Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

 
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] >> Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific >> After Action Reports >> Page: <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
- 4/13/2002 11:20:22 AM   
Sinjen


Posts: 113
Joined: 3/22/2002
From: Florida
Status: offline 		heh I'm reading, can't wait to hear the next report.

Size 9!

That can support your level bombers right???

Wow get that fully operational and supplied and your way to air superiority is greatly enhanced.

(in reply to IChristie)
Post #: 181
Short and sweet AAR - 4/13/2002 11:53:00 AM   
IChristie

 

Posts: 673
Joined: 3/26/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada
Status: offline 		15 Sept - Koumac is up and running. Minimal base forces have transferred in. Enough to let me operate a sentai of Oscars for at least a while. The flying boat express is keeping the troops from starving (just) while the APD's return with supplies. The first resupply will reach Koumac tomorrow.

In the midst of all that the US sends another bombardment force North. It moves to a position to threaten either Nevea or Lunga and when I move to block it from Lunga (with the CL's from Shortland) it heads for Lunga. It wreaks havoc on the patrol boats and minelayer TF's at anchor in the sound. The heroism of the DD Yagumo drives the force away from the tankers unloading at the port and none of them is touched. The Nagumo manages to torpedo and sink a USS DD and hits a CA and CL with gunfire. SHe herself is badly damaged but still afloat in the morning. In the morning the birds of paradise go into action and damage teh CL achilles of the South coast of San Cristobal. They catch her again the next day in port and put another couple bombs into her.

The invasion fleet is assembled and refueled in the conentration area. It's show time!

_____________________________

Iain Christie
-----------------
"If patience is a virtue then persistence is it's part.
It's better to light a candle than stand and curse the dark"

- James Keelaghan

(in reply to IChristie)
Post #: 182
- 4/13/2002 11:57:34 AM   
Sinjen


Posts: 113
Joined: 3/22/2002
From: Florida
Status: offline 		Sounds like the Captain of Yagumo rates a personal decoration by the Emperor.

We await to hear more glorious reports. I sense a building momentum. You definetely have the initiative. Barring some terrible disastor I think you may pull this off.

(in reply to IChristie)
Post #: 183
Tally Ho! Luganville - 4/13/2002 12:24:59 PM   
IChristie

 

Posts: 673
Joined: 3/26/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada
Status: offline 		16 Sept - The invasion fleet is spotted about a days sailing out from Luganville. The LBA swings into gear with raids of about 50 planes. The combination of close air support CAP from and LRP from Nevea does significant damage and no ships are hit. As expected the strikes concentrate on the two carriers and ignore the transports.

17 Sept - Arrival at Luganville. The air action gets really exciting as the AI throws everything including the kitchen sink and several bathroom fixtures at the invasion force. Once more the carriers get all the attention and Unyo is eventually hit by two 1000lb bombs dropped by SBD's That puts her out of commission and her a/c divert to Koumac of all places. I'll need to step up the LRP now.

LBA has been totally ineffective because of weather, grounded every day!

In a naval action off Luganville the heavies (and I mean heavy) go to work on a tanker convoy at 12000 yards. First they sink the escorts and then all three oilers go to the bottom. Then they turn their sights on bombarding Luganville. They damage several a/c and do 143 damage points to the runway. That ought to put a damper on the fly boys tomorrow.

Now, time for the army to do some work for a change

_____________________________

Iain Christie
-----------------
"If patience is a virtue then persistence is it's part.
It's better to light a candle than stand and curse the dark"

- James Keelaghan

(in reply to IChristie)
Post #: 184
size 9? - 4/13/2002 12:34:25 PM   
mogami


Posts: 12789
Joined: 8/23/2000
From: You can't get here from there
Status: offline 		Hey can you just dump everything to your new size 9 airbase?
Did you say it counts as a Victory base so all you need do is hold on to it till Jan (I need to look at a map again I do not know where any of these bases are)
Events are moving faster then I can keep up with, you have already (Sept) started your invasion of Luganville?)

_____________________________






I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!

(in reply to IChristie)
Post #: 185
- 4/13/2002 12:37:55 PM   
ratster

 

Posts: 166
Joined: 1/21/2002
From: PA
Status: offline 		Where is Koumac in relation to Luganville? Whats the Allied base at Efate Port Vila like? The meat grinder is warming up!

_____________________________

" If it be now, tis not to come: if it be not to come, it will be now; if it be not now, yet it will come: the readiness is all"

Clan [GOAT]

(in reply to IChristie)
Post #: 186
OK now - 4/13/2002 12:41:42 PM   
mogami


Posts: 12789
Joined: 8/23/2000
From: You can't get here from there
Status: offline 		Hi, It seems one must read every thread in the forum to get an idea of what is happening. Kourmac is his diversion to draw the AI into send LCU away from Luganville. It is part of New Cal and the AI can march his LCU there from the southern base. SO he really does not want to put anything there. (its just bait)

_____________________________






I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!

(in reply to IChristie)
Post #: 187
- 4/13/2002 12:55:49 PM   
ratster

 

Posts: 166
Joined: 1/21/2002
From: PA
Status: offline 		Ah, I see. I'm curious to see what happens when the weather clears.

_____________________________

" If it be now, tis not to come: if it be not to come, it will be now; if it be not now, yet it will come: the readiness is all"

Clan [GOAT]

(in reply to IChristie)
Post #: 188
PBEM games - 4/13/2002 1:02:58 PM   
mogami


Posts: 12789
Joined: 8/23/2000
From: You can't get here from there
Status: offline 		Once we all have this fantastic game I think I will be interested in being the Allies in the long May start Campaign and the Japanese in the Aug Start.

_____________________________






I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!

(in reply to IChristie)
Post #: 189
- 4/13/2002 1:03:31 PM   
IChristie

 

Posts: 673
Joined: 3/26/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada
Status: offline 		Things moved quickly tonight as I got a free domestic evening! Sorry about the short notice :)

Well the AI didn't seem to be taking the bait so I went ahead and attacked Luganville anyway. I figure this gives me two irons in the fire. While it will be tough for me to keep two supplied. It will be tougher for him to attack in two locations. Especially since I have a significant part of his LCU bottled up in Luganville right now.

Either one of Luganville or Koumac will give auto victory.

Koumac was easier to take but will be tough to resupply if Luganville is in enemy hands

19 Sept - The army is ashore. We start with a bombardment attack and find that we have 33 000 troops ashore (in two days!) but the enemy has 47 000 and fortification level 5. This is going to be every bit as interesting as we thought. The 2nd division is on it's way from Shortland to add more offensive weight. After that I can pull more reinforcements from Rabaul and Truk. I'll be interested to see how big the invasion force is once it's all ashore. It should be in excess of 50 000.

Despite orders to remain on station the Ryujo makes a break for it. All this does is get it out from under the LBA provided CAP and it is holed a couple of times by Hudsons. It is badly damaged enough that it a/c debunk to Koumac. The av support situation at Koumac needs to be addressed I only have a bare minimum there now (like 5). I was moving support from Gili Gili, but now it's closed down again and the flying boats don't seem to be able to get out - arrrghh!

The heavies stay on station and continue to pound Luganville airport. Putting that out of action would be a good thing. I may also consider pulling some LCU off to go capture Port Vila (if it is lightly held) to put its airfield out of commission as it is also becoming a major pain.

So far, so good. No transports have been lost to enemy air and I am managing to keep about 30 fighters in CAP over the fleet.

Well, that's all for tonight. I have to go wring out this shirt and change my underwear

_____________________________

Iain Christie
-----------------
"If patience is a virtue then persistence is it's part.
It's better to light a candle than stand and curse the dark"

- James Keelaghan

(in reply to IChristie)
Post #: 190
- 4/13/2002 1:06:48 PM   
ratster

 

Posts: 166
Joined: 1/21/2002
From: PA
Status: offline 		Yes, temporary leave has been authorized. :D

_____________________________

" If it be now, tis not to come: if it be not to come, it will be now; if it be not now, yet it will come: the readiness is all"

Clan [GOAT]

(in reply to IChristie)
Post #: 191
- 4/13/2002 1:10:46 PM   
juliet7bravo

 

Posts: 894
Joined: 5/30/2001
Status: offline 		What kind of LCU force is in Noumea? Any chance of taking it as well? The US infantry reinforcements are around there somewhere...any idea where? If they're at Luganville you're in a world of hurt.

That's about another 25+% of their oilers. If you take Luganville, that's going to make it extremely tough on the Allies until they can take back the airbase at Koumac.

Ya know, if you pull this off it's going to be a shame if the game just flat ends Jan '43...talk about interesting times for the US trying to make amphibious assaults to recapture major built up bases in the teeth of your LBA. Next stop for you would be Noumea and Port Villa before they can build up troops and supplies?

(in reply to IChristie)
Post #: 192
- 4/13/2002 1:13:45 PM   
bradfordkay

 

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline 		Well, you may have landed too early at Luganville, but this gives the allied player a quandary. Does he split his forces to try to push you out of both locations or just concentrate on one? Is the AI trained to react to an impending automatic victory? It's possible that he might try to save Luganville and forget to reclaim Koumac....

Have your heavies come into contact with the North Carolina? I'm interested in seeing how the Showboat performs against the Yamato. The North Carolina was the first battlewagon I ever saw or set foot upon, and so she holds a sentimental value for me as well as for Boomboom, but in the interest of winning this game I'm all for sinking her....

(in reply to IChristie)
Post #: 193
- 4/13/2002 1:16:24 PM   
juliet7bravo

 

Posts: 894
Joined: 5/30/2001
Status: offline 		Ouch, 47K of troops and level 5 fort...guess that answers where the US troops are at. My guess Port Villa and Noumea are lightly held in that case. Taking out Port Villa would be a priority...with your carriers and bombardment TF's you can make sure they don't get reinforcements and supplies if you own the air over the beachhead.

(in reply to IChristie)
Post #: 194
Reservations - 4/13/2002 1:20:56 PM   
mogami


Posts: 12789
Joined: 8/23/2000
From: You can't get here from there
Status: offline 		Reservations concerning operational plans should be voiced before the operations commence. Hence I will refrain from any comments except for ones that might contribute to success.
After the US surrenders I will bring up some thoughts for future class's of the IJN acadamy.
Item

1. Reinforcments to Luganville. It is Sept withhold all troops not already ashore in Truk to reduce supply requirments on Lunganville. Let the allies start the land combat there and use their supply. We can not supply that many troops at the present so we must,
a. build up supply at closest bases I would think at least 150k tons at Shortland or Lunga in excess of what these bases require.
If I had the supply rules I could whip out my trusty slide rule and give a better estimate (I am sure we will find out shortly based on what Lugancville consumes)
b. maintain supply to troops already ashore. In addition to stockpiles for the future.
c. cut supply to allied units at Luganville. This is the paramount requirment to victory. We can never outnumber the US enough to win a headbutting contest. The Americans must be forced to run out of ammo and let nature be our ally in their destruction. The more troops they have out of supply the faster the effects will show. We must prevent the attrition of our troops till the time comes for their heroic effort.

Approx 90 days to victory check. Prearations for all out land offensive and reinforcment would need to be complete not later then Nov 15th to allow 6 weeks to capture base. (US troops can still be at Luganville as long as we control the base)

_____________________________






I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!

(in reply to IChristie)
Post #: 195
- 4/13/2002 1:40:03 PM   
HOTB

 

Posts: 5
Joined: 4/7/2002
From: Nowhereville, Illinois
Status: offline 		Just a newbie de-lurking to say how much I've enjoyed reading this. It seems like every few hours I come back to see if there's been an update.

My question is: Can you set up something like routine convoys to shuttle supplies from Truk, or does each supply run have to be given orders to pick up supplies and then ordered on their way? I'm asking because with all the excitement with the invasion down south, I'm thinking it would be easy to forget about routine orders on the other side of the map.

(in reply to IChristie)
Post #: 196
Victory Conditions - 4/13/2002 6:26:35 PM   
mogami


Posts: 12789
Joined: 8/23/2000
From: You can't get here from there
Status: offline 		Greetings, While our fearless Theater commander catches up on his sleep I am going to wax philosophical for a while before posing a question to my fellow UV anticipating forum mates.

Japanese War Aims and Strategy and the Allied Response.

OK I am interested purely in the war-game aspects not the political or historic. I speaking solely about a person playing the Japanese side in a war-game who wants to meet the games victory conditions (not win the real WW2)
I think it is a good thing to have it possible for the Japanese to achieve some sort of automatic victory (Allied auto victory should also be possible)
The long May campaign is a microcosm of the larger war. Japan has a material advantage, the enemy is on the defensive. But these conditions are not indefinite. If the Japanese player does nothing time will pass the initiative to the allies and he will find himself faced by overwhelming numbers.
In order to just maintain the status quo he has to win repeated victories at little cost. Exchanges favor the Allies and a major defeat can quickly result in others rapidly following.
So the question is always what means are there to insure the Allied player will commit his out numbered forces to battle rather then trade space for time while he receives the reinforcements that will guarantee victory. Auto victory conditions such as those being included in the game are the answer of course I was amused by the fans on the side lines who were in favor of meeting the auto victory conditions even if doing so required loss that would mean certain defeat in a larger scale game (Witp)I guess I have a hard time separating the South Pacific actions from their impact else where. It certainly would be a disaster for the US player if the Japanese player is able to capture Espirtu Santo and destroy a Marine division in the process (the idea behind this victory condition is the threat of future Japanese operations that accompany such a capture) but if in so doing (remember up to this point the Allied player will have not had a Midway scale victory) He gives up his most dangerous weapon (his CV's) Then the allied recapture is only a matter of time and a new Marine Division will be raised to replace the lost one. And the threat that the Victory conditions imply are empty. You can only throw everything (including kitchen sinks) one time.
I am not a programer so I do not know the difficulty of implementing this idea. I might in fact be the only person who even worries about such things. The current victory condition is south of hex row 52 on Jan 1 43. I would suggest this line move up or down according to score or have a proviso attached
If Japan controls a level 5 base below hexrow 52 on 1 Jan 43 and has double the supply and (insert here) a points ratio of (to be determined) they are awarded an automatic victory.
Have you ever seen a SPWaW battle where near the last turn one or both players start throwing units away trying to grab a VH? (move trucks or shot up sqds onto them knowing they will die but they will change possession of the hex first)
My basic point is to be awarded an auto victory based on how meeting those conditions would have lead to a victory in the larger war implies the side being awarded the victory will have the means to follow it up. The conditions could be as simple as something like (if Japan lost 4 CV the game is over) or some point value in Warships of all flavors (this could be the very Allied Auto victory I was referring to earlier)
I certainly don't want to make the game unwinnable for the Japanese player. But I also don't want to play PBEM games where the most successful players are the ones who simply start moving everything below the 52 hexrow no matter what the cost.
What do you all think?

_____________________________






I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!

(in reply to IChristie)
Post #: 197
- 4/13/2002 7:17:11 PM   
juliet7bravo

 

Posts: 894
Joined: 5/30/2001
Status: offline 		I think this auto-victory routine is gamey. Look at the discussion over using 50% damaged carriers (in '42!!!) as stalking horses to absorb air attacks away from the transports!

I've never played the game (obviously) but it means the Allied player (or computer) has to have every level 5 base manned and fortified to resist a last ditch/last minute "below hexrow 52 Banzai charge". The IJN player guesses right, and hits a lightly defended base with 50K troops it's all over with. Means Guadacanal and the Solomons really ain't important at all except as "way stations", the IJN player can strip/expend everything to use in a mad dash south.

It means the Allied player can't just "do all right" through '42, he has to attain and maintain an overwhelming fleet supremacy. If the IJN player keeps a fleet in being, manages his supply adequately, and keeps sufficient transport available he can always "roll the dice" as 1943 starts looming in front of him.

That said...there should be a way for the IJN to actually win. Plodding along till the end of '43 in this one confined theatre, it seems to me the end is fairly predictable unless the Allied player is a putz or has some really lousy luck.

Thoughts...Maybe he'd have to take a base by Jan '43, and HOLD it for like 3 months total, and have to hold certain key bases above hexrow 52 as well. I think the IJN player (to achieve auto-victory) should have to simutaneously hold Port Moresby as well...the IJN goal to begin with, plus it actually would put him in a solid tactical/strategic position where expansion south would make sense. Dunno...without playing the game, don't know how difficult any of these would be.

Other thoughts...how much fuel has he been using/stockpiling (and projected to use)? I suspect it's waaaaaay more than they had available historically. I think we're also seeing the problem with Truk having unlimited fuel available. What's the capacity limit on Rabaul for storage?

(in reply to IChristie)
Post #: 198
- 4/13/2002 7:45:19 PM   
Caltone


Posts: 651
Joined: 9/5/2001
From: Raleigh, NC USA
Status: offline 		As another who keeps a constant vigil on these forums and this thread in particular, let me add something to the auto victory question.

Auto victory is a key piece to the game play. I think this could still be achieved however while still factoring in some of the politcal and off map situations.

Mogami is on the right track. The Japanese player should be required to have a viable threat after taking a major forward base (his naval air arm). Without this we are basically back to May 42 with the battle lines just having been redrawn. Some sort of point advantage needs to be part of the auto victory calculation.

Perhaps in this situation, the Pacific theater could require the US to devote enough resources from the European theater to keep the Germans viable. A strong Japanese CV force could theorectically do this, especially if they continually wrecked havoc on resupply TF's.

Just some thoughts and I voted for Luganville in the poll :D Good Luck!

(in reply to IChristie)
Post #: 199
- 4/13/2002 7:51:29 PM   
Kadste

 

Posts: 47
Joined: 12/21/2001
From: Ottawa, Canda
Status: offline 		Maybe the auto victory conditions should be picked before the game starts.

As the Japanese, you could pick let's say two (or three, or even more) victory hexes above hexrow 52 AND one victory hex below hexrow 52. This would be your strategic plan and you would have to follow it.

You could do something similar for the US.

Also, I agree that you should have to hold the base. The closer the base is from your original front, the longer you have to hold it.

Just some thoughts,

(in reply to IChristie)
Post #: 200
- 4/13/2002 8:12:12 PM   
IanLister

 

Posts: 158
Joined: 4/7/2002
From: Pennine Hills, Northern England, UK
Status: offline 		Mogami, I agree with your views about victory conditions - there is no way the Japanese would have thrown away carriers, damaged or otherwise, in 1942; the situation at Leyte Gulf was obviously very different.
The problem, surely, is the fact that UV only represents part of the early part of the war. Could any possible circumstance have brought the allies to the negotiating table in 1942 or early 43? Surely not. So then, to establish what represents victory for the Japanese in this game, should we be measuring the performance of the player reative to history? If so, taking and holding Guadalcanal comfortably by the end of 1942 without significant naval losses relative to those of the Americans would represent victory.
Another way of looking at it: The allies were desperate to hold Port Moresby and prevent a Japanese airbase on Guadalcanal which could lead to interdiction of the US-Australia supply route, as I understand. Perhaps the capture and secure defence of these 2 bases would represent a significant victory for the Japanese. It would certainly have led to a longer and more difficult war, which in the long run was the best the Japanese could hope for, with the possibility that the allies would lose the stomach for the fight.
To sum up, I believe capturing, holding and fortifying Lunga, or somewhere in that area, and Port Moresby represents a decisive Japanese victory, by comparison with what happened historically; these should be the conditions for automatic victory, coupled with a limitation on Japanese naval losses, which were obviously much harder to make good than those of the US.

_____________________________

Battleaxe Rules!

(in reply to IChristie)
Post #: 201
- 4/13/2002 8:18:15 PM   
madflava13


Posts: 1530
Joined: 2/7/2001
From: Alexandria, VA
Status: offline 		I think you guys are missing the point of the auto-victory. It's not as easy as you think it is. You need double the supply level, and you must maintain it for some time period (not sure on the length tho). This is not easy - the japanese do not have the resources to do this, garrison PNG, etc. I bet once everyone has their hands on the game very few people will actually pursue this option as it is most likely not feasible.

Iain is going for it partly at the request of the Matrix staff to see how the AI reacts, partly because we're all egging him on, and partly for the hell of it. Thats why he's committing his carriers as "targets" for allied air - no one would do that for real, he's just going for broke to see what happens...

Finally, think of this: a squadron or two of Bettys based in Espiruto Santo has the range to interdict the supply lines from the US to Australia - there's your political/military reason to protect these bases...

_____________________________

"The Paraguayan Air Force's request for spraying subsidies was not as Paraguayan as it were..."

(in reply to IChristie)
Post #: 202
- 4/13/2002 8:57:50 PM   
Caltone


Posts: 651
Joined: 9/5/2001
From: Raleigh, NC USA
Status: offline 		I have no doubts on the difficulty faced by turning Espiruto Santo into another Rabaul or Truk. It just seemed to me that achieving this through a pyrrhic victory should not be an automatic win.

Its all good though. One of the great things about historical wargames is that we have a context to measure our gains. As IanLister mentions, simply holding Guadalcanal and building it up without significant losses represents a Japanese victory.

And whether playing against the AI or PBEM, we can set our own house rules.

(in reply to IChristie)
Post #: 203
- 4/13/2002 10:17:54 PM   
IChristie

 

Posts: 673
Joined: 3/26/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada
Status: offline 		I think one thing to remember is that we are discussing [B]automatic victory[/B] vs. [B]victory at end of the game[/B]. There is no doubt that holding the Solomons and Gili Gili - Buna - Lae would virtually ensure Japanese victory by the end of the game. But in this campaign, that's a long time to wait. I think the auto victory conditions are a way of deciding when one side has progressed to the point that further play is simply not worthwhile.

Obviously, if the Japanese still hold Espiritu Santo or Australia on Jan 1, 1943 the assumption is that the Japanese position is so strong that the game is pretty much over and the rest of 1943 is going to consist of watching the US batter itself ineffectually against the strong Japanese position. Better at that point to officially declare victory and start another game than play out the string just for form.

Frankly, I knew the auto-victory conditions existed but I did not even consider going for them until encouraged to do so by Joel (and the general staff). I think in any game there are always going to be ways to "play to win the game" as opposed to "playing to win the battle" meaning achieving victory within narrow game terms rather than within the larger "historical context". The challenge for the design team has obviously been to ensure that when one side wins the game it implies a victory in historical terms as well.

Obviously some thought has already gone into the auto victory conditions to ensure that any presences south of row 52 is credible (need for the base to >5, need for double supply etc). I would have to defer to those with more experience with the game to decide if it's balanced enough. Though obviously from Joel's comments it is not a strategy that it often pursued....

Though maybe it will be more common now :rolleyes:

_____________________________

Iain Christie
-----------------
"If patience is a virtue then persistence is it's part.
It's better to light a candle than stand and curse the dark"

- James Keelaghan

(in reply to IChristie)
Post #: 204
- 4/13/2002 10:45:01 PM   
IChristie

 

Posts: 673
Joined: 3/26/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada
Status: offline 		The bleary eyed theatre commander, cheeks hollow from lack of sleep and the weight of carrying the expectations of an empire (or at least a dedictated gaming community), hands wrapped around his coffee mug in a death grip to prevent them from shaking, shambles into the briefing room in the Imperial General Headquarters. There, leaning on the large chart table for support he tries to martial his confused and racing thoughts:

Admiral Mogami, you are once again a step ahead of the staff on the ground. Of course the long term view is the one to take. With troops safely ashore the priority now is to look to the logistical train and make sure we can sustain the incursion. There is plenty of time to throw the Americans out of Espiritu Santo once they are starving and desperate. For now it would seem that our priorities would be:

1. Take the US LBA out of the picture. This will require two actions: first disable the airfield at Luganville. Intel suggests we are close to doing this and that a couple more nights of bombardment by the Yamato will finish the job. Of course, this will not disable it permanently so some of kind periodic revisitation will be necessary. This will require some consideration of fuel consumption.

Second, take Port Vila. According to Intel The base is lightly held. I would suggest despatching a force of about 1000 troops, either from those still embarked at Luganville or using elements of the 2nd division now approaching from the North.

Once the enemy LBA is removed resupply even as far south as Koumac will become primarily a logistical and not a tactical problem. There are large stocks of supply at both Lunga (66K) and Shortland (75K) to support near term defensive or bombardment operations out of the beach head. Once the transports are back on convoy runs the logistics should be manageable

2. Establish a forward base for our own LBA. This could be either Koumac or Port Vila. The primary problems will be supply and av support which is always hard to come by. The Birds of Paradise base a lunga is too far away to act as a a base for close air support of the invasion.

3. Interdict all allied shipping heading for Luganville and potentially station at least light surface units there. Even if the airfield cannot be kept continuously out of commission a force as large as 47K cannot be resupplied by air, even when teh US transport fleet reaches 8 or 10 groups of C-47's by the end of the year.

4. Set a date for the final offensive and begin stockpiling supplies.

Gentlemen, I need to get back to the front and get a look at our latest dispositions, the staff has been so focused on the invasion that we have not been minding our other stores. Please let me know the outcome of your learned and wise counsels through the normal channels

I bid you good day...

_____________________________

Iain Christie
-----------------
"If patience is a virtue then persistence is it's part.
It's better to light a candle than stand and curse the dark"

- James Keelaghan

(in reply to IChristie)
Post #: 205
- 4/13/2002 11:08:54 PM   
madflava13


Posts: 1530
Joined: 2/7/2001
From: Alexandria, VA
Status: offline 		More general info on US subs (taken from Adm. Lockwood's "Sink 'Em All"):

US Subs (modern ones) had cruising ranges of about 10,000-12,000 (depending on whether they topped off again before heading out) - this translates into 50-60 days at sea roughly.

S boats had 30 day at sea times. Not comfortable though - temps could rise to 135 degrees in some of their engineering spaces.

The S-boat force in UV (sub squadron 5) historically was under the command of Captain R.W. Christie - he was based in Brisbane with the tender Griffin and 11 S boats. Lockwood says, "The inevitable corrosion and pitting of the strength of the hulls had so weakened them that their successful resistance to a close depth charging was in grave doubt." -- Iain's experiences seem to show that UV mirrors this...

Ok, I gotta run - if anyone has more questions re: subs, let me know and I'll see what I can find out...

_____________________________

"The Paraguayan Air Force's request for spraying subsidies was not as Paraguayan as it were..."

(in reply to IChristie)
Post #: 206
- 4/13/2002 11:10:49 PM   
ratster

 

Posts: 166
Joined: 1/21/2002
From: PA
Status: offline 		I tend to be a [I]"gamer"[/I] as opposed to a [I]"wargamer"[/I], although I prefer wargames for their detail, complexity and challenge. So I look for [I]exploits[/I], or [I]"TKOs"[/I], in every game system I play.

I don't have a problem with the auto-victory conditions as they are. Perhaps having to hold the base with double supply for a week or 2, amd or with a defined minimum number of troops, would make it have a more [I]"realistic"[/I] feel, avoiding the last ditch [I]land-100-guys-for-a-day-on-Jan 1, 1943-with-double-supply-at-an-empty-base-and-win-the-game-scenario[/I]. Not having played the game its impossible to know.

As for Ian's current situation, as I originally stated, [I]"an island too far"[/I]. The AI has yet to respond with all of its assets. I suspect things are going to get very dicey for the Emporer's boys at Luganville, very soon. Mogami has the right take on the situation, its all about supply now. This is where not having the assets that were [I]"burned"[/I] doing other things not related to this operation early in the game is going to come back and haunt Ian. Of course since he hadn't planned this operation from the start, his culpability at the court martial will be defensible. :D

_____________________________

" If it be now, tis not to come: if it be not to come, it will be now; if it be not now, yet it will come: the readiness is all"

Clan [GOAT]

(in reply to IChristie)
Post #: 207
- 4/14/2002 12:38:52 AM   
HOTB

 

Posts: 5
Joined: 4/7/2002
From: Nowhereville, Illinois
Status: offline 		Well, it looks like I'll be checking every 4 hours or so to see if there's been another briefing. I'm certainly enjoying reading about it.

In regards to the automatic victory condition, I was wondering if the conditions should be raised for a non-Midway May starting time? In a historical game without the CV's lost at Midway I imagine it would be harder to take and hold a southern base. I guess what I need to ask is: How much help have the Akagi, Kaga, and Hiryu been? Would this invasion have been possible without them (or at least their dis-embarked airgroups)?

(in reply to IChristie)
Post #: 208
my 2 cents - 4/14/2002 12:40:26 AM   
brisd


Posts: 614
Joined: 5/20/2000
From: San Diego, CA
Status: offline 		Hi all. longtime lurker, rare poster. First off, FANTASTIC THREAD!
I am looking forward to this game and its bigger bro, WITP with anticipation. A few observations:

1. Iain's AAR is the most fun I've had reading in sometime. Remember fellow gamers, this is a BETA AAR and he is learning the game as he plays. Having said that, he gives me hope that an aggressive Japanese player can do much better than history.

2. I trust this wargame will be a superb effort, most due to Gary Grigsby. I have been playing his games since early 80's (North Atlantic '86, War in Russia '84&'93, Second Front, Kampfgruppe, Steel Panthers 1/2/3 and his previous masterpiece, WITP.) My fav was WITP, I prefer strategic level games, with operational ones and tactical level efforts in that order. After the game has been released and initial posts indicate it is NOT a bugfest, then Matrix has my $$ immediately. The team they have assembled seems first-rate.

3. This debate on the Auto-Victory conditions seems premature to me. We don't even have a copy of the game (beta even) to refer to. I like Iain's last post concerning AV as a way to wrap up a one-sided game and not drag it out if one side is badly losing. One point I will say - any Allied player that does not hold those AV bases and have sufficient forces to recapture one that was lightly defended is losing badly after Jan43 - the date is there to make sure there is sufficient Allied resources to prevent its occurance except during exceptional IJN or poor Allied play.

4. My input on the selection of Luganville as target of knockout blow seems right on. In GG's WITP, my fav strategy was to capture Guadalcanal and Rennel, build them up and then move south, capturing a large Allied held base and then putting my LBA there. Once the IJN has sufficient Betty's and Zero's in place, the isolation of the other surrounding bases is inevitable if the IJN still have naval superiority. Such strategy only works prior to 1943 of course, soon after the deluge from America overwelms the Japanese.

5. I am looking forward to the new WITP: Struggle Against Japan and hope that an aggressive Japanese player can conquer OZ as in the original WITP. Australia was practically defenseless in Dec 41 - what if the IJN intercepted those troop convoy's ferrying Aussies from the Middle East? I will take that up on the other forum at some date.

Good luck Iain!

Brian

(in reply to IChristie)
Post #: 209
a few things - 4/14/2002 2:25:00 AM   
malvoisin

 

Posts: 11
Joined: 4/14/2002
Status: offline 		first, i'm not much of a wargamer, but i've really enjoyed this thread (although until now, i've had very little to contribute) and i'm really excited by the prospect of UV, despite being a mac person. (hey! the wider monitor size would let me see more of the map.) but anyway, this might *gasp* force me into rehabilitating my pc.

second, yes, the automatic victory conditions will lead to gamey results, but since you're dealing with a game, well, you're going to get them anyway.

the rule is probably intended to do two things:

1. get rid of a really boring endgame. if the automatic victory is balanced such that it is only acheivable when a player would decisively dominate the rest of the game, it will prevent the last x% of the game to feel like a simple mopping up operation. chasing that last aztec settler around the map is No Fun At All, and nobody likes to win by resignation or die slowly.

2. the game designers want to encourage some kind of behavior in the players. they may be trying to encourage (possibly ahistorical) risky behavior that might not necessarily be realistic, but as ian's aar shows, it is whole lot more exciting than watching him sit around waiting to be eaten alive by the allies and mosquitos. on the other hand they may be trying to encourage historical behavior without adding complexity to the game engine itself OR that might be just impossible to model -- it is not a coincidence that the window on the japanese automatic victory really starts to close just as the allied materiel advantage starts to be felt. given that concerns outside of the theater are irrelevant to the game itself, maybe the rule is simply intended to discourage the allied player from sitting around and hoarding resources until the odds get better later in the campaign. a game which could be won by the allied player doing -nothing- wouldn't be much fun, would it? and if the actual automatic victories are -rare-, you still have a damned good reason to be fighting in new guinea and the solomons, which means that the rule has encouraged historical behavior without having to model history exactly (which is, of course, impossible. and hey! this is an abstraction, anyway, right?)

i'd guess the allies' initial strategy, first and foremost, should be to render the japanese incapable of acheiving their automatic victory conditions (which means that he will have to fight for the solomons), and then put their superior numbers to work. its a little general, i know, but i haven't played the game, and i don't know all of the rules. and where the hell is australia, anyway?

third, as a remarkably underutilized game programmer in nyc who's up for adoption (clean, charming, industrious, well-disciplined, etc.), i can tell you, mogami, that the rules are more a matter of design than programming and that it shouldn't be too hard to program new victory conditions (in theory, at least.) the trick would be getting them tested, balanced, and getting AI to exploit them all in time to meet whatever deliverables deadline that they have with matrix (which i'd bet is overdue, no offense meant to the developers, so they'd like to get paid.) and trying to do all of that in the midst of bug fixes, balancing, and play-testing is probably one of the best possible ways to make a project fail. to recontextualize your assertion that its poor form to voice reservations concerning operational plans after commencement: asking for new features in any nontrivial application when it is in late beta is a really good way to get programmers really uptight.

see? it got me all worked up and i'm just waiting for the game to be released.

(in reply to IChristie)
Post #: 210
Page:   <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific >> After Action Reports >> Page: <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   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

3.188