The First Team: Take Two!

Post descriptions of your brilliant successes and unfortunate demises.

Moderators: wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami

User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17134
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: The Society Page

Post by John 3rd »

I love language and its varied meanings!  What works in one region of the country or in another nation doesn't elsewhere.  Always remember Shaw's great quote that the American and English were were a common people separated only by a common language.

Dan--I sent the turn to you quite a while ago.  Did you not get it?

Those two Inf Div could move up to Lashio as a blocking move but I truly fear his units in Mandalay coming down BEHIND my position.  Don't think 35th Brigade would be enough to hold the hex...
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

User avatar
Nemo121
Posts: 5821
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2004 11:15 am
Contact:

RE: The Society Page

Post by Nemo121 »

Ah, it may be an Irish thing then... It carries hints of British rule with it to my mind. They viewed us as peons so if I called anyone a peon it'd be tantamount to me saying I wanted to fight them. Interesting how the word travels differently.


Canoerebel, thanks for correcting me on what you meant. I utterly misinterpreted what you said. The fault was mine. Now, back to regular programming.


A contemplation on the Lanchester Laws as they relate to logistics and phasing.

Assume that an attacker has 10 divisions requiring 20,000 tons of supply per month to keep in fighting trim. The attacker wishes to subdue two regions, each of which is defended by 4 divisions worth of troops ( taking into account the multiplying effects of defences etc ). For this example we must assume that the two forces involved are "ordinary" and not extraordinary forces ( which, by Soviet definitions, act as force multipliers )

If one devotes less than 4 units to one invasion then one will be deadlocked on the beaches ( or driven back into the sea ). So, the minimum you can devote to a holding invasion is 4 divisions. This leaves 6 divisions to attack the second target ( we'll call this B ). let's assume each "round" of combat takes 1 week and then see where we are.

B: 6 divisions vs 4 divisions = 36 vs 16 ( as per Lanchester Squared Laws ). We'll assume each divisions deals out 1/10th of its combat power in damage per week.

Round 1: 36 vs 16  -> (36-1.6) vs ( 16 - 3.6) = 34.4 vs 12.4 ..... Supplies consumed = 3,000 tons ( 2,000 x 6 divided by 4 )
Round 2: 34.4 vs 12.4 -> (34.4 - 1.24 ) vs (12.4 - 3.44) = 33.2 vs 9 .... Supplies consumed 2866 tons
Round 3: 33.2 vs 9 -> 32.3 vs 5.8.... Supplies consumed 2692 tons.

This continues on for 2 more rounds. resulting in about 31.5 Japanese combat units remaining. This equates to 5.6 divisions. total consumption will fall just a bit short of 14,000 tons and take 5 weeks to conclude.


In the meantime the 4 divisions facing eachother on island B will batter eachother from a combined combat total of 16 to 9. Thus the 4 IJA and 4 Allied divisions will be reduced to 3 IJA and 3 Allied divisions.

When the 5.6 new IJA divisions land the 8.6 IJA divisions will quickly overmatch the 3 Allied divisions as follows:
74 vs 9. Combat should take no more than 10 days to resolve and result in the destruction of all Allied divisions and a further 10% of an IJA divisions.

In total 8 Allied divisions will be destroyed by 10 IJA divisions at a cost of 1.5 IJA divisions over the course of 6.5 weeks. Supply consumption during combat will be about 120,000 tons.


Going 5 vs 4 in each island results in marginally better results with about 1.4 divisions being destroyed but overall combat taking even a little longer ( although mostly in mopping up operations ). One can also expect that damage to infrastructure from two relatively evenly matched foes will be severe. The benefit of going in 5 vs 4 is that since you aren't accepting deadlock somewhere you don't HAVE to transfer in the forces from island A to take Island B and, as such, this sort of overmatch is useful if you expect to conduct a rolling campaign along two disparate axes.


Going in 10 divs vs 4 in island A and then 10 vs 4 in Island B yields the following results....
Island A falls in 10 days, Island B falls in just over 11. Total losses to the IJA in BOTH island campaigns is under 0.25 of a division. Total supplies consumed is barely 60,000 tons AND the infrastructure of Islands A and B are likely to be a LOT less damaged than when the force correlation is less favourable to the attacker.


Also of great importance IF you've got your sums wrong is the fact that by bringing 10 divs you so overmatch the enemy that even if he has 6 units per island they STILL fall easily.



So, the question of force correlation and phasing ( in parallel or in series ) is CRUCIAL to determining the strategic paradigm under which you are going to operate and I think often people wonder why their offensives stall when, by looking at the Lanchester Laws, their axes of advance, their phasing AND the implications of all of the above in terms of logistics they could keep things rolling. They key point is that by overmatching the enemy significantly and thus allowing you to run MORE operations in series in a given unit time than you can run operations in parallel you can actually either:

a) achieve the same objectives in a shorter time and at less cost in terms of supplies or
b) achieve more objectives within the same timeframe and supply cost.
c) or some variation thereof.

I think that when you look at a lot of AARs you can see that these interplays haven't been fully thought through.


I'll give an example of this with maskirovka....
Noumea vs 2nd ACR... By reinforcing a subsidiary axis such that it slightly overmatched the enemy ( a 5 vs 4 situation ) I was able to create a maskirovka in which that very slight overmatch drew more and more enemy forces into action ( since the 5 vs 4 nature of the combat promised a bloody deadlock if only it could be turned into a 5 vs 5 )... Of course I took a tithe of any enemy shipping which attempted to reinforce the island and as soon as a reinforcement landed to make it 5 vs 5 I landed another unit from my ready reserve to turn it into a 6 vs 5.

By not overmatching significantly the tantalising possibility of victory/deadlock was held out until such time as a significant enemy force was committed --- and that enemy committment made MY maskirovka convincing. In short the enemy did my own deception work for me by committing to the area ---- at which time I brought my main force to bear and quickly crushed the enemy base ( it took 3 days from the initial assault to its capture with tens of thousands of captives IIRC ).


So, my maskirovka involved phasing and strict adherence to the Lanchester Laws to create the appropriate force correlations at the appropriate times to both bolster my maskirovka and then deliver the killing blow so that operations against Nz could be commenced quickly. That, IMO, is a reasonable example of the interplay of phasing, Lanchester Laws and maskirovka.


Obviously I'm sure there are better examples out there but that's the best I can come up with right now [8D]
John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.
User avatar
Nemo121
Posts: 5821
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2004 11:15 am
Contact:

RE: The Society Page

Post by Nemo121 »

John,
 
If this is your question --- Will the Allies attack from Lashio or Mandalay? --- then you need to either build a strong defence in Burma which can hold them both off IF they combine long enough for a landing in India to cut them off from behind
 
OR
 
you need to land more troops in Burma in order to create a strong defensive position or, ideally, push the Allies out of Lashio and Mandalay.
 
 
If you don't take care of Burma you are going to find it drawing troops away from your Indian invasion at just the point in time that those troops are fully committed.
John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17134
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: The Society Page

Post by John 3rd »

I'll see what Brad thinks regarding this topic.  Perhaps we could pull a Brigade or two into Burma to strengthen the defense and enable us to move to Lashio.  This would probably be workable since we have two available Brigades in Palembang now.  Might be enough to hold things together while we get everything else moving in India...

Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

User avatar
ny59giants
Posts: 9867
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:02 pm

RE: The Society Page

Post by ny59giants »

My interruption of what Nemo is saying, is it may be more cost effective for you to sent in another Bde to Division worth of troops to pull more of the the Allies into Burma and away from India. If the Allies feel that you are going for the land route to conquer Burma, then they may bring in more troops.
[center]Image[/center]
User avatar
vettim89
Posts: 3664
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 11:38 pm
Location: Toledo, Ohio

RE: The Society Page

Post by vettim89 »

My only question about Nemo's very well written post would be in game terms does Prep points or the lack thereof have an effect on the Lanchester equation? In the parallel example it would be assumed that both forces would be fully prepped for their objectives. In the series example units would be fully prepped for the first invasion but minimally preppedd for the second barring a substantial pause. Especially with island landings the second invasaion will suffer more causualties and take more time due to high disruption levels suffered during the landings.

Nemo, do you feel that prep points are a force multiplier at all?

(BTW, you just changed the way I am going to play out the next six months of my game)
"We have met the enemy and they are ours" - Commodore O.H. Perry
User avatar
Nemo121
Posts: 5821
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2004 11:15 am
Contact:

RE: The Society Page

Post by Nemo121 »

vettim, glad to be of help... If you want to post a precis in your AAR I can have a look at it and comment... I'm due for a 56 hour shift from Wednesday morning to Friday afternoon so will welcome some relaxing reading after.
 
 
Prep points are a force multiplier insofar as they boost AV but if you and your opponent are equally strategically savvy prep points should cancel out. As a result I tend not to account for them in any assessment of achievable AV for two reasons:
1. I am often prepping units for my second phase targets while landing on the beaches of the first phase target.
2. Strategic misdirection should prevent the enemy from prepping for precisely the correct target most of the time ( unless, of course, the enemy is prepping units for atolls etc ) and enemy units who are prepped for Batavia when you are really going to land at Kragen and split the enemy defences are rendered irrelevant.
 
Mostly though the first point tends to cancel out any preparation points the enemy has. If you want though you can just add in a small multiplier to their base strength ( which is then squared ) to account for any assumed advantage in prep points if you choose to draw a different assumption on prep point balance.
 
 
In addition I would point out that there are ways and means to prevent high losses to landing forces under even the most adverse conditions.
 
E.g. Use BBs, CAs etc as fast transports and you can combat-land a division off fast transports in a day quite easily with minimal disruption and loss ( a lot less loss than when coming ashore from APs anyways ). If you've taken a nearby point base to which you can return for the next division you can easily land 4 divisions on an atoll over 12 days or so, find those 4 divisions in excellent form and then take it. You don't HAVE to land your troops from APs into the teeth of enemy fire. Don't be constrained by the conventional wisdom.
 
In addition air attack on ports etc can really cut landing losses.
John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.
User avatar
ny59giants
Posts: 9867
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:02 pm

RE: The Society Page

Post by ny59giants »

If memory serves me right, didn't the Americans use APDs for Fast Transport mission in the Solomons after G'canal was captured?? Using Zeros or P-38s for LRCAP should help either side protect the "big boys."
[center]Image[/center]
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: The Society Page

Post by Canoerebel »

In Watchtower, the Americans landed Raiders (I think at Tulagi and Florida) using APDs, then used the APDs to shuttle troops between those islands and Guadalcanal.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
modrow
Posts: 1099
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 10:02 am

RE: The Society Page

Post by modrow »

Nemo,
ORIGINAL: Nemo121


A contemplation on the Lanchester Laws as they relate to logistics and phasing.

...

Obviously I'm sure there are better examples out there but that's the best I can come up with right now [8D]

Thanks a lot for this excellent post ! Very instructive for me !

Hartwig
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17134
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: The Society Page

Post by John 3rd »

This is why I love an AAR.  Well said Nemo and it actually makes sense to a dumb Historian like me...

I think we will add a Brigade to Burma for reasons already described.  Just had Taung Gyi go to AF-2 and Meiktila also went AF-2 last turn.  This will help for air bombardment purposes.
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17134
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

BB vs. Singapore

Post by John 3rd »

aaahhhh...yaaaaa...that REALLY worked!


Morning Email exchange:

That's why I hadn't bombarded Singapore before; someone suggested you could do it, but I didn't trust that. I always thought that you should not try to bombard any hex with any ship whose Caliber didn't exceed any CD guns in the hex. Those 15in at Sinagpore trashed our BB's; they won't sink, but they are going to be in the shop until mid-42. That leaves us with 4 in the Pacific; just the Kongos. GRRRR!!!!!

I think we are going to have to use CAs only for CV escort. We need to probably conserve the Kongos. At least it's early, but we will need the CVs to protect us against the RN BBs, because we won't be able to with surface units.

On a lighter note, Tonga falls and two more subs eat IJA bombs near Manila.

I am prepping the troops at Palembang for Trincomalee; though maybe you have a better idea. We will have to clear that at some point, and the Palembang units need a little rest anyway.

OK, we are going to start that PILOT replacement; I'll let you do the work.

Step 1: There is a Zero Daitai at Bangkok; convert that unit to Claudes, then convert it back. An alternative way to break the planes is to load them onto an AK and load them off (that is preferred), but we don't have an AK there.

Also, move the Zeros from Soryu to Bangkok. Next turn, step 2.



Brad

I couldn't do the upgrade at Bangkok due to not enough supply. Instead I did it at Rangoon. I changed out 1 Daitai of Zero down to Claude and back. Moved Soryu Zero to Rangoon.

We have a Daitai of Kates flying missions out Meiktila. Should they be moved to Rangoon too so we can reapir the losses to the TT Daitai? Am also moving a Chutai of Kate from Japan to area as well. They just jumped to Shanghai and will move to Hanio next turn.

Things I noticed:
1. Agree that the SS Ops are going really well in the Phil. If you want to shift Betty back to AF that is cool. I'm not sure if I've ever seen them hit a SS as well. Interesting thought...

2. The 3rd Base Force is at Amboina. Do we want to pick it up and place it at Exmouth so we have Air Support troops there? We could move a small BF to Ex and transfer the Amboina boys someplace more useful.

3. I KNEW the BB Bomb was a bad idea. Will post a screenshot on the AAR for 'comment.'

4. Actually think we shall be OK with BBs. We can pull the one in Japan and one of the three that hit Sing won't be too bad. A few days in Singapore will help for repairs.

5. Whether that email was SysOps or not my CVs are empty and heading for the barn. I had a pair of AO moving out to give them some fuel and the damned ships refueled a STF passing through the same hex! Damn!

6. Fuel is a major problem down there. I have 3 TF of Tankers moving back-and-forth but the distance is a killer.

7. Gisbome will get a Spec Base Force and that 1st China Brig and no more after that. We'll see what those forces can do...

John


Image
Attachments
SingBB.jpg
SingBB.jpg (181.65 KiB) Viewed 1 time
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

Rainer79
Posts: 603
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 7:49 am
Location: Austria

RE: BB vs. Singapore

Post by Rainer79 »

Ouch. That looks bad. These ships could be sorely missed when you go for India.

How much did you expand your armaments industry BTW? The reinforcement needs alone are staggering in this mod.
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17134
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

Armaments

Post by John 3rd »

Brad--Can you answer that question?

Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

User avatar
Q-Ball
Posts: 7312
Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2002 4:43 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois

RE: Armaments

Post by Q-Ball »

RE: Armaments, we are up to 600 in production, which is 100 more than start, and we have gained in the pool despite heavy reinforcements.

In general, we have held off on major industrial expansions, in order to conserve supply for offensives. With Resource Centers coming on line in the SRA, our supply situation is improving, and will allow some expansion. Armaments is one area, but most will be focused on aircraft and engines. We will probably expand a shipyard or two.
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17134
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

Operational Planning

Post by John 3rd »

With Singapore due to fall by Dec 1944, we need to start the true planning for the invasion of India.  Thanks to the heavy defense that has been put up by the Brits at Singapore the invasion forces are all concentrated there.  Provided a short amount of time to rebuild somewhat these units can be loaded and ready to land at Viza within 10-14 Days of Singapore's Fall.

As part of the discussion we realize that the true threat to the landing--beyond some LBA--is the Royal Navy.  After CarDiv2's ineffective strike at Columbo, the Allies--if it can be believed--have maintained their Fleet THERE.  I ran by Brad the idea of combining our CVs into one Strike Force to make a serious attempt to smash the Royal Navy there at the onset of the Operation.

These are the CV Available for the Operation:

CarDiv2
Hiryu     Total Planes:  78 Zero--42 Val--68 Kate
Soryu
Shoho
Zuiho

2 CA, 1 CL, and 8 DD

Mini-KB
Junyo    Total Planes:  77 Zero--17 Val--41 Kate
Ryujo
Taiyo
Hosho

1 CA, 3 CL, 8 DD

Total Strike Force:  155 Zero--59 Val--109 Kate

If we set CAP at 50%--we should have roughly 80 Zero for Escort. 

Speed will be the problem with CVE Taiyo at a top speed of 21 Knots.  We could leave her as part of the Escort for the Invasion Force and use the rest for attacking purposes.

We'll take losses but if we get a decent Port Attack there is a real chance that the Royal Navy could be taken out of the equation before the fight hardly even starts.

Thoughts?

Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

User avatar
ny59giants
Posts: 9867
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:02 pm

RE: Operational Planning

Post by ny59giants »

I would try to decrease the number of Vals even further and add more Kates. Your Kates carry Torpedoes and 800kg AP bombs. If RN BBs are present, those Vals will not do any damage. 
[center]Image[/center]
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17134
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: Operational Planning

Post by John 3rd »

Good thoughts Sir.  We could pull the 42 Vals off Hiryu/Soryu and replace them with 54 Kates.  That would REALLY add some strength to the attack!

EVIL thinking...as a member of the Cabal I would expect no less! 
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

Rainer79
Posts: 603
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 7:49 am
Location: Austria

RE: Armaments

Post by Rainer79 »

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

RE: Armaments, we are up to 600 in production, which is 100 more than start, and we have gained in the pool despite heavy reinforcements.

In general, we have held off on major industrial expansions, in order to conserve supply for offensives. With Resource Centers coming on line in the SRA, our supply situation is improving, and will allow some expansion. Armaments is one area, but most will be focused on aircraft and engines. We will probably expand a shipyard or two.

Thanks. My armament industry is currently less than that and is not quite big enough to build a surplus in the pool. I did some expansion of the aircraft industry and added (few) additional shipyards though. I'll probably have to keep it at this level for now though.

Interestingly enough the Kuriles and other small islands near Japan tend to have supply stockpiles of 8000 tons which now are being used to help fund the industry build-up.
User avatar
TenChiMato
Posts: 52
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 11:50 am

RE: Operational Planning

Post by TenChiMato »

Hi,
not wishing to turn the knife into the wound but what are the results of your naval bombardment of Singapore, did you had good results at least? Also what about the Yamato? When will it be available?

Also your two CVs TFs are not that powerful unless you keep them together: the Soryu-Hiryu TF is barely more powerful than the British CVs TF and I doubt your mini-KB will be a match against them.

If the Hiryu-Soryu TF face the brits alone with the mini-KB lagging behind due to Taiyo slow speed you risk ending into a Coral Sea style exchange trading 1 for 1 or worse.
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”