Matrix Games Forums

Space Program Manager Launch Contest Announced!Battle Academy 2 is out now on iPad!A closer look at rockets in Space Program ManagerDeal of the Week - Pride of NationsA 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
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

fulkerson v Rob.......no Rob please

 
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 >> fulkerson v Rob.......no Rob please Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
fulkerson v Rob.......no Rob please - 5/12/2012 4:23:14 AM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 21110
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ, USA, Earth, Solar System
Status: online
Rob and I decided to do a restart and he has given me his kind permission to do an AAR about it so here goes. We did the historical start and here's the complete combat report ( attachment below ) for those of you who want to check out the fantasticlly good results I got. Just click on the attachment link and then click on the file name and then resize the window so you can read it.


Attachment (1)

< Message edited by larryfulkerson -- 5/12/2012 1:03:02 PM >
Post #: 1
RE: fulkerson v Rob.......no Rob please - 5/12/2012 4:47:15 AM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 21110
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ, USA, Earth, Solar System
Status: online
Here's the losses in airplanes and ships. Rob's side took a beating. I guess I'm off to a good start. I don't want to bore you guys with ALL the combat results but I thought I might go through the highlights so the new guys can play along too. I'm counting me as one of the new guys too. I'm getting excellent advice from all you experts out there and I appreciate it muchly.


(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 2
RE: fulkerson v Rob.......no Rob please - 5/12/2012 4:54:44 AM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 21110
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ, USA, Earth, Solar System
Status: online
Here's the Pearl Harbour alpha strike results:


(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 3
RE: fulkerson v Rob.......no Rob please - 5/12/2012 5:01:31 AM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 21110
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ, USA, Earth, Solar System
Status: online
Here's where Repluse and POW bit the dust:


(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 4
RE: fulkerson v Rob.......no Rob please - 5/12/2012 5:10:31 AM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 21110
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ, USA, Earth, Solar System
Status: online
And one of the Jap CVL's has a good alpha strike:


(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 5
RE: fulkerson v Rob.......no Rob please - 5/12/2012 5:15:02 AM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 21110
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ, USA, Earth, Solar System
Status: online
There was lots of good news from Kota Bharu:


(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 6
RE: fulkerson v Rob.......no Rob please - 5/12/2012 5:25:28 AM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 21110
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ, USA, Earth, Solar System
Status: online
I got some semi-bad news from Wake however. I may have to turn off those bombers before they get shot up again on some future mission(s):


(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 7
RE: fulkerson v Rob.......no Rob please - 5/12/2012 5:32:20 AM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 21110
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ, USA, Earth, Solar System
Status: online
I decided to put the Nell's in question on Naval Search instead of "Airfield" attacks. They will live longer that way. Bomber missions w/o escorts are really risky I'm finding out.


(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 8
RE: fulkerson v Rob.......no Rob please - 5/12/2012 5:43:49 AM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 21110
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ, USA, Earth, Solar System
Status: online
So far my DD's bombarding Midway appear to have done nothing. I need to use bigger ships I guess: The KB is headed for wake. I'm putting together some AK's to carry some troops to Midway and they should arrive there within a month or two.


(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 9
RE: fulkerson v Rob.......no Rob please - 5/12/2012 5:52:55 AM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 21110
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ, USA, Earth, Solar System
Status: online
At least the Japs captured SOMETHING during the day. There were some more attacks.......on Georgetown, Alor Star, Hong Kong, etc. but not much got done.



< Message edited by larryfulkerson -- 5/12/2012 5:53:51 AM >

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 10
RE: fulkerson v Rob.......no Rob please - 5/12/2012 6:09:27 AM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 21110
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ, USA, Earth, Solar System
Status: online
I thought it might be a good idea to go through all the HI bases expanding the airbase and specific ports so that I could store more stuff there w/o spoilage.


(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 11
RE: fulkerson v Rob.......no Rob please - 5/12/2012 6:14:09 AM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 21110
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ, USA, Earth, Solar System
Status: online
And then I remember somebody, I think Bullwinkle, told me that Kate production was turned off at start so I decided to expand the Kate production a bit so we at least start producing some.


(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 12
RE: fulkerson v Rob.......no Rob please - 5/12/2012 6:18:39 AM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 21110
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ, USA, Earth, Solar System
Status: online
And then I remembered that when I was playing the Allied AI I had a problemo w/ vehicle production so I doubled the production of every city that starts with a "K".


(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 13
RE: fulkerson v Rob.......no Rob please - 5/12/2012 10:36:24 AM   
Puhis

 

Posts: 1698
Joined: 11/30/2008
From: Finland
Status: offline
Larry, you can double all vehicle factories, and even that is not too much. Also, eventually you need much bigger Kate factory, size 5 factory is only producing 5 planes a month.

BTW, good first turn with allied battleships, it seems that you definitely got 4 of them, maybe 6.

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 14
RE: fulkerson v Rob.......no Rob please - 5/12/2012 11:25:29 AM   
Cannonfodder


Posts: 1963
Joined: 10/22/2008
From: the Netherlands
Status: offline
About the unescorted bomber strikes, early in the war it helps to fly them really low (let's say at a 1000 feet). The fighters will have trouble intercepting them while patrolling at higher altitudes.

Don't do this at bases that have low altitude CAP and/or a lot of light flak guns.

_____________________________


"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


(in reply to Puhis)
Post #: 15
RE: fulkerson v Rob.......no Rob please - 5/12/2012 12:55:30 PM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 21110
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ, USA, Earth, Solar System
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: Puhis
Larry, you can double all vehicle factories, and even that is not too much. Also, eventually you need much bigger Kate factory, size 5 factory is only producing 5 planes a month.

Did you mean to say double ALL the vehicle factories? And then you'll need even more? Really? For sure? Well, I must say, that's astounding. BUT alright.......let's do it. Thanks. And about the Kate factories......um I was told to be careful and cautious etc. when changing stuff in the economy and thought it sounded like good advice etc. BUT you're correct......5 planes a month isn't nearly enough. I predict that I'm going to need about 10 times that amount. I plan on being aggressive and bold but not reckless so I'm probably going to loose a lot of stuff...like Kates. Your advice is sound, sounds like to me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Puhis
BTW, good first turn with allied battleships, it seems that you definitely got 4 of them, maybe 6.

Yeah, but FOW considerations dictate that it's an engenious trap to get me to try invading the Pearl base using only my DD's so they can sink each and every one of them with their supposedly "sunk" BB's. Although, if it's true then yeah, I can live with that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cannonfodder
About the unescorted bomber strikes, early in the war it helps to fly them really low (let's say at a 1000 feet). The fighters will have trouble intercepting them while patrolling at higher altitudes.

Don't do this at bases that have low altitude CAP and/or a lot of light flak guns.

Sounds like a plan to me. I like to surprise my opponent....keeps him guessing. I dare say he'll probably put some AA at all his forward bases to thwart such a bold ploy. I say let's try it.

(in reply to Cannonfodder)
Post #: 16
RE: fulkerson v Rob.......no Rob please - 5/12/2012 1:19:05 PM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 21110
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ, USA, Earth, Solar System
Status: online
I don't remember where I got this document but I just ran across it just now in my directory and thought I'd share it with you guys. It's the R&D factories that the Japs have. Some genuine genius came up with this I'm pretty sure. I'm using it even as we speak. Thanks to players like him we have a much better game.


(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 17
RE: fulkerson v Rob.......no Rob please - 5/12/2012 1:20:05 PM   
n01487477


Posts: 4717
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

I thought it might be a good idea to go through all the HI bases expanding the airbase and specific ports so that I could store more stuff there w/o spoilage.



Ports etc don't expand without Engineers... and you should be using them judiciously to expand ports that will be your convoy hubs


quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

quote:

ORIGINAL: Puhis
Larry, you can double all vehicle factories, and even that is not too much. Also, eventually you need much bigger Kate factory, size 5 factory is only producing 5 planes a month.

Did you mean to say double ALL the vehicle factories? And then you'll need even more? Really? For sure? Well, I must say, that's astounding. BUT alright.......let's do it. Thanks. And about the Kate factories......um I was told to be careful and cautious etc. when changing stuff in the economy and thought it sounded like good advice etc. BUT you're correct......5 planes a month isn't nearly enough. I predict that I'm going to need about 10 times that amount. I plan on being aggressive and bold but not reckless so I'm probably going to loose a lot of stuff...like Kates. Your advice is sound, sounds like to me.

I think I said this ... but some things need doing straight away!
Yeah, I recommend between 250 - 300 Veh plants. Build at multiple locations to get them built quickly.
Turn off 300 Arm plants ...

Maybe time to read my Econ101 doc or visit Mr Solli's AAR

_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 18
RE: fulkerson v Rob.......no Rob please - 5/12/2012 1:21:27 PM   
n01487477


Posts: 4717
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

I don't remember where I got this document but I just ran across it just now in my directory and thought I'd share it with you guys. It's the R&D factories that the Japs have. Some genuine genius came up with this I'm pretty sure. I'm using it even as we speak. Thanks to players like him we have a much better game.


Turn off repairs to all but those you'll invest in. Make a plan and then ask some guys here how to do it well

_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 19
RE: fulkerson v Rob.......no Rob please - 5/12/2012 1:32:58 PM   
SuluSea


Posts: 2110
Joined: 11/17/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

I don't remember where I got this document but I just ran across it just now in my directory and thought I'd share it with you guys. It's the R&D factories that the Japs have. Some genuine genius came up with this I'm pretty sure. I'm using it even as we speak. Thanks to players like him we have a much better game.




Hi Larry, I posted that I put a lot of time into studying the Japanese economy and the best have answered my questions . I'm far from an expert.

I posted that only as a frame of reference all planes researched are prior to 1/44 IIRC my R&D plans have the war broke up into 2 segments you have to be very careful with your economy using something like that.

I have an updated one I used in my PBEM that didn't last long I can post in a few, I'll have to find it.

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 20
RE: fulkerson v Rob.......no Rob please - 5/12/2012 1:42:03 PM   
SuluSea


Posts: 2110
Joined: 11/17/2006
Status: offline
Okay here it is.. as you can see Franks (a plane you must have) are researched in here and some of the research goes into '44 which should help in not stressing your economy as much.

You'll also notice I eliminated much of the Nick research due to some tests I posted in the war room part of the forum. IMO it's just a waste to put that much into it.



< Message edited by SuluSea -- 5/12/2012 1:44:18 PM >

(in reply to SuluSea)
Post #: 21
RE: fulkerson v Rob.......no Rob please - 5/12/2012 1:47:06 PM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 21110
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ, USA, Earth, Solar System
Status: online
I'm planning on seeing if I can't get the KB to meet up with the AO's available at point "Texico" and get a drink and then the KB will head over to Wake and project some force. I remember Wake being a pain and I don't want that to be the case this time. Of the six carriers present I have all the DB's and TB's on naval attack missions except the the Zuikaku who will concentrate on ASW. The fighters will concentrate on CAP and LRCAP and hopefully as the carriers move out to point Texico they will still be within range to make a second strike to put the cap on a really good beginning effort. If I can devestate Rob enough I might be able to run rampant through the South Pacific with impunity such that Rob will offer me a "restart" again. Perhaps. Just a thought.


(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 22
RE: fulkerson v Rob.......no Rob please - 5/12/2012 1:55:24 PM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 21110
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ, USA, Earth, Solar System
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: n01487477
quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson
I thought it might be a good idea to go through all the HI bases expanding the airbase and specific ports so that I could store more stuff there w/o spoilage.

Ports etc don't expand without Engineers... and you should be using them judiciously to expand ports that will be your convoy hubs

I did not know that. Thanks. I'll look around for some engineers not doing anything and move them to more important duties. And yes, I get that the convoy hubs should be the focus of expansion. Cool.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Puhis
Larry, you can double all vehicle factories, and even that is not too much. Also, eventually you need much bigger Kate factory, size 5 factory is only producing 5 planes a month.


quote:

ORIGINAL: n01487477
...I recommend between 250 - 300 Veh plants. Build at multiple locations to get them built quickly.
Turn off 300 Arm plants ...

Okie dokie. Roger that. I'm on it. Thanks. That will be the very next thing I do so I don't forget.

(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 23
RE: fulkerson v Rob.......no Rob please - 5/12/2012 1:58:13 PM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 21110
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ, USA, Earth, Solar System
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: n01487477
Turn off repairs to all but those [R&D] you'll invest in. Make a plan and then ask some guys here how to do it well

Yeah, I've turned off the repairs on ALL the factories except for R&D and the Kate facilities and I'm looking into the vehicle factories just after I post this. Good advice, thanks.

(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 24
RE: fulkerson v Rob.......no Rob please - 5/12/2012 2:00:34 PM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 21110
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ, USA, Earth, Solar System
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: SuluSea
... as you can see (sic) Franks (a plane you must have) are researched in here and some of the research goes into '44 which should help in not stressing your economy as much.

You'll also notice I eliminated much of the Nick research due to some tests I posted in the war room part of the forum. IMO it's just a waste to put that much into it.

Thanks a heap SuluSea dude. You're a gold mine.

(in reply to SuluSea)
Post #: 25
RE: fulkerson v Rob.......no Rob please - 5/12/2012 2:15:43 PM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 21110
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ, USA, Earth, Solar System
Status: online
Here you can see how I've switched three cities from armament factories to vehicles, the biggest being Tokyo. And I boosted the Kate output to 50 planes a month. It's a pretty good first stab at trying to do things better.



< Message edited by larryfulkerson -- 5/12/2012 2:17:56 PM >

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 26
RE: fulkerson v Rob.......no Rob please - 5/12/2012 2:18:47 PM   
n01487477


Posts: 4717
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

Here you can see how I've switched three cities from armament factories to vehicles, the biggest being Tokyo. And I boosted the Kate output to 50 planes a month. It's a pretty good first stab at trying to do things better.



BIG NO NO ... IMO ... I hope you have a save from before this. Never convert anything. Expand what you have.

Reasoning: you might need to turn those Arm factories back on at some point. 2 they still need to repair fully anyway and there is no advantage to conversions.

[edit] Expand each of the existing (6 VEH) to 30(0)... then maybe to 40, if needed .

< Message edited by n01487477 -- 5/12/2012 2:20:12 PM >


_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 27
RE: fulkerson v Rob.......no Rob please - 5/12/2012 2:30:40 PM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 21110
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ, USA, Earth, Solar System
Status: online
I've ordered two LCU's from elsewhere to move to point Sapporo. Engineers to expand the port and the INF so as to be ready to move into harm's way. I'm planning on moving most of the resources from Sapporo to the Home Islands. In fact most of the resources from that island I plan on moving. There's not much industry there to need them so they might just as well be moved to where they are needed I figure. I'm going to grab some oil from Shikuka and move it to, oh....I guess Tokyo or somewhere where there's a big port. I don't plan on moving any oil from Port Arthur as PA is going to need that oil to produce some supply for China. I've heard China is supply poor and I don't want to exasserbate the situation further.


(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 28
RE: fulkerson v Rob.......no Rob please - 5/12/2012 2:34:23 PM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 21110
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ, USA, Earth, Solar System
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: n01487477
quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson
Here you can see how I've switched three cities from armament factories to vehicles, the biggest being Tokyo. And I boosted the Kate output to 50 planes a month. It's a pretty good first stab at trying to do things better.

BIG NO NO ... IMO ... I hope you have a save from before this. Never convert anything. Expand what you have.

Reasoning: you might need to turn those Arm factories back on at some point. 2 they still need to repair fully anyway and there is no advantage to conversions.
[edit] Expand each of the existing (6 VEH) to 30(0)... then maybe to 40, if needed .

OOOoops. Sorry. Well, live and learn. Yeah, I have a save but I don't want to do anything "gamey" so I'll live with it. But I'm taking your advice to heart and will expand instead of convert from now on. Typical new guy maneouver, converting instead of expanding. This is a case of where I should have asked first instead of screwing the pooch.

EDIT: As I understand you, your advice is to expand the remaining 6 vehicle factories to 30(0) and perhaps 40(0) later. 10-4?




< Message edited by larryfulkerson -- 5/12/2012 2:37:37 PM >

(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 29
RE: fulkerson v Rob.......no Rob please - 5/12/2012 2:37:29 PM   
SuluSea


Posts: 2110
Joined: 11/17/2006
Status: offline
I may have some other stuff, I'll have to sort through everything.. Heading out to a wedding now.. Have fun.

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> fulkerson v Rob.......no Rob please Page: [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

0.107