Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Combat Report: Sept 27-28, 1943

 
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 >> After Action Reports >> RE: Combat Report: Sept 27-28, 1943 Page: <<   < prev  24 25 [26] 27 28   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Combat Report: Sept 27-28, 1943 - 6/7/2008 10:40:54 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline 		Hmm, so are you telling me that if I build 300 Frank factories in 1942 I pay only 3,000 HI but NO supplies whereas if I build those 300 Frank factories at a time when the Frank is in service it will cost those 3,000 HI PLUS 330,000 tons of supply?

That sounds kinda crazy and logically inconsistent ( which probably means it is true given how this game sometimes works  )


P.s. I do understand that converting costs nothing.

< Message edited by Nemo121 -- 6/7/2008 10:43:16 PM >

(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 751
RE: Combat Report: Sept 27-28, 1943 - 6/7/2008 11:36:39 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline 		Correct Nemo.  R&D "repair" costs no supply.

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 752
RE: Combat Report: Sept 27-28, 1943 - 6/8/2008 12:00:50 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: n01487477

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121
What do you mean when you say you shifted 100 R&D points to the Frank? Does this mean you created 100 Frank factories? If so this burns about 1,000 HI and 110,000 tons of supply. Seems kinda wasteful.

no it does not. R&D does NOT use up a single HI point!

Yes, to convert them costs nothing in HI, but to expand them, the HI costs = the number expanded * 10 (which is what I think Nemo was saying



I must have misunderstood that and stand corrected.

_____________________________


(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 753
RE: Combat Report: Sept 27-28, 1943 - 6/8/2008 1:54:50 AM   
FeurerKrieg


Posts: 3397
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Denver, CO
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Correct Nemo. R&D "repair" costs no supply.


I have never heard this. So, based on this, all R&D factories should be set to repair correct?

_____________________________


Upper portion used with permission of www.subart.net, copyright John Meeks

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 754
RE: Combat Report: Sept 27-28, 1943 - 6/8/2008 2:17:02 AM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Feurer Krieg


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Correct Nemo. R&D "repair" costs no supply.


I have never heard this. So, based on this, all R&D factories should be set to repair correct?


Absolutely!

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to FeurerKrieg)
Post #: 755
RE: Combat Report: Sept 27-28, 1943 - 6/8/2008 5:05:51 AM   
Uamaga

 

Posts: 79
Joined: 4/17/2008
From: Kraków, Poland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Correct Nemo.  R&D "repair" costs no supply.


Are you sure about it?
I mean: did you make or have you seen any tests proofing it?

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 756
RE: Combat Report: Sept 27-28, 1943 - 6/8/2008 5:24:27 AM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline 		I didn't test it personally, but I did see the results of the test.  Can't remember who did it unfortunately.

The closest thing I did to a test was to turn off all R&D and run a turn.  Then I reran the turn with all R&D on.  No difference in supply.

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Uamaga)
Post #: 757
RE: Combat Report: Sept 27-28, 1943 - 6/8/2008 5:48:32 AM   
n01487477


Posts: 4779
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline 		Yes, and I can confirm it too ... have tested it only quickly, but the results seem to confirm what Mike is saying ... R&D costs no supply, when repairing & when producing ...[edit] but as always, I'll do some other tests and get back to all of you ...

< Message edited by n01487477 -- 6/8/2008 6:06:54 AM >

_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 758
RE: Combat Report: Sept 27-28, 1943 - 6/8/2008 6:37:23 AM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline 		If this is true, WOW!!

_____________________________


(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 759
RE: Combat Report: Sept 27-28, 1943 - 6/8/2008 8:42:50 AM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline 		Yeah, if this is true then from Day 1 of the game Japan should just expand the production of ALL 1943 and onwards fighters to something like 1000 planes each secure in the knowledge that it won't cost any supply and will just bring all these planes in 3 months earlier and with MASSIVE initial production runs.

Really seems like a major design oversight.

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 760
RE: Combat Report: Sept 27-28, 1943 - 6/8/2008 9:41:15 AM   
n01487477


Posts: 4779
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline 		Edited for clarity & accuracy

How I understand it is thus:

1. Expanding any Factory will cost HI & supplies initially. ( the HI costs = the number expanded * 10 + initial supply cost (100* number expanded)
2. To repair a "normal NOT -rd" factory will cost supplies. (1000 supplies/damage point repaired)
3. [edit] And to repair a "-rd" factory will cost 1000 / damage point ...
4. Aircraft factories that are -rd (nothing to repair or use)
5. To convert a factory will cost no HI.(nothing)

THE FOLLOWING IT NOW INCORRECT ...
Make sense ... so if you have the initial HI & supplies, then Nemo is correct, you could expand all, and get a free bonus!
quote:


Yeah, if this is true then from Day 1 of the game Japan should just expand the production of ALL 1943 and onwards fighters to something like 1000 planes each secure in the knowledge that it won't cost any supply and will just bring all these planes in 3 months earlier and with MASSIVE initial production runs.

But expanding to 1000 = 1000 * 10 = 10000 HI / planetype ... + 1000 * 100 SUPPLIES = 100000 SUPPLIES/ PLANE FACTORY ... But there is a good point to be made here ...

< Message edited by n01487477 -- 6/9/2008 11:43:02 AM >

_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 761
RE: Combat Report: Sept 27-28, 1943 - 6/8/2008 2:00:13 PM   
Uamaga

 

Posts: 79
Joined: 4/17/2008
From: Kraków, Poland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

I didn't test it personally, but I did see the results of the test.  Can't remember who did it unfortunately.

The closest thing I did to a test was to turn off all R&D and run a turn.  Then I reran the turn with all R&D on.  No difference in supply.


I see... But did you notice at that period ANY change in state of R&D factories? I mean: got any of R&D factories repaired?
My understanding of it (but I admit I didnt make a decisive test yet) is that R&D factories repair slowly in random way (probability o repairing depends on factory size and time till aircraft is going into production). And only if that random test is passed 1k of suppy is eaten. Hence my question...

BTW another thing I must yet prepare a decisive test for is the fact that R&D factories do not make any research (do not produce research points/prototypes) until they fully repaired. If true (and I believe it is) it is probably single most overlooked fact about R&D

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 762
RE: Combat Report: Sept 27-28, 1943 - 6/8/2008 2:21:36 PM   
Uamaga

 

Posts: 79
Joined: 4/17/2008
From: Kraków, Poland
Status: offline

Sorry for self-replying but I thought it is worth to post parts of what I posted in old thread. It is how I believe R&D is working but as I said I have no proof test of it yet (it is based more or less on me trying peeking into the code direct).
If you have or will make tests which falsify this (or better yet proof it ) I will be more then happy

(replace word "prototype" below to "research point" if you prefer)

quote:

Repairing of factories for aircrafts already in production (see above) goes as expected: 1 factory element is repaired every day at a cost of 1000 supply points (assuming 10000 or more supplies available at base). However for aircrafts in reserch probability of repairing of factory element depends on number of days till aircraft enters production and total factory size (sum of ready and disabled elements): If RANDOM(0 .. NumberOfDaysTillInProduction) > SizeOfFactory then factory element will not be repaired that day.



quote:


If Factory is assigned to produce aircraft not yet available - it's considered Researching that aircraft by building its prototypes.
  • To be able to build prototypes factory must be fully repaired itself - must have no disabled elements. Please note remarks above about factory repairing.
  • Research does not consume neither HI points nor engines.
  • Research speed: for every 100 plane prototypes built date of availability is moved up by 1 month.
  • Prototype build rate is much slower then build rate of production aircrafts:

    • Large factories are much less effective: even factory of size 320 once ready will build only slightly more then 1 prototype a day (about 35 prototypes per month). Such factories also cost a lot of supplies before they get ready for researching.
    • Very small factories are cheap but not very efficient either: factory of size 2 will build on averange only about 3 prototypes per month. Also it is likely that it will take lot of time till these two factory elements get repaired before such factory can start research of aircraft with availability date far in the future (on averange it will take as long as waiting for repairing of big factory of size 320 - unless you get lucky with dice rolls)
    • My personal choise/advice would be: concentrate research on 1-2 aircraft types and use factories of size 30+. Single factory of size 30+, once ready will deliver steady stream of 30 prototypes per month. Build as many of such factories as needed to achive desired speed-up but remember that they need first spend time to fully repair themselfs.






(in reply to Uamaga)
Post #: 763
RE: Combat Report: Sept 27-28, 1943 - 6/8/2008 2:23:11 PM   
n01487477


Posts: 4779
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline 		Edited again for accuracy -- I think I got it wrong
quote:

ORIGINAL: n01487477
How I understand it is thus:

1. Expanding any Factory will cost HI & supplies initially. ( the HI costs = the number expanded * 10 + initial supply cost (100* number expanded)
2. To repair a "normal NOT -rd" factory will cost supplies. (1000 supplies/damage point repaired)
3. [edit] And to repair a "-rd" factory will cost 1000 / damage point ...
4. Aircraft factories that are -rd (nothing use)
5. To convert a factory will cost no HI.(nothing)

quote:


I see... But did you notice at that period ANY change in state of R&D factories? I mean: got any of R&D factories repaired?
My understanding of it (but I admit I didnt make a decisive test yet) is that R&D factories repair slowly in random way (probability o repairing depends on factory size and time till aircraft is going into production). And only if that random test is passed 1k of suppy is eaten. Hence my question...


Uamaga, I ran this test and I have to say I believe I got it wrong the first time ... There is a small anomaly with the supplies, but that is because I had to have Resource Cntrs operating so that my Zero's would produce. It "seems" you are correct. But I'd have to set up a base with nothing else to ensure complete accuracy ... I also ran without any repairs and I got an increase in supplies ... So although it isn't the definitive test ... it's what it is ...

Time till aircraft is a known factor ... not sure about size ...

The second test is interesting though ...






Attachment (1)

< Message edited by n01487477 -- 6/8/2008 2:31:05 PM >

_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java

(in reply to Uamaga)
Post #: 764
RE: Combat Report: Sept 27-28, 1943 - 6/8/2008 2:44:40 PM   
Uamaga

 

Posts: 79
Joined: 4/17/2008
From: Kraków, Poland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: n01487477
Uamaga, I ran this test and I have to say I believe I got it wrong the first time ... There is a small anomaly with the supplies, but that is because I had to have Resource Cntrs operating so that my Zero's would produce. It "seems" you are correct. But I'd have to set up a base with nothing else to ensure complete accuracy ... I also ran without any repairs and I got an increase in supplies ... So although it isn't the definitive test ... it's what it is ...


Sounds encouraging...

quote:


Time till aircraft is a known factor ... not sure about size ...

If you refer to factory size in random test: it is simply sum of ready & disbaled (to be repaired) elements of the factory (for that big Frank factory size=320) - fixed number till one decides to expand the factory. Nice thing about the random test (if I got it right) is that once number of days is less-or-equal factory size factory will repair 1 element every day (100% of test pass) so one can always got its damaged factories ready for production on time.


quote:


The second test is interesting though ...

Testing the second issue is difficult as there is (afaik) no place one can check the real number of research points gathered - until one get actual one-month speed bump meaning exactly 100 r.pts. was researched.


(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 765
Aircraft factories - 6/9/2008 8:29:10 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Hello.  Back from my short trip and find my AAR a full page longer then when I left it 2 days ago!  How about that?

I am glad that a move I did has sparked POSITIVE discussion.  I thought that I had the aircraft R&D Model fairly well understood.  This might make it the ONLY portion of the economy I understood!

Am working on a new plan for going after Dan.  Will broach the subject for thought in a little while.


< Message edited by John 3rd -- 6/9/2008 11:37:13 PM >

_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to Uamaga)
Post #: 766
RE: Aircraft factories - 6/11/2008 11:22:12 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline 		So, after all that has anyone PROVED the ituation one way or the other regarding R&D factories?  From what I could discern of the test which was carried out it looked as though R&D repair DID cost about 1000 tons of supplies in that day.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 767
RE: Aircraft factories - 6/12/2008 4:00:46 AM   
n01487477


Posts: 4779
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline 		Confirmed!
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121
So, after all that has anyone PROVED the ituation one way or the other regarding R&D factories? From what I could discern of the test which was carried out it looked as though R&D repair DID cost about 1000 tons of supplies in that day.

  • No doubt about it ... did a baseline of 10 turns for supply, with A6M3a factory -rd (10)0 turned off.
  • Then turned it on ... turn 14 and 22 confirm ... 1000 supplies to repair a -rd factory.





    Attachment (1)

    _____________________________

    -Damian-
    EconDoc
    TrackerAE
    Tutes&Java

    (in reply to Nemo121)
    • Post #: 768
    New Planning - 6/13/2008 2:55:36 AM   
    John 3rd


    Posts: 17178
    Joined: 9/8/2005
    From: La Salle, Colorado
    Status: offline     		Good Day loyal readers!  I have been sort of lolly-gagging around the house and haven't done a serious update on some new Operational Thinking within the Japanese High Command.

    With a few days away from doing turns, I have put together what I think is a new Operation that will be designed to deprive Dan's ships from American aircover.  I got to thinking about that raid I launched with the Amagi/Unryu TF.  There were lots of damaged American ships heading east and only ONE ship--that I saw--going west.  That ship was an MLE and it was sunk my the CVs.  Why an MLE?  I got to thinking that Dan must have fotgotten to bring one with him in that vast Invasion Armada that still circles Iwo Jima.

    What does this mean?  Simple answer--no mines around Iwo.  He has swept all mine away and has none of his to put into place.  This means that Iwo is vulnerable to bombardment.  I had thought about this a lot earlier but Nemo raised great objections as to the feasiblity of launching an attack with BBs.  His thinking was right on and it has lead me into a new direction:

    1.  Dan's ENTIRE Fleet is around Iwo...
    2.  His staging point for bringing in reinforcements is Midway--initiate Japanese recon of island.
    3.  He has little-to-no CV airpower there.

    I am looking at combining Nemo's thinking with mine and launch an operation that stands a great chance of sinking a number of American ships that has the effect of drawing away the American Fleet.  My CV/CVL will augment their fighter protection AND attack shipping around Midway.  If Dan moves away and tries to engage me then I will send my BBs against Iwo and cripple his LBA as well as sink a number of those support ships circling the island.

    IF Dan doesn't move away then I continue hitting whatever targets I can find. 

    Either way, the Japanese SHOULD be able to score a victory...

    This is all initial thinking on my part...




    _____________________________



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

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

    (in reply to n01487477)
    Post #: 769
    RE: New Planning - 6/13/2008 3:37:32 AM   
    EUBanana


    Posts: 4552
    Joined: 9/30/2003
    From: Little England
    Status: offline
    quote:

    ORIGINAL: John 3rd

    <snip>

    Midway

    <snip>

    Either way, the Japanese SHOULD be able to score a victory...


    Tempting fate.


    Sounds reasonable. But, be wary of...

    a) You'll be practically blind around Midway, its pretty much on its own in the middle of nowhere. He however, will not, given Midway is a US garrison, probably a pretty big one given he chose to hit Iwo.

    b) Its not all that far from Iwo to Midway - it'll have to be a really quick raid to avoid reprisal chances. A day or two.

    c) What if you happen to bump into his CVs on the way home? You won't know if they are about, see a), and it is quite likely they will happen to be in the vicinity, unless you got eyes on them at Iwo.



    That said you have to hit him, right? as he's on Japans doorstep. And thats his supply route. Its pretty much it as far as choice is concerned. Raid that supply route, or sit tight.

    _____________________________


    (in reply to John 3rd)
    Post #: 770
    RE: New Planning - 6/13/2008 7:06:57 AM   
    John 3rd


    Posts: 17178
    Joined: 9/8/2005
    From: La Salle, Colorado
    Status: offline     		EUBanana I don't think you have posted onto the AAR before.  Welcome Sir!

    Isn't ANY Japanese action in late-1943 tempting fate? 

    His Fleet has been stationed around Iwo for 6 weeks.  It is my hope that he is gathering a reinforcement convoy at Midway and I can pounce on it.  It would be logical that there are a few CVs that have entered US service since his movement west began.  IF that is the case then perhaps I can get a few US CVs sunk before he can react.  I would give myself a max of 2 days there. 

    Initial TF composition will be 9 CV and 5 CVL carrying 446 Fighters (A6M3a/A6M5), 165 DB, and 156 TB. I'm using Nemo's ideas and switching all my CVL airgroups and replace them with a full Daitai of Fighters. Additionally, CVs Amagi and Unryu will ONLY carry Fighters (54 each). This should give me the power to destroy any LBA attack launched from Midway AND still have enough escorts to fight my way through CAP.

    I have the advantage of being able to retire toward Kwajalein, Truk, or Saipan.  My hopes are to DRAW him eastward so my 6 BB at Saipan can smash into Iwo Jima.  The BBs will be covered going in by all 180 army Fighters on Pagan as well as 5 Daitai of Zeros from my CVEs who will be at Pagan as well. This could provide up to 300 Fighters covering the BBs. These planes should do serious damage to any LBA Strike coming at my BBs.

    I won't initiate the Surface component until I am sure he is moving east and is far enough away that I can strike and bounce my way to Tokyo with the BBs.

    The plan is written up on a pad of paper and I will post the specifics of it tomorrow if given the chance.

    I've also made my mind up on how I am going to reinforce the area to keep Dan fron getting anything cheaply. 

    1.  The Inf Div in Japan will get marching orders to the Southern/Eastern side of Honshu and Kyushu.  I cannot rule out Dan doing something even more crazy then taking Iwo Jima so the 6-8 Inf Div in Japan will move to the coast just in case.

    2.  Okinawa will get the 4th Inf Div coming up from the south.

    3.  Formosa will get the next Chinese Inf Div that I can buy out on Political Points.

    4.  The Philippines are fine but I will pull some engineers from there to move to Formosa.

    These are my current troop thoughts.


    < Message edited by John 3rd -- 6/13/2008 7:15:33 AM >

    _____________________________



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

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

    (in reply to EUBanana)
    Post #: 771
    Operation Nakri, Mark 3 - 6/13/2008 5:32:14 PM   
    John 3rd


    Posts: 17178
    Joined: 9/8/2005
    From: La Salle, Colorado
    Status: offline     		Operation Nakri, Mark 3
    Order-of-Battle
     
    Kaigun, Kido Butai                           Total Air:  440 Z, 165 DB, 156 TB
    This formidable force will move to Wake from Saipan and then approach Midway from due south.  The hope is to catch any shipping at Midway and the surrounding area.  The TF will stay a maximum of 2 days.  I will launch a one day recon of the base from Wake to see what my opposition might be.
     
    CTF-1             Adm Nagumo               TF Total:  103 Z, 48 DB, 48 TB
    CV Akagi         24—24—24
    CV Kaga         24—24—24
    CVL Ryujo      55 (28 Organic and 27 added)
     
     
    CA Atago, Chokai, Haguro
    CL Oyodo
    DD 8
     
     
    CTF-2             Adm Nobutani              TF Total:  69 Z, 42 DB, 42 TB
    CV Hiryu         21—21—21
    CV Soryu         21—21—21
    CVL Ryuho      27
     
     
    CA Tone, Chikuma, Mogami
    CL 1
    DD 8
     
     
    CTF-3             Adm Yamaguchi           TF Total:  82 Z, 48 DB, 48 TB
    CV Shokaku    31—24—24
    CV Zuikaku     24—24—24
    CVL Shoho      27
     
     
    CA Myoko, Takao, Suzuya
    CL 1
    DD 8
     
     
    CTF-4             Adm Ozawa                 TF Total:  135 Z
    CV Unryu        54
    CV Amagi        54                                This is my incarnation of what the Japanese wanted
    CVL Zuiho       27                                to do after Midway with their Operational Thinking.
     
     
    CA Nachi, Ashigara, Kumano
    CL 1
    DD 8
     
     
    CTF-5             Adm Kusaka                TF Total:  52 Z, 27 DB, 18 TB
    CV Taiho         27—27—18
    CVL Chiyoda   27
     
     
    CA Maya, Furutaka
    CL 2
    DD 8
     
     
     
    Support Force                         Will deploy to Wake to top-off fuel before strike.
     
    AO 6
    DD 7
     
     
     
     
     
    Iwo Jima Operation
    All ships will be in Saipan until there is movement by the American TF.  IF the US Fleet moves, then the Distant Support Force will move to Papan and the Bombardment Force will attack Iwo Jima under the air cover provided by the Distant Support Force and Army Fighters at Papan.  The BBs will then move home to Tokyo Bay after their bombardment.  
     
    If Dan does nothing then this portion of the Operation does not happen.
     
    Kaigun, Main Body
    Bombardment Force-A          Adm Tanaka
    BB Yamato, Mutsu, Nagato
    CL 3
    DD 10
     
     
    Bombardment Force-B         
    BC Hiei, Haruna, Kongo
    CA Aoba
    CL 3
    DD 10
     
     
    Distant Support Force                       Air Total:  150 Z and 5 TB
    CTF-6             Adm Inouye                 TF Total:  81 Z
    CVE Shinyo     27
    CVE Taiyo       27
    CVE Unyo       27
     
     
    CL 1
    DD 6
     
     
    CTF-7             Adm Yoshino               TF Total:  59 Z, 5 TB
    CVE Kaiyo      27
    CVE Chuyo     27
    CVE Hosho     05—00—05
     
     
    CL 1
    DD 6

    < Message edited by John 3rd -- 6/13/2008 5:44:40 PM >

    _____________________________



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

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

    (in reply to John 3rd)
    Post #: 772
    RE: Operation Nakri, Mark 3 - 6/13/2008 6:04:48 PM   
    pat.casey

     

    Posts: 393
    Joined: 9/10/2007
    Status: offline     		I'm assuming Saipan has one heck of a massive CAP? Because two can play at the raiding game, neh?

    If your CVs are off raiding midway, he might decide it's a good time to hit the ships parked at Saipan and if he does that its pretty much bye-bye surface fleet isn't it?

    As you mention, he's got his fleet concentrated at Iwo, and you're in the process of splitting yours which smells like the historical midway.

    Of course you know your opponent better than we do, and if you think he's highly likely to take your bait and move east, then the risk is probably worthwhile. I'm just worried about dispersing forces in the face of enemy concentration on principal.

    (in reply to John 3rd)
    Post #: 773
    RE: Operation Nakri, Mark 3 - 6/13/2008 6:43:07 PM   
    John 3rd


    Posts: 17178
    Joined: 9/8/2005
    From: La Salle, Colorado
    Status: offline     		VERY good thoughts Sir. 

    Thinking on it, I agree with your view.  When the Kido Butai leaves, I will pull the BB/CVE TF back to Guam.  He isn't doing any recon except at Saipan so it will appear that the enture Fleet has left.  On the OTHER hand, I do have over 400 fighters at Pagan and Saipan if Dan does move this way.  I don't think he will pull away from Iwo.  He KNOWS I am planning to come after him and has pulled back into the seas surrounding the island. 

    I am leaving the BB behind because this is a raid and I need speed.  My slowest TF with Akagi/Kaga can go 5/5 while all the rest can move 6/6.  Want that speed so 'I can get out of trouble faster then I got into it.' 

    Good thinking and advice Sir!

    _____________________________



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

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

    (in reply to pat.casey)
    Post #: 774
    RE: Operation Nakri, Mark 3 - 6/13/2008 8:54:57 PM   
    FeurerKrieg


    Posts: 3397
    Joined: 6/15/2005
    From: Denver, CO
    Status: offline
    quote:

    I'm just worried about dispersing forces in the face of enemy concentration on principal.


    Well, it is late 43. If anything, I'd say Japanese strategy at that point should be about dispersion. Most AARs that I've read do not go well for Japan in any large battles that occur. Major Jap wins late war -can- happen, sure, but I'd say on balance they don't. You don't want to keep most of your eggs in one basket after a certain point (as Japan).

    _____________________________


    Upper portion used with permission of www.subart.net, copyright John Meeks

    (in reply to pat.casey)
    Post #: 775
    RE: Operation Nakri, Mark 3 - 6/13/2008 9:45:11 PM   
    John 3rd


    Posts: 17178
    Joined: 9/8/2005
    From: La Salle, Colorado
    Status: offline     		I concur with that opinion.  In my campaign against Paul Layne (Feb 1945) I scored two big victories sinkling several CVs by picking my fights, being sneaky, and not walking into obvious pitched battle.  If I CAN take dan by surprise there is real hope for some good news.

    It is a risk but one I can live with.



    _____________________________



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

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

    (in reply to FeurerKrieg)
    Post #: 776
    RE: Operation Nakri, Mark 3 - 6/13/2008 10:00:50 PM   
    anarchyintheuk

     

    Posts: 3921
    Joined: 5/5/2004
    From: Dallas
    Status: offline     		Isn't the Ryujo overloaded?

    (in reply to John 3rd)
    Post #: 777
    RE: Operation Nakri, Mark 3 - 6/13/2008 10:04:12 PM   
    John 3rd


    Posts: 17178
    Joined: 9/8/2005
    From: La Salle, Colorado
    Status: offline     		The CV is rated at 49 planes and I am placing 55 on her.  This SHOULD be OK.  By my understanding, I can go to 115% percent and they still fly right?  That would yield a max capacity of 55.  Am I right about that?


    _____________________________



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

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

    (in reply to anarchyintheuk)
    Post #: 778
    RE: Operation Nakri, Mark 3 - 6/13/2008 10:05:39 PM   
    Mike Solli


    Posts: 15792
    Joined: 10/18/2000
    From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
    Status: offline
    quote:

    ORIGINAL: John 3rd

    The CV is rated at 49 planes and I am placing 55 on her.  This SHOULD be OK.  By my understanding, I can go to 115% percent and they still fly right?  That would yield a max capacity of 55.  Am I right about that?



    Yup. If she's rated at 49, you can put 56 on her.

    _____________________________


    Created by the amazing Dixie

    (in reply to John 3rd)
    Post #: 779
    RE: Operation Nakri, Mark 3 - 6/13/2008 10:06:43 PM   
    John 3rd


    Posts: 17178
    Joined: 9/8/2005
    From: La Salle, Colorado
    Status: offline     		Good!  Thought I was right but it is always good to check. 

    _____________________________



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

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

    (in reply to Mike Solli)
    Post #: 780
    Page:   <<   < prev  24 25 [26] 27 28   next >   >>
    All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> After Action Reports >> RE: Combat Report: Sept 27-28, 1943 Page: <<   < prev  24 25 [26] 27 28   next >   >>
    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

    1.016