A strategic question

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 strategic question

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> A strategic question

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

A strategic question - 7/16/2007 1:12:07 PM

Hortlund

Posts: 2884
Joined: 10/13/2000
Status: offline

So Im in the middle of a PBEM against AdmNelson. And since he is on vacation right now, I thought Id take the opportunity to ask you fine gentlemen for advice.

AdmNelson, if you have returned to the forum after your vacation, please do not read beyond this line.

Edit..I mean AdmNelson. Sorry, got the admirals confused there.

Ok, the situation is this. Its March 1942.

Strategic situation
I have captured the PI except Bataan and those two small islands with PA divisions on them. I have two divisions and a handful of smaller units and 5 artillery reducing Bataan. I have also just transferred 4 squadrons of Sallys to Clark to help finish him off. Bataan should not be able to hold more than a couple of weeks more.

All of the NEI is in my hands except Batavia, which will fall inside a week.

Singapore is in Japanese hands, so is Rangoon and Mandalay. I am about to take both Mytkinta and Akyab, they should fall inside a month.

I have taken the usual islands in the central pacific. Tarawa etc, I have also taken the three atolls south of Tarawa to intercept his shipping. Futunafti or something?

Rabaul, Guadalcanal, Port Moresby...I own everything in the Solomons and New Guinea.

I have taken Sian in China, effectively cutting off the entire northern chinese front.

Forces
I have not lost a single carrier. Nor have I lost a single battleship. I have three BBs that are in various states of damage though. The worst is at 60sys, and the best at 12.

He has lost lots of CAs, both US, Aus and UKs, but Force Z is still around somewhere. Prince of Wales took at torpedo hit, but that was months ago, she could be back in action already. I have lost many destroyers (15-20) and lots of transports, but not too many.

I have lots and lots of Zeros, I think Ive only lost 29 and Ive got over 200 in the replacement pool.

My Carriers are divided into four units.
I have Agaki, Kaga, Hiruy and Soryu off Rangoon.
I have Zuikaku and Shokaku at Guadalcanal.
I have one mini-KB with two CVL and one CVE south of Pago-Pago
I have one mini-KB with two CVL at Kawajelein

I have 3BBs and 4CAs at Rangoon together with 40+ APs and scores of DD and MSW and PC. I think I could lift three divisions in one go if I wanted to.

I have 3 divisions at Rangoon, one at Mandalay, one on the way to Akyab.
I have 2 divisions on Java
I have 2 divisions at Bataan and in Singapore
I have 1 division at Port Moresby, Guadalcanal, Truk

I have 2 brigades on Java
I have 1 brigade on Sumatra, Truk, Rangoon, Mandalay

I have the two parachute regiments heading for Rangoon.

Economy
I have taken enough bases undamaged/ with very little damage not to worry about resources or oil. As soon as I finish off Batavia, I will start the convoys to ship stuff home.

Im producing 200 Zeros/month, and generally Im quite content with my supply-situation.

Thoughts
I am quite pleased with the strategic situation. For limited losses I have been able to take all the essential areas. I could settle down now and build up my defences, or I could do one more offensive with the aim to severely disrupt his ability to build up and/or threaten me.

I have excellent defensive positions in the central pacific, cornered on Tarawa and with a small perimiter to the south. I would have to reinforce this area with at least two divisions though.

I have excellent defensive positions in the solomons, with a strong anchor at Guadalcanal and Port Moresby. It will be hard for the allied player to get a foothold in this area.

I have soon reached my "normal" perimeter in Burma, when Akyab and Mytakinta falls.

My Chinese offensive is going quite well, and if I want I should be able to clear all of northern china within a year or so.

I have been toying with the idea to either attack India or Ceylon, that is the reason for the build-up at Rangoon.

What next?

Do I go over on the defensive now?

Do I make a move on Noumea?

Do I make a move on Ceylon?

Do I make a move on India?

Do I make a move on Australia?

< Message edited by Panzerjaeger Hortlund -- 7/16/2007 1:20:21 PM >

_____________________________

The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close.
In its place we are entering a period of consequences..

Post #: 1

RE: A strategic question - 7/16/2007 1:50:30 PM

AmiralLaurent

Posts: 3351
Joined: 3/11/2003
From: Near Paris, France
Status: offline

How in the hell did you manage to lose only 29 Zero in 3 months ? My op loss alone will be above that in one month probably...

As for what you can do, it depends of the game style of your opponent.

Some questions:
1) did Adm play Sir Robin, or did he fight in DEI ?
2) do you recon N Australia ?
3) what is the status of Allied CV ? Did they appear already somewhere or did they do nothing until now ?
4) how much troops are facing you in N Burma ?

My only advice at the moment would be to concentrate your CVs. Allied LBA will be more and more powerful and can defeat alone a small CV group, and US CV may do this too...

(in reply to Hortlund)

Post #: 2

RE: A strategic question - 7/16/2007 2:32:08 PM

Hortlund

Posts: 2884
Joined: 10/13/2000
Status: offline

I only lost 9 Zeros in AA combat. 20 are ops losses. Fun part is the good admiral has 53 P-39s as ops losses, but I havent seen a single P-39 anywhere. I think I must have sunk an AK with lots of P-39s on it hehe.

1) He ran away. He did put up a fight with his naval units, but he did not reinforce anything. Practically the entire dutch and US PI-fleet is at the bottom of the ocean, together with the DDs from Z. He did manage to get PoW and Repulse out though.

2) No. I dont see it as a viable option really. I have the small islands north of Darwin and I could theoretically mount a pretty strong offensive. But I dont see the reason for it really. Easier to defend the islands than N Australia really.

3) No sign of the RN CVs. Lexington tried to defend Port Moresby but pulled away. Ive seen Enterprise in the Noumea area. If I were to venture a guess, I think Enterprise is off chasing my mini KB south of Pago-Pago, while Lexington is in the Brisbane-area. I think he is really afraid of a move to Noumea, Ive seen him reinforce Luganville last week, and I believe he has reinforced Noumea already.

4) Uncertain. He has 7000 men at Mytkinta, and one Burma brigade at Akyab + a 100-tank unit coming down the trail to reinforce them.

I dont want to concentrate my CVs, I want to have some to raid allied shipping lanes, and some to provide a safeguard in two areas at the same time. If I choose to go over on the defensive however, I will pull back the KB to Saipan or something like that and have them hang out there waiting. The small CVLs and CVEs will be on convoy harassment duty however. I want to force him to tie down at least some of his CVs on convoy protection duty.

_____________________________

The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close.
In its place we are entering a period of consequences..

(in reply to AmiralLaurent)

Post #: 3

RE: A strategic question - 7/16/2007 2:34:11 PM

Hortlund

Posts: 2884
Joined: 10/13/2000
Status: offline

I have been considering a strike at Johnston Island or Palmyra...just to remove those bases for him. If I do that, I will get a "hole" where I can sneak my carriers into his shipping lanes without him having PBYs to spot me.

_____________________________

The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close.
In its place we are entering a period of consequences..

(in reply to Hortlund)

Post #: 4

RE: A strategic question - 7/16/2007 2:43:40 PM

saj42

Posts: 1125
Joined: 4/19/2005
From: Somerset, England
Status: offline

how about Canton Island?
It is 15 hexes from any other allied base (in stock anyway) so Allied player cannot use LBA to defend or attack it from supporting bases

quote:

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

I have been considering a strike at Johnston Island or Palmyra...just to remove those bases for him. If I do that, I will get a "hole" where I can sneak my carriers into his shipping lanes without him having PBYs to spot me.

_____________________________

Banner by rogueusmc

(in reply to Hortlund)

Post #: 5

RE: A strategic question - 7/16/2007 2:45:04 PM

Hortlund

Posts: 2884
Joined: 10/13/2000
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tallyho!

how about Canton Island?
It is 15 hexes from any other allied base (in stock anyway) so Allied player cannot use LBA to defend or attack it from supporting bases

I think he's got at least a US division there. Ive seen a huge convoy land there, and I know the 27th US was on that convoy.

_____________________________

The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close.
In its place we are entering a period of consequences..

(in reply to saj42)

Post #: 6

RE: A strategic question - 7/16/2007 3:25:40 PM

AmiralLaurent

Posts: 3351
Joined: 3/11/2003
From: Near Paris, France
Status: offline

By the way, do you play a stock scenario or not ?

From the above I would say yes.

In this case taking N Australia will protect your resource/oil centers in the area, and will negate to your opponent the ability to attack from here later. If you read Pauk's AAR you will see that it is not so hard to defend this area from a land offensive, as it will be without air power. I have invaded the four bases of NW Australia in two PBEM and already repulsed an Australian counter-offensive (in summer 1942) without difficulty. Ressources in Darwin and Derby are a bonus.

After the first phase of the war (securing the SRA), the goal of Japan should be to reduce the Allied ability to attack either it or the Home Islands. So either take bases from where SRA may be attacked (Darwin area, Bengal) or destroy Allied units (land, air and sea) that will be used for the counter-offensive.

So invading an atoll defended by a full division could be a good idea if you bring 4 Div yourself, half of your BB and most of your CV. You will probably win and destroy this division, and may trigger a reaction of US CV in a good position for you.

As for raiding with CVL/CVE forces I don't think it is a good idea in a PBEM. US CV can't be used offensively for a long time but will be used well to cover a troop convoy against such a force, and will certainly win. So either you will sink convoy with AK/TK (and the Allied had tons of them so won't care much) or you will find a more valuable target but be destroyed by its escort (at least if the Allied player is doing that to cover troop convoys).

(in reply to Hortlund)

Post #: 7

RE: A strategic question - 7/16/2007 3:38:50 PM

Hortlund

Posts: 2884
Joined: 10/13/2000
Status: offline

We are playing stock + nikmod.

I see your point about Australia, it might be a really good idea. However Im sure Im looking at bases loaded with two divisions each by now, and frankly I dont think its worth the risk to bring all of my units into allied LB-range. With the nikmod, the bomber almost always gets through, so I dont want to hover with the KB inside LB-range if I dont absolutely have to.

Same with the atoll. I think its too big risk for too little gain. Sure I can bring the might of the Imperial navy there, but that would mean that Im also putting my CVs at risk. Right now I have 6 fleet carriers without a scratch, with full air-wings and experience in the 90s. Thats one hell of a deterrent come 1944.

The more I think about it, the more I think I'll go over to the defensive now. Dig in deep. Spend 1942 just fortifying my bases, he cant touch me now anyway.

_____________________________

The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close.
In its place we are entering a period of consequences..

(in reply to AmiralLaurent)

Post #: 8

RE: A strategic question - 7/16/2007 4:06:07 PM

Canoerebel

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

It's only March '42, for heaven's sake! Kick his rear end somewhere and have fun doing it.

(in reply to Hortlund)

Post #: 9

RE: A strategic question - 7/16/2007 6:54:51 PM

Mistmatz

Posts: 1399
Joined: 10/16/2005
Status: offline

Do you play for points or the long haul?

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 10

RE: A strategic question - 7/16/2007 7:07:44 PM

Hortlund

Posts: 2884
Joined: 10/13/2000
Status: offline

Long haul

_____________________________

The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close.
In its place we are entering a period of consequences..

(in reply to Mistmatz)

Post #: 11

RE: A strategic question - 7/16/2007 8:13:40 PM

scott64

Posts: 4019
Joined: 9/12/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline

Invade NZ

_____________________________

Lucky for you, tonight it's just me

Any ship can be a minesweeper..once !! :)

http://suspenseandmystery.blogspot.com/

(in reply to Hortlund)

Post #: 12

RE: A strategic question - 7/17/2007 4:07:57 AM

ny59giants

Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline

As an Allied player only to date, I would say that the weakening of the Americans is priority #1. Thus, I would take Noumea, Suva, and Pago Pago to make transporting supplies to NZ/Oz hazardous. The capture of northern Australia is nice along with parts of India, but the Americans are going to win the war by themselves. Just ask Andy Mac.

I would do what you can to force any counter offensive in the Pacific by the Americans having to be done only with CV support. The longer you can delay that, the better off you will be.

If he can use LBA to support invasions, then you are in trouble. B-24's

Don't forget to push him back in the Aleutians.

Just my $.02

_____________________________

(in reply to scott64)

Post #: 13

RE: A strategic question - 7/17/2007 11:15:09 AM

Grotius

Posts: 5798
Joined: 10/18/2002
From: The Imperial Palace.
Status: offline

I was going to ask about the Aleutians myself. I've been reading the "Penguin" AAR (Faberton v Speedy), so maybe I'm unduly obsessed with the north, but you don't want him grabbing your northernmost base and bombing the home islands from there.

As for your broader question -- push or go to the defensive -- I would wager that the conventional wisdom is: don't give up the initiative yet. Push somewhere while you've got the Zero bonus, and, more importantly, while you're still fighting battles of your choosing at locations you choose. Once you go over to the defensive, he'll pick the time and place for battles, which immediately puts you at a disadvantage. You'll spend a long three years reacting to his moves. Perhaps take Noumea and other targets in the South Pacific, to slow down the Americans. If nothing else, this approach might be more fun for you -- important, because defending as Japan may get less fun as the years wear on.

That said, though, it's also fun to win. :) Taking more territory just for the sake of taking more territory may not make you more secure. If you can defend a smaller perimeter more effectively, maybe that's for the best.

So, basically, I'm with you whatever you decide. :P

(in reply to ny59giants)

Post #: 14

RE: A strategic question - 7/17/2007 1:18:02 PM

Hortlund

Posts: 2884
Joined: 10/13/2000
Status: offline

The northern front.
Ive been a player who focused on those bases in the north. But the way they are located at the beginning of the war means there is a rather huge gap between the US and Japanese bases. But once you get into the other sides territory, the bases are close together. Meaning that if you jump over that big gap, you will be facing a war of attrition. The Japs cannot take all the bases to Anchoredge. The US cant take all the bases to the Home Islands.

So if you grab a foothold there, you will be facing a war of attrition. And you will be facing that war of attrition in an area where you cant be sure that you'll be able to use your airpower. To me that sounds like a losing proposition for the Japanese player.

It is also quite easy to see if something is going on up there, since the bases will have to be expanded before any offensive aventure can take place. If I see him expand his bases up north, I'll be sure to fortify all those small islands and crowd them with infantry, but until that happens, I see no reason to go there.

I am reluctant to go for Suva or Pago-Pago or Noumea because I will be stretched too thin. Right now my defences are cornered on Port Moresby, Guadalcanal and Tarawa. Each of these bases have reasonable support-bases within LB-range. I can support PM from Rabaul and Guadalcanal from the Solomons where Im building up lots and lots of lvl 4-airfields. Tarawa can be supported from the other islands up to Kawajelein.

If I go for Noumea, Suva, Pago-Pago I will have extended myself outside this "support-range". Meaning that come 43, I will be at very high risk at those bases. He can easily mount attacks on those bases from reasonable distance, and he can easily cut them off. I feel like Im sticking my head in the loose if I go for those bases, and all he has to do is kick out the chair from underneath. If I go for Noumea I need to put at least one division and lots of airunits there. What do I do with them if he decides to skip Noumea and attack directly at Guadalcanal and up the island chain? I will have just pissed those units away. Or I have to mount a huge operation to try to extract them from there...an operation that will require carrier support.

Ideally, I want to have the KB at anchor through to 44 and defend the outer perimiter with land-based units only.

_____________________________

The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close.
In its place we are entering a period of consequences..

(in reply to Grotius)

Post #: 15

RE: A strategic question - 7/17/2007 1:54:29 PM

JMS2

Posts: 357
Joined: 10/11/2005
Status: offline

Take Johnston, and build it up, it makes a fine outpost for the Central Pacific, giving warning of moves off Pearl. Defend it with AAA.

_____________________________

(in reply to Hortlund)

Post #: 16

RE: A strategic question - 7/17/2007 3:12:55 PM

Milman

Posts: 269
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Serbia
Status: offline

From your post i think you allready decided that you will not attack any more Pacific/Australia from obvious and if you aks me good reasons . But you can attack some of those bases to destroy USA LCU and stop their building of Air/port instalations and then retreat leaving just CD , ENG and smal INF units to defend those islands .
You can't defend only Tarawa . Allies will have at least 15 airwings of marine dauntless afther summer months which will crush your LCU on Tarawa if you don't defend all 3 bases . It will happen same thing like it is happening right now on Bataan but quicker .
Stay away from ceylon if you don't plan to invade India . That will put you in battle of attrition whith brit planes . You will give to Nelson great chance to use hes Hurricanes which in most PBEM's can't participate in offensive operations becouse of short legs .
India is hard question he allready have few good divisions there . I need a little more info about that if you can give me :
1. Did he transported any unit from Malaya (i mean with AK/AP not with subs) ?
2. What happened with British units in Burma ?
3. Did he sent Chinese divisions to reinforce Burma/India ?

(in reply to JMS2)

Post #: 17

RE: A strategic question - 7/17/2007 3:24:18 PM

Hortlund

Posts: 2884
Joined: 10/13/2000
Status: offline

On Tarawa, Im reinforcing all those three islands with engineers, at least 100 combat value-units, CDs and will build them to lvl 9 forts. On top of that Im putting one division on Tarawa.

I managed to cut off and destroy two of his burma brigades south of Rangoon, so I think he is low on troops in India. I saw no major retreats from Singapore. I think he just pulled everything back from Malaya into Singapore and tried to defend from there.

I have defeated one chinese corps in Burma, and there are 7000 troops at Mykinta...so I think he has sent some chinese troops there

_____________________________

The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close.
In its place we are entering a period of consequences..

(in reply to Milman)

Post #: 18

RE: A strategic question - 7/17/2007 3:55:04 PM

Milman

Posts: 269
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Serbia
Status: offline

only 7k in Mykinta means he retreated to India . If you calculate he have 2 brit div (full) 4 ind div (probably on 35% strength) and maybe 2 div if we calculate other brigades together . It is about 6 Div of Infantry units + tank regiments + eng units . He will get one Div and one brigade in 45 days .
Means you will need at least 10 Div and probably most of your air forces and strong navy if you wnat to take all India bases . Of course be prepared that you will probably lost all of yours best pilots against Hurricans and AVG .
On your place i would stay away from India since you allready sent few Divisions on Pacific . Since it is end of March maybe it is better that you finish Burma campaign .
If you are ready to risk a little in India you can invade Diamond Harbour with all Divs you can send right now and see how things happen . You will probably take base and if he attack you hard you can practice evacuation of troops which you will need in the future :) .

(in reply to Hortlund)

Post #: 19

RE: A strategic question - 7/17/2007 6:25:09 PM

Mistmatz

Posts: 1399
Joined: 10/16/2005
Status: offline

I'd go for anything in the pacific you could grab but only buildup an inner/safer perimeter.

The forward bases are expendable, but may provide a chance to crush an invasion or two if your opponent gets greedy and wants to shorten the US-AUS connection to early.

On the other hand playing greedy might give your opponent a chance or two, to crush your invasions... ;)

(in reply to Milman)

Post #: 20

RE: A strategic question - 7/17/2007 7:41:06 PM

Hortlund

Posts: 2884
Joined: 10/13/2000
Status: offline

Well, I was looking over the positions now, and Im going to mount one more offensive in the centpac. I'll take Baker island, and have Tarawa as the center-hub of the Baker-Tarawa-Funafti-area. I'll fill all the atolls with at least 100 combat values and CDs. I'll probably stick an artillery unit and two AA units on each atoll too. I'll bring those in from the russian front. That should prove a tough nut to crack for him. After that, Im going over on the defensive on all fronts except china.

_____________________________

The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close.
In its place we are entering a period of consequences..

(in reply to Mistmatz)

Post #: 21

RE: A strategic question - 7/17/2007 9:48:49 PM

Grotius

Posts: 5798
Joined: 10/18/2002
From: The Imperial Palace.
Status: offline

Sounds good.

The only reason I ask about the north is that once he makes that long hop to your northernmost base (whose name I forget), doesn't he have a much shorter road to the Home Islands? In fact, won't he eventually be able to bomb the Home Islands from that northernmost base? I'm not saying you should aim to conquer Anchorage; just wondering whether a little buffer zone here might discourage him from going that way. Then again, perhaps you sense that he's already not inclined to go that way.

(in reply to Hortlund)

Post #: 22

RE: A strategic question - 7/17/2007 9:54:18 PM

Hortlund

Posts: 2884
Joined: 10/13/2000
Status: offline

Paramushiro Jima is the northernmost Japanese base closest to the Auletians.

Yes, it is bad if he gets a hold up there, so I will definitively fight him for it if he tries. However, the area north of a certian hexrow is in arctic weather, and during the winter half of the year its almost impossible to fly from those bases. Cant remember the exact details, I just know its bad.

If he goes there, I will be able to use my navy to pound the allied bases, his aircover will be sporadic, he will be at the very end of a long supply-chain and Im gonna be right in my own back yard.

One thing to consider however, is the risk for an attack on the northern home-island. Cant remember its name, but there are some industry up there.

_____________________________

The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close.
In its place we are entering a period of consequences..

(in reply to Grotius)

Post #: 23

RE: A strategic question - 7/17/2007 10:13:35 PM

Feinder

Posts: 6589
Joined: 9/4/2002
From: Land o' Lakes, FL
Status: offline

If you can afford the offense, there's much to be said for simply expanding your perimeter (say going after Canton/Palmyra as well as Baker), and then simply defending the minimally.

Defending Canton/Palmyra would be difficult, so don't. Just capture them, to force the Allies to retake them. You don't have to garrison them with much, just a fragment of a Bde with about 500 troops. Enough that he's going to have to prep an RCT to kick you out, but not enough troops that you actually care. There's nothing wrong with defending -inside- the permiter, and having some of the bases on the perimeter as empty shell.

But if you make him prep a whole RCT to to attack a base that he cares about (and you don't), you've just put that RCT on the shelf 2 - 3 months (the time it takes him to prep, and then invade).

Having a few "I don't care by my enemy will want them" bases scattered around, also gives you opportunity to strike - since you know he's going to want it, you can be ready when he does, or you can completely disregard the recapture, because you don't care anyway.

-F-

-F-

_____________________________

"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me

(in reply to Hortlund)

Post #: 24

RE: A strategic question - 7/17/2007 10:15:43 PM

Feinder

Posts: 6589
Joined: 9/4/2002
From: Land o' Lakes, FL
Status: offline

quote:

One thing to consider however, is the risk for an attack on the northern home-island. Cant remember its name, but there are some industry up there.

Toyohara - I just bombed it in my own PBEM game (Jan 42). There's another group factories beside Ominato that is a tempting target as well.

-F-

_____________________________

"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me

(in reply to Hortlund)

Post #: 25

RE: A strategic question - 7/18/2007 12:52:51 PM

Hortlund

Posts: 2884
Joined: 10/13/2000
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Feinder

If you can afford the offense, there's much to be said for simply expanding your perimeter (say going after Canton/Palmyra as well as Baker), and then simply defending the minimally.

Defending Canton/Palmyra would be difficult, so don't.� Just capture them, to force the Allies to retake them.� You don't have to garrison them with much, just a fragment of a Bde with about 500 troops.� Enough that he's going to have to prep an RCT to kick you out, but not enough troops that you actually care.� There's nothing wrong with defending -inside- the permiter, and having some of the bases on the perimeter as empty shell.

But if you make him prep a whole RCT to to attack a base that he cares about (and you don't), you've just�put that RCT on the shelf�2 - 3 months (the time it takes him to prep, and then invade).

Having a few "I don't care by my enemy will want them" bases scattered around, also gives you opportunity to strike - since you know he's going to want it, you can be ready when he does, or you can completely disregard the recapture, because you don't care anyway.

-F-

-F-

Well, I have the troops to do it. Right now Im shifting three divisions from Rangoon to the centpac. I decided to go over on the defensive in Burma and not try for India.

But is it worth it? If I go after Canton Island or Palmyra, Im bound to run into CVs and BBs. I think I would win any such exchange, but I would probably lose one CV...if I come with the full might of the KB and face two or three US CVs, I would sink them, but probably lose one myself.

Is it worth it? I really think the best use of the KB for me now is to make it invisible. Heck I could anchor them at Tokyo...if I do that they will remain a phantom in the allied players head. He will never know when they'll show up, and therefore he will have to be much more careful than he'd otherwise be.

_____________________________

The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close.
In its place we are entering a period of consequences..

(in reply to Feinder)

Post #: 26

RE: A strategic question - 7/18/2007 1:00:34 PM

veji1

Posts: 1019
Joined: 7/9/2005
Status: offline

You want to run into CVs and BBs now !!! not in 6 months or a year time.

This is why you have to go for him en force, if you don't dent his offensive capabilities while you can, you will regret it.

(in reply to Hortlund)

Post #: 27

RE: A strategic question - 7/18/2007 1:14:28 PM

AmiralLaurent

Posts: 3351
Joined: 3/11/2003
From: Near Paris, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

Paramushiro Jima is the northernmost Japanese base closest to the Auletians.

Yes, it is bad if he gets a hold up there, so I will definitively fight him for it if he tries. However, the area north of a certian hexrow is in arctic weather, and during the winter half of the year its almost impossible to fly from those bases. Cant remember the exact details, I just know its bad.

If he goes there, I will be able to use my navy to pound the allied bases, his aircover will be sporadic, he will be at the very end of a long supply-chain and Im gonna be right in my own back yard.

One thing to consider however, is the risk for an attack on the northern home-island. Cant remember its name, but there are some industry up there.

Don't except the artic weather to protect your northern front... it is as bas simulated as the monsoon in Burma... it will reduce the level of air activity but aircraft will still fly around 50% of the time.. instead of a probable 10% IRL.... and ships won't be much damaged by it... so an operation in the area in winter is fairly doable.

As for the supply chain, Aleutians are closer from the West Coast than the Solomons... and in WITP there is no problem landing a million supplies on Attu and Kiska and wage a major operation from here. So the northern flank is a major option for the Allied.

On the other hand the Allied attacking there early will come to play on the Japanese ground. Japanese supply line will be very short, with repair yards, big bases and big ports in the area. And last but not least Japan can't afford an Allied success here so will commit all his forces there. IMOO the Allied player may attack in 1942 but not where it hurts Japan the most... Allied forces can win local superiority but not if Japan in 42 gathers all its might at one place. And that is what Japan should do if PJ is invaded in 42.

So in conclusion an Allied attack on Kuriles/Sakhalin in 1942 is doable and defensive measures (or offensive ones with an invasion of the Aleutian Islands) should be taken, but I will launch such an attack only if most of the Japanese power will be involved in operations thousand of miles away (lile an invasion of NZ).

(in reply to Hortlund)

Post #: 28

RE: A strategic question - 7/18/2007 1:44:13 PM

Hortlund

Posts: 2884
Joined: 10/13/2000
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AmiralLaurent

Don't except the artic weather to protect your northern front... it is as bas simulated as the monsoon in Burma... it will reduce the level of air activity but aircraft will still fly around 50% of the time.. instead of a probable 10% IRL.... and ships won't be much damaged by it... so an operation in the area in winter is fairly doable.

As for the supply chain, Aleutians are closer from the West Coast than the Solomons... and in WITP there is no problem landing a million supplies on Attu and Kiska and wage a major operation from here. So the northern flank is a major option for the Allied.

On the other hand the Allied attacking there early will come to play on the Japanese ground. Japanese supply line will be very short, with repair yards, big bases and big ports in the area. And last but not least Japan can't afford an Allied success here so will commit all his forces there. IMOO the Allied player may attack in 1942 but not where it hurts Japan the most... Allied forces can win local superiority but not if Japan in 42 gathers all its might at one place. And that is what Japan should do if PJ is invaded in 42.

So in conclusion an Allied attack on Kuriles/Sakhalin in 1942 is doable and defensive measures (or offensive ones with an invasion of the Aleutian Islands) should be taken, but I will launch such an attack only if most of the Japanese power will be involved in operations thousand of miles away (lile an invasion of NZ).

But those 50% are on top of all other modifiers right? Or is it a 50% check and if they clear it they fly as normal? Also, isnt the weather rather bad...like rain or thunderstorms...meaning the ops losses will be nightmarish?

Also, wont the allied player have to build up the bases some before drowning them in supplies...or have I completely missunderstood the waste/spoilage-rules?

Anyway, like you say, Im not afraid of an allied venture into this area in 42 or 43...right now I can crush him at any location of the map if I put the full might of my armed forces there. I think I could even take Pearl right now if I really really wanted to..

_____________________________

The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close.
In its place we are entering a period of consequences..

(in reply to AmiralLaurent)

Post #: 29

RE: A strategic question - 7/18/2007 5:08:03 PM

AmiralLaurent

Posts: 3351
Joined: 3/11/2003
From: Near Paris, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

But those 50% are on top of all other modifiers right? Or is it a 50% check and if they clear it they fly as normal? Also, isnt the weather rather bad...like rain or thunderstorms...meaning the ops losses will be nightmarish?

No. I don't know of the check but the FINAL result of ALL checks is that bombers fly one day every two on a mean number. As for op losses they were around 1% and not significantly higher than in other area.

Bomber will fly attacks on base if their base has no cloud (for naval attack the target should also be clear) and even in thunderstorm weather it will happen 40-50% of the time according to my experience. So bombers flying will probably not be affected by bad weather for op losses.

Aircraft on CAP, LRCAP and patrol will fly even if their own base is cloud-covered and are the ones that will see op losses rising in bad weather, but again the rate won't be too bad to stop operations (CAP op loss is almost nil, patrol very low (1-2 per 1000), LRCAP more important (1-5%, but still high even in good weather)).

As I said before: moonsoon won't stop ops in Burma, and winter won't stop ops in the North.

(in reply to Hortlund)

Post #: 30