A good 'bleed rate' for Allies Vs IJA/IJN

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

A good 'bleed rate' for Allies Vs IJA/IJN

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 >> A good 'bleed rate' for Allies Vs IJA/IJN

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

A good 'bleed rate' for Allies Vs IJA/IJN - 2/6/2011 6:40:56 AM

Blue Water Navy

Posts: 16
Joined: 11/22/2010
Status: offline

Do any of you have a "if I can do x amount of damage a day/week i will win the war" formula. First week of the war 200+ Jap Aircraft and 20 AK sunk. Even with fog of war...of course.

Post #: 1

RE: A good 'bleed rate' for Allies Vs IJA/IJN - 2/6/2011 7:32:29 PM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Blue Water Navy

Do any of you have a "if I can do x amount of damage a day/week i will win the war" formula. First week of the war 200+ Jap Aircraft and 20 AK sunk. Even with fog of war...of course.

Not a formula, but I watch my sinkings of Japanese tankers and AOs pretty closely.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Blue Water Navy)

Post #: 2

RE: A good 'bleed rate' for Allies Vs IJA/IJN - 2/6/2011 8:06:45 PM

John Lansford

Posts: 2662
Joined: 4/29/2002
Status: offline

Every ship you lose as the Allies, you'll get replaced on a 1:1 rate, for some classes you'll get replacements at 2:1 or even 3:1 rate. The Japanese couldn't replace any class at even a 1:1 rate, but they start the war with a LOT of transports. Losing 20 hulls in the first week won't even slow them down; what you want to do is sink loaded troop transports, major warships (even serious damage is good) and submarines. I got lucky and early on my Asiatic Fleet warships intercepted a troop convoy headed for Borneo, sinking nearly the entire TF. Since the landings were all scripted and most of the LCU's were already scheduled for other invasions, I held the oil bases on Borneo for at least a month longer than I'd expected just from that one engagement.

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 3

RE: A good 'bleed rate' for Allies Vs IJA/IJN - 2/6/2011 8:44:30 PM

FatR

Posts: 2522
Joined: 10/23/2009
From: St.Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline

Losses of less than 100 xAK/AK/xAKL have practicalyl no chance of impacting Japanese operations and economics. For a significant effect try 200 per year and more. Any big tanker counts in the first half of 1942, though. After that a Japanese player can convert a couple dozen of xAKs to TKs.

(in reply to John Lansford)

Post #: 4

RE: A good 'bleed rate' for Allies Vs IJA/IJN - 2/7/2011 12:12:02 PM

pmath

Posts: 102
Joined: 2/19/2004
Status: offline

Kill or bleed rate is not the optimum way to disrupt AI Japan early, rather decide on critical oil/fuel/res areas to mount unconventional defense to deny the area to Japan long term or permanently. The farther you stray from historical the more difficult for the AI to script response.

(in reply to FatR)

Post #: 5

RE: A good 'bleed rate' for Allies Vs IJA/IJN - 2/7/2011 1:10:21 PM

Canoerebel

Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline

Depends on the opponent and the scenario.

If this is Scenario One against the AI, you haven't scratched the AI yet, but you will, and the AI will have trouble stopping you whether it loses 20 ships the entire war or 20 ships a day.

On the other hand, if this is Scenario Two against an experienced human opponent, you probably won't ever win the air war as the Allies. Neither is there much chance of doing enough damage to Japan's merchant fleet to really have an effect. But the Japanese navy is it's achilles heal. It only has a limited number of capital ships, so each one of those you bag is really an achievement that means something.

(in reply to pmath)

Post #: 6

RE: A good 'bleed rate' for Allies Vs IJA/IJN - 2/10/2011 12:33:05 PM

Chickenboy

Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Depends on the opponent and the scenario.

If this is Scenario One against the AI, you haven't scratched the AI yet, but you will, and the AI will have trouble stopping you whether it loses 20 ships the entire war or 20 ships a day.

On the other hand, if this is Scenario Two against an experienced human opponent, you probably won't ever win the air war as the Allies. Neither is there much chance of doing enough damage to Japan's merchant fleet to really have an effect. But the Japanese navy is it's achilles heal. It only has a limited number of capital ships, so each one of those you bag is really an achievement that means something.

I agree with Canoerebel, it's all about who your opponent is.

Since the AI cheats like a mother-f***** with regards to transportation of resources, fuel and oil, losing even a modestly large ship contingent is unlikely to faze is much. Against a human opponent by PBEM, it's a different ballgame.

_____________________________

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 7

RE: A good 'bleed rate' for Allies Vs IJA/IJN - 2/10/2011 10:50:03 PM

inqistor

Posts: 1813
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline

Actually, playing as Allies, your main goal should be to "not lose on points until end of 1942". So watch closely your plane, and ship exchange ratio. If you sink 100 Japan ships, but lose 500 in the same timeframe, that would probably not put you in good position.

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 8

Page: [1]

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> The War Room >> A good 'bleed rate' for Allies Vs IJA/IJN

Page: [1]