Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Reluctant admiral - India or Australia

 
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 >> The War Room >> Reluctant admiral - India or Australia Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Reluctant admiral - India or Australia - 10/30/2018 3:04:25 PM   
PetrOs

 

Posts: 260
Joined: 11/11/2006
Status: offline
I am playing the reluctant admiral scenario as Japanese/Hard vs AI. Its mid-april 1942, and I secured Singapore, DEI, Philippines (north, south are starving, and would be cleaned by 1-2 brigades from the north), Burma, large part of China, Rabaul, Port Moresby, Noumea, and in progress of cleaning up Fiji. I now have around 12 divisions with tanks, artillery and support troops waiting for the next order. I would also "switch" some China divisions when I will go on. The problem is - what to do now. I have several plans, and cant decide which one to use

1) Go for India. I can see several ways to go here:
1a - Land in Diamond Harbor or Calcutta with 5-7 divisions same time, with the reinforcements prepared in Rangoon. Drop paratroops around the Calcutta to prevent retreat. Concentrate some 15 divisions there and sweep to the north west, thrusting to Bombay. Use all 3 my carrier TFs (TF1 - Kaimon, Shokaku, Zuikaku, Akagi, Kaga, TF2 - Hiryu Soryu Junyo Hiyo Shoho, TF3 - all other CVLs and CVEs, all air groups with 50+% on fighters, usually 12-18 each Val and Kate, and 35-40 Zero on each CV) to prevent offmap reinforcements. One more big CV is coming in around 2 months, and would probably replace Kaga in TF1, which would go to TF2.
1b - Land on Ceylon, use it as a stage area, then land in Trivandrum or so. Clean up toward north-east.
1c - Land directly in Bombay or even Karachi. This would make the reinforcement and supply prevention much easier, but longer supply path for me.
1d - Go for Ceylon, then Bombay.

2) Go for Australia
2a - go by the way of North Australia. Probably useless as road network is very limited.
2b - Land in Cairns/Townsville. Then sweep around the coast clockwise. This way, my supply hub in Rabaul and direct support/forward repair at Port Moresby is close by. Also, my CVs can react if any US carriers appear.
2c - go towards Perth, then sweep counterclockwise. Use 2 CVTFs to block reinforcements from USA and one from offmap bases west of Australia.

Which way would you go? Where is actually more resources/Industry available, India (I have the feeling it is India...) or Australia? Indian industry has shorter way to the oil supply (could be fed from Rangoon and Merak), but going for India would give US free hands to attack on my eastern border (Midway-Baker Island-Fiji, probably going with my south seas army group (52th division and 6 or 7 SNLF brigades) for New Zealand after finishing Fiji). I can of course concentrate enough land based air power to do much harm (something like 200 Betty/Nell, and around 50-70 each of Val/Kate, with 200-300 Zeros and 200-300 Oscars to cover them), which could move around the defensive perimeter as needed, using prepared bases with air HQs for torpedos. Allies still have all their carriers but Hermes which got a total of 5 submarine torps over one night near Colombo in 4 attacks by 3 subs. I could of course use only some CVs on India, for example taking Junyo, Hiyo, all CVLs and CVEs there (should be enough to deal with british CVs, cover convoys and sink reinforcements), and placing 7, soon 8 big carriers around the eastern border.

I could count on some 5-6 Zero groups, 4-6 Nell/Betty groups, 10-12 Oscar groups and recons for invasion, rest is on the eastern defense perimeter. I have very heavy research done on Tojo IIa (current prod rate of 165, and its under research still), and I hope for it to be available soon, to reequip Oscar groups from front line. Also, Nick 1a are coming in a few days, and would be produced at 70 planes rate, mainly for area defense/FB role. They will need to train in fighter tactics however, as most Nick groups are now still with Ann/Sonya/Mary/Ida, but I would probably swap the pilots to the guys from trained reserve when reequipping, 8-9 Nate groups are producing enough pilots with 65+ experience/65+ air combat which are "graduated" to reserves every month, 100% Cap is effective in beefing the boys up. All army medium bombers (including all light bomber groups which cant change to Nick) are now equipped with Sally I/II, Lily I/II and Helen I, and are used exclusively in ASW role (sending at least 30 allied subs down by now, I currently have only 2 sightings of subs near Taiwan/Phillipines, and one near Japan). I can however take them out of that role if needed, most bases along the coast have 2-3 squadrons.

Post #: 1
RE: Reluctant admiral - India or Australia - 10/30/2018 4:10:52 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline
The AI does not do a good job at defending stuff well, so in all likelihood you can knock out the enemy's fleet by keeping yours concentrated and not face too much threat in the mid-Pacific.

From the Allied point of view India is much easier to defend. Lots of British/Australian units come in from Aden and the initially poor Indian army starts to improve morale and experience as their units fill out. There are a lot of Indian squads in the pools but few Australian. The road and rail network in India makes it easier for the Allied side to move troops around and once they get some good tank units they can be tough to beat.

Australia will not be so tough. It does not have the population and transportation infrastructure to defend itself well. Make your major targets the bases from Brisbane to Melbourne and the rest will collapse like wet cake.

Forget about industry being the major goal. It doesn't help all that much when you capture it and can be considerably damaged during the fighting.
Strategic position to prevent an Allied attack on Japan later is all that matters.

_____________________________

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 PetrOs)
Post #: 2
RE: Reluctant admiral - India or Australia - 10/30/2018 4:39:41 PM   
PetrOs

 

Posts: 260
Joined: 11/11/2006
Status: offline
Thanks.. Australia is a much easier go, I know that, especially as its cutoff or close to being cut off due to heavy airpower at Noumea, Nadi, and all the way up the chain. With the NZ taken it will be ready to starve, and cant really be used to stage assault.

When I played as allies, I had an offensive coming out from India towards Singapore by late 42... The reinforcements are coming out of offmap, and a carrier TF + surface patrols near Karachi and Bombay can cut them off (but would need to be there all the time until those ports are taken.). If those reinforcements cant arrive, the India is gone....

I had a successful India invasion by land + Diamond Harbor a few years ago... I am tempted to make a save as for now, and go for Bombay invasion outright. I could then base the prevention patrol there, and strike towards north to Karachi and south to close smaller ports. I would also need to beat the Ceylon, but maybe could try to make it on my way. I assume 2 Divs with HQ + some garrison/support/base force would be enough for Ceylon, and landing some 10 divisions in Bombay should also work if stretching out for tonnage... While the main mass moving around India, I could land with CV support in the small port on south tip of Ceylon with first echelon, and use it for AO/AKE/AD base until Colombo and Trinkomalee fall. Then CVs could rearm/refuel, and go for main invasion support. After initial invasion, I could then send most big carriers to the defense perimeter, with small ones being adequate for prevention patrol (which can be also abandoned if all ports are taken and fortified and LBA is strong). I might send my Burma forces overland to Calcutta, as it might be ripe to fall if AI pulls off the troops towards Bombay...

In case I fail, I could always try another branch ;)

Going for industry is important, as it can be put to a good service if repaired. But strategic position is important....


(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 3
RE: Reluctant admiral - India or Australia - 10/30/2018 5:02:02 PM   
GetAssista

 

Posts: 2732
Joined: 9/19/2009
Status: offline
Against AI I would advise Australia.
You can totally conquer the whole continent and the game would still continue fine with Allies pushing from other directions. With India, you would sooner or later develop an urge to grab it all, and you can do it up to and including Karachi if you try. But that would break the game and keep Brits/Indians (and everything that spawns in Aden) out forever. They would never launch an amphibious assault on India coast from Aden. Or you'd have to live under certain restrictions, e.g. never advance north past the Delhi line or such.

(in reply to PetrOs)
Post #: 4
RE: Reluctant admiral - India or Australia - 10/30/2018 9:13:50 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline
Part of the problem in India is putting a garrison in all those bases ...

_____________________________

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 GetAssista)
Post #: 5
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> The War Room >> Reluctant admiral - India or Australia Page: [1]
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

3.141