supporting landing operations and hunting shipping
AKA Cannonfodder

"It happened, therefore it can happen again: this is the core of what we have to say. It can happen, and it can happen everywhere.”
¯ Primo Levi, writer, holocaust survivor
Numdydar
Posts: 3271
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:56 pm

RE: DEI: Use of the KB in the first 6 months

Post by Numdydar »

Agree CF was misunderstood so sorry about that [:(]

But there is still the fuel cost for doing all this back and forth. Especially when you do not really need the KB in the DEI. It would be far better to raid the East coast of Oz, Brisbane, Sydney, etc. in Dec '41 since there is very little flack and zero CAP for most of '41. Plus it takes less fuel to do this. Plus you really do not need the KB in the DEI to shut things down. There are plenty of other assets that Japan can use to do the same thing. Of course it takes a little longer but most of these assets are already there and will not have the fuel costs of sailing the KB here and there.

Have you noticed the common thread of Fuel usage in my posts yet? [:)]
User avatar
KenchiSulla
Posts: 2956
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 3:19 pm
Location: the Netherlands

RE: DEI: Use of the KB in the first 6 months

Post by KenchiSulla »

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

Agree CF was misunderstood so sorry about that [:(]

But there is still the fuel cost for doing all this back and forth. Especially when you do not really need the KB in the DEI. It would be far better to raid the East coast of Oz, Brisbane, Sydney, etc. in Dec '41 since there is very little flack and zero CAP for most of '41. Plus it takes less fuel to do this. Plus you really do not need the KB in the DEI to shut things down. There are plenty of other assets that Japan can use to do the same thing. Of course it takes a little longer but most of these assets are already there and will not have the fuel costs of sailing the KB here and there.

Have you noticed the common thread of Fuel usage in my posts yet? [:)]

No harm done, you were trying to make a point (and in my opinion the right one too!)

Is the fuel cost really that important? If the Japanese player can expand the perimeter far enough he'll have enough fuel to last him well into 1945, even with operations ongoing! I agree that you do not need KB to secure the region but if you want it done quickly in order to be able go deeper later then you do need them! Lets just compare the potential results of the two courses:

- KB helps secure Singapore, the critical oil fields and forward airbases by ignoring PH (this is key) and covering landings at Mersing, Palembang and Sinkawang. Singapore falls within a month, Palembang and Sinkawang within a few days... KB is now free to move out into the dark area before Christmas and can be deployed south or east OR it can be kept in the general area (but undetected) and move on India early in January, after the fall of Singapore!

Against

- KB raids the east coast and achieves: (and here is I would like you to comment! I don't see any strategic gains here.... Tactically sure, but strategic?)
AKA Cannonfodder

"It happened, therefore it can happen again: this is the core of what we have to say. It can happen, and it can happen everywhere.”
¯ Primo Levi, writer, holocaust survivor
User avatar
Mundy
Posts: 2867
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2002 6:12 am
Location: Neenah

RE: DEI: Use of the KB in the first 6 months

Post by Mundy »

Having dealt with this a bit...

I found Cannonfodder's non-Pearl first turn interesting in our game. My initial assumption was that the subs in Manila were the primary target. He probably bagged about half a dozen or so. If the Japanese plan was solely to deal with the subs, I've come to think it wasn't worth it.

However.

I had to deal with KB divisions all over the rest of the Singapore/DEI area. He was able to put a bunch of troops in Mersing untouched, which pretty much wrapped up that little theatre rather quickly. Singapore didn't last very long after that.

I don't respect the RAF much in that part of the map, as they never seem to hit, but if the Japanese are careless, surprises can happen. AW1Steve is showing this to me in my other game. CF had everything covered though, which sealed up things pretty quickly.
Image
User avatar
Encircled
Posts: 2095
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 3:50 pm
Location: Northern England

RE: DEI: Use of the KB in the first 6 months

Post by Encircled »

I don't think you can discount strategic bombing of the West Coast to be honest, but its a very high risk strategy.

Again, it goes for whether you are playing for a VP win early, or knuckling down for a long term defeat (with all the, er, fun that entails!) [:)]
User avatar
Chickenboy
Posts: 24520
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 11:30 pm
Location: San Antonio, TX

RE: DEI: Use of the KB in the first 6 months

Post by Chickenboy »

ORIGINAL: Cannonfodder

I've seen and used all kinds of strategies in the DEI. One of them involves using the KB to cover landings, gain air superiority and flush out navy and Merchants..

- Do you think it is worth the risk to employ carriers in the conquest of the DEI?
- What is the added value of the KB in the DEI compared to employing it in support of other operations / keeping it hidden and safe?

Cannonfodder,

A little late getting in on the conversation, but here's my two bits.

I've been trying for a crushing and sudden blow in my PBEM games. As the Japanese, I want to neutralize / liquidate as much of the DEI and Singapore as I possibly can as soon as I possibly can.

Smashing the Hell out of Manila with everything on turn 1 reduces functional submarine-based torpedoes substantially in this conquest. That generally includes most or all of the KB. I have then split off Kaga to operate with other CVE / CVLs in the area whilest the body of KB escorts invasion forces elsewhere in the Pacific (e.g., Rabaul, Port Moresby, Noumea, Suva, etc.) for an early conquest there. Kaga and company are more than sufficient to provide an impetus to Allied shipping to leave on turn one or die.

This vacuum needs to be filled with Imperial ground forces as soon as practical. I aim to be on Sumatra within one month and Java within 6 weeks of the onset of hostilities. The naval air can provide cover until an air HQ is established on the NW corner of Borneo, thereby closing off the approaches to Palembang from Sumatra.

As others have stated, having carriers navigating in confined waters is dangerous. I think that heavy airborne reconnaisance and naval search (increase DL for submarines) reduces this risk somewhat. Trying to not be predictable with carrier placement is important too. Feints, "dash and bash" movements, and use of covering SCTFs helps.

In my opinion, I like the supporting carrier air for DEI operations. I think it mitigates the omnipresent Allied surface interdiction of my amphibious forces somewhat. I'd rather have a CVL take a torpedo than lose the better part of an infantry division to surface raiders. I've seen that happen many times in other AARs. I think I'd cry.

Image
Numdydar
Posts: 3271
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:56 pm

RE: DEI: Use of the KB in the first 6 months

Post by Numdydar »

ORIGINAL: Cannonfodder

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

Agree CF was misunderstood so sorry about that [:(]

But there is still the fuel cost for doing all this back and forth. Especially when you do not really need the KB in the DEI. It would be far better to raid the East coast of Oz, Brisbane, Sydney, etc. in Dec '41 since there is very little flack and zero CAP for most of '41. Plus it takes less fuel to do this. Plus you really do not need the KB in the DEI to shut things down. There are plenty of other assets that Japan can use to do the same thing. Of course it takes a little longer but most of these assets are already there and will not have the fuel costs of sailing the KB here and there.

Have you noticed the common thread of Fuel usage in my posts yet? [:)]

No harm done, you were trying to make a point (and in my opinion the right one too!)

Is the fuel cost really that important? If the Japanese player can expand the perimeter far enough he'll have enough fuel to last him well into 1945, even with operations ongoing! I agree that you do not need KB to secure the region but if you want it done quickly in order to be able go deeper later then you do need them! Lets just compare the potential results of the two courses:

- KB helps secure Singapore, the critical oil fields and forward airbases by ignoring PH (this is key) and covering landings at Mersing, Palembang and Sinkawang. Singapore falls within a month, Palembang and Sinkawang within a few days... KB is now free to move out into the dark area before Christmas and can be deployed south or east OR it can be kept in the general area (but undetected) and move on India early in January, after the fall of Singapore!

Against

- KB raids the east coast and achieves: (and here is I would like you to comment! I don't see any strategic gains here.... Tactically sure, but strategic?)

The Allies need to put their ships somewhere that are running for their lives from parts North [:)]. After all many of these ships have short legs. With good searches you can find out where some concentrations are.

And yes, fuel IS that important because at some point you will no longer have any. With the Allied power it is just too easy to cut Japan off. Plus fuel for Japan is typically not in the right location to do much good. [:(] In one game I had 1M fuel in Singapore [X(] and just could not get enough out to keep things going elsewhere. So yes, Japan as an empire can have lots of fuel within its control, but unless it is in the HI or where your TFs need it, you may as well have none.
User avatar
rustysi
Posts: 7472
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2012 3:23 am
Location: LI, NY

RE: DEI: Use of the KB in the first 6 months

Post by rustysi »

In one game I had 1M fuel in Singapore

Was that forced upon you by your opponent? Or through fault of your own? You know kinda a lessons learned type of thing.[:D]
It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb
Numdydar
Posts: 3271
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:56 pm

RE: DEI: Use of the KB in the first 6 months

Post by Numdydar »

Too few tankers too little time [:@]

If you set up TFs to feed Singapore with small tanker fleets from around the DEI area, it is pretty easy to get a lot of fuel there. Unfortunately I also needed fuel for my fleet ops (imagine that [:D]) so I had to use some AOs and TKs for that duty. Since I had to move the fuel from Singapore to Rabael/Truk, it took them a while to get there and back [:@].

Also I had been a little excessive in my combat TFs movement it took a while to recover. Which meant reduced TKs to move fuel to Japan. Which meant a buildup in Singapore. And the wheels go round and round [8|]
User avatar
Shark7
Posts: 7936
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 4:11 pm
Location: The Big Nowhere

RE: DEI: Use of the KB in the first 6 months

Post by Shark7 »

You can use AKs for moving fuel, and I do that quite a bit. Thing is you never have enough freighters or tankers to do everything you need to do, so its all about prioritizing.

The real challenge is finding out how much shipping you need to move resources to maintain industry while leaving enough shipping to move the fuel to the places you need it. And you will need that fuel in the HI late game.
Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'
User avatar
rustysi
Posts: 7472
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2012 3:23 am
Location: LI, NY

RE: DEI: Use of the KB in the first 6 months

Post by rustysi »

ORIGINAL: Shark7

You can use AKs for moving fuel, and I do that quite a bit. Thing is you never have enough freighters or tankers to do everything you need to do, so its all about prioritizing.

The real challenge is finding out how much shipping you need to move resources to maintain industry while leaving enough shipping to move the fuel to the places you need it. And you will need that fuel in the HI late game.

In my games only ships with an inherent fuel capacity move fuel.
It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb
User avatar
AW1Steve
Posts: 14518
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 6:32 am
Location: Mordor Illlinois

RE: DEI: Use of the KB in the first 6 months

Post by AW1Steve »

ORIGINAL: rustysi

ORIGINAL: Shark7

You can use AKs for moving fuel, and I do that quite a bit. Thing is you never have enough freighters or tankers to do everything you need to do, so its all about prioritizing.

The real challenge is finding out how much shipping you need to move resources to maintain industry while leaving enough shipping to move the fuel to the places you need it. And you will need that fuel in the HI late game.

In my games only ships with an inherent fuel capacity move fuel.
If your AK's and AKL's can't move 55 gal drums , then you have a different game than the rest of ours. [:D]


There was a tremendous amount of fuel , AVGAS and POL moved around the Pacific in WW2 that way. [:)]
User avatar
rustysi
Posts: 7472
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2012 3:23 am
Location: LI, NY

RE: DEI: Use of the KB in the first 6 months

Post by rustysi »

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

Too few tankers too little time [:@]

If you set up TFs to feed Singapore with small tanker fleets from around the DEI area, it is pretty easy to get a lot of fuel there. Unfortunately I also needed fuel for my fleet ops (imagine that [:D]) so I had to use some AOs and TKs for that duty. Since I had to move the fuel from Singapore to Rabael/Truk, it took them a while to get there and back [:@].

Also I had been a little excessive in my combat TFs movement it took a while to recover. Which meant reduced TKs to move fuel to Japan. Which meant a buildup in Singapore. And the wheels go round and round [8|]

Yeah, I get it easy enough to fall behind with your limited capacity. Just a couple of things you may/may not be doing. Day one I put all cargo ships that can be converted to tankers in port awaiting the day. I use those 8k AO's to run fuel Rabaul/Truk/Borneo. I'm diligent about moving fuel/oil and I'm still falling behind a bit. I've accelerated tanker builds though and by the end of '42 (currently Sept '42) I'll get six more with a capacity just above 50k. Also see a couple of cargos (in the build queue) that I think convert to small tankers. Hope it'll catch me up.
It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb
Post Reply

Return to “War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition”