Q-Ball
Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002 From: Chicago, Illinois Status: offline
|
Mynok is correct in that LBA won't reach that far, exposing you to Vildebeest and Swordfish attack. Without aircover, those planes are dangerous, and though you will get ashiore, you can expect losses. They have enough oomph to take down a Kongo, and you don't need that kind of loss. You also can't do it unless Force Z is neutralized. If you are landing at Mersing turn 1, you are probably allowing your opponent to move Force Z out of harms' way. I think a landing after the first week or two is highly adviseable. You can aircover from Khota Bharu by then, or using Baby KB. You can set up a torpedo-capable base at Singkawang to keep Force Z away. You can use reinforcment units that are not in the first wave. The only problem with this is that a competent Allied player will know this, and move all the Aussie units to Mersing turn one to guard against this. Pretty much ends that plan. Malaya is a big problem for Japan, because 2 Bns can keep you out of Singapore until January; just enough to guard against Paras, and make you walk down the peninsula. One thing I would advocate as a MUST: Set up some sort of torp-capable base at Singkawang or Kuching the first week, and put some Netties there. You need to close the port, and that sealane to Allied shipping. RE: MANILA STRIKE: Chickenboy raises an old debate; should KB strike Manila turn one? I can see the arguments, but I am against it personally. For many reasons. First, the targets are better at Pearl. At Manila, you sink alot of subs, but that's the only real target, the rest are ships the Allies can afford to lose. At Pearl, you can sink BBs, or at least put them in the shop so long you won't see them the first year of the war. I have read "forget BB's, too hard to supply/fuel", but I think that's bunk. The Allies have gobs of fuel, plenty of tankers, lots of AKE conversions, with a little advanced planning you can keep those babies sailing. I also think in AE, BBs are MORE valuable than WITP, not less. Why? They are harder to kill. Bombs don't work, and LBA in general is less of a threat to shipping. This makes control of water around targets imperitive, and BBs are the ultimate aribiter of that control. Second, is what you do with KB afterwards. You don't need KB to advance in the SRA; you need surface combattants, and you need the IJN LBA, but not Carriers. You need to think and plan ahead to get torp-capable bases set up; once those are set-up, you now effectively control all water within 12 hexes (Zero escort range). KB is better spent countering the USN CVs. If you want to take Rabaul or PM early, which I advise, you need carrier support. The thing is you don't need ALL your CVs; split a couple off and send those to the SRA if you want to. This is the only point in the game as Japan I would split CVs, but the first two months there is minimal risk to doing so. Even worse, in the SRA the Allies will always know where KB is, which means they have freedom of action elsewhere to do what they want. That can mean convoys getting reinforcements out, it can mean USN CVs hitting your Rabaul invasion forces, it can mean many things, all of them bad for you. The KB in the SRA will spend alot of time LRCAP and hitting land targets, both of which are a complete waste, because with a little planning that job can easily be done by your LBA.
< Message edited by Q-Ball -- 2/1/2010 6:34:53 PM >
_____________________________
|