Matrix Games Forums

Battle Academy is now available on SteamPlayers compare Ageods Civil War to Civil War IIDeal of the week - An updated War in the East goes half Price!Sign up for the Qvadriga beta for iPad and Android!Come and say hi at Pax and SaluteLegends of War goes on sale!Piercing Fortress Europa Gets UpdatedBattle Academy Mega Pack is now availableClose Combat: Gateway to Caen Teaser TrailerDeal of the Week Alea Jacta Est
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Jap Strategy Discussion Thread

 
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 >> The War Room >> Jap Strategy Discussion Thread Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Jap Strategy Discussion Thread - 4/28/2012 1:33:54 AM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 20816
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ, USA, Earth, Solar System
Status: offline
So um........Hey you guys. Let's say I have this game going on where my economy is slightly drunk and the car is weaving and I'm sitting in the back seat giving directions and remember I have a cell phone where I can use the "Jap Strategy HotLine" . Could some of you experts out there take a look at my game and gimme some pointers? It would be GREATLY appreciated.

Here's the link to my saved game file:

EDIT: link deleted since the file isn't available anymore.

< Message edited by larryfulkerson -- 5/6/2012 5:49:49 PM >
Post #: 1
RE: Jap Strategy Discussion Thread - 4/28/2012 1:36:25 AM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 20816
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ, USA, Earth, Solar System
Status: offline
The way I see things I have at least three good areas to especially push hard. I'd like us to discuss these and see which one should be the one I adopt in my game.

I'm willing to forgo the foray into Burma / India because I don't think I have the supply to push really hard there. I'd really rather do most of my advancing in the South Pacific somewhere but I'm open to other opinions.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by larryfulkerson -- 4/28/2012 1:38:40 AM >

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 2
RE: Jap Strategy Discussion Thread - 4/28/2012 1:40:21 AM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 20816
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ, USA, Earth, Solar System
Status: offline
Here's a picture I did that lists the current conditions air base and port-wise. What's the pro's and con's of this route?

I'm callling this War Plan Red ( red arrow on the picture above ). I'm thinking Dutch Harbour would be the goal of this Plan.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by larryfulkerson -- 4/28/2012 1:48:07 AM >

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 3
RE: Jap Strategy Discussion Thread - 4/28/2012 1:42:31 AM   
Empire101


Posts: 1956
Joined: 5/20/2008
From: Coruscant
Status: offline
I think you need to look at Burma/India as well.

Burma in the short term yields valuable oil and refinery's that are relatively easy to get your hands on.

India, at least upto the Calcutta/Darjeeling axis, I think, is a long term but achieveable strategic goal

Just my 2 cents!!



_____________________________

Our lives may be more boring than those who lived in apocalyptic times,
but being bored is greatly preferable to being prematurely dead because of some ideological fantasy.
- Michael Burleigh


(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 4
RE: Jap Strategy Discussion Thread - 4/28/2012 1:43:22 AM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 20816
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ, USA, Earth, Solar System
Status: offline
This is the conditions for Plan White. Comments........anyone?




Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 5
RE: Jap Strategy Discussion Thread - 4/28/2012 1:44:46 AM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 20816
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ, USA, Earth, Solar System
Status: offline
And here's the conditions in Plan Yellow. Still looking for comments.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 6
RE: Jap Strategy Discussion Thread - 4/28/2012 1:48:25 AM   
Empire101


Posts: 1956
Joined: 5/20/2008
From: Coruscant
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

This is the conditions for Plan White. Comments........anyone?





This is an important area to take and expand if your goal is to attempt to strangle Australia, and cut American aid down to the bone by interdicting Fuel/troop/supply convoys.

I attempt to take Port Moresby and continue the advance via Luganville, Samoa, Fiji etc. By establishing bases in these areas, it becomes increasingly difficult for the US to resupply Australia


_____________________________

Our lives may be more boring than those who lived in apocalyptic times,
but being bored is greatly preferable to being prematurely dead because of some ideological fantasy.
- Michael Burleigh


(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 7
RE: Jap Strategy Discussion Thread - 4/28/2012 1:53:32 AM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 20816
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ, USA, Earth, Solar System
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Empire101
I think you need to look at Burma/India as well.

Burma in the short term yields valuable oil and refinery's that are relatively easy to get your hands on.

India, at least upto the Calcutta/Darjeeling axis, I think, is a long term but achieveable strategic goal

Just my 2 cents!!


Thanks for your input Empire dude. I'm no expert in land warfare and frankly the land war in WITP-AE isn't WITE quality if you know what I mean. But hey......if Burma is a pushover then yeah, I say let's go for it. I'm just thinking that there would be months at a time where I'd have to save up enough supply to do a major offensive and I'm more a 3-D thinker where the complex inter-relationships of planes and ships and foot dudes working together to make a plan happen is more to my liking. That plus I don't like the garrison bleed-off that happens when you actually do grab some area.....you have to leave some troops behind as a garrison every where you go on the land.

(in reply to Empire101)
Post #: 8
RE: Jap Strategy Discussion Thread - 4/28/2012 1:57:51 AM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 20816
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ, USA, Earth, Solar System
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Empire101
This [ Plan White ] is an important area to take and expand if your goal is to attempt to strangle Australia, and cut American aid down to the bone by interdicting Fuel/troop/supply convoys.

I attempt to take Port Moresby and continue the advance via Luganville, Samoa, Fiji etc. By establishing bases in these areas, it becomes increasingly difficult for the US to resupply Australia

YES. Now you're talking my game. I love this idea. Thanks. I'm guessing at the very least Espirtu Santos would be the eventual goal to strangle Australia and prevent the rapid re-supply of American ( west coast ) aid. And this route combined with advances on the west coast of Australia might hinder re-supply via Cape Town etc. from the far west.

(in reply to Empire101)
Post #: 9
RE: Jap Strategy Discussion Thread - 4/28/2012 6:17:55 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 5459
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

Here's a picture I did that lists the current conditions air base and port-wise. What's the pro's and con's of this route?

I'm callling this War Plan Red ( red arrow on the picture above ). I'm thinking Dutch Harbour would be the goal of this Plan.

I stop at Adak. My goal is simply blocking the Northern route. There isn't anything else up that I want. Adak does that. Going further just makes it easier on the allies IMO. You shorten their supply lines and lengthen yours to no real benefit. Just my thoughts.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 10
RE: Jap Strategy Discussion Thread - 4/28/2012 6:21:35 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 5459
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

And here's the conditions in Plan Yellow. Still looking for comments.


I don't go much beyond Darwin unless I'm going for Sydney and all of OZ. I prefer India though. Better supply lines for me, much better booty (HI etc), and has bigger impact upon allies (keeps them out of Burma longer)

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 11
RE: Jap Strategy Discussion Thread - 4/28/2012 6:28:56 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 5459
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

quote:

ORIGINAL: Empire101
I think you need to look at Burma/India as well.

Burma in the short term yields valuable oil and refinery's that are relatively easy to get your hands on.

India, at least upto the Calcutta/Darjeeling axis, I think, is a long term but achieveable strategic goal

Just my 2 cents!!


Thanks for your input Empire dude. I'm no expert in land warfare and frankly the land war in WITP-AE isn't WITE quality if you know what I mean. But hey......if Burma is a pushover then yeah, I say let's go for it. I'm just thinking that there would be months at a time where I'd have to save up enough supply to do a major offensive and I'm more a 3-D thinker where the complex inter-relationships of planes and ships and foot dudes working together to make a plan happen is more to my liking. That plus I don't like the garrison bleed-off that happens when you actually do grab some area.....you have to leave some troops behind as a garrison every where you go on the land.

Supply isn't that bad IF in connection with your India focus you are also putting China out of the war. If you have Singers to Fusan open and Shanghai to Rangoon open via Kunming, you should not have supply issues in India. Yes you will have to ship some, but your conquests will get you a lot. Taking Calcutta normally gets me +100,000 supply. Madras also is usually a big haul. Ceylon is usually good for +50,000. Plus you are also capturing a lot of fuel. Read raders AAR. When he took India, he netted more than a million HI equivalent in HI and fuel. That's a lot and you will never get that in OZ of SE Pacific islands. From the IJ perspective, the game is all about HI and fuel. I never fight unless I see some of one or the other in the goal.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 12
RE: Jap Strategy Discussion Thread - 4/28/2012 9:33:43 AM   
Empire101


Posts: 1956
Joined: 5/20/2008
From: Coruscant
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo


quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

quote:

ORIGINAL: Empire101
I think you need to look at Burma/India as well.

Burma in the short term yields valuable oil and refinery's that are relatively easy to get your hands on.

India, at least upto the Calcutta/Darjeeling axis, I think, is a long term but achieveable strategic goal

Just my 2 cents!!


Thanks for your input Empire dude. I'm no expert in land warfare and frankly the land war in WITP-AE isn't WITE quality if you know what I mean. But hey......if Burma is a pushover then yeah, I say let's go for it. I'm just thinking that there would be months at a time where I'd have to save up enough supply to do a major offensive and I'm more a 3-D thinker where the complex inter-relationships of planes and ships and foot dudes working together to make a plan happen is more to my liking. That plus I don't like the garrison bleed-off that happens when you actually do grab some area.....you have to leave some troops behind as a garrison every where you go on the land.

Supply isn't that bad IF in connection with your India focus you are also putting China out of the war. If you have Singers to Fusan open and Shanghai to Rangoon open via Kunming, you should not have supply issues in India. Yes you will have to ship some, but your conquests will get you a lot. Taking Calcutta normally gets me +100,000 supply. Madras also is usually a big haul. Ceylon is usually good for +50,000. Plus you are also capturing a lot of fuel. Read raders AAR. When he took India, he netted more than a million HI equivalent in HI and fuel. That's a lot and you will never get that in OZ of SE Pacific islands. From the IJ perspective, the game is all about HI and fuel. I never fight unless I see some of one or the other in the goal.



I absolutely agree with Pax. The war is being fought to secure those oil and resources for the Japanese economy.
Although the Land warfare element is not upto WitE standard, it is still vital to the game.

Another aspect that you need to consider is the 'Batter China to Death' strategy. Lots of industry and resource lying about here to use in the Japanese economy.

_____________________________

Our lives may be more boring than those who lived in apocalyptic times,
but being bored is greatly preferable to being prematurely dead because of some ideological fantasy.
- Michael Burleigh


(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 13
RE: Jap Strategy Discussion Thread - 4/28/2012 10:13:00 AM   
Cannonfodder


Posts: 1682
Joined: 10/22/2008
From: the Netherlands
Status: offline
Burma - yes there is oil and fuel.. all nice.. The reason you really need it is to create a defense jungle buffer to keep the brits out of your important fuel lifeline!

Stretch the south pacific if you want. Just remember that the allies just need to role up New Guinea and Isolate Truk to make your position in that area a very difficult (and hungry) one!

_____________________________



"An agile, adaptable and capable Air Force that, person for person, is second to none, and that makes a decisive air power contribution in support of the UK Defence Mission."


(in reply to Empire101)
Post #: 14
RE: Jap Strategy Discussion Thread - 4/28/2012 3:02:54 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 17371
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: Twin Cities, MN
Status: offline
My two bits:

1. Clear out the Australian rabble from P/NG, specifically Port Moresby and Milne Bay. You need to hold these as a buffer as long as practical.
2. Why are you permitting an Allied presence / buildup at Tulagi? His buildup there needs to be checked and his efforts countered.
3. Burma, as the others have suggested, must be secured. Magwe is a valuable oil production site and you need the land buffer to hold off the lime...erm...British and Indian troops.
4. You should convert all bases in the DEI, whether they're inhabited or not. I still see a number of islands that are still dutch flagged.

That'll do for starters. These should be accomplished before April 1942. You did not furnish us with the date of your game and-due to warnings about viruses in DLs that you offered before-I'm not going to view your save files at this time. These activities should keep you occupied for this time at least. That will buy you time to further coordinate your offensive and defensive efforts.

Good luck!

_____________________________


(in reply to Cannonfodder)
Post #: 15
RE: Jap Strategy Discussion Thread - 4/28/2012 4:28:32 PM   
Commander Stormwolf

 

Posts: 1620
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline
there is a campaign i had in WITP Vanilla --> against an japanese opponent

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1924134&mpage=4&key=bore%2Cpacific

he took port moresby

he took noumea

he landed paratroopers at hilo (hawaii)

he was pretty pleased with himself

... and then i sunk his carriers

.. and then i sunk his battleships

.. and then i massacred his air force

.. and then i landed in northern japan

all in the middle of 1942

oh.. i did lose a few cruisers, destroyers, and pt boats..

allied CV sunk = 0
allied BB sunk = 0

jap opponent quits


< Message edited by Commander Stormwolf -- 4/28/2012 4:35:41 PM >


_____________________________

"No Enemy Survives Contact with the Plan" - Commander Stormwolf

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 16
RE: Jap Strategy Discussion Thread - 4/30/2012 9:09:44 PM   
inqistor


Posts: 1332
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson
if Burma is a pushover then yeah, I say let's go for it. I'm just thinking that there would be months at a time where I'd have to save up enough supply to do a major offensive and I'm more a 3-D thinker where the complex inter-relationships of planes and ships and foot dudes working together to make a plan happen is more to my liking. That plus I don't like the garrison bleed-off that happens when you actually do grab some area.....you have to leave some troops behind as a garrison every where you go on the land.

Burma is a must, because you HAVE TO cut off supply for China. Then you have to prepare for long, bloody air war. Whoever win, will sweep plains around Mandalay, and reopen/keep closed Burma Road.

Kuriles is quickest way to bombard Japan, so you should secure this route.

Australia, New Caledonia, Fiji, etc. gives you nothing, but extends Allies supply routes to Australia, so it is good side-show, where you lose nothing, when you have to get back.

Your main goal should be to keep enemy from your oil fields, and production centers as long as possible.

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 17
RE: Jap Strategy Discussion Thread - 5/2/2012 2:31:00 AM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 20816
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ, USA, Earth, Solar System
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy
....due to warnings about viruses in DLs that you offered before-I'm not going to view your save files at this time.

Yeah, I saw that warning and took it to heart. I updated my virus definations and did a full-system sweep and did in fact find 5 mal-ware files. But the anti-virus program took care of them and so now I'm clean. Thanks to everyone who said something.

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 18
RE: Jap Strategy Discussion Thread - 5/2/2012 4:25:53 PM   
Miller


Posts: 1593
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline
As the Japs I take all the historical gains plus the following:

As much of China as possible, Burma, Nothern Aus (Darwin is a MUST!), PM/Lae/New Guinea area, Lunga/Tulagi and New Cal/New Heb. Anything else is overkill and likely to fail against a decent opponent.......all in my humble opinion of course!

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 19
RE: Jap Strategy Discussion Thread - 5/2/2012 5:06:10 PM   
cavalry

 

Posts: 1792
Joined: 9/2/2003
From: Blackboys East Sussex UK
Status: offline
Does taking Darwin release more allied troops?

your ideas would make me feel over extended even in scn 2

(in reply to Miller)
Post #: 20
RE: Jap Strategy Discussion Thread - 5/2/2012 5:07:08 PM   
koniu

 

Posts: 1940
Joined: 2/28/2011
From: Konin, Poland, European Union
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: cavalry

Does taking Darwin release more allied troops?

your ideas would make me feel over extended even in scn 2


No, activation line is far more south.

< Message edited by koniu -- 5/2/2012 5:13:35 PM >


_____________________________

"Only the Dead Have Seen the End of War"

(in reply to cavalry)
Post #: 21
RE: Jap Strategy Discussion Thread - 5/4/2012 2:01:49 AM   
jolly_pillager

 

Posts: 178
Joined: 1/15/2006
Status: offline
Your strategic goal is to secure the resources your economy needs to continue functioning (including securing the SLOC's required to move these resources to your industry).

Territory seized that does not contribute to that goal is pretty much meaningless (and may even be counterproductive). Keep in mind that a successful Japanese Empire is not the one that took Calcutta for a half a year, but the one that kept the tankers coming in right through 1945 and prevented the invasion of Japan until the clock ran out in '46.



(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 22
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> The War Room >> Jap Strategy Discussion Thread Page: [1]
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

0.098