Islands of Destiny: RA 5.0 Japanese Side

[John 3rd]

SuW--Sub War? ASW is currently doing pretty well with 5-8 hits called out every turn. My real ASW Escorts are finally about to get rolling. Too little too late but what the heck.

Ordered the KB from Marcus to Saipan.

The 19th ID, 65th Brigade, 6th Brigade all unloaded without interference at Manila. 48th ID is three days out.

[John 3rd]

Did anyone notice Dan going over 500,000 hits on his AAR? Well Done!

[JohnDillworth]

Did anyone notice Dan going over 500,000 hits on his AAR? Well Done!

Yeah, well once that Confederate General talk starts there is no stopping folks.....

[Bearcat2]

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth

Did anyone notice Dan going over 500,000 hits on his AAR? Well Done!

Yeah, well once that Confederate General talk starts there is no stopping folks.....

You can blame me for starting that; but it wasn't Confederate general talk, it was mainly Union general talk [:)]


In the interest of fairness, since I compared his style of play to a civil war general; I think if I had to pick a civil war general comparison to John 3rd, it would be Custer*; although lately, I think he has turned into Joe Johnston.


*The civil war Custer; not the post war Custer.

[John 3rd]

Lee called George Armstrong Custer the "worst General he'd ever met but also the luckiest." Don't quite know what to make of all that.

Dan? If you ask me...very simple answer...GRANT.

[JohnDillworth]

You can blame me for starting that; but it wasn't Confederate general talk, it was mainly Union general talk

Well you may have started this particular brush-fire but this keeps happening so I think the undergrowth over there is like kindling because this stuff keeps popping up. Give it a week or two and there it is again. I've learned almost as much Civil War History in these forums as WWII history

[MakeeLearn]

What does your Ace Roster look like?

[Bearcat2]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Lee called George Armstrong Custer the "worst General he'd ever met but also the luckiest." Don't quite know what to make of all that.

Dan? If you ask me...very simple answer...GRANT.

[:D]

Bold moves, relentless when he decided on a course of action.

[JohnDillworth]

“I know he's a good general, but is he lucky?” - Napoleon
he only hired Generals he though lucky.

Dan, Grant? Yeah, thats about right. Relentless application of massive force with little regard to casualties.

[John 3rd]

Glad to see some of you fellers over here!

[John 3rd]

Just sent Dan the April 11, 1944 turn. It was not pleasant for Japan but have to go to church...

[adarbrauner]

Noooo......why.........
Nooo

We STILL can do that!

[JohnDillworth]

have to go to church...

That's some bad turn......

[crsutton]

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth

“I know he's a good general, but is he lucky?” - Napoleon
he only hired Generals he though lucky.

Dan, Grant? Yeah, thats about right. Relentless application of massive force with little regard to casualties.

Can't agree. That is an oversimplification of Grant who unlike any other General in the war had a knack for capturing whole armies intact. (Donaldson, Vicksburg, Appomattox) When you look at the whole picture, that is armies destroyed and prisoners taken, the numbers even out or even favor Grant. Grant was probably the best overall military mind of that generation of commanders. Lee was just as ruthless with casualties when he thought the return would outweigh the gain. This is the way they fought battles up through World War I. It was expected that you would sacrifice massive casualties in the attack but the results came when you broke the enemy and then their losses would be greater. Dan is indeed very Grant like in his methods. Very willing to accept losses to achieve a greater gain. But in the end the results justify the means.

[JohnDillworth]

I don't think Grant was careless, I think he knew that he was going to have to grind the South down to a nub. He had more of everything. He was smart and well understood grand strategy. The Wilderness Campaign and the final flanking at Richmond were necessary. Grant & Sherman together were lethal. They knew what it would take and they just kept coming. As Lincoln said, He Fights

[Capt. Harlock]

Dan is indeed very Grant like in his methods. Very willing to accept losses to achieve a greater gain. But in the end the results justify the means.

Depends on what results are the objective. If it's to push back the Japanese conquests, that happens eventually with just about any decently compentent Allied player and a modicum of luck. (The fact that the Allies have suffered major troop losses in Sumatra and Celebes and yet still have enough for an offensive in the Phillipines speaks for itself.) If it's to pile up victory points (and this is, after all, a game), then John has clearly outplayed Dan. If it's to make for an interesting and unusual game, then Dan has done brilliantly (half a million hits!)

[John 3rd]

Grant did what no one was able t0 do in the Civil War. He could simply do the horrible math: Attack, Attack, Attack. Lincoln saw it as early as June 1864. His line "General--I begin to see it" clearly demonstrated that he and his Commanding General were on the same page. Lee was able to survive before because the Union Generals would pull back, replenish, rest, and train for a few months giving Lee's force time to recover somewhat. I always thought of it as Lee fighting with foil while Grant fought with a saber. Grant simply had to have the strategic foresight to coordinate ALL the Union Armies and keep Lee pinned to his earthworks while being ground down to nothing. 'Unconditional Surrender' Grant was brilliant.

My .02.

Dan's overcoming of the vast defeat of Sumatra is fairly easy to explain. My surface forces, particularly DDs, were gutted in that Japanese 'victory.' The CV Battle, occurring at the end of the Sumatra Campaign, nailed the coffin closed for Japan. What a horrific 'battle.' These are the week or so of turns I truly wish I could have back. Juggling those THREE games at the same time led me to take short cuts and not be as thorough as I am now. Have made the decision to never, EVER run more then one match at a time. The Carrier Clash was a disaster of epic proportions and has directly led here. Dan, correctly, saw my weakness and has exploited it. Well done by him.

To be honest I cannot help but want another match with him once this one is truly finished. That said, I am spoken for in my next game. The player waiting in the wings KNOWS who he is and I look forward to that match.

I do not have DDs right now. Last turn saw EIGHT of my very few destroyers get sunk. Very bad. RA and Between the Storms cuts down the number of First Class DDs (read Kagero/Moon-Class) with the LAST First Class DD coming out in January 1944. Now I get the 2nd Class DDs who are OK but smaller and weaker replacements. Lethal combination of events...

[JohnDillworth]

I do not have DDs right now. Last turn saw EIGHT of my very few destroyers get sunk.

Thats not good. Closed waters like this are Cruiser country but neither one of you has a whole lot of those. Allies probably have more DD's then they know what to do with at this point in the war. Curious to see the turn because I suspect air didn't get 8 DD's

[John 3rd]

SIX were sunk by Air.

[Bif1961]

There was a lot more to grant then to consider him simply a General that understood he would win the battle of attrition. The one battle that Grant always regretted was Cold Harbor, VA, it was truly a repeat of Marye's Heights. However, Grants strength was always sliding around Lee, once Lee established a tough defensive position. He almost won the race to Richmond and had a near victory at the crater, but he did hem in Lee at Petersburgs and Richmond, now Lee had to play grant's game and he lost.