Matrix Games Forums

A new update for Piercing Fortress EuropaNew screenshots for War in the West!Pike & Shot is now available!Server Maintenance Battle Academy 2 gets updated!Deal of the Week: Advanced Tactics Gold Ask Buzz Aldrin!Pike & Shot gets Release Date and Twitch Session!Deal of the Week Espana 1936War in the West coming in December!
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned.

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned. Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned. - 3/9/2010 1:45:04 PM   
aztez

 

Posts: 3955
Joined: 2/26/2005
From: Finland
Status: offline
String: Thanx. That is useful information. I never actually have put any of my squadrons into 100% training. Kept them at 70-80% but will alter this once I get home from work.

Yup, the airfields below level 4 are somewhat of an deathtrap.

(in reply to String)
Post #: 61
RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned. - 3/9/2010 3:31:17 PM   
wpurdom

 

Posts: 410
Joined: 10/27/2000
From: Decatur, GA, USA
Status: offline
According to Lundstrom in First Team, p. 307, Catalinas were by doctrine used in the Guadalcanal campaign only in night attacks in the absence of fighters. An example can be found at http://www.vp-11.org/TorpedoRun.html

Of course, there were exceptions where daylight torpedo attacks were made. The most famous was a daylight attack in the face of fighter opposition by Gen. Geiger's personal pilot with improvised torpedo release controls which supposedly hit a troop transport. Another were the unsuccessful Catalina strikes at Midway, such as on the Jintsu.

The Catalina was not a good plane to do a torpedo attack in the face of AA fire or fighter opposition, but it may have been as good as the TBD Devastator! After all, at that time, IIRC US naval aviators had to release their torpedoes at 80 MPH due to not having drag rings or the Japanese equivalent (which was some sort of wooden construction to protect the torpedo IIRC) or the torpedo would not function. And the top speed of Caltalina models is 190-200 while the TBD goes at the enormous speed of 206! Which is to say that all that was preventing the use of Catalina in the early stages for naval torpedo attacks was the lack of training of their pilots and the lack of realization that other LBA was totally ineffective.

This was the stage where the Allies thought they could interdict naval convoys with B-17s - at least army commanders thought that the B-17 was their best anti-shipping aricraft and there weren't any naval aviator commanders in the DEI. If you want to follow historical practice, put your B-17's on naval attack and trust in a miracle!

< Message edited by wpurdom -- 3/9/2010 3:33:41 PM >

(in reply to aztez)
Post #: 62
RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned. - 3/9/2010 3:53:10 PM   
wpurdom

 

Posts: 410
Joined: 10/27/2000
From: Decatur, GA, USA
Status: offline
It seems to work best to me if you somewhat overfill your squadrons with pilots and then put them on 100% training - that way the fatigue levels don't rise way up - fatigue levels don't seem to send op losses way up, but I wager they have some effect. Also as Rob says, the greater number of pilots seem to get trained just fine.

I wouldn't wait on training these squadrons up locally. I would send them your better pilots from Stateside and Pearl and also train replacements there. On the fighter jocks, this will also give you a chance to get some of the Training Command pilots which you can start distributing to other squadrons once you go above two in the one at the point. Use some of your B-18 squadrons and float plane squadrons to train in naval attack.

How full you keep operational squadrons may depend on how much and how often you want to micromanage.Your key squadrons at the point of the sword, you may want to double up on pilots, like many of the US CV squadrons do at the outset. Suppose you want to defend a good airfield like Soerabaja or Batavia. With enough support it can keep most of your P-40's flying even with hard use. By hot-bunking (rotating) the pilots you can run 100% CAP when you need it and still meet next turn's attack.

(in reply to wpurdom)
Post #: 63
RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned. - 3/9/2010 5:13:53 PM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 6023
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/now in Israel
Status: offline
Those Banshees are quite lethal, against AI I usually keep them as long as I have spare planes, even paying Political Points. When pilots hit 60 with NavalB, they start to be really lethal against anything else than CV TF despite being generally low exp otherwise.

< Message edited by Sardaukar -- 3/9/2010 5:15:26 PM >


_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-


(in reply to wpurdom)
Post #: 64
RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned. - 3/9/2010 5:48:06 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 7231
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline
Hmmmm. Still going to fortify Java.

After six months into two campaigns as the Allies my feeling is that against a competent opponent you will not hold Java and will suffer the loss of all units sent there. Allied air power is just too weak, and Allied minor units are worthless vs high quality Japanese troops. You might delay him-especially if he is unaware and does not send enough invasion troops, but you can't count on that and the loss of those units will hurt.

Knowing what I now know as the Allied player, if I ever play the Japanese I would aim to do the following. Singapore within four weeks. Bataan not more than six to eight weeks. Burma cleared by the end of March, Into Java and Indonesia by March to take them by the end of March. Clean up DEI and begin prepping to take Darwin in an early May to June campaign. My excellent opponent did all of this with little trouble.

In additon, as a Japanese player, now with an understanding the total weakness of the Indian army, I might delay the Darwin operation and seize Celyon as I see no way it can be held by the Allied player without stripping out all decent units in India (see Andy Mac's AAR)-especially if I see key British and Indian units in Java. I am sort of surprised that it is not happening more in the AARs we are seeing as Celyon is easy to take and easy to hold until perhaps 1943. As an added bonus taking Colombo for one day cancels two 1945 British carriers (who thought of this?) and gives the VP to the Japanese player.

< Message edited by crsutton -- 3/9/2010 6:26:42 PM >


_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Sardaukar)
Post #: 65
RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned. - 3/9/2010 6:14:21 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 14898
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

As an added bonus taking Colombo for one day cancels two 1945 British carriers (who thought of this?) and gives the VP to the Japanese player.


It appears this was an oversight in the scenario. It has also been posted that a CVL scheduled to arrive at Trincomalee is in the same situation.

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 66
RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned. - 3/9/2010 6:32:35 PM   
aztez

 

Posts: 3955
Joined: 2/26/2005
From: Finland
Status: offline
wpurdom: That is actually one of books that I have looked to buy. I only have read few of these detailing the battles around the pacific.

Intresting facts there regarding the use of PBY's.

Those TBD Devastators were propably one of the poorest torpedo bombers around! Not many survived the battle of Midway flying that model.

This is 1st time I have used those Catalina's on offensive missions and you sold me using them. Thanks for intresting information. Allthough, I did just put 3 squadrons on assaults.

Intresting to see whether or not we actually hit something with them.

Personally I hate micromanage but something I'am willing to do with these fighters / divebombers. The are now on transit to Perth where they will train up their experience levels.

Very intresting information regarding that rotation system with the pilots.

We shall look into this. The turn is not in my inbox so need to wait a bit though.

Sardaukar: Damn you living in Malta. You should be here enjoying the snow flake atmosphere!

I like those Banshees too and there quite a few of them too. I would say that IF lucky they could knock out an carrier or two with proper training and adequate escorts.

I'am really trying to build up experience levels fast and wohn't mind spending some PP's to keep them in theatre a bit longer.

crsutton: Welcome! Hmmmm, very thought out views. Again shows the intresting strategy aspect of the game.

Maybe and then again maybe not. The Java will be no pushover and with forts building up fast he will have tough time coming.

The way I see the advantage and disadvantage are listed below:

+ The resource centers will be much more damaged with proper defense of Java. If not defended they fall intact.
+ This operation will buy time. Maybe not in Oz nor India (except that those experience levels will rise) BUT it will help CenPac. Either he brings in KB or suffer even more losses.
+ He cannot start his economy on full force until the whole Java front is cleared. Even with those additional CD guns at Oosthaven and Palempang are bound to hurt him.
+ Any squadron fully destroyed or lost can be bought back via PP.
+ I'am keeping my brigades etc on reserve to conserve them and "hide" them. The bombardments are not supposed to show these units.

- This will make the initial Indian front a bit weaker BUT we get those extra divisions and units if he invades.
- I think the defense of Luzon and Malaya are closely tight up with this. We need to hold out some extra on either of these fronts if to succeed. My bet is with Luzon. I have a lot
of supplies there and now with no bugs eating them up the odds look better. As said though we need to hold out on either of these battles.. the optum would be both places.
- I agree that this operations have many risks with it eventhough it can pay off in dividens.

It will be something to watch out though. Katsuragi is most likely very good opponent since as said he beat up kaleun with japan in witp.

This does give me three extra bonuses though. 1) He has no experience using 2 day turns, 2) He does not know me which should give extra caution to his playing style and 3) He revealed
that he has never gone againts an organized withdrawal strategy.

Those things add extra flavour to this PBEM in my mind.

The Ceylon.. it is an two way street. Personally I don't even mind losing it since it will serve as POW camp for his troops in the longrun.

I don't even vision on holding out at Java indefinately but maybe, just maybe we can hold out all summer and than some.

Actually thinking about moving all the US carrier aircraft into Java. Not risking carriers but getting the planes out. That ought to be intresting to watch too.

There are a lot of ideas an concerns floatating so... well who knows what the future brings.

One things for sure (and thanks to Dave and forum members) I'am a far better AE player than I was when the game was relesased. One thing though.. I doubt he has Java and other areas done by march though. Very much doubt this at the moment.

Hmmmm, I didn't know about those carriers being cancelled IF Colombo falls. That doesn't make any sense at all. They should appear on Aden or Cape Town.

I have been following the PzB game vs Andy Mac. Well, good play by him I must admit. Than again any sort of an major offensive with japan vs Oz is.. well beyond any historical possibility for Japan. Well, that is how witp was and still is with AE... japan can conquer a lot more than what was realistic in WW2. Fun to watch though that is for sure.

witpqs: Most definately something that needs fixing. As said doesn't make any sense at all if the game handles Colombo such way.

Utter rubbish one could say!


< Message edited by aztez -- 3/9/2010 6:46:02 PM >

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 67
RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned. - 3/9/2010 7:19:11 PM   
wpurdom

 

Posts: 410
Joined: 10/27/2000
From: Decatur, GA, USA
Status: offline
You will get two different sets of Banshees. If you use the first set, those squadrons will get to be at low strength with good pilots. If you then rush your second set of Banshee squadrons to the theater you can disband (no reform) some or all of the first squadrons into the second set without costing PP's although you will lose the PP's for early withdrawals.

I wouldn't be surprised if this was historical - that some of these early squadrons were merged into reinforcement squadrons IRL

I don't remember all the details of which P-40 and Banshee squadrons you can save the planes through "disbanding" into another squadron - some you can, some of the P-40s you can't. But unless its been changed in the latest version, I'm pretty sure you can save most or all of your Banshees and, at the same time, put their experienced pilots right where you need them without delay. Some of the far eastern P-40 squadrons, I know, won't let you save the planes through disbanding. Under the new system, you can always save pilots through transfers, however. Of course, you know the program lets you know whether planes will be destroyed on a disband before you have to go through with it.

If you can save the Banshee planes when you get to this stage, I doubt you'll want to spend PP's to keep the first set of Banshee squadrons around since you'll be able to productively use up all the planes in the second set of squadrons.

(in reply to aztez)
Post #: 68
RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned. - 3/9/2010 7:39:15 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 14898
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
It wasn't really clear to me when AE first came out, but getting PP's for early withdrawal of air groups is optional. Here is how it works.

Click on Withdraw.

You will be asked something like 'withdraw group-name losing planes and pilots gaining ## PP's for the player Y/N?'.

I am sure I have the language in the last line wrong, but it doesn't matter. Just answer "No"!

You will then be asked something like 'withdraw group-name planes and pilots going to the pools Y/N?'

Answer "Yes" and you get to keep all the planes and pilots in the pools.

All of those ADBA P-40's and Banshees allow you to do this, as do many, many other groups that withdraw. The key is that if it is asking you about getting PP's, you can answer "No", then you will be asked about keeping the planes & pilots.

BTW, if you answer "No" to both questions, the Withdraw command is aborted and the groups stays in the game. You can check a group this way to see if you get the option to keep the planes & pilots, just answer "No" to both questions.

(in reply to wpurdom)
Post #: 69
RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned. - 3/9/2010 9:36:59 PM   
wpurdom

 

Posts: 410
Joined: 10/27/2000
From: Decatur, GA, USA
Status: offline
With these particular groups, I generally find it better to disband them into the follow-up groups and put my pilots and planes where I need them en masse, than to have them go into the pools. But it depends on the situation and the size of the different groups, I admit.

But whichever way he does it, I think aztec will find ways to productively use up the Banshee and P-40 planes in the first groups by transferring them to follow-up groups rather than paying PP's to keep them in play.

I haven't seen anywhere you can deploy the Banshees after the second set of squadrons is withdrawn. Is anyone aware of any squadrons that can be converted into Banshees after June 1942?

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 70
RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned. - 3/9/2010 9:52:07 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 14898
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
There are two squadrons (+1 5-ship HQ squadron) that come in later than the ABDA squadrons. These are assigned to SWPac and do not withdraw (except for the HQ squadron).

I don't know of any groups that can upgrade to the A-24, but there is at least one that can upgrade to the A-24B (which is available sometime in '43).

(in reply to wpurdom)
Post #: 71
RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned. - 3/9/2010 11:12:01 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 7231
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: wpurdom

With these particular groups, I generally find it better to disband them into the follow-up groups and put my pilots and planes where I need them en masse, than to have them go into the pools. But it depends on the situation and the size of the different groups, I admit.

But whichever way he does it, I think aztec will find ways to productively use up the Banshee and P-40 planes in the first groups by transferring them to follow-up groups rather than paying PP's to keep them in play.

I haven't seen anywhere you can deploy the Banshees after the second set of squadrons is withdrawn. Is anyone aware of any squadrons that can be converted into Banshees after June 1942?



None can be converted but there are one or two that come on in the States that can remain as Banshees. It is July 42 and I have two squadrons of them, one in India and one in the Pacific. And, since they have yet to go into battle there is about 60 in the pool.


Uh yeah, like witpqs said.....


_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to wpurdom)
Post #: 72
RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned. - 3/10/2010 8:28:14 AM   
LoBaron


Posts: 4587
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline
Aztez did you already upgrade to the newest patch?
I just love the new reolution options. Nothing better than running AE @ 1920x1080.

Good progress in disrupting the Japanese landings. If for nothing else they lose a few transports
and its a strain on the offensive timetable...

_____________________________

S**t happens in war.

All hail the superior ones!

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 73
RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned. - 3/10/2010 11:30:59 AM   
aztez

 

Posts: 3955
Joined: 2/26/2005
From: Finland
Status: offline
wpurdom: Hmmm, I will look into the squadron reinforcements. Need to check what the schedule is.

I will look at those Banshees once they arrive at Perth. Actually should be arriving in the "new turn".

I actually never used that "disband" method but I have no doubt you are correct. As said I hate micromanage that much so
no suprise that this information slipped through my eyes.

The only bad thing is time. My opponent is closing towards Darwin and seems to be making rapid push here.

I did have good experiences with those Banshees. Now, I don't remember the experience levels or such but they did sunk quite
a few AK's and AP's.

Very much appreciate all the information and options given. This should help out quite a few players around the boards.

witpqs: I missed this information in my other PBEM game. This would have most useful to know but will use it in this one though.

The upgrade paths are not numerous for this plane type though as you said.

Good information here too.

I will try to do an general update tonight but I might not have time. An update is promised for tomorrow though.

crsutton:

LoBaron: Yes, we are running the latest patch from the beginning. I will toy around the new resolution now but haven't had time
test it. What I have seen it really does look nice and my laptop has an Full HD capability.

Thanks. Quite pleased with the surface combat engaments so far. He seems to pushing forward hard. Maybe a bit too hard... well
more about this when I have time to do an update. As said trying to get that out tonight if possible.

A bit worried about the low experience levels of the Indian troops though. At least they do have solid leaders with decent equipment.

They are quite sometime off from gettin 100 prep points and thus starting to train properly.

(in reply to LoBaron)
Post #: 74
RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned. - 3/11/2010 4:49:00 PM   
aztez

 

Posts: 3955
Joined: 2/26/2005
From: Finland
Status: offline
Japanese expansion and news (december 26th 1941 - january 3rd 1942)


The game has entered into year 1942.

The map below recaps the past few turns progress. I have been very busy last few days so I didn't have time to do an turn by turn updates.

Top 3 things happening now are as follows:

1) More troops arrive at Java. We have substantial troop deployments here already with more enroute.
2) The battle of Luzon is about to hit full gear. Enemy has entered the hex at Clark Field.
3) There are a lot of ship movement in Amboina, Kendari and Davao regio. I think Timor will be lost soon.

We have received some fighters and I'am sending quite a few into Cape Town. Either these are used at Java or India. This remains to be seen.

Those much talked about Banshees are at Perth. I haven't disbanded them yet since I want to see how fast they do train up.

Other than the PBEM is making steady progress.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to aztez)
Post #: 75
RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned. - 3/11/2010 9:01:52 PM   
wpurdom

 

Posts: 410
Joined: 10/27/2000
From: Decatur, GA, USA
Status: offline
On double-filling frontline squadrons with pilots

No player should consider this gamey. Bergerud in Fire in the Sky states that Kenney's policy was that you should try to have two aircrews for every aircraft in a frontline squadron, and that his superiors gave him pushback on that only on the transport squadrons.

(in reply to aztez)
Post #: 76
RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned. - 3/11/2010 9:12:41 PM   
jrlans


Posts: 180
Joined: 8/27/2005
From: Los Angeles, CA
Status: offline
Honestly Az, I wouldnt disband the Banshee I'd pay the PP piper to keep them in play as long as they are there and there is enough A/C they pose a viable threat to even CAs. This means that you can effectivly maul an invasion (if you can get the escorts to cover them) within range.  It will force your opponent to try to close down airfields and will probably open up the waves.

To stop your oppnent from Nav strike / Airfield  i would recomend creating a couple small TFs with disposable ships (MLs, AMc etc . . ) and keep them in your ports undocked. This should attract any Nav bombing squads and keep them off your airfields. If your opponent changes tactics and only starts going after your Airfields or ports that opens you up to launch a couple of small SCTFs and raid.

(in reply to wpurdom)
Post #: 77
RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned. - 3/11/2010 9:14:08 PM   
aztez

 

Posts: 3955
Joined: 2/26/2005
From: Finland
Status: offline
Java (january 4th - 5th 1942)


The previous turns spotting of CV Kaga torpedo aircraft was correct.

It seems katsuragi has moved his carriers into Java Sea.

Now the question remains where does he strike? My bet is that we shall see some fighting above Batavia.

There is an ABDA cruiser TF docked at Batavia. That fleet is ordered to stay put. Allthough I was tempted to try an intervene againts his carriers.

The US carriers will arrive into Pearl Harbour next turn.

Pic below shows an enemy carriers closing in...




Attachment (1)

(in reply to wpurdom)
Post #: 78
RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned. - 3/11/2010 9:22:20 PM   
aztez

 

Posts: 3955
Joined: 2/26/2005
From: Finland
Status: offline
wpurdom: The "gamey" part is something I want to avoid in all of my PBM games so that information is good to hear.

As said at the moment judging how fast their experience levels rise up.

jrlans: I like those aircraft too. They did maul some of Dave's transports early on my other PBEM game so kind of have an soft spot for them.

Divebombers are very valuable in AE. Personally I feel they are the most likely bombers to cause serious damage.

I do get plenty of SBD's later on with good crews but don't have that many to start with so that why I'am willing to keep those.

With good dice rolls who knows what they are capable of doing.

Yeah, it is always good to have few TF's in one place. The above pic shows cruiser TF, couple of transport TF's and an Minesweeping TF docked at Batavia.

Nothing gamey though such as single ship TF's.

(in reply to aztez)
Post #: 79
RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned. - 3/11/2010 9:29:39 PM   
jrlans


Posts: 180
Joined: 8/27/2005
From: Los Angeles, CA
Status: offline
Yea its a little gamey what I think I would honestly do is for up two, groups of three AMc or so at both Batvia and Soerabaja and then just have them patrol between the two ports . . . local trafic

(in reply to aztez)
Post #: 80
RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned. - 3/11/2010 9:49:49 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 14898
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jrlans

Honestly Az, I wouldnt disband the Banshee I'd pay the PP piper to keep them in play as long as they are there and there is enough A/C they pose a viable threat to even CAs. This means that you can effectivly maul an invasion (if you can get the escorts to cover them) within range.  It will force your opponent to try to close down airfields and will probably open up the waves.



How many PP per squadron per turn will that cost?

(in reply to jrlans)
Post #: 81
RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned. - 3/11/2010 10:00:01 PM   
jrlans


Posts: 180
Joined: 8/27/2005
From: Los Angeles, CA
Status: offline
Im not exactly sure but I seem to remember in my games that i could keep a couple of squadrons that were set to withdraw in service and the PP draw basicaly evened out my gain. In otherwrods my PP were stagnant.  The real PP killer right now is ship withdrawl.

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 82
RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned. - 3/11/2010 11:49:57 PM   
wpurdom

 

Posts: 410
Joined: 10/27/2000
From: Decatur, GA, USA
Status: offline
Whether paying the PP cost makes any sense depends on the losses you take and your pool of Banshees. I am expecting that when your enemy comes into the vicinity of Java you'll have enough productive use for the Banshees that you'll lose enough planes that either your frontline or replacement Banshee squadrons will be way understrength. If you rush your reinforcement squadrons forward, they'll get there before you pay PP's on the old squadron, but it may require advanced planning.

I remember in my AI game, one 13 plane reinforcement squadron came on map with 2 planes. I disbanded a nine plane squadron into it. If you have one full or nearly full squadron and one with only 2-4 planes, no reason to pay PP's to keep both is all I'm saying. A couple reserve aircraft in a full squadron is no loss. Same thing for the P-40's.

< Message edited by wpurdom -- 3/11/2010 11:51:15 PM >

(in reply to jrlans)
Post #: 83
RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned. - 3/12/2010 1:07:55 AM   
wpurdom

 

Posts: 410
Joined: 10/27/2000
From: Decatur, GA, USA
Status: offline
Let me apologize in advance, since I'm almost sure I'm about to try to teach Grandma to such eggs.

1. Have you picked out your final redoubt hex or hexes on Java to fortify. Experience on other AARs suggest that the mountainous bases at Malang and in the north are by far the best holdout hexes for inferior forces. Are you going to fortify one holdout base or one at each end of the island.

2. Are you productively using your transports and patrols to bring in restricted Dutch troops that aren't useful where they are? Especially base forces (e.g. at Den Passar, if you don't expect ot use it.

3. Are you going to write off British units or save a cadre? A lot of folks would say that cadres of British combat units (as opposed to bases and air HQs can't be rebuilt productively. Indians, quite another story.

(in reply to wpurdom)
Post #: 84
RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned. - 3/12/2010 8:15:30 AM   
aztez

 

Posts: 3955
Joined: 2/26/2005
From: Finland
Status: offline
jrlans: The Soerabaja and Batavia tour would be for scuba diving holidays! 

Yeah, nothing gamey on setting such local mine sweeping TF's.

We actually had quite an fireworks at Batavia and kind of good/bad result there. I will post more about it tonight.

witpqs: I don't actually remember but as jrlans said it kind of evens out. I will check on this later today. Now at work.

In overall that "call" will be made when this is actually imminent.

wpurdom: A bunch of questions and here my views.

1) Yes. We will actually fight it out at Batavia. There two reasons and those are terrain + forts and the prep points. Those outweight other hexes.
Also we will fight at Soerabaja but the main forces are at Batavia.

2) Done already. Few units are waiting for the transports since the KB pulled the timetable a bit back.

3) As said I'am not big fan of cadres. We are not using this with Dave either and same goes here. Actually need to confirm this with katsuragi.

A few units we can "save" but I strongly feel that +95% not.

The usage of PP's really depends on situation at hand. That is always an judgement call.

We shall what happens. I don't mind those planes from the pools since now it is all about delaying and max. hurting him.

The game gives a lot of options. I have had a pleasure to clash againts Dave and discuss with quite a few experienced forum members. That adds up and this game is going to be tough from the start.

(in reply to wpurdom)
Post #: 85
RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned. - 3/12/2010 9:46:44 AM   
String


Posts: 2653
Joined: 10/7/2003
From: Estonia
Status: offline
quote:

[Reply to Message]


I hope you won't attrit your airforce vs. KB this early.

_____________________________

Surface combat TF fanboy

(in reply to aztez)
Post #: 86
RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned. - 3/12/2010 10:01:03 AM   
aztez

 

Posts: 3955
Joined: 2/26/2005
From: Finland
Status: offline
String: I did not fly out any navalstrikes. They are just waste of bombers this early on the game.

However I did CAP Batavia heavily and combined that with AA guns.

I will post the results later on tonigh but it seemed kind of 1:1 losses vs his elite pilots.

Quite a few Kate's and Val's were downed. He did sunk some ABDA cruisers and transports in return. Those had mmostly unloaded though.

I have better fighters arriving at Cape Town in +20 days from WC.

(in reply to String)
Post #: 87
RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned. - 3/12/2010 12:31:33 PM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 6023
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/now in Israel
Status: offline
Saving cadres can be quite detrimental in AE, especially for Brits and even Australians. Filling depleted unit can really hurt your replacement pools, leaving many important units understrength.

On the other hand, one can save cadre and disband it in "national base" into replacement pool to top up other units. Not sure if that'd be worth it though, unless fragment was major chunk of unit.

_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-


(in reply to aztez)
Post #: 88
RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned. - 3/12/2010 3:51:57 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 7231
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs


quote:

ORIGINAL: jrlans

Honestly Az, I wouldnt disband the Banshee I'd pay the PP piper to keep them in play as long as they are there and there is enough A/C they pose a viable threat to even CAs. This means that you can effectivly maul an invasion (if you can get the escorts to cover them) within range.  It will force your opponent to try to close down airfields and will probably open up the waves.



How many PP per squadron per turn will that cost?




Well, I am in August 1942 and have virtually no PP in my pool. So, I can't recommend doing things that waste PPs. A single CL costs 15 PP per day to keep, a British carrier about 65. You need to move infantry from the West Coast pronto. Save those PPs.


_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 89
RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned. - 3/12/2010 6:25:48 PM   
wpurdom

 

Posts: 410
Joined: 10/27/2000
From: Decatur, GA, USA
Status: offline
quote:

Yes. We will actually fight it out at Batavia. There two reasons and those are terrain + forts and the prep points. Those outweight other hexes.
Also we will fight at Soerabaja but the main forces are at Batavia.


Both cities have mountainous bases right next to them. Soerabaja doesn't seem to have any terrain advantages and isn't Batavia just light urban? With respect to Batavia, IJA frequently lands at Merak and comes straight down. If you can spare some engineers to fortify the mountain base some (even level 2) and he doesn't take it first, your Batavia garrison might still be of some use after it gets kicked out of town. Even more so in Soerabaja. If he only brings enough to kick you out of Soerabaja, it wouldn't be enough to kick you out of the mountain base.

On PP points - PP points for withdrawal and retention seem to be the same regardless of the number of planes/pilots left.

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 90
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned. Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.121