Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Finding Nemo, and a Discussion on China Strategy

 
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 >> Finding Nemo, and a Discussion on China Strategy Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Finding Nemo, and a Discussion on China Strategy - 10/23/2018 11:20:58 PM   
dave sindel

 

Posts: 488
Joined: 3/13/2006
From: Millersburg, OH
Status: offline
I was pleasantly surprised when I logged onto the forum and saw some posts by Nemo121. While some of what he writes goes right over my head, I will admit that some has been very helpful in my appreciation of this fine game. I hope that he will chime in on this thread.

My 2nd PBEM isnt going so well. It is August 1942, and I have now lost all 6 of the USN fleet carriers. My last USN CV - Wasp - suffered sub attacks two turns in a row. The first attack left her with 87 flotation damage and a speed of 3. She took 3 more torpedoes during my current turn from a different sub, and promptly sank. I wont have a USN fleet carrier until Essex arrives in about 9 months...

My opponent appears to thrive on the naval war, and has expressed a strong distaste for the land war. Unfortunately, the land war is now all I have left, so I am seeking guidance.

My opponent has not launched any sort of major offensive in China. He appears content to stand pat in his present locations. He has expressed the belief that China is a "waste of time" for the Japanese. So my question for JFB's is this - do you agree with that approach / assessment?

My question of the Forum in general is - what would you do as the Allies ?

Maps below:




Attachment (1)
Post #: 1
RE: Finding Nemo, and a Discussion on China Strategy - 10/23/2018 11:21:59 PM   
dave sindel

 

Posts: 488
Joined: 3/13/2006
From: Millersburg, OH
Status: offline
Map of Burma - no major offensive in this theater either.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to dave sindel)
Post #: 2
RE: Finding Nemo, and a Discussion on China Strategy - 10/23/2018 11:22:59 PM   
dave sindel

 

Posts: 488
Joined: 3/13/2006
From: Millersburg, OH
Status: offline
CV losses




Attachment (1)

(in reply to dave sindel)
Post #: 3
RE: Finding Nemo, and a Discussion on China Strategy - 10/24/2018 12:01:15 AM   
Anachro


Posts: 2506
Joined: 11/23/2015
From: The Coastal Elite
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: dave sindel
My opponent appears to thrive on the naval war, and has expressed a strong distaste for the land war. Unfortunately, the land war is now all I have left, so I am seeking guidance.

My opponent has not launched any sort of major offensive in China. He appears content to stand pat in his present locations. He has expressed the belief that China is a "waste of time" for the Japanese. So my question for JFB's is this - do you agree with that approach / assessment?


I'll be happy to add more later as this is very interesting, but I'm a bit busy right now so I'll only say this: I say hit your opponent exactly where he doesn't want it. He has expressed distaste for China and "land war." He "thrives on naval war." So go after him by land using your land and air power. While your carriers are gone, your air power is still immense and LBA can be used effectively.

Going after him by land, then, is the perfect thing to do. Him not pushing into China is a mistake and it will bite him in the end and you can cause serious difficulties later on, especially in '43 and '44. If he hasn't pushed into India, you can plan and begin a land offensive into Burma and through that China. Doing so is a necessity since loss of your carriers inhibits other things, but it is perhaps an aspect of the game where he is at his weakest in ability. If you feel comfortable with that, then do it!

I would lastly like to say that I am a bit envious of you as this seems like a fun scenario to play with and learn how to be effective as the Allies without carriers. I think it's certainly possible to win the war without any carriers at all!

< Message edited by Anachro -- 10/24/2018 12:06:44 AM >

(in reply to dave sindel)
Post #: 4
RE: Finding Nemo, and a Discussion on China Strategy - 10/24/2018 12:17:32 AM   
btd64


Posts: 9723
Joined: 1/23/2010
From: Mass. USA. now in Lancaster, OHIO
Status: offline
Dave, I have some experence without CV's. But first, which scenario is this. And Second, hit him where he is not expecting it. As Anachro said, in China. You must have many Group armies that have grown in strength. Use them....GP

_____________________________

Intel i7 4.3GHz 10th Gen,16GB Ram,Nvidia GeForce MX330

AKA General Patton

WPO,WITP,WITPAE-Mod Designer/Tester
DWU-Beta Tester
TOAW4-Alpha/Beta Tester

"Do everything you ask of those you command"....Gen. George S. Patton

(in reply to Anachro)
Post #: 5
RE: Finding Nemo, and a Discussion on China Strategy - 10/24/2018 1:48:42 AM   
jdsrae


Posts: 2629
Joined: 3/1/2010
From: Gandangara Country
Status: offline
i won’t have time for play by email for many years, but I’m using that time to prepare!
Agree with the Burma China strategy above, but you’ll need to apply pressure elsewhere too to keep him guessing a bit.
Against an aggressive human opponent you probably need to garrison SE PAC (which had Balboa as the HQ historically) and develop Bora Bora / maybe Tahiti in support and use your growing land based air assets. Tahiti may be too far for his carriers to reach without burning too much fuel.
Sounds like a good challenge, I look forward to the greater challenge of a human opponent one day, it’d be a completely different game every time.

_____________________________

Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no SolInvictus): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655

(in reply to btd64)
Post #: 6
RE: Finding Nemo, and a Discussion on China Strategy - 10/24/2018 2:12:06 AM   
AcePylut


Posts: 1494
Joined: 3/19/2004
Status: offline
Move about 500-600 AV into Canton. It will stop some of his industry there, and since it's heavy urban, it'll be really difficult to kick your troops out of the hex.

_____________________________


(in reply to jdsrae)
Post #: 7
RE: Finding Nemo, and a Discussion on China Strategy - 10/24/2018 3:38:48 AM   
erstad

 

Posts: 1944
Joined: 8/3/2004
From: Midwest USA
Status: offline
Why are your bases in India red for supply? Either you haven't been bringing enough supply in, or you have some bases set to hoard it all. Either way, that should be addressed. India shouldn't be in the red for supply.

You look pretty low in China too, but that could be more normal. That could limit your ambitions...

(in reply to AcePylut)
Post #: 8
RE: Finding Nemo, and a Discussion on China Strategy - 10/24/2018 5:20:47 AM   
adarbrauner

 

Posts: 1496
Joined: 11/3/2016
From: Zichron Yaaqov, Israel; Before, Treviso, Italy
Status: offline
I'd say that the war in China is not a waste of time from japanese side, but rather an unpleasant necessity that you can't shake off your shoulders from;

(in reply to erstad)
Post #: 9
RE: Finding Nemo, and a Discussion on China Strategy - 10/24/2018 6:24:20 AM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 17879
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline
Much depends on whether you have agreed that Auto-Victory will decide the game or not. If A-V is in play, the Japanese player can harvest a lot of points for destroying Chinese units - pin them with tanks, then surround them and wipe them out. One point per six squads IIRC, but other devices like guns count too.

And in the negative side, he needs to prevent your Chinese Corps from filling out, getting training/experience and improving morale or by 1943 he will have difficulty hanging on the large VP bases in China which Japan needs to keep the Allies from getting to A-V.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to adarbrauner)
Post #: 10
RE: Finding Nemo, and a Discussion on China Strategy - 10/24/2018 8:09:28 AM   
RogerJNeilson


Posts: 1277
Joined: 4/12/2012
From: Bedlington, Northumberland, UK
Status: offline
Ok I am mid February 1945 and I am moving my Carriers into action for the first time since I lost one in the Indian Ocean years ago. Carriers are necessary in the big water areas but are a liability in narrow areas. China is great fun for the Allies.

Roger

_____________________________

An unplanned dynasty: Roger Neilson, Roger Neilson 11, Roger Neilson 3 previous posts 898+1515 + 1126 = 3539.....Finally completed my game which started the day WITP:AE was released

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 11
RE: Finding Nemo, and a Discussion on China Strategy - 10/24/2018 8:46:46 AM   
GetAssista

 

Posts: 2728
Joined: 9/19/2009
Status: offline
Wow, OP, you got lucky with your opponent leaving China be. Bring some long range bombers and supply to Changsha and teach him a lesson. Well, maybe not because you don't really want him to change his mind just yet.
Meanwhile
- organize the Hump airbridge and watch your malnourished Chinese become fatter
- open up Myitkyina campaign. I suppose you were able to evac some Chinese to India? Do it for some more, they love Indian food
- dig in your corps in some strategic (3x terrain cutting the road or protecting the city) offbase hexes. I see all your LCUs are inside your bases, this is not the approach you should use in China. After half a year digging indestructible forts 5 can be a real bummer for Japan

< Message edited by GetAssista -- 10/24/2018 8:49:02 AM >

(in reply to RogerJNeilson)
Post #: 12
RE: Finding Nemo, and a Discussion on China Strategy - 10/24/2018 10:23:42 AM   
RogerJNeilson


Posts: 1277
Joined: 4/12/2012
From: Bedlington, Northumberland, UK
Status: offline
and have patience, at a certain time you can start to swarm him in China whilst at the same time seeking attack lines through IndoChina and the Celebes. Once you have footholds then you can out-engineer him and overwhelming LBA will wear him down.

Roger

_____________________________

An unplanned dynasty: Roger Neilson, Roger Neilson 11, Roger Neilson 3 previous posts 898+1515 + 1126 = 3539.....Finally completed my game which started the day WITP:AE was released

(in reply to GetAssista)
Post #: 13
RE: Finding Nemo, and a Discussion on China Strategy - 10/24/2018 11:27:56 AM   
dave sindel

 

Posts: 488
Joined: 3/13/2006
From: Millersburg, OH
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: btd64

Dave, I have some experence without CV's. But first, which scenario is this. And Second, hit him where he is not expecting it. As Anachro said, in China. You must have many Group armies that have grown in strength. Use them....GP



GP - this is stock scenario 1

(in reply to btd64)
Post #: 14
RE: Finding Nemo, and a Discussion on China Strategy - 10/24/2018 11:33:42 AM   
dave sindel

 

Posts: 488
Joined: 3/13/2006
From: Millersburg, OH
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jdsrae

i won’t have time for play by email for many years, but I’m using that time to prepare!
Agree with the Burma China strategy above, but you’ll need to apply pressure elsewhere too to keep him guessing a bit.
Against an aggressive human opponent you probably need to garrison SE PAC (which had Balboa as the HQ historically) and develop Bora Bora / maybe Tahiti in support and use your growing land based air assets. Tahiti may be too far for his carriers to reach without burning too much fuel.
Sounds like a good challenge, I look forward to the greater challenge of a human opponent one day, it’d be a completely different game every time.


The majority of the action has been focused on an arc from the Marshalls to Noumea. I have Wotje, Maleolap, Ailinglaplap, Nauru, Ocean. All of the Gilberts are Allied bases. For a while, I held Lunga - beat him to the punch so to speak. It took a major effort for him to re-take it.

(in reply to jdsrae)
Post #: 15
RE: Finding Nemo, and a Discussion on China Strategy - 10/24/2018 11:34:18 AM   
dave sindel

 

Posts: 488
Joined: 3/13/2006
From: Millersburg, OH
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AcePylut

Move about 500-600 AV into Canton. It will stop some of his industry there, and since it's heavy urban, it'll be really difficult to kick your troops out of the hex.


on the way...

(in reply to AcePylut)
Post #: 16
RE: Finding Nemo, and a Discussion on China Strategy - 10/24/2018 11:36:57 AM   
dave sindel

 

Posts: 488
Joined: 3/13/2006
From: Millersburg, OH
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: erstad

Why are your bases in India red for supply? Either you haven't been bringing enough supply in, or you have some bases set to hoard it all. Either way, that should be addressed. India shouldn't be in the red for supply.

You look pretty low in China too, but that could be more normal. That could limit your ambitions...


an excellent question that has me perplexed... I've been bringing supply into Calcutta & Chittagong on a regular basis from Cape Town and Aden. I'm definitely open to some advice in fixing this issue

(in reply to erstad)
Post #: 17
RE: Finding Nemo, and a Discussion on China Strategy - 10/24/2018 11:44:24 AM   
dave sindel

 

Posts: 488
Joined: 3/13/2006
From: Millersburg, OH
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Much depends on whether you have agreed that Auto-Victory will decide the game or not. If A-V is in play, the Japanese player can harvest a lot of points for destroying Chinese units - pin them with tanks, then surround them and wipe them out. One point per six squads IIRC, but other devices like guns count too.

And in the negative side, he needs to prevent your Chinese Corps from filling out, getting training/experience and improving morale or by 1943 he will have difficulty hanging on the large VP bases in China which Japan needs to keep the Allies from getting to A-V.


actually we've never had a discussion about A-V. I suppose we should.

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 18
RE: Finding Nemo, and a Discussion on China Strategy - 10/24/2018 2:13:49 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 26006
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: dave sindel


quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Much depends on whether you have agreed that Auto-Victory will decide the game or not. If A-V is in play, the Japanese player can harvest a lot of points for destroying Chinese units - pin them with tanks, then surround them and wipe them out. One point per six squads IIRC, but other devices like guns count too.

And in the negative side, he needs to prevent your Chinese Corps from filling out, getting training/experience and improving morale or by 1943 he will have difficulty hanging on the large VP bases in China which Japan needs to keep the Allies from getting to A-V.


actually we've never had a discussion about A-V. I suppose we should.

Look at the game date: you are in the midst of the monsoon for those bases, which imposes a daily cap on supply which can arrive via ground. Look into the monsoon issue. It really does matter.

_____________________________


(in reply to dave sindel)
Post #: 19
RE: Finding Nemo, and a Discussion on China Strategy - 10/24/2018 2:26:07 PM   
Yaab


Posts: 4542
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AcePylut

Move about 500-600 AV into Canton. It will stop some of his industry there, and since it's heavy urban, it'll be really difficult to kick your troops out of the hex.


This. Canton and HK will boost your supply production capabilities in China. However, both bases can be bombed from the sea, so the captured industry can be wrecked by Jap SC TFs. Can the Chinese achieve a local air superiority over Canton and HK? Seems tricky.

(in reply to AcePylut)
Post #: 20
RE: Finding Nemo, and a Discussion on China Strategy - 10/24/2018 2:55:20 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline
Looking at the pictures posted, the situation for you in China looks excellent. Any IJ player who remains inactive in China is giving a massive gift to the Allied player, so you should exploit it.

By Aug '42, you should have most, if not all, of your Chinese units trained up to the max EXP that training can reach (45 EXP). If not, hope the lull lasts longer and you get the chance to train up.

Sit tight, the massive numbers of American transport planes due to arrive in China will give you the supply you need to change China into an active theatre for you.

As already suggested, move units into frontline IJ cities with industry to halt production. Canton and Wuchang are key candidates. The point isn't to attack the Japanese, it's to sit in the good terrain and force them to dislodge you.

(in reply to dave sindel)
Post #: 21
RE: Finding Nemo, and a Discussion on China Strategy - 10/24/2018 5:33:06 PM   
Uncivil Engineer

 

Posts: 991
Joined: 2/22/2012
From: Florida, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dave sindel


quote:

ORIGINAL: AcePylut

Move about 500-600 AV into Canton. It will stop some of his industry there, and since it's heavy urban, it'll be really difficult to kick your troops out of the hex.


on the way...


I assume you are aware that the garrison requirement at Canton is 360. If he's been ignoring China, he probably still has 360+ AV there, which should be dug in behind fort level 4 or 5 (or higher). You won't be capturing it with 500 Chinese AV. But, co-occupying it will mess with his supply situation. On the other hand, Hong Kong may be lightly defended, if he moved the 38th Division out after capturing it and didn't replace it with something substantial. Capturing HK will definitely mess with his supplies. HK is worth 50 more HI than Canton. That's my 2 cents.

(in reply to dave sindel)
Post #: 22
RE: Finding Nemo, and a Discussion on China Strategy - 10/24/2018 6:23:39 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Uncivil Engineer


quote:

ORIGINAL: dave sindel


quote:

ORIGINAL: AcePylut

Move about 500-600 AV into Canton. It will stop some of his industry there, and since it's heavy urban, it'll be really difficult to kick your troops out of the hex.


on the way...


I assume you are aware that the garrison requirement at Canton is 360. If he's been ignoring China, he probably still has 360+ AV there, which should be dug in behind fort level 4 or 5 (or higher). You won't be capturing it with 500 Chinese AV. But, co-occupying it will mess with his supply situation. On the other hand, Hong Kong may be lightly defended, if he moved the 38th Division out after capturing it and didn't replace it with something substantial. Capturing HK will definitely mess with his supplies. HK is worth 50 more HI than Canton. That's my 2 cents.


You're missing the point. The mere presence of enemy troops in a hex stops the production of industrial enterprsies within that hex. In this case, all the Chinese troops have to do is march in and stop.

Then the onus is on the Japanese player to evict the Chinese from x3 urban terrain. And the level of Japanese forts won't matter one iota if they're on the offensive.

(in reply to Uncivil Engineer)
Post #: 23
RE: Finding Nemo, and a Discussion on China Strategy - 10/24/2018 7:25:10 PM   
dave sindel

 

Posts: 488
Joined: 3/13/2006
From: Millersburg, OH
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs


quote:

ORIGINAL: dave sindel


quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Much depends on whether you have agreed that Auto-Victory will decide the game or not. If A-V is in play, the Japanese player can harvest a lot of points for destroying Chinese units - pin them with tanks, then surround them and wipe them out. One point per six squads IIRC, but other devices like guns count too.

And in the negative side, he needs to prevent your Chinese Corps from filling out, getting training/experience and improving morale or by 1943 he will have difficulty hanging on the large VP bases in China which Japan needs to keep the Allies from getting to A-V.


actually we've never had a discussion about A-V. I suppose we should.

Look at the game date: you are in the midst of the monsoon for those bases, which imposes a daily cap on supply which can arrive via ground. Look into the monsoon issue. It really does matter.


thanks for the insight George. Appreciate it.

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 24
RE: Finding Nemo, and a Discussion on China Strategy - 10/24/2018 8:54:09 PM   
Flicker

 

Posts: 229
Joined: 11/24/2011
From: Rocket City USA
Status: offline
Have you repaired your industry in Chungking (also Changsha and Nanning)? If not, I would stockpile supplies in Chungking and repair light industry, then HI, then manpower, then resources. It will take a few months (this is one of the first things I do as Allies). Repeat with Changsha, then Nanning.

(in reply to dave sindel)
Post #: 25
RE: Finding Nemo, and a Discussion on China Strategy - 10/24/2018 9:14:23 PM   
Anachro


Posts: 2506
Joined: 11/23/2015
From: The Coastal Elite
Status: offline
The fact that you sank some of his carriers including the Shokaku means you aren't in too bad of a position. He might assume you are going to do a land campaign and his lack of offensive north of Burma means you can do a counter-offensive instead. Still, I would certainly make use of naval invasion feints far away to try and draw away troops/ships from that theater. Perhaps a push into the Kuriles/Aleutians or into Guinea or parts of the southern DEI. Nothing too big or permanent mind you. These would be feints in my mind, but they have to look real to him.

(in reply to Flicker)
Post #: 26
RE: Finding Nemo, and a Discussion on China Strategy - 10/24/2018 9:28:59 PM   
rustysi


Posts: 7472
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing


quote:

ORIGINAL: Uncivil Engineer


quote:

ORIGINAL: dave sindel


quote:

ORIGINAL: AcePylut

Move about 500-600 AV into Canton. It will stop some of his industry there, and since it's heavy urban, it'll be really difficult to kick your troops out of the hex.


on the way...


I assume you are aware that the garrison requirement at Canton is 360. If he's been ignoring China, he probably still has 360+ AV there, which should be dug in behind fort level 4 or 5 (or higher). You won't be capturing it with 500 Chinese AV. But, co-occupying it will mess with his supply situation. On the other hand, Hong Kong may be lightly defended, if he moved the 38th Division out after capturing it and didn't replace it with something substantial. Capturing HK will definitely mess with his supplies. HK is worth 50 more HI than Canton. That's my 2 cents.


You're missing the point. The mere presence of enemy troops in a hex stops the production of industrial enterprsies within that hex. In this case, all the Chinese troops have to do is march in and stop.

Then the onus is on the Japanese player to evict the Chinese from x3 urban terrain. And the level of Japanese forts won't matter one iota if they're on the offensive.


IIRC you're all missing the point. Having opposing forces in Canton will only stop the production of any resources that may be produced in that location. If he can supply the base with sufficient inputs from outside the hex all industries will function normally. For Japan resource shortages are not normally a problem.

Now OTOH that doesn't make moving into Canton a poor decision. You'll still get the terrain benefit.



_____________________________

It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 27
RE: Finding Nemo, and a Discussion on China Strategy - 10/25/2018 12:18:26 AM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
Hi Dave,

Since I've been invited I'll chip in. In future though probably best to post in the STAVKA thread as I have subscription on to that thread to let me know when someone posts and don't check the rest of the forum all that carefully.

There is some information missing which hampers the attempt to craft a helpful answer so I'll ask for some more info first:
1. Can you post a strategic map view of what you hold and what he holds?

2. Can you post his plane losses vs yours?

3. You've spoken about your opponent's distaste for the land war and appearance of thriving on the naval war. While your assessment of his focus/ability is, of course, important when assessing his critical vulnerability I think that your writing down what HE has stated his strengths are would be most helpful, followed by him stating what he doesn't like. I'd also be very interested in the answer to the question of whether he has just expressed distaste for "land war in China" OR whether he has shown the insight to link his distaste with his failure to act in a critical theatre?

Distaste is irrelevant. What is effective and efficient is relevant. I might have a distaste of the land war in China but if it the theatre of decision then my distaste won't prevent me focusing my time and energy on planning the operations necessary to achieve the strategic objections within the theatre in order to meet my grand strategic goal.

Your opponent, from what you say and from the screenshots you have posted, seems to do what he likes and ignore what he doesn't. If this is true and he doesn't learn from this then you can exploit this to defeat him.

4. What HRs do you have for China? Do you have limits on the use of Chinese Corps? Do you have limits on strategic bombing in China or from China.

5. Are you using stacking limits for ground warfare?



Basic advice which is true irrespective of any answers to the above:
A. It seems he does what he likes and ignores what he doesn't. Rob him of this choice and he will become increasingly frustrated. Played properly the majority of games are not WON by one player but LOST by one player. Frustrate him and he will rapidly engage in choices which degrade his forces, position and personal morale. All you then have to do is make reasonable choices and resist the temptation to do anything showy and he will lose the game to you for you.


B. The loss of 6 CVs isn't much of a handicap. It simply limits and delays your ability to commit landings in the Pacific in the face of opposition from KB. You can still land forces in the face of LBA when KB isn't around and you can still island hop under your own land based fighter cover. Just resist the temptation to risk CVs until you have a decisive advantage and you can rapidly advance in the Pacific from mid-43/end-43 depending on how safe you want to be. The key point though is that you can still advance wherever KB isn't--- and you can speed up your ability to resist KB by swapping out your strike planes for all-fighter airgroups. Right there, 4 US CVs should be able to put up enough fighters to slaughter most attacks from KB. Optimise your CV cover for defence instead of attack and you need far fewer CVs to fend off KB and can launch amphibious invasions much earlier than you would normally expect.


C. I've twice won Scenario 2 games as Allies ( starting on 8th December once and taking over from an Allied player who surrendered ) whilst voluntarily not using Allied CVs for anything other than aircraft transfer. No offensive missions or even CAP from any Allied CV ( including British ). I just made China the theatre of decision, kept the Burma road open or re-opened it and then use British, American, Australian and Chinese land forces to push down to Singapore and across to Shanghai. In one of the games I even captured all of Korea and invaded the Japanese home islands without ever using CVs for anything other than air transport from CONUSA to Australia or India.

So, my advice would be
1.sort out the supply problems in Southern India ( build the bases up so that even with monsoon conditions they pull sufficient supply to support an air bridge into China ),

2. Use EVERY transport and bomber you have to fly supplies into China - losses are irrelevant in this mission.

3. move your defending Chinese forces into better defensive terrain ( you are defending in open terrain in many places ). Assume you can move Chinese forces into x2 or x 3 defensive terrain. Assume you are currently using 50 Chinese Armies to defend. Well, if you put them in x2 and x 3 terrain that means you can mount a defence which is just as strong using no more than 25 armies. The other 25 can be freed up for offensive action. If you don't have HRs against it I'd push them to re-open the Burma road.

4. Once the Burma Road is open build bases to draw supply into China, use the Chinese forces to aid the Allies in retaking Burma and then begin the sweep down into Malaysia, Vietnam and coastal China.

5. End-game push into Korea and hop across a few measly hexes of water under LRCAP. This assumes you get to the southern tip of Korea before January 1944 ... something which is eminently doable ... and are a cautious player who won't want to risk your CVs before you are assured of superiority in early 44. If you are willing to risk CVs early then, of course, you can combine the above with a Pacific thrust or carrier support in the South China Sea - which will speed things up through seaborne envelopment of Japanese coastal fortress along the Vietnamese and Chinese coastlines.

For you this will be much easier because once you have enough carriers you can put pressure onto Japan in the Pacific although, if I were you, I'd instead invest the CVs into the DEI and coastal China campaigns as that will strangle Japanese SLOCs and bring about their collapse much more rapidly than a slow, wasteful Pacific campaign.


Bottom line though, so you lost 6 CVs? You can still prosecute amphibious invasions so long as KB isn't around ( although your losses will, necessarily, increase ). Alternately if you don't want to make a naval campaign through the Pacific your means of decision then there are other ways to beat Japan rapidly and effectively.... even without the use of CVs.

If you follow this latter path I would expect your opponent to resign at some point as he would not "enjoy" that approach. The question then becomes if you are playing for his enjoyment, yours, to explore interesting strategic gambits or some weighted variation of all of the above. That's something only you can answer.

Summary: No carriers, no cry. Just batter him to death on land.

< Message edited by Nemo121 -- 10/25/2018 12:23:08 AM >


_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to rustysi)
Post #: 28
RE: Finding Nemo, and a Discussion on China Strategy - 10/25/2018 11:37:10 AM   
Yaab


Posts: 4542
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline
ad 2. Remember guys, B-26 Marauder is your friend here, cause it carries 2 supply points per plane (4000 load capacity) in the stock scenarios.

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 29
RE: Finding Nemo, and a Discussion on China Strategy - 10/25/2018 11:55:35 AM   
dave sindel

 

Posts: 488
Joined: 3/13/2006
From: Millersburg, OH
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Hi Dave,

Since I've been invited I'll chip in. In future though probably best to post in the STAVKA thread as I have subscription on to that thread to let me know when someone posts and don't check the rest of the forum all that carefully.

There is some information missing which hampers the attempt to craft a helpful answer so I'll ask for some more info first:
1. Can you post a strategic map view of what you hold and what he holds?

2. Can you post his plane losses vs yours?

3. You've spoken about your opponent's distaste for the land war and appearance of thriving on the naval war. While your assessment of his focus/ability is, of course, important when assessing his critical vulnerability I think that your writing down what HE has stated his strengths are would be most helpful, followed by him stating what he doesn't like. I'd also be very interested in the answer to the question of whether he has just expressed distaste for "land war in China" OR whether he has shown the insight to link his distaste with his failure to act in a critical theatre?

Distaste is irrelevant. What is effective and efficient is relevant. I might have a distaste of the land war in China but if it the theatre of decision then my distaste won't prevent me focusing my time and energy on planning the operations necessary to achieve the strategic objections within the theatre in order to meet my grand strategic goal.

Your opponent, from what you say and from the screenshots you have posted, seems to do what he likes and ignore what he doesn't. If this is true and he doesn't learn from this then you can exploit this to defeat him.

4. What HRs do you have for China? Do you have limits on the use of Chinese Corps? Do you have limits on strategic bombing in China or from China.

5. Are you using stacking limits for ground warfare?



Basic advice which is true irrespective of any answers to the above:
A. It seems he does what he likes and ignores what he doesn't. Rob him of this choice and he will become increasingly frustrated. Played properly the majority of games are not WON by one player but LOST by one player. Frustrate him and he will rapidly engage in choices which degrade his forces, position and personal morale. All you then have to do is make reasonable choices and resist the temptation to do anything showy and he will lose the game to you for you.


B. The loss of 6 CVs isn't much of a handicap. It simply limits and delays your ability to commit landings in the Pacific in the face of opposition from KB. You can still land forces in the face of LBA when KB isn't around and you can still island hop under your own land based fighter cover. Just resist the temptation to risk CVs until you have a decisive advantage and you can rapidly advance in the Pacific from mid-43/end-43 depending on how safe you want to be. The key point though is that you can still advance wherever KB isn't--- and you can speed up your ability to resist KB by swapping out your strike planes for all-fighter airgroups. Right there, 4 US CVs should be able to put up enough fighters to slaughter most attacks from KB. Optimise your CV cover for defence instead of attack and you need far fewer CVs to fend off KB and can launch amphibious invasions much earlier than you would normally expect.


C. I've twice won Scenario 2 games as Allies ( starting on 8th December once and taking over from an Allied player who surrendered ) whilst voluntarily not using Allied CVs for anything other than aircraft transfer. No offensive missions or even CAP from any Allied CV ( including British ). I just made China the theatre of decision, kept the Burma road open or re-opened it and then use British, American, Australian and Chinese land forces to push down to Singapore and across to Shanghai. In one of the games I even captured all of Korea and invaded the Japanese home islands without ever using CVs for anything other than air transport from CONUSA to Australia or India.

So, my advice would be
1.sort out the supply problems in Southern India ( build the bases up so that even with monsoon conditions they pull sufficient supply to support an air bridge into China ),

2. Use EVERY transport and bomber you have to fly supplies into China - losses are irrelevant in this mission.

3. move your defending Chinese forces into better defensive terrain ( you are defending in open terrain in many places ). Assume you can move Chinese forces into x2 or x 3 defensive terrain. Assume you are currently using 50 Chinese Armies to defend. Well, if you put them in x2 and x 3 terrain that means you can mount a defence which is just as strong using no more than 25 armies. The other 25 can be freed up for offensive action. If you don't have HRs against it I'd push them to re-open the Burma road.

4. Once the Burma Road is open build bases to draw supply into China, use the Chinese forces to aid the Allies in retaking Burma and then begin the sweep down into Malaysia, Vietnam and coastal China.

5. End-game push into Korea and hop across a few measly hexes of water under LRCAP. This assumes you get to the southern tip of Korea before January 1944 ... something which is eminently doable ... and are a cautious player who won't want to risk your CVs before you are assured of superiority in early 44. If you are willing to risk CVs early then, of course, you can combine the above with a Pacific thrust or carrier support in the South China Sea - which will speed things up through seaborne envelopment of Japanese coastal fortress along the Vietnamese and Chinese coastlines.

For you this will be much easier because once you have enough carriers you can put pressure onto Japan in the Pacific although, if I were you, I'd instead invest the CVs into the DEI and coastal China campaigns as that will strangle Japanese SLOCs and bring about their collapse much more rapidly than a slow, wasteful Pacific campaign.


Bottom line though, so you lost 6 CVs? You can still prosecute amphibious invasions so long as KB isn't around ( although your losses will, necessarily, increase ). Alternately if you don't want to make a naval campaign through the Pacific your means of decision then there are other ways to beat Japan rapidly and effectively.... even without the use of CVs.

If you follow this latter path I would expect your opponent to resign at some point as he would not "enjoy" that approach. The question then becomes if you are playing for his enjoyment, yours, to explore interesting strategic gambits or some weighted variation of all of the above. That's something only you can answer.

Summary: No carriers, no cry. Just batter him to death on land.


Thank you for responding, and for all of the advice / insights. I'm at work, so it will be this evening before I can post a strategic map and the plane loss summary. To answer a couple of questions -

"distaste" was my word, paraphrasing my impression of his attitude. He has used the word "boring" a couple of times in our communications. He is very proud of his conduct of carrier operations. I complimented him on one particular operation and his response was along the lines of " I'm the best carrier guy since Halsey".

No HR's on China of any sort. No stacking limits on land warfare.

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Finding Nemo, and a Discussion on China Strategy Page: [1] 2 3   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

0.262