A Good Place to Start - Matthew (A) v Fokko (J) - Bottlenecks Mod

Post descriptions of your brilliant victories and unfortunate defeats here.

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

M Peaston
Posts: 305
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2022 5:13 am

Re: A Good Place to Start - Matthew (A) v Fokko (J) - Bottlenecks Mod

Post by M Peaston »

RangerJoe wrote: Mon Apr 01, 2024 1:51 am You can build a 0 port to a 3(0) port but that takes a lot of time.

You might be able to pick things up and land them using an amphibious TF, sometimes you have to have only the big items on board for a second try, only one item per ship.
That’s what I thought, but there is no option to expand the port here. I’ve checked others with an SPS of 0 and you’re right, they can be expanded - but not Norfolk Island for some reason. It’s not a big issue - I can make good use of the Norfolk Island Garrison elsewhere. The main use I have planned for the Island is to facilitate the transfer of aircraft between Australia-New Zealand-Fiji, and to this end I’ve got a small amount of aviation support there. I do need to build up enough supplies to enable drop tank use though, I’ve made that mistake before!
M Peaston
Posts: 305
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2022 5:13 am

Re: A Good Place to Start - Matthew (A) v Fokko (J) - Bottlenecks Mod

Post by M Peaston »

Norfolk Island.

Norfolk Island.png
Norfolk Island.png (941.66 KiB) Viewed 828 times
M Peaston
Posts: 305
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2022 5:13 am

Re: A Good Place to Start - Matthew (A) v Fokko (J) - Bottlenecks Mod

Post by M Peaston »

BBfanboy wrote: Mon Apr 01, 2024 11:35 am In the Aleutians, Adak is far too vulnerable to staff up in the first 6-8 months. The IJN can have local Naval and Air superiority by bringing a CVL and CAs up there while they land one of their many SNLFs. You need to have a base that can host HBs to keep Japan from developing one on Adak. DH is SPS (0) for airfield, so you need to put troops and engineers on Umnak to build it up as a complementary base to DH. Once you have bombers that can recon and bomb Adak and have a decent ground force to fight off a couple of SNLFs, you can start working on that.
I like to send 4-6 S-boats with their working torps to DH to patrol the Aleutians - short range patrols there, some choke points and poor IJN/IJA ASW. And of course, you need enough TK and xAKLs to bring supply to all your Aleutians possessions.

This sounds a much better plan to defend the Aleutians than I’ve managed to come up with. I had completely overlooked Umnak.

This might be a useful time to outline my forces in the North Pacific - it features low in my priorities.

Adak itself has an infantry Bn and a construction Rgt, search aircraft and supporting auxiliaries. Logistics are being run out of Prince Rupert with about a dozen (mostly small) xAKs and xAKLs, and about half-a-dozen small tankers. Allocated to Alaska Command for patrolling and/or convoy protection are 4 Subs (not the ’S’ Class, they’re mostly in the Coral Sea/Solomons/Bismarcks), 4 Destroyers and a Light Cruiser. This being a DaBabes-style mod there are of course plenty of sloops. Aircraft-wise, other than naval search there are only a few obsolete bombers and fighters. Of course, the Japanese can take Adak any time they want - at this stage they can have pretty much anything they want, but I want to make sure they can’t have everything they want, and the more force required to take Adak, the less there is available elsewhere.

…..developing Umnak first would have been better though; I’ll see what I can do……
M Peaston
Posts: 305
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2022 5:13 am

Re: A Good Place to Start - Matthew (A) v Fokko (J) - Bottlenecks Mod

Post by M Peaston »

BBfanboy wrote: Mon Apr 01, 2024 11:42 am Re the P-40Es on Java - even the Japanese Oscar equipped units have an Air Combat experience advantage over Allied aircraft. If I detected a landing force coming to Java I would put those P-40Es on Naval Strike at 100 feet at normal range so they can carry their 500 lb bomb. They haven't been trained for that kind of attack but at 100 feet you can usually get lucky hits with ~10% of the aircraft you send, and often you can avoid CAP at that altitude because it is busy sweeping high and patrolling at 10K or so. Of course you can't use that tactic too often because the enemy will counter it. My attitude is that you are likely to lose those planes anyway, so why not do something potentially severe to the enemy?
I’ve read AARs where P40s and other fighters have been used to good effect in an anti-shipping role in the early stages of the war, and I completely agree with you - if I’m going to lose the aircraft then I might as well achieve something with them - except I’ve no intention of losing them!

The idea is that by keeping the Japanese on the back foot at Palembang I hope to delay the inevitable forthcoming Japanese air offensive against Java - if his fighters are busy defending his bases he’s got less available to sweep mine. When sweeping, my Hurricanes have shown they can mix it with the Oscars, but I don’t have the numbers in the pool to sustain any effort, so I’ve brought up the P40Es. If it doesn’t work, or if losses get too high, or if the Japanese start to exert pressure over Batavia then I’ll pull the fighters back. My fighter losses have been relatively low up until now and I want to keep it that way.
User avatar
RangerJoe
Posts: 17505
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:39 pm
Location: Who knows?

Re: A Good Place to Start - Matthew (A) v Fokko (J) - Bottlenecks Mod

Post by RangerJoe »

P-39s are effective down low, if they and Buffaloes have the altitude advantage, they can also jump the enemy as well. Just have them over their own airfields or close to them. remember that if the enemy sweeps high but the bombers come in low, have your CAP even lower since they can and will climb to attack the bombers but may avoid the sweepers.

As far as Norfolk Island and a port are concerned, you might want to ask on the map thread or the beta thread if that is an error. My game shows that it can be built up.
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing! :o

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
:twisted: ; Julia Child
Image
User avatar
LargeSlowTarget
Posts: 4886
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Hessen, Germany - now living in France

Re: A Good Place to Start - Matthew (A) v Fokko (J) - Bottlenecks Mod

Post by LargeSlowTarget »

Norfolk Is. = data error in the editor, according to the screenshot it is a 'Primary Airbase" instead of a "Port".

I have checked my game files and Norfolk is a port in my current mod version and the few older versions I have kept on the drive.

Maybe an error in the version you are using that got fixed in the meantime, but I have no recollection of having changed anything about that base.
User avatar
JeffroK
Posts: 6412
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am

Re: A Good Place to Start - Matthew (A) v Fokko (J) - Bottlenecks Mod

Post by JeffroK »

M Peaston wrote: Tue Apr 02, 2024 6:03 pm Norfolk Island.


Norfolk Island.png
Norfolk Island is overated at (0), there still isnt a port and the slightest seas makes portage awkward.
The airfield was made by cutting the top off a hill and demolishing some beautiful trees.
A lovely place to visit.
Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum
M Peaston
Posts: 305
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2022 5:13 am

Re: A Good Place to Start - Matthew (A) v Fokko (J) - Bottlenecks Mod

Post by M Peaston »

Hi JeffroK, thanks for giving us a sense of what Norfolk Island is like; it makes it more of a place, not just a dot on the map. It looks like that in this version of history there won’t be too many more trees being cut down, but those in the forces now to be diverted elsewhere won’t get to visit to appreciate the beauty.
M Peaston
Posts: 305
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2022 5:13 am

Re: A Good Place to Start - Matthew (A) v Fokko (J) - Bottlenecks Mod

Post by M Peaston »

1st March 1942


CHINA

There were heavy Japanese air attacks across south and south-eastern China. For its part the Chinese Air Force was the only Allied air force in action today. Three CAF Hudsons bombed the port at Pescadores, hitting AK Azumasan Maru. Allied intel was good, there was no fighter opposition during the daylight raid.


INDIA/BURMA

33rd Division captured Martaban. Given that the Japanese also now control Pegu I’m accelerating plans to evacuate Rangoon.


ABDA

Elements of the Japanese 56th Division easily sweep aside the Dutch defenders of Medan, who are now trying to retreat on Sabang.

Marblehead leaves Darwin under escort for more extensive repairs at Melbourne.

The first cock-up of the month - the Hurricane squadron repairing at Soerabaja has been ordered back to Batavia to join the P40Es in the planned sweep of Palembang. However, the Hurricanes weren’t authorised to use drop-tanks during the transfer, so the they have just arrived in Batavia by train all neatly packed in their crates…..the sweep has been postponed. Brooke-Popham is not very happy, partly because of the effect on military operations, but mostly because this happened in front of an American Squadron. One can just imagine the sniggers…..


SWPAC/SOPAC

A convoy with 26,000 fuel has been dispatched from Sydney to Townsville - and yes, I’ve remembered to toggle fuel stockpile on! (I’ve made the mistake before of shipping in fuel to a location at some risk only to find afterwards it had been trickling its way back overland to where it had started). 6th AIF Division is on its way to Townsville by train and I don’t want anything go wrong with the deployment to Port Moresby.

I’m looking at sending the Marine Para Bns at Luganville to Tulagi. I’ve got three APDs at Luganville for the job - they’re going to run supplies into Tulagi first, if that is successful I’ll risk the Marines.


USA

A small reinforcement convoy leaves San Francisco bound for Sydney with:

4x AA Rgt
2x Construction Rgt
1x BF
1x Recon Lightning
M Peaston
Posts: 305
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2022 5:13 am

Re: A Good Place to Start - Matthew (A) v Fokko (J) - Bottlenecks Mod

Post by M Peaston »

2nd March 1942


CHINA

Chinese attempts to break out of Sihong have been thwarted - the Japanese 32nd Div ‘A’ has been joined by 32nd Div ‘B’. Chinese casualties were heavy.

A little to the north, in a rare show of unity the 18th Army and 2nd Red Guerilla Corp are advancing on Anyang. Anyang appears to be weakly held (2nd NCPC Bde and NCPC Army HQ if Allied intel is correct). I wanted to keep my powder dry on this, hoping to time an attack to coincide with any Japanese offensive towards Sian, Chengchow, Yunan or somewhere in the region, but the Japanese seem intent on eliminating every Chinese stronghold in 11th War Area. The Nationalists and Communists figured they may as well go out in a blaze of glory rather than just sit in place and wait to be starved out. The trouble is, the Japanese have proved particularly adept at using the railways to reinforce a target long before I get there. We’ll see what happens.

Allied intel indicates that there are now Japanese fighters based at Pescadores. That’s good - if they’ve moved fighters there, then I won’t encounter them elsewhere.



INDIA/BURMA

103rd RN BF is being withdrawn from Rangoon by barge, and will go to Akyab. The remaining defenders, 100th RAF BF, 45th Indian Bde and 2nd Burma Bde will head north.



ABDA

The second cock-up of the month. Now, the pilots of 242 RAF Squadron have had to put up with some, shall we say, gentle joshing from their American cousins since arriving at Batavia for the day’s planned fighter sweeps over Palembang with their Hurricanes still neatly packed up in their crates. However, what goes around comes around. It seems there has been some kind of monumental miscalculation, as even with drop tanks the P40Es do not have sufficient range to operate over Palembang from Batavia. So it will be the Australian and Dutch pilots in their Buffalos who’ll be joining the RAF in socking it to the Japanese over Palembang, whilst the Americans are left behind flying CAP over Batavia. Now it’s the American Pilots’ turn to be the subject of some - ahem - ‘mild’ ribbing.

I wonder if anyone’ll be laughing when all the empty chairs start appearing in the pilots’ messes?

West of Babeldaob the captain of KIX fluffs his chance of a medal when the four torpedoes he fired at Zuiho all miss. Credit for having a go though, and it has provided some useful intelligence that Japanese carriers are at sea. The message “Attack Imminent” is flashed around the eastern DEI, although no deployments will be made without further information as to Japanese intentions.

Japanese units reach Benkoelen



SWPAC/SOPAC

An event that is hardly likely to make the headlines, or even an obscure history footnote, but for the first time Bora Bora has fully refuelled a trans-Pacific convoy. A small step on the path to eventual victory!
M Peaston
Posts: 305
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2022 5:13 am

Re: A Good Place to Start - Matthew (A) v Fokko (J) - Bottlenecks Mod

Post by M Peaston »

Zuiho.png
Zuiho.png (2.21 MiB) Viewed 592 times
Fokko hasn't been one to have his carriers at sea for no reason, and (so far at least) appears to be reluctant to risk his carriers in any deep raids. My working assumption is that mini-KB is providing cover for an invasion fleet. Up to now Mini-KB has been based at Babeldaob, therefore it appears to be heading for the DEI.

Are the Japanese heading for Tarakan/Balikpapan/Makassar Strait? Or are they looking to bypass this whole area and go for Ambon and/or Kendari?
M Peaston
Posts: 305
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2022 5:13 am

Re: A Good Place to Start - Matthew (A) v Fokko (J) - Bottlenecks Mod

Post by M Peaston »

11th War Area.png
11th War Area.png (1.61 MiB) Viewed 591 times
JanSako
Posts: 499
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2022 12:06 pm

Re: A Good Place to Start - Matthew (A) v Fokko (J) - Bottlenecks Mod

Post by JanSako »

IMO Japan taking all the dot bases in China is a mistake. Most of them only have a stationary admin unit that cannot/is not supposed to move & so pose no danger. They all require an IJA garrison of at least 10 & so tie down a good amount of troops that could be used to garrison the railroads & road Japan actually needs.
If they are not garrisoned, they are a constant source of VP loss.

I usually just take the ones that produce the most supply for the partisans - most of the dot bases have a daily +1 supply, but some are 5-10 which is a nice surplus to be denied. Then wait for the Corps to come out to the open to try to cut the railroads & use airpower to melt them. That is how I dealt with the Laiwu grouping. Interesting that he went after it with the forts 9.
The other pocket South, I managed to take Hwaiyn in my current Japan game because he moved the 2 Corps units out of it, now they are sitting in the swamps with no supply & I do not mind that. As Allies, those 2 Corps + the Partisan unit in that pocket are a pretty good 'fleet-in-being' that Japan needs to keep an eye on - basically a couple-three IMB's to keep around there.
M Peaston
Posts: 305
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2022 5:13 am

Re: A Good Place to Start - Matthew (A) v Fokko (J) - Bottlenecks Mod

Post by M Peaston »

JanSako wrote: Thu Apr 18, 2024 8:20 am IMO Japan taking all the dot bases in China is a mistake. Most of them only have a stationary admin unit that cannot/is not supposed to move & so pose no danger. They all require an IJA garrison of at least 10 & so tie down a good amount of troops that could be used to garrison the railroads & road Japan actually needs.
If they are not garrisoned, they are a constant source of VP loss.

I usually just take the ones that produce the most supply for the partisans - most of the dot bases have a daily +1 supply, but some are 5-10 which is a nice surplus to be denied. Then wait for the Corps to come out to the open to try to cut the railroads & use airpower to melt them. That is how I dealt with the Laiwu grouping. Interesting that he went after it with the forts 9.
The other pocket South, I managed to take Hwaiyn in my current Japan game because he moved the 2 Corps units out of it, now they are sitting in the swamps with no supply & I do not mind that. As Allies, those 2 Corps + the Partisan unit in that pocket are a pretty good 'fleet-in-being' that Japan needs to keep an eye on - basically a couple-three IMB's to keep around there.
I don’t think either of us realised Laiwu was a level 9 fort until the first Japanese assault there. :)

Thank you for your analysis, JanSako. If Japan is going to struggle to garrison the dot bases then I should try and find a way to encourage the Japanese to take more of them. From what you’re saying it sounds like the Japanese would be better off putting up with some partisan attacks rather than trying to eliminate them altogether.

I still don't know yet what the Japanese are trying to achieve in China. The Japanese offensive towards Lanchow is currently stalled at Ningsia, but I think the attack will be renewed when reinforced with units from the aborted attempt towards Kiuchuan/Hami.

Farther south I’m less sure of Japanese intentions. My thinking is that the Japanese are concentrating on securing their rear areas before going on the offensive - possibly to Wuchow/Kukong and/or in the 3rd War Area south of Changsha.

The Japanese have bombed the resources at Nanyang three days running now. I’m wondering why bother bombing resources they could take fairly easily?

If the Japanese are going to largely seek to maintain the status quo then I do have some ideas for a Chinese offensive later in the war.

Strategically, China’s role is simply to tie down as many Japanese units as possible for as long as possible to prevent them being used elsewhere. How I’m going to achieve this I think depends largely on what the Japanese do.
JanSako
Posts: 499
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2022 12:06 pm

Re: A Good Place to Start - Matthew (A) v Fokko (J) - Bottlenecks Mod

Post by JanSako »

Not exactly a 'struggle' to garrison the bases, but it does tie down a good amount of units. He can also use the trick of buying out an IMB and air-transport fragments into another base, then move each fragment into their final garrison base. That works for Allies in India too but is not as needed.
I agree that he should be already be pushing more at this time. Maybe he does not want those resources, that is why he is bombing them? Meaning he has no intention of attacking there. Or it is a trick to make you think that :)

TBH I do not think he realizes how serious his resource/fuel situation is about to get. Those easy to capture resource bases are super important because every bit he does not take in China he has to replace by shipping all the way from Malaya. The fuel cost and shipping needs are massive for ~150k resources/day or close to 50 xAK's unloaded daily.
The cargo ships are half the capacity of stock ones & that effect cannot be overstated.
User avatar
RangerJoe
Posts: 17505
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:39 pm
Location: Who knows?

Re: A Good Place to Start - Matthew (A) v Fokko (J) - Bottlenecks Mod

Post by RangerJoe »

Shipping may not be that expensive if he can get a form of "Magic Highway" going which is not that hard if certain bases have their stockpiles and demands set accordingly.
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing! :o

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
:twisted: ; Julia Child
Image
JanSako
Posts: 499
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2022 12:06 pm

Re: A Good Place to Start - Matthew (A) v Fokko (J) - Bottlenecks Mod

Post by JanSako »

In this case Japan has not really even moved from their starting positions in the South... nowhere close to opening The Highway & by March the Home Islands resource stockpiles in this mode are pretty much gone, even with pulling from Manchukuo & Hokkaido.
At this point he is either shipping (with all hulls) from SRA or some of his HI have stopped.
User avatar
RangerJoe
Posts: 17505
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:39 pm
Location: Who knows?

Re: A Good Place to Start - Matthew (A) v Fokko (J) - Bottlenecks Mod

Post by RangerJoe »

He does not have to ship it all the way to the Home Islands. I have dropped stuff off at Hong Kong to make its way to Fusan before I got the highway open.
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing! :o

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
:twisted: ; Julia Child
Image
User avatar
LargeSlowTarget
Posts: 4886
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Hessen, Germany - now living in France

Re: A Good Place to Start - Matthew (A) v Fokko (J) - Bottlenecks Mod

Post by LargeSlowTarget »

In this mod there are no bridges crossing the main section of the Yangtze - because the first bridge across the lower Yangtze (i.e. from above Chungking to the sea) was built only in 1955-57. So there are no railroads or roads over the river - just trails representing ferries. Furthermore, large sections of pre-war railroads got deliberately dismantled / destroyed in 1937-41, so there are gaps and missing links. I don't think that resources dropped at HK will reach Fusan - and this is desired by mod design. The "magic highway" from Singers to Fusan is a JFB's wet dream and utterly unrealistic.
User avatar
RangerJoe
Posts: 17505
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:39 pm
Location: Who knows?

Re: A Good Place to Start - Matthew (A) v Fokko (J) - Bottlenecks Mod

Post by RangerJoe »

In my updated map with the beta that I am playing, the bridges are destroyed but the resources flow just fine without them. It is only the travel by the units that is impeded. But even any resources making it from Hong Kong to Shanghai can cut off some sea travel.
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing! :o

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
:twisted: ; Julia Child
Image
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”