Matrix Games Forums

Come and see us during the Spieltagen in Essen!New Screenshots for Pike & ShotDeal of the Week Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations WOTYCommand: Modern Air/Naval Operations WOTY is now available!Frontline : The Longest Day Announced and in Beta!Command gets Wargame of the Year EditionDeal of the Week: Pandora SeriesPandora: Eclipse of Nashira is now availableDistant Worlds Gets another updateHell is Approaching
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Aug. 10/42 Update and 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: Aug. 10/42 Update and lessons learned Page: <<   < prev  25 26 [27] 28 29   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Aug. 10/42 Update and lessons learned - 7/20/2013 5:15:25 AM   
Yaab


Posts: 831
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poznan, Poland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

All the action was in China, some good, some bad.

First off, the good news. Lanchow falls against a 2:1 deliberate attack. Chinese losses are heavy with over 800 infantry and non-combat squads destroyed. Japanese losses are light in comparison. The fuel/oil facilities are largely intact at 74(16). One division will rest at Lanchow, the remaining forces will push on to Sining.

The bad news is the isolated Chinese forces continue to hold out against repeated assaults. Japanese forces finally achieved a 2:1 against the larger enemy force near Nanyang, but suffered higher casualties than the defenders, including having a mortar battalion almost wiped out.

I'm freeing up additional forces to put an end to this debacle. Every day of delay allows the Chinese to strengthen their defences throughout China.

As to lessons learned, I won't isolate Chinese troops in anything other than a base hex in the future. The fact Lanchow fell easily against a 2:1 attack after forts were reduced to zero, shows me that the land combat model favours defending a non-base hex. All it took was a 2:1 attack to force a retreat. If Lanchow had been isolated, these troops would have simply surrendered. In comparison to what their brethren can do in a non-base hex with no supply and completely isolated, taking Lanchow or any other base hex is a piece of cake.

In a non-base hex in good defensive terrain, fort levels aren't reduced, supply is not required to prevent collapse and if isolated the enemy force will fight to the death. If I'm going to fight Chinese troops in non-base hexes, I must leave an open hex side to allow a retreat, otherwise I'll become mired in an attritional battle that will last for weeks/months on end. Isolated Chinese forces in a non-base hex have survived attacks as high as 23:1 odds in my experience.

The latest attack where I just had a mortar battalion all but wiped out against a Chinese force that has had no supply for months, tells me the key to attacking in China is brute force. Economy of force doesn't matter in this game, if anything it only hurts you. Maneuvering to isolate and destroy enemy forces is a complete waste of time and counterproductive. My forces are weaker for it and the time I have lost will only lead to confronting a stronger and well dug in enemy moving forward.

At least Lanchow's fuel/oil are now in Japanese hands and will go a long way to supporting the war effort. An Air HQ will be deployed to Lanchow and the three bases (Sining, Lanchow and Kungchang) will be developed into large airfields in order to provide protection against Allied bombing raids to destroy the production facilities.


I think it was Alfred who brought the question of base/non-base fortifications in his Fortifications 101 guide. The non-base fortifications cannot be brought down by combat enigineers so you have to bring enough Japanes AV to dislodge the Chinese from the hex. On the other hand, since the Chinese have no combat engineers in their LCUs they cannot drop the forts in base hexes. thus it makes more sense for the Japanese to defend in bases once the tide turns in China.

< Message edited by Yaab -- 7/20/2013 5:16:02 AM >

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 781
RE: Aug. 10/42 Update and lessons learned - 7/20/2013 5:29:07 AM   
zuluhour


Posts: 3100
Joined: 1/20/2011
From: Maryland
Status: offline
In a base which has a permanent defensive structure in place, enemy combat engineers can reduce part of the interlocked defensive structure even when the overall assault has failed to carry the entire position. Out in the field there is nothing permanent for the combat engineers to reduce, the assault either smashes through and captures the entire position or it is repulsed and thrown back to the starting lines.


excerpt from Alfred:

(in reply to Yaab)
Post #: 782
RE: Aug. 10/42 Update and lessons learned - 7/20/2013 5:30:16 AM   
zuluhour


Posts: 3100
Joined: 1/20/2011
From: Maryland
Status: offline
Attention class and welcome to Fortification 101.

What is fortification

The game employs the term fort levels in two similar but different situations. These are:

(a) base hex (includes dot base)
(b) non base hex

In a base hex, fortification levels represent how strong and extensive the permanent defensive structure is. Think of Fort Eban and the Maginot Line forts in Europe representing something like a fort level 8 or 9, the Dragons Teeth of the incomplete Siegfried Line something much less, perhaps a 3 rising to a 4 or 5 where the Dragons Teeth are matched with pill boxes.

Base fortification levels are permanent in the sense that they exist independently of the presence or otherwise of friendly troops. Your base 6 fortification levels will remain after the garrison has completely moved out. It remains ready to welcome and house any future arriving friendly troops who are able to immediately enjoy the benefits of the permanent defensive structure.

In a non base hex, nothing permanent is built. This would be clearer if the game had used the term "entrenchment" rather than fortification. Out in the field, individual units entrench themselves with foxholes and then berms etc. However this fortification level essentially represents temporary defence structures which will be lost when the unit moves out. Arriving units have to start from scratch their own entrenching.

Construction of forts

Engineers are required to build forts whether in a base or out in the field. Just as you need engineers to build things in the game such as airfields and ports, similarly you need them to build forts (and entrenchments). Just as engineers who are in "rest mode" do not build things in a base, the same applies to entrenching out in the field. Makes sense, right? Oh, and of course you would also need to have adequate supply on hand to feed the hard working engineers.

In a base which has a permanent defensive structure in place, enemy combat engineers can reduce part of the interlocked defensive structure even when the overall assault has failed to carry the entire position. Out in the field there is nothing permanent for the combat engineers to reduce, the assault either smashes through and captures the entire position or it is repulsed and thrown back to the starting lines.

Not all bases can build up their fortification level beyond 6. The base screen will indicate whether you can build beyond level 6. You will not be able to build up your tiny atoll beyond level 6. Furthermore, where you can build beyond level 6, you need to have 25k+ in supplies present. If the supply depot drops below 25K, the base construction figure will appear in red and construction will freeze until the supply again exceeds 25k.

I have seen units out in the field with entrenchment up to 6. I do not believe that units out in the field can entrench beyond level 6 because there is no supply depot present out in the field with 25k+ supply.

Benefit of forts

For the defence, forts provide three major benefits generally and one in monsoon affected bases.

(a) they shield troops from suffering casualties
(b) they improve the adjusted assault value modifier
(c) attackers need their adjusted combat odds to exceed or equal the fortification level +2 to capture the hex
(d) during the monsoon season, the maximum amount of daily supply is partly determined on the base fortification level

Alfred

****the whole post***

(in reply to zuluhour)
Post #: 783
RE: Aug. 10/42 Update and lessons learned - 7/20/2013 6:35:02 AM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 2892
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: zuluhour


quote:


In a non base hex, nothing permanent is built. This would be clearer if the game had used the term "entrenchment" rather than fortification. Out in the field, individual units entrench themselves with foxholes and then berms etc. However this fortification level essentially represents temporary defence structures which will be lost when the unit moves out. Arriving units have to start from scratch their own entrenching.

Construction of forts

Engineers are required to build forts whether in a base or out in the field. Just as you need engineers to build things in the game such as airfields and ports, similarly you need them to build forts (and entrenchments). Just as engineers who are in "rest mode" do not build things in a base, the same applies to entrenching out in the field. Makes sense, right? Oh, and of course you would also need to have adequate supply on hand to feed the hard working engineers.

I have seen units out in the field with entrenchment up to 6. I do not believe that units out in the field can entrench beyond level 6 because there is no supply depot present out in the field with 25k+ supply.

Benefit of forts

For the defence, forts provide three major benefits generally and one in monsoon affected bases.

(a) they shield troops from suffering casualties
(b) they improve the adjusted assault value modifier
(c) attackers need their adjusted combat odds to exceed or equal the fortification level +2 to capture the hex
(d) during the monsoon season, the maximum amount of daily supply is partly determined on the base fortification level

Alfred


Thanks for posting Yaab and zuluhour. Just to put things in perspective for those that want to discuss this further, here are the number of attacks and the odds associated with them against this enemy force that is completely isolated with all hex sides under Japanese control. The attempt to reduce this force commenced on July 7/42 and continues with the game date now being Aug. 14/42.

1. odds 1:1
2. odds 1:1
3. odds 2:1
4. odds 5:1
5. odds 11:1
6. odds 16:1
7. odds 14:1
8. odds 14:1
9. odds 23:1
10. odds 23:1
11. odds 13:1
12. odds 19:1
13. odds 5:1
14. odds 8:1
15. odds 15:1
16. odds 23:1
17. odds 6:1
18. odds 8:1
19. odds 8:1

So that's 19 ground assaults with only three being less than 5:1 odds in five weeks. I doubt the field forts are high. I may ask Jocke what they are so that can be factored into this discussion.

Am I the only one that has a problem with this? Alfred's post is enlightening, but having achieved odds as high as 23:1 and yet the defenders still hold out shows something else besides fort levels is preventing me from destroying these units. How much AV is needed? With stacking limits I can't bring in a Japanese Deathstar to simply steamroll the defenders. I tried to use economy of force once I was achieving odds consistently over 10:1 yet that still wasn't enough.

I really don't get this and it just seems wrong.

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 7/20/2013 6:36:46 AM >


_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to zuluhour)
Post #: 784
RE: Aug. 10/42 Update and lessons learned - 7/20/2013 7:04:42 AM   
Yaab


Posts: 831
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poznan, Poland
Status: offline
You have attacked 19 times. How big is the Chinese stack? How many Chinese squads are you destroying in each attack? Has the Chinese AV been getting lower over time?

Fort level in a non-base hex probably caps at 5 or 6.

Maybe the AV odds are only needed by the code for calculating retreat? The hex is surrounded so you need to wipe out the Chinese. Maybe in such situation, some devices are more apt at killing squads i.e heavy artillery or GP bombs than AV advantge in infantry squads? The Japanese 70-75mm guns are just like 81mm Chinese mortars in term of killing power. Just guessing.

< Message edited by Yaab -- 7/20/2013 7:12:15 AM >

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 785
RE: Aug. 10/42 Update and lessons learned - 7/20/2013 1:06:13 PM   
zuluhour


Posts: 3100
Joined: 1/20/2011
From: Maryland
Status: offline
That is odd, number of enemy maybe? Another relevant factor, by Alfred:

Unit Supply

a unit with 100% supply has its unadjusted assault value multiplied by 1
a unit with 75% supply is multiplied by 0.8
a unit with 50% supply is multiplied by 0.6
a unit with 25% supply is multiplied by 0.4
a unit with zero supply is multiplied by 0.2

(in reply to Yaab)
Post #: 786
Aug. 16/42 Simply a disaster... - 7/21/2013 8:42:51 AM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 2892
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
The Gilbert Islands:

The second invasion of Makin is an unmitigated debacle from the get go. A poor naval bombardment followed up by a disastrous shock attack. It's official, I don't know what I'm doing in this game anymore. 5th Division was 100% prepped for Makin. Most of the division had been landed in the initial amphibious assault and the second operation was to land the remainder of the division, plus 38th Division, 11th Tank Rgt. and 22nd Ind Engineer Rgt. Well, somehow my best division (92% experince at 100% prep) is the one that gets trashed spelling disater for the entire operation. I expected the losses to come from the less prepped 38th Division and 11th Tank Rgt. AAR follows:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Makin (136,125)

Japanese Shock attack

Attacking force 19783 troops, 89 guns, 186 vehicles, Assault Value = 618

Defending force 6887 troops, 230 guns, 232 vehicles, Assault Value = 170

Japanese adjusted assault: 20

Allied adjusted defense: 25

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 2 (fort level 3)

Combat modifiers
Defender: forts(+), disruption(-), supply(-)
Attacker: shock(+), disruption(-)

Japanese ground losses:
3269 casualties reported
Squads: 120 destroyed, 156 disabled
Non Combat: 14 destroyed, 20 disabled
Engineers: 12 destroyed, 19 disabled
Guns lost 18 (10 destroyed, 8 disabled)
Vehicles lost 59 (22 destroyed, 37 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
294 casualties reported
Squads: 3 destroyed, 27 disabled
Non Combat: 2 destroyed, 41 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Guns lost 27 (3 destroyed, 24 disabled)
Vehicles lost 72 (2 destroyed, 70 disabled)

Assaulting units:
5th Division (91% disruption) WTF! This unit was 100% prepped and only landed the remaining 20% of its TOE.
38th Div /1 (39% disruption)
11th Tank Rgt /1 (17% disruption)
22nd Ind. Engineer Regiment (this was on me, I loaded and landed the wrong engineer unit with no AV)

Defending units:
763rd Tank Battalion
7th Marine Regiment
1st Marine Defense Battalion
119th USAAF Base Force
64th Coast AA Regiment

An adjusted AV of 20? WTF? I'm speechless and beyond complaining. I'm so done trying to figure out why things are going so badly this game. I'll continue to land forces and shock attack until my force is wiped out, or the enemy is destroyed. I really don't care after wasting months on this operation.

Canton Island:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Canton Island (153,143)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 4804 troops, 141 guns, 24 vehicles, Assault Value = 177

Defending force 2614 troops, 13 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 68

Allied adjusted assault: 60

Japanese adjusted defense: 6

Allied assault odds: 10 to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: leaders(-), fatigue(-), supply(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
2613 casualties reported
Squads: 88 destroyed, 2 disabled
Non Combat: 54 destroyed, 15 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 13 (13 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Units destroyed 1

Allied ground losses:
242 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 59 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 8 disabled
Guns lost 13 (1 destroyed, 12 disabled)

Assaulting units:
2nd Marine Regiment
3rd Marine Defense Battalion

Defending units:
Maizuru 1st SNLF
Maizuru 2nd SNLF

The Philippines:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Cagayan (79,89)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 26913 troops, 352 guns, 83 vehicles, Assault Value = 875

Defending force 8195 troops, 20 guns, 28 vehicles, Assault Value = 233

Japanese adjusted assault: 753

Allied adjusted defense: 35

Japanese assault odds: 21 to 1 (fort level 0)

Japanese forces CAPTURE Cagayan !!!

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), leaders(+), fatigue(-), experience(-)
supply(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
122 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 9 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Units pursuing 1

Allied ground losses:
2178 casualties reported
Squads: 219 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 98 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 2 (2 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Vehicles lost 21 (21 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Units retreated 5

Defeated Allied Units Retreating!

Assaulting units:
4th Division
16th Division
32nd Nav Gsn Unit
1st Medium Field Artillery Regiment
8th Medium Field Artillery Regiment

Defending units:
3rd PA Constabulary Regiment
101st PA Infantry Division
102nd PA Infantry Division
Cagayan USAAF Base Force
III Philippine Corps

China:

I asked Jocke a few questions about China and what was happening there concerning the isolated Chinese units and how they were still holding out. He confirmed that no unit has field fortifications higher than level 2 and they have had no supply for MONTHS. He also added a further piece of information which I find simply amazing. The Chinese units still have morale in the 70-80's after months of being completely surrounded and access to ZERO supply. So, after 19 assaults and weeks of intermittent artillery bombardments and air attacks these units still have high morale? My bet is this is why they will not surrender regardless of the odds they face.

Thoughts:

Makin is a disaster. I never expected to suffer an identical result to the first invasion considering the steps I took to weaken Makin and prevent supply from reaching the base. It didn't matter. The bombardments, the air attacks, the landing additional combat troops only to see the best prepared unit is the one that gets wiped out? An adjusted AV of 20? Ok, Gary Grigsby and company, you win. I simply give up trying to figure this game out. I was concerned months/years ago about becoming a better player, I no longer feel that way. I could care less.

Lack of supply counts for sweet FA in this game, it really does and I need to stop basing my operations thinking I've gained any advantage by denying it to my opponent's forces. I don't understand how this game works and will now play accordingly. I'm predicting I'll get crushed in record time.

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 7/21/2013 8:43:31 AM >


_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to zuluhour)
Post #: 787
RE: Aug. 16/42 Simply a disaster... - 7/21/2013 10:36:19 AM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 2892
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
I've decided to cut my losses and withdraw from Makin. I'm now overstacked on the Atoll and the attack depleted all supply that had been unloaded. Funny how two elite Divisions get trashed and lack of supply prevents me from sticking this landing out, yet POS Chinese units can hold out for months without it. Love it! I expect to lose a ton since I can't get most of the troops off with the shipping available. Most likely scratch four LCU's (including two elite divisions) from the Japanese OOB.

Jocke is away till Wednesday, but I rushed the turn off to him anyway. I don't even want to look at this game till he's back and sends the turn, and even then maybe not ever again I'm so frustrated.

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 788
RE: Aug. 16/42 Simply a disaster... - 7/21/2013 1:59:59 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 14805
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
What sort of ships were they embarked on and how long were they on board the ships? It also looks like Makin was greatly over stacked by landing a second division.

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/site/staffmonkeys/

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 789
RE: Aug. 16/42 Simply a disaster... - 7/21/2013 5:57:01 PM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 2892
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

What sort of ships were they embarked on and how long were they on board the ships? It also looks like Makin was greatly over stacked by landing a second division.


All xAK's and a lot of them so there'd be minimal troops to unload from each one. All troops just boarded transports four days ago so fatigue should not have been a factor. I thought you could do an initial attack overstacked and then remove excess troops after. Isn't that what's recommended for taking an Atoll? If the Atoll has a stacking limit of 6k I've often read people saying land a division (which would overstack the Atoll) so how is this any different?

Not a single ship was hit to defensive CD gunfire and yet I suffered around 1000 casualties unloading. Disruption to 38th Division is now at 39% and 11th Tank Rgt. at 18%. So this level of disruption hardly warrants such a drastic reduction in my combat power, doesn't it?

What I don't understand is that 5th Division was the unit already on the island and had 3/4 of it's strength with no disruption. I landed the remaining 1/4 along with as much of the 38th Division, 11th Tank Rgt. and 22nd Eng. Rgt. as possible. 5th Division was 100% prepped, yet was the unit that got wiped out and now has 91% disruption, so that is what I don't get. To have my adjusted AV knocked down to only 20 seems extreme.

The initial landing I used xPP's and AX's and suffered just as badly. So it appears without the landing bonus Japan is incapable of landing on a contested Atoll. I have one LSD so I can hardly use just that to avoid disruption and yet still get enough troops on the island.

Doesn't matter now, I'm withdrawing and will have to re-evaluate how to move forward. At least I know the Allie dposition is bad to if they could only muster an adjusted AV of 25. I'll continue to pound the base and try another landing when I've recovered.

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 790
RE: Aug. 16/42 Simply a disaster... - 7/21/2013 8:06:03 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 14805
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
I asked about stacking because you mentioned something about the second day's unloading. I was thinking about recovery from disruption, which benefits from supply.

The over stacking penalty is a removal of supply, and it occurs after the combat phase. So, as you say, you can over stack as long as you can keep unloading adequate supply during the turn to support combat. If way over stacked, then at the end (after combat) all the remaining supply will be taken as a penalty. But unload more during the following turn, and again it is available for combat that turn (then taken away again at the end, and so on).

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/site/staffmonkeys/

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 791
RE: Aug. 16/42 Simply a disaster... - 7/21/2013 8:39:28 PM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 5809
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

All xAK's and a lot of them so there'd be minimal troops to unload from each one. Doesn't matter now, I'm withdrawing and will have to re-evaluate how to move forward. At least I know the Allie dposition is bad to if they could only muster an adjusted AV of 25. I'll continue to pound the base and try another landing when I've recovered.

Once you lose the landing bonus as IJ, well, it is really hard to do a contested landing. OK, almost impossible. If you look back at PzB's game, his landings when he took back bases were all 1 - 2 hexes away and then they marched in.

You have a bunch of Yusen's which can convert to AK's. Those and your lone LST are what you need to use. Even then, it is going to be a crap-shoot.

IJ gets its landing bonus in the early game to simulate how unprepared overall the allies were. The allies are able to effectively make amphib's due to their special amphib HQ's and multitude of landing craft. IJ has neither of those, and without those two bonuses or the early game bonus, IJ contested amphib operations are very high risk affairs.

It isn't that you aren't doing it right, its that the IJ doesn't have the tools needed to do what you want to do. But sandbox the AK's vs xAK's. you'll see a significant disruption difference. Still prolly not enough to work, but you will have lower disruption.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 792
RE: Aug. 16/42 Simply a disaster... - 7/22/2013 1:50:23 AM   
JonReb


Posts: 713
Joined: 11/26/2006
From: Santa Cruz, California
Status: offline
Add to the mix that assaulting an atoll of all places is a very difficult affair, not to mention the dug in marines. Tough bastards.
Those diminished assault values are depressing to see nonetheless, I can't imagine seeing the real action. It might have taken another week of constant bombardment to really soften up the defenders and knock out the remaining supplies on their end. I still think the game simulates the risks involved with atolls quite accurately, and as has been said the Japanese really aren't suited for such operations in the first place.

< Message edited by JonReb -- 7/22/2013 1:57:41 AM >

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 793
RE: Aug. 16/42 Simply a disaster... - 7/22/2013 5:01:11 AM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 2892
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

It isn't that you aren't doing it right, its that the IJ doesn't have the tools needed to do what you want to do.


I think this is it. The fact that the enemy adjusted AV was only 25 shows that I did an adequate job of softening up the defenders. What killed me once again was the disruption to my own forces . What I don't understand is how a fully prepped unit that already had 3/4 of it's strength on the Atoll for a month then suffers 91% disruption trying to land the remaining 1/4 of it's strength. Essentially, the fact that I tried to land reinforcements was a mistake. I would have been better off to attack with what was already on the Atoll. To me this seems incredibly unrealistic. I just don't see how my raw AV is adjusted so low and I suffer such high disruption to my forces when not a single transport is damaged while unloading over the beach, yet my LCU's are trashed before combat is even initiated. My LCU's were elite units and I expected them to perform as such.

I think this is my last game with Japan. As a player, if my side is hard-coded to perform like **** from Dec. 7th/41 on with no chance to improve despite my best efforts then they are not the side for me to play. I've always enjoyed playing the underdog, but this game is beginning to make it impossible for me to enjoy doing so.

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 7/22/2013 5:03:32 AM >


_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 794
Thoughts - 7/22/2013 8:12:24 AM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 2892
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
After recent events, I'm going to have to re-evaluate my entire strategy for this game. It's obvious to me that Japan's offensive capabilities in terms of land combat are neligible so I'm adopting more of a static defence.

No further effort to capture Makin Atoll will be pursued. In fact, I'm prepared to strip my defences in the Gilbert and Marshall Island's to the bare minimum. I'll try to use Makin as a lure to draw out Allied naval forces for destruction while I prepare my main MLR in the Pacific.

A large Chinese force is spotted N.W. of Ichang moving east. I don't think it's an offensive, but Nanyang is vulnerable. I've decided to change my tactics in China. Instead of maneuver and isolation, I will bring the hammer and rely on being able to supply overstacked hexes to bludgeon the Chinese into submission forcing retreats that are the most effective way of destroying China's combat strength.

Having reached May 1943 in my other PBEM as the Allies I know what I'm in store for as Japan and I need to change the way I play. I can't change the outcome in any way. All I can do is try to make it as costly as possible. I'm simply playing for pride now. This will be my last game as Japan so I'll try and go out with a bang.

Just waiting for Jocke to return on Wednesday and the game will get moving again.

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 795
Update - 7/26/2013 7:33:25 PM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 2892
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
Aug. 17/42:

The Gilberts Islands:

All troops have been withdrawn successfully from Makin with the exception of some stragglers of the 22nd Ind. Eng. Rgt. I'm attempting to get as many of them off by fast transport by covering surface ships.

Burma:

The Japanese 112th Inf. Rgt. is finally forced back and suffers heavy casualties after Jocke reinforces. I've decided to pull back forces advancing on Kalemyo since I can't get enough supply forward to sustain operations.

Production:

Engine Ha-43 advances R&D to 5/45.

Thoughts:

Not many. I continue to plug away in China, but I'm stalled now. The failure to eliminate these isolated pockets has thrown my entire China strategy off. I'm regrouping and will look to reassess my best options to get the front fluid again.

Other than that, simply consolidating my position and concentrating on the economy.

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 796
Aug. 19-22/42 - 7/29/2013 3:56:23 AM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 2892
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
We were able to get a few turns in this weekend.

China:

68th Division reinforced 15th Division trying to eliminate the pocket near Changsha and the stalemate was finally broken. It seems you need very high odds to destroy a pocket of isolated troops. Three deliberate attacks in a row deliver the final blows that destroy six enemy corps and two HQ's. AAR's follow:

Aug. 19th
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at 82,53 (near Changsha)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 22956 troops, 244 guns, 69 vehicles, Assault Value = 791

Defending force 13591 troops, 35 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 49

Japanese adjusted assault: 548

Allied adjusted defense: 9

Japanese assault odds: 60 to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), disruption(-), fatigue(-), experience(-)
supply(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
42 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Allied ground losses:
1559 casualties reported
Squads: 79 destroyed, 8 disabled
Non Combat: 101 destroyed, 81 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 15 (15 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Units destroyed 1

Assaulting units:
68th Division
15th Division
1st Mortar Battalion
21st Mortar Battalion

Defending units:
21st Chinese Corps
9th Prov Chinese Corps
3rd New Chinese Corps
49th Chinese Corps
19th Group Army
50th Chinese Corps
23rd Group Army
78th Chinese Corps

Aug. 20th
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at 82,53 (near Changsha)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 22947 troops, 245 guns, 69 vehicles, Assault Value = 789

Defending force 12115 troops, 14 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 41

Japanese adjusted assault: 634

Allied adjusted defense: 7

Japanese assault odds: 90 to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), disruption(-), fatigue(-), experience(-)
supply(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
47 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 5 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Allied ground losses:
10536 casualties reported
Squads: 79 destroyed, 19 disabled
Non Combat: 981 destroyed, 13 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 13 (11 destroyed, 2 disabled)
Units destroyed 5

Assaulting units:
68th Division
15th Division
1st Mortar Battalion
21st Mortar Battalion

Defending units:
78th Chinese Corps
3rd New Chinese Corps
50th Chinese Corps
49th Chinese Corps
19th Group Army
21st Chinese Corps
9th Prov Chinese Corps

Aug. 21st

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at 82,53 (near Changsha)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 22927 troops, 246 guns, 69 vehicles, Assault Value = 838

Defending force 4465 troops, 4 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 5

Japanese adjusted assault: 477

Allied adjusted defense: 1

Japanese assault odds: 477 to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), disruption(-), fatigue(-), experience(-)
supply(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
13 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Allied ground losses:
4108 casualties reported
Squads: 95 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 285 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 3 (3 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Units destroyed 2

Assaulting units:
13th Tank Regiment
68th Division
15th Division
1st Mortar Battalion
21st Mortar Battalion

Defending units:
3rd New Chinese Corps
49th Chinese Corps

Next up is the isolated enemy position near Nanchang. Reinforcements are en route and every bomber in the Chinese theatre will concentrate on hammering the defenders.

In other news, Tienshui fell to the first deliberate attack on the 22nd. The capture of this base frees up six divisions for the offensive against Kienko. AAR follows:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Tienshui (81,38)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 29273 troops, 251 guns, 260 vehicles, Assault Value = 1511

Defending force 16882 troops, 160 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 455

Japanese engineers reduce fortifications to 0

Japanese adjusted assault: 1355

Allied adjusted defense: 145

Japanese assault odds: 9 to 1 (fort level 0)

Japanese forces CAPTURE Tienshui !!!

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), preparation(-), experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
406 casualties reported
Squads: 4 destroyed, 45 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 8 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 5 disabled
Guns lost 24 (1 destroyed, 23 disabled)
Vehicles lost 6 (1 destroyed, 5 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
4004 casualties reported
Squads: 165 destroyed, 56 disabled
Non Combat: 257 destroyed, 12 disabled
Engineers: 20 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 39 (27 destroyed, 12 disabled)
Units retreated 5

Defeated Allied Units Retreating!

Assaulting units:
35th Division
3rd Tank Regiment
4th Ind.Mixed Brigade
59th Division
32nd Division
2nd Tank Regiment
14th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
12th Army
13th Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion

Defending units:
82nd Chinese Corps
3rd Chinese Cavalry Corps
3rd Chinese Corps
3rd Prov Chinese Corps
6th Chinese Base Force

Recent events will see the resumption of offensive operations into the heart of China. The pocket near Nanchang must be cleared quickly to allow six divisions to redeploy to the front. A drive on Patung will be undertaken to flank a large enemy force near Ichang that is moving to threaten Nanyang and area.

The Gilbert Islands:

All units have been successfully withdrawn from Makin. Large numbers of enemy submarines are making supply runs to the Atoll. Japanese minelaying submarines will deply mines in an effort to interupt the flow of supply reaching the defenders.

Production:

Ha-45 advances R&D to 4/43
Ha-43 advances R&D to 5/45
Ki-44 Tojo IIb advances R&D to 3/43

Economy:

The Home Islands has surpassed 1,000,000 supply and resources over 7,000,000 and growing. The corner has been turned and stockpiles across the board are increasing.

Thoughts:

I need to make up time in China.

Will the tenuous enemy position at Makin draw out the Allied Fleet?

Supply in Burma is low preventing offensive operations. This is my first experience with Japan in Burma where Monsoon effects and poor supply flow actually work. I'm adjusting slowly to the changes and how they affect gameplay. I fear Burma is going to cause me problems and angst once again.

Screenshot of Northen China follows showing the current state of affairs:



Attachment (1)

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 7/29/2013 3:59:28 AM >


_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 797
RE: Aug. 19-22/42 - 7/29/2013 6:06:02 AM   
Yaab


Posts: 831
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poznan, Poland
Status: offline
Finally, you have eliminated this Chinese stack. I wish either the manual or the devs were more explicit about situations like these. I was wondering myself why this isolated stack wouldn't die.

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 798
RE: Aug. 19-22/42 - 7/30/2013 5:05:49 AM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 2892
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Yaab

Finally, you have eliminated this Chinese stack. I wish either the manual or the devs were more explicit about situations like these. I was wondering myself why this isolated stack wouldn't die.


Live and learn. At least I know what to do differently next time and perhaps others will benefit from my experience dealing with this situation.


< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 7/30/2013 5:29:35 AM >


_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to Yaab)
Post #: 799
Southern China - 7/30/2013 5:28:47 AM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 2892
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
I've decided to go all out for Kweiyang. Initially, I started moving reinforcements to help reduce the second isolated Chinese force, but I've since redirected my forces towards Kweiyang. I'm almost at the stacking limits for the hex, so additional forces won't contribute anything but increased supply usage. However, if I can capture Kweiyang then I'll split China in two and can destroy the Chinese forces in detail. I have to apply maximum pressure and get moving again. With the Philippines almost secure, bombers and artillery will be redeployed to China for an all out offensive.

Here is Southern China:




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 800
Recent developments - 7/31/2013 7:52:43 PM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 2892
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
There are nine enemy submarines currently in the Makin atoll hex. I believe these are attempting to supply the base or lay additional mines. They also provide a deterrent to my naval bombardment operations. BB Fuso has made it back to Japan after taking a torpedo during a naval bombardment mission against Makin. She's out of commission for 139 days, so I won't risk more ships put out of action against Makin. The trick now is to prevent enough supply reaching Makin to allow for fort or airbase expansion. I'm going to try various ways to increase the risk factor for enemy submarines as well.

Speaking of enemy submarines, so far all my attempts to interdict them have proven useless. Jocke is using two specific routes into the DEI and I've mined both, so far no love. I continually spot submarines traversing these routes and I'm powerless to interdict them. This is extremely frustrating, but I signed up this so won't complain too much. British submarines have planted themselves east of Singapore hoping to nail my tanker TF's. I'm doing everything in my power to damage/sink these enemy vessels in shallow water, but nothing is having an effect so far. The Allied player really has been given near immunity in DaBabes with little to no threat against his submarine forces. I just wait for the dud rate to improve and the following carnage.

Production wise, I just turned off all merchant shipping construction except tankers. I will spend the next few turns looking at what I want to produce, but I've made the decision to stop most of the non-military vessel construction. I don't need more transports and the increase in fuel consumption that will follow. Priority will be on ASW assets even though I expect them to be almost useless.

The game is progressing slowly again. I'm painting our upstairs and just busy in general. I also leave for vacation in two weeks and most likely won't have internet access to continue turns. Well get this puppy rolling again at some point!


< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 7/31/2013 7:53:41 PM >


_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 801
RE: Recent developments - 8/1/2013 3:45:56 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 5809
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

I continually spot submarines traversing these routes and I'm powerless to interdict them. This is extremely frustrating, but I signed up this so won't complain too much. British submarines have planted themselves east of Singapore hoping to nail my tanker TF's. I'm doing everything in my power to damage/sink these enemy vessels in shallow water, but nothing is having an effect so far. The Allied player really has been given near immunity in DaBabes with little to no threat against his submarine forces. I just wait for the dud rate to improve and the following carnage.

Ouch ... are you able to get the DL's up to +8 and then use ASW TF's?

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 802
RE: Recent developments - 8/1/2013 10:49:17 AM   
obvert


Posts: 7081
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo


quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

I continually spot submarines traversing these routes and I'm powerless to interdict them. This is extremely frustrating, but I signed up this so won't complain too much. British submarines have planted themselves east of Singapore hoping to nail my tanker TF's. I'm doing everything in my power to damage/sink these enemy vessels in shallow water, but nothing is having an effect so far. The Allied player really has been given near immunity in DaBabes with little to no threat against his submarine forces. I just wait for the dud rate to improve and the following carnage.

Ouch ... are you able to get the DL's up to +8 and then use ASW TF's?


In line with this how are your air ASW assets training up? I don't think Babes weakens air ASW, does it? I've been pretty successful with a majority of the 2E IJAAF trained for ASW missions. They have to be 60-70 ASW to start getting consistent kills. I also train in low nav to 60-70, thus also getting good late war kami pilots in the bargain.

If I saw those subs there I would have a 20 plane Jake group flying night search 50% at 1k, a 27 plane Sally group flying 40% ASW, 40% training at 1k, 20% rest and a Kate group flying naval search 50% at 2k. In my game with usual training levels that would mean 2-3 sub attacks a day in that area and at least one hit message a day. Most are FOW but after a week some of those subs will be sunk or heading home for repairs.

_____________________________


"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 803
RE: Recent developments - 8/1/2013 5:13:45 PM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 2892
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

In line with this how are your air ASW assets training up? I don't think Babes weakens air ASW, does it? I've been pretty successful with a majority of the 2E IJAAF trained for ASW missions. They have to be 60-70 ASW to start getting consistent kills. I also train in low nav to 60-70, thus also getting good late war kami pilots in the bargain.

If I saw those subs there I would have a 20 plane Jake group flying night search 50% at 1k, a 27 plane Sally group flying 40% ASW, 40% training at 1k, 20% rest and a Kate group flying naval search 50% at 2k. In my game with usual training levels that would mean 2-3 sub attacks a day in that area and at least one hit message a day. Most are FOW but after a week some of those subs will be sunk or heading home for repairs.


I've dedicated two Sentai's of Helen's and Sally's to both ASW and night search missions. I've increased the number of naval ASW TF's in the area. Essentially I'm parking ASW assets along the route my tankers take exiting Singapore. I've also got a Val unit on air ASW and moving in additional air units.

Skill levels range from 50' to 70' with enough in each Sentai to warrant better success. I'm upgrading the weaker skilled pilots by reassigning more experienced/skilled pilots from other units.

I've been here before. I go through all the appropriate steps to combat enemy submarines, but in my opinion DaBabes has really neutered Japanese ASW. Jocke always mentions to me that Allied ASW has also been reduced in effectiveness, but that's relative isn't it? Allied ASW is already pretty good, Japan's was bad to begin with, now it's non-existent.

I'm not complaining, just putting this out there for others. I knew what I was getting into agreeing to DaBabes and have made the adjustment in my gameplay and more importantly, my expectations. I do what I have to do to combat enemy submarines, but I have zero confidence that they will be successful now. In stock, Japan can achieve moderate success against enemy submarines (especially later with the super powered E's), but I fear that successfully sinking Allied submarines in this PBEM will be mediocre at best.

The biggest disappointment is mines. I've heavily mined the entry/exit points that Jocke is moving his submarines through and I have yet to score a mine hit. That would at least force him to use other routes, or better yet use some caution. Right now he simply sails where he wishes at little to no risk.

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 804
RE: Recent developments - 8/1/2013 5:30:19 PM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 2892
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
I think you have to play a DaBabes scenario to understand how things are different. What worked in stock, doesn't necessarily translate into success in this mod. I'm discovering lots of little things now that really make a difference to gameplay and this is only a "lite" version of DaBabes.

Without sounding like a whiner, I really do think this is my last game as Japan for awhile. I'm just not enjoying being shackled with arbitrary reductions to Japan's capabilities. I understand the desire for more realism, but we all know how that ends. Without the possibility of improving Japan's historical combat capabilities by applying more effective tactics then they used historically, there isn't much for me to look forward to or improve upon.

Like I mentioned previously, the recent changes in official patches and the DaBabes mod makes it almost impossible for me to enjoy playing Japan anymore. I want what I do to matter, but feel I'm now just along for the ride.

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 8/1/2013 6:17:14 PM >


_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 805
RE: Recent developments - 8/1/2013 5:36:07 PM   
zuluhour


Posts: 3100
Joined: 1/20/2011
From: Maryland
Status: offline
I to have laid mine fields (submarine types) and await their success. I'm not sure we will truly know for some time due to FOW how well we have done. We may have to wait and see.

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 806
RE: Recent developments - 8/1/2013 6:18:52 PM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 2892
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: zuluhour

I to have laid mine fields (submarine types) and await their success. I'm not sure we will truly know for some time due to FOW how well we have done. We may have to wait and see.


I've done all three types. Submarine Type 88, and dedicated CM laid Type 4 and Type 93. No joy yet.

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to zuluhour)
Post #: 807
RE: Recent developments - 8/2/2013 2:31:57 PM   
Richard III


Posts: 594
Joined: 10/24/2005
Status: online
That` really too bad, you do/did great AAR`s that excited people about the Game. FWIW, I`m experiencing the same issues as Japan with the Allied subs in three (3) stock scenario 2 games. To the point that 2 opponents looked to see if we had left "Realistic US Torps ON ..in settings....I have been losing a merchant a day, from 12/10/41 including Tankers with large ASW escorts and had at least 2-4 attacks on the mini KB and the real KB.

In fact I have to wonder if these boys are running all their Subs at Computer Control, which may use the AI game AI routines, what with their uncanny ability to find deep water TF`s and move to get into good attack locations, in places they should have no air recon ability.

Anyway, sorry to somewhat hijack your thread, Also FWIW, I stopped building most of the 1944-45 CV`s and merchants.

Good luck

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

I think you have to play a DaBabes scenario to understand how things are different. What worked in stock, doesn't necessarily translate into success in this mod. I'm discovering lots of little things now that really make a difference to gameplay and this is only a "lite" version of DaBabes.

Without sounding like a whiner, I really do think this is my last game as Japan for awhile. I'm just not enjoying being shackled with arbitrary reductions to Japan's capabilities. I understand the desire for more realism, but we all know how that ends. Without the possibility of improving Japan's historical combat capabilities by applying more effective tactics then they used historically, there isn't much for me to look forward to or improve upon.

Like I mentioned previously, the recent changes in official patches and the DaBabes mod makes it almost impossible for me to enjoy playing Japan anymore. I want what I do to matter, but feel I'm now just along for the ride.



_____________________________

"If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail"
A. Maslow

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 808
RE: Recent developments - 8/2/2013 3:12:13 PM   
obvert


Posts: 7081
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: online
Yeah, sounds like you're doing what you can. Sucks to be so impotent, but I guess that is the history, isn't it, as much as it's more fun to get other options. The problem is also that the pacing for the Allied air power doesn't change much, and 4Es will still bomb willy-nilly as they please every day. If it's going to be historical I'd like it to be historical, and have the Allied ships carrying raw materials as well as the combat stuff, have an Allied economy they had to concern themselves with, have India be a supply drain rather than huge supply producer and have early war pilots be scarce for the Allies, as they were. It can't just go one way.

Many of Japan's issues were not ability to do the things we do in game, but the decision making process to get them done and coordinate efforts. The Allies even had that to an extent. The tools were there though, and although most Allied players complain about the economic control allowing the Japanese player unhistorical plane numbers, when you look at those historically produced, most of us aren't far above those numbers and we're just making better airframe choices.

Anyway, the Japanese could easily have had a better ASW program than they did, but it would be nice if there were some kind of economic choice you could make to effect that, like research points put into ASW advances and MAD and radar. Maybe in WITP II.

_____________________________


"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to Richard III)
Post #: 809
RE: Recent developments - 8/2/2013 3:42:39 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 14805
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
quote:

Yeah, sounds like you're doing what you can. Sucks to be so impotent, but I guess that is the history, isn't it, as much as it's more fun to get other options. The problem is also that the pacing for the Allied air power doesn't change much, and 4Es will still bomb willy-nilly as they please every day. If it's going to be historical I'd like it to be historical, and have the Allied ships carrying raw materials as well as the combat stuff, have an Allied economy they had to concern themselves with, have India be a supply drain rather than huge supply producer and have early war pilots be scarce for the Allies, as they were. It can't just go one way.


Sounds as though you would like DBB-C (28-C).

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/site/staffmonkeys/

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 810
Page:   <<   < prev  25 26 [27] 28 29   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Aug. 10/42 Update and lessons learned Page: <<   < prev  25 26 [27] 28 29   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

0.139