The Whys and the Wherefores - AAR Post Mortem and House Rule Discussion (IJ – DanSez) vs (Allied – t

[DanSez]

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

I don't like house rules, point blank. I find them to stifle creativity and be a crutch for weaker players to depend upon.

I'm firmly in the anarchy camp!

I have already admitted to be a weaker player.

[DanSez]

ORIGINAL: jwolf

As far as I know, weather is routinely awful in the North Pacific. If ever a ship could dodge air search, that would be the place.

Yes, weather and random dice rolls. But if the raider has to trasverse 10+ hexes of survaled seas, then I am hoping search would pick them up at least once on the way in or out.

Maybe I expect too much.

I will save the files and if the test progresses, then can dissect if my search and patrols were adequate.

I appreciate the comments.

[mind_messing]

ORIGINAL: DanSez

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

I don't like house rules, point blank. I find them to stifle creativity and be a crutch for weaker players to depend upon.

I'm firmly in the anarchy camp!

I have already admitted to be a weaker player.

Sorry, didn't intent you to take that as a jibe at your abilities.

If anything, i'd encourage you to try without house rules to make yourself a better player.

For example, you won't learn about the best way to construct a night CAP over an airbase if you have a house rule banning night bombing...

[brian800000]

ORIGINAL: DanSez

ORIGINAL: jwolf

As far as I know, weather is routinely awful in the North Pacific. If ever a ship could dodge air search, that would be the place.

Yes, weather and random dice rolls. But if the raider has to trasverse 10+ hexes of survaled seas, then I am hoping search would pick them up at least once on the way in or out.

Maybe I expect too much.

I will save the files and if the test progresses, then can dissect if my search and patrols were adequate.

I appreciate the comments.

The ocean is really big. If you have a patrol group covering a territory out to 10 hexes, that is over 500,000 square miles of ocean to cover every day. Go out to 15 hexes and you are more than a million. Spotting a single ship in that territory that may have bad weather seems a lot to ask for a dozen patrol planes.

[DanSez]

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

If anything, i'd encourage you to try without house rules to make yourself a better player.

For example, you won't learn about the best way to construct a night CAP over an airbase if you have a house rule banning night bombing...

Trascott was the requestor of the 50% moonlight rule. Night bombing isn't banned. I mentioned the push for night fighter R&D and we are already jousting over Burma and the Solomon Islands in the dark.

A number of our house rules are to slow down the operational tempo.
The goal isn't to cripple one side or the other, as the end results are accepted (defeat of Japan).

I hope to improve my game skills and the best teacher is experience. You can't learn everything at once. This thread is also an attempt to address a rumor/urban myth about single ship task forces at the moment.

You are very skilled and 'play to win'. How many years have you been playing?
Regardless, I'm nowhere near your level yet.
Thanks for the comments.

[Canoerebel]

Dan, I haven't read all the comments, but I hope you don't end up feeling that I'm helping pile on. I wanted to toss in my comments.

I don't like house rules. They are too often a crutch and are annoying to keep track of.

Single-ship TFs are not hard to spot and are not hard to target. They may or may not be hard to hit, depending upon a lot of things like weather and the skill of the enemy pilots.

I recently sent two one-DD TFs into the DEI in my game with Erik. He didn't have search up until after the first DD sank a small ship of his. Then he put search and strike aircraft up. He immediately spotted my DD and some Kates hit it with a bomb. Sometime thereafter, I sent an old USN DD raiding in the same vicinity. This time Erik had search aircraft flying. They sighted my DD and I withdrew it. If I felt like the routine was borked, I would've let the DD continue to raid. Instead, I felt like the DD was a lost cause if I didn't extract it.

I've had many similar instances in my game with John III and Erik. The search and strike routines against lone DDs seem to work fine. They aren't easy to hit and shouldn't be, but they can be lost for no return if the defender has his defenses up and prepared.

[DanSez]

ORIGINAL: brian800000
The ocean is really big. If you have a patrol group covering a territory out to 10 hexes, that is over 500,000 square miles of ocean to cover every day. Go out to 15 hexes and you are more than a million. Spotting a single ship in that territory that may have bad weather seems a lot to ask for a dozen patrol planes.

True, it is a big wide ocean. But it also takes a ship time to transverse that distance. It isn't just one shot to spot the single ship. It is two phases each day, plus the (best case) 3 days it takes to move into the zone, attack and flee. Emily has a long search range.

With (best case) 6 recon pulses, I should get one good shot at a sighting or else it is undefendable. Random dice and so forth, maybe not this test but the next one.

Then, once sighted the question is will Naval Attack launch against a single ship task force.

So: can I spot it?
And if I can spot it: can I strike it?

That is the issue. I am willing to reveal my search and deployments post mortem for discussion. Hopefully we will get trascott's movement notes as well so we can plot against my search. We may continue this test thru the South-Central Pacific region next as Winter is about to sock in the Aleutians.

It will take several game days, maybe more than a week depending on his choice of raider and it's current location, to log enough turns to start dissecting this first test.

[DanSez]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
Single-ship TFs are not hard to spot and are not hard to target. They may or may not be hard to hit, depending upon a lot of things like weather and the skill of the enemy pilots.

I recently sent two one-DD TFs into the DEI in my game with Erik. He didn't have search up until after the first DD sank a small ship of his. Then he put search and strike aircraft up. He immediately spotted my DD and some Kates hit it with a bomb.

I appreciate your taking the time to comment. I don't take it as piling on.

Stating something is so doesn't teach me how.

If I can detect and launch strikes in this game (current test or next round if needed), then I am documenting the death to the single task force urban myth, doing a service for the community.

I hope it is so.

If I can't get it to trigger, but with dissecting my search and picket plans, maybe someone can give improved instructions so my game is improved and in later followup tests, the urban myth is disproved.

[JeffroK]

ORIGINAL: DanSez

ORIGINAL: brian800000
The ocean is really big. If you have a patrol group covering a territory out to 10 hexes, that is over 500,000 square miles of ocean to cover every day. Go out to 15 hexes and you are more than a million. Spotting a single ship in that territory that may have bad weather seems a lot to ask for a dozen patrol planes.

True, it is a big wide ocean. But it also takes a ship time to transverse that distance. It isn't just one shot to spot the single ship. It is two phases each day, plus the (best case) 3 days it takes to move into the zone, attack and flee. Emily has a long search range.

With (best case) 6 recon pulses, I should get one good shot at a sighting or else it is undefendable. Random dice and so forth, maybe not this test but the next one.

Then, once sighted the question is will Naval Attack launch against a single ship task force.

So: can I spot it?
And if I can spot it: can I strike it?

That is the issue. I am willing to reveal my search and deployments post mortem for discussion. Hopefully we will get trascott's movement notes as well so we can plot against my search. We may continue this test thru the South-Central Pacific region next as Winter is about to sock in the Aleutians.

It will take several game days, maybe more than a week depending on his choice of raider and it's current location, to log enough turns to start dissecting this first test.

Remember Midway. Even a small delay in aircraft take offs, faulty radios, etc etc etc.

Nothing is guaranteed in this game, makes it fantastic.

[JeffroK]

Talking House Rules:

If I was to PBEM this ever again I'd look into "strategic HR" rather than "Tactical HR"

ie You must pay PP to cross borders.
US LCU cannot enter China/India/Burma except for the historicl forces (Merrill, 112 Cav etc)
Only AIF units (6,7,8 & 9 Aust Infantry, Cdo Companies, Armd Rgts & Base Forces) can leave continental Australia except for 3 other Divisions which can enter Papua/NewGuinea, Solomons. The 3 AIF Divisions & Corps troops which arrive in Aden cannot be deployed into India. They may base in Ceylon but must attempt to transit to Australia (bit hard to enforce)
NZ Army/Air Force units cannot move further north than Rabaul.
Canadian units can only deploy in Canada, Alaska incl the Aleutians.

Similar limits on the japanese player.

Generally I want to create more of the political environment that the war took place in rather than limit some of the tactics used.

[brian800000]

ORIGINAL: DanSez

ORIGINAL: brian800000
The ocean is really big. If you have a patrol group covering a territory out to 10 hexes, that is over 500,000 square miles of ocean to cover every day. Go out to 15 hexes and you are more than a million. Spotting a single ship in that territory that may have bad weather seems a lot to ask for a dozen patrol planes.

True, it is a big wide ocean. But it also takes a ship time to transverse that distance. It isn't just one shot to spot the single ship. It is two phases each day, plus the (best case) 3 days it takes to move into the zone, attack and flee. Emily has a long search range.

With (best case) 6 recon pulses, I should get one good shot at a sighting or else it is undefendable. Random dice and so forth, maybe not this test but the next one.

Then, once sighted the question is will Naval Attack launch against a single ship task force.

So: can I spot it?
And if I can spot it: can I strike it?

That is the issue. I am willing to reveal my search and deployments post mortem for discussion. Hopefully we will get trascott's movement notes as well so we can plot against my search. We may continue this test thru the South-Central Pacific region next as Winter is about to sock in the Aleutians.

It will take several game days, maybe more than a week depending on his choice of raider and it's current location, to log enough turns to start dissecting this first test.

I strongly object to the idea that you should be able to spot it with a high degree of certainty. You mentioned the Emily. The normal range of the Emily is 24 hexes, or 960 nautical miles. If you have the planes searching at their normal range, that is almost 3 million nautical square miles they are trying to cover.

Lets assume a group of 12 planes, each in the air for 12 hours a day, for 3 days. That is 432 hours of flying time. With almost 3 million nautical square miles to cover, that means each plane needs to cover over 6,000 square miles for each hour they are in the air. That is impossible, even in perfect weather, and with target that is both large and stationary.

If anything, the patrol aircraft results are too good in the game, in my opinion. This doesn't mean single ship attacks are undefendable - but in real life the defense involved multiple elements, including escort ships (with a prominent use of carriers in escort duty).

Keep in mind that submarines were effectively single ship raiders in the war--and they were notoriously hard to spot from the air. They were smaller than destroyers, but not that dramatically.

[BBfanboy]

The developers long ago told us that search beyond 12 hexes is increasingly spotty because of the width of the 10º wedge within the arc. You can only see so far from a search plane, even with radar assistance. Fly too low and the horizon is closer, fly too high and it is difficult to spot small ships, given cloud and haze.

[Encircled]

Dunno about anyone else, but my current opponent and I have the following house rules that seem to be ok

1. Fighters on CAP or SWEEP have a max altitude 10,000' less than their ceiling.
2. No strategic bombing from or in China.
3. 4E Bombers cannot Naval Attack below 6,000'.
4. Restricted LCUs crossing national borders must pay PPs
- Restricted Allied LCUs can walk to Akyab
- Thai units can enter Burma and Malaya
5. Restricted air units must be paid for individually and not en masse with an HQ.
6. No uber resizing of CV air units (50+)
7. No surface ship passage thru Malacca straits unless Singapore is owned
8. Night airfield or port bombing limited to a one squadron per target .
9. Japanese may not attack Chinese air bases except when Allied planes are detected
10. Allied planes performing CAP traps in China much stay in their current bases for at least one full day after the trap has occured.

I don't have a problem with any of them to be honest and as the game has reached 3 March 1944, we must be doing something right! [:)]

[DanSez]

ORIGINAL: JeffroK

Talking House Rules:

If I was to PBEM this ever again I'd look into "strategic HR" rather than "Tactical HR"

ie You must pay PP to cross borders.
US LCU cannot enter China/India/Burma except for the historicl forces (Merrill, 112 Cav etc)
Only AIF units (6,7,8 & 9 Aust Infantry, Cdo Companies, Armd Rgts & Base Forces) can leave continental Australia except for 3 other Divisions which can enter Papua/NewGuinea, Solomons. The 3 AIF Divisions & Corps troops which arrive in Aden cannot be deployed into India. They may base in Ceylon but must attempt to transit to Australia (bit hard to enforce)
NZ Army/Air Force units cannot move further north than Rabaul.
Canadian units can only deploy in Canada, Alaska incl the Aleutians.

Similar limits on the japanese player.

Generally I want to create more of the political environment that the war took place in rather than limit some of the tactics used.

We have gone that route as well but didn't want to throw too much chum in the water (so to speak...)

We have deployment rules:
Brits are to the East of Singers until Singers is recaptured
Aussies are in the South as historic (DEI/ Java/ Borneo/ Solomons)
US is the big dog and can go anywhere with some limits to deploying in China.
Japan has theater force requirements until the Kamikazi zone is invaded.

The idea is to create smaller zones of conflict with each side having a big fire brigade to bring to bear at the point of offense. If it is successful, only time will tell. I dislike the Death Star tactics -- swamping the internal calculations and turning it into an overly complicated game of Risk to me.

But to each their own.

[DanSez]

ORIGINAL: brian800000

I strongly object to the idea that you should be able to spot it with a high degree of certainty.

Ok, let's me define it clearer.
I said over a series of pulse that I should have a good chance to detect.
I would hope that over a number of these events, a random would fall in my favor.
That doesn't mean certainty, which is a different thing.

And there is a difference in a submarine puttering along 10 ft about the waterline with a very small smoke trail vs a CA blowing out smoke and steam at Full Speed making a run into enemy territory.

ASW Search spots subs frequently even with middle skilled pilots.
Can Naval Search spot a CA puffing tons of smoke with the same ratio?
If it can't at all. That is a problem.
If Naval Strikes won't launch on single ship task forces because the numbers have been nudged to not consider them a threat, that too is a problem.
That is the purpose of these test.

If ANYONE has any recent game results you wish to post about this issue, I would appreciate it -- warning this is an Open Thread so don't blow your own OPSEC.

Thanks for the comments.

[DanSez]

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

The developers long ago told us that search beyond 12 hexes is increasingly spotty because of the width of the 10º wedge within the arc. You can only see so far from a search plane, even with radar assistance. Fly too low and the horizon is closer, fly too high and it is difficult to spot small ships, given cloud and haze.

Good point but if the raider is raiding near the port, it would be within the 10-12 hex range you refer to.

Raiders in deep oceans far from ports should be hard to spot.

A raider running in to blow up a re-supply run with nav search covering the area from another base 3-5 hexes away should have a fair chance to be detected sometime in the approach, battle action or retreat out of the search zone. Weather and randoms aside, eventually the dice should come out 'detect' if the game engine allows it.

Agreed?

And yes, there is another level of randoms and variabls if a Naval Strike will launch. One test can not begin to cover all the potential points of failure to launch, but eventually: the question remains, will Naval Strike launch at a single ship raider?

There are a lot of players with vast game experience here -- does anyone have a set of reports showing this event occurring? I would be interested.

Thanks

[DanSez]

ORIGINAL: Encircled

Dunno about anyone else, but my current opponent and I have the following house rules that seem to be ok

1. Fighters on CAP or SWEEP have a max altitude 10,000' less than their ceiling.
2. No strategic bombing from or in China.
3. 4E Bombers cannot Naval Attack below 6,000'.
4. Restricted LCUs crossing national borders must pay PPs
- Restricted Allied LCUs can walk to Akyab
- Thai units can enter Burma and Malaya
5. Restricted air units must be paid for individually and not en masse with an HQ.
6. No uber resizing of CV air units (50+)
7. No surface ship passage thru Malacca straits unless Singapore is owned
8. Night airfield or port bombing limited to a one squadron per target .
9. Japanese may not attack Chinese air bases except when Allied planes are detected
10. Allied planes performing CAP traps in China much stay in their current bases for at least one full day after the trap has occured.

I don't have a problem with any of them to be honest and as the game has reached 3 March 1944, we must be doing something right! [:)]

I see a number of your rules repeated in posts asking for future opponents and in AARs. House rules are not evil, but are used to 'set the expectations' or to prevent abuses experienced in previous games.

In my game with traskott, much of our discussion has been about the pace of operations. I want a long slow paced game so I can learn how not to kill the economy, to learn about the mid war fighters, lessons on what I should have been researching, and to be competitive thru the early 44 transition. I have never played past mid-43. He is being a good sport in allowing that and I will stand till the end to take the relentless plastering of B-29s.

Real life, we are doing 3 to 5 turns a week. Not a blistering pace. His big payoff is still a year or more away. Meanwhile, I spend hours on pilot training and learning better ways to manage logistics; plus the fun stuff of stacking fighters, trying to disrupt his naval resupplies, trying to slow down his 2E plastering of Lae and figuring out how to assist the retreating IJ forces in New Guinea. I am learning something new each week.

Thanks

[traskott]

Dont bother in retreat troops at NG, all will be destroyed :p.

About single TF raiders, which was the main theme of the thread, I asked Dan about them because I see them been used almost at every game but didnt want to broke the rule of min size of combat TF.

My thoughts: Raiders ala Kormoran style are ok for me.If (if) single t.f. can be spotted and engaged by a well planned defense, I think they should be allowed.

[MakeeLearn]

This is not an attack on you, just the easiest way for me to write my ideas on this.

Serving in a airborne unit, when we were not in the field we would be the first choice by the Air Force to fly as observers in Air and Sea Rescue missions. A call would come and and CQ would walk through the barracks to pick the lucky two. This was over the Pacific Ocean and the Gulf of Mexico. People mostly seem to need Search and Rescue on the weekends. And as you are getting ready to go out on the town... "HEY! Detail, Search and Rescue, be ready and downstairs in 15mins." And there goes your weekend!


It's not like every time... you are flying along and all of a suddenly a break in the clouds... a shout of ..."LOOK SHIP!" and there is a ship, large and clear.
Most of the time you will see a anomaly and there are lots and lots of those, and upon further investigation it is a ship. And above a certain height it is the wake(s) that will be seen before the ship.

Looking out over different shades of light and dark, reflections, waves - A constant viewing and searching within abstract art.


With any amount of cloud cover there is a chance that there is a cloud between the search plane and the ship(s). And there is no guarantee that just because it can be seen that it will be seen. Aircraft crew are not in a perfect "look for ships" mode the entire time. Eating, drinking, performing aircraft tasks, butt scratching, etc. And even when the eyes are engaged the brain may be wandering. All while undergoing a constant all-enveloping hypnotic vibration that wears on you.


And on the flip side of not finding any ships, you will be seeing "ships" everywhere.


There is reality and there is The Game. I believe, and I may be wrong, that WITPAE has a complex algorithm for search. Not a plane and ship in same hex - 1 die roll pass/fail.


From what I've experienced, air attacks will be launched against single ship Task Forces. Seeing 1 ship means that there could be more nearby.

[Mike McCreery]

What they all said....