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: Developments

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Developments Page: <<   < prev  28 29 [30] 31 32   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Developments - 2/4/2010 1:37:32 PM   
FatR

 

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

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I've detailed the major woes I've encountered thus far - strategic bombing in China, artillery death stars, and nucelar subs - but there's another concern that worries me even more going forward. 

Right now the Allies are in fairly decent position - June '43, Miller and I are locked in a fierce wrestling match in the DEI, and the Japanese are ahead 32,000 to 20,000.  But it's the air war that's really making it difficult for the Allies to advance.

The Japanese have lost 1200 more aircraft to date, but in the a-2-a category they've lost 300 less.  This is a telling statistic.  It shows that Allied fighters are getting beaten in nearly every engagement with Japanese fighters - whether the Allied fighters are flying escort, sweep, or flying CAP.

I am having a heck of a time in the DEI because my fighters get trashed.  I ran out of P-38 replacements, so I had to swap them out with P-40Ks.  My P-40s get beaten as do Corsairs, Wildcats, and Kittyhawks. 

By mid-43 I would have expected the Allies to be winning most a-2-a battles and Japanese losses to be greviously high.  That isn't the case in my game as best I can tell.  Miller has mentioned a few things in different posts and emails suggesting that he too is struggling to mount an adequate air defense, but I can't tell that from my position.

Until the Allies get control of the air I cannot safely move forward in concentrated numbers.  Instead of sending forward a big invasion fleet, right now I can only send out expendable little detachments and wait for airfields to get big enough to base massive numbers of fighters.  Base building takes time, so the advances will be slow.

Why are the Allies not performing at historic levels?  I'm not positive - it could very well be something purely to do with player performance:  how Miller trains his pilots compared to how I do so.  But Allied pilots seem to have low experience and not enough aircraft in the pools to replace losses.  By mid-43 I doubt the Allies were down to just one P-38 squadron in the entire PTO, but that's my situation.

I'm working on the problem, but the going is slow!    

Can Japanese afford any offensive air operation at this stage? Or are they reduced to defending their own airfields and attempting to strike at invasion fleets and forward bases? If the latter, they your performance is not far behind RL, if at all. In mid-1943 RL Allied advance was slow and limited to the areas where Japanese ability to put aircraft in the air was severely restricted by stretched communications and poor forward bases. You're invading areas where Japanese don't suffer from such problems nearly as much, so a tougher air war is to be expected. As about higher A2A losses for Allies, if Japanese air forces generally are on the defensive, they will naturally benefit from improved A2A kill ratio against bomber formations and their escorts; lots of damaged planes will be able to land, instead of crashing on their return trips, as well.



< Message edited by FatR -- 2/4/2010 2:11:27 PM >

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 871
RE: Developments - 2/4/2010 2:08:02 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		6/12/43 to 6/17/43
 
Gents:  Many more good observations.  It had never occurred to me to draw comparisons to the Allied position in this game (concentrating on DEI) to the real war (concentrated in the Solomons in mid-'43).  Yes, the DEI would be much more heavily defended than were the Solomons, so indeed the going should be even slower than it was in the Solomons.  When I look at it from that perspective it makes sense for the game to be where it's at right now.

NYGiants:  Your comments were very encouraging and much appreciated.

CenPac:  Talk about a goof up!  I had transferred all my CVE TFs from NoPac (Adak Island) to SoPac (Auckland) with a scheduled stopover at Christmas Island to refuel.  After a few days I realized one of my CVE TFs was very tardy.  I tracked it down short of Christmas Island totally out of fuel (yes, I had checked to see that it had enough fuel before departing - or at least I think I did.  ).  Wow, these ships had very high SYS damage!  I diverted them to Palmyra, which was only four hexes away.  They are refueling now and I'll probably send them to Pearl to recover the SYS damage.

SoPac:  I'm sending out four merchant ships to act as pickets on the far side of Tarawa.  The invasion TFs are ready to set sail, but won't approach the island until the pickets are in place and the coast looks clear.

SWPac:  I might find out if I can outguess Miller.  You will recall that I had the Royal Sovereign TF make its presence known around Milne Bay shortly after Miller empoyed a CA force in the region.  I figured by upping the ante I might entice Miller to send bigger game this way.  Patrol aircraft just reported a PB force of some size rounding Milne and heading for PM.  Now, Miller knows that PBs aren't going to stand a chance against Royal Sovereign, so I think he's offering them as bait in hopes of springing an ambush, either with BBs of his own or even his Mini-KB.  The Allied carriers (Wasp, Essex, Saratoga, Victorious, and three CVEs) are parked at Noumea, so I'm sending them NW about mid-way to Milne Bay.  They should be in a position to strike from there if things look "ripe."

Subwars:  I continue to notice that ASW TFs set to patrol in a port hex don't do anything against subs in that hex.  So I set them to patrol a hex outside the port and then they will react back into the port.  Also, my combat TFs remain much more adept at ASW than do ASW TFs.  Go figure.

Burma:  Zzz as the Allied build-up near Rangoon continues.

China:  Not sure what's ultimately going to happen on my MLR - Liuchow, Kweilin, Changsha, Changteh.  Miller poked a hole in it at Hengyang, but hasn't moved against the two bases behind Changsha yet.  They are both garrisoned, but not all that strongly.

(in reply to FatR)
Post #: 872
RE: Developments - 2/4/2010 2:58:04 PM   
Grollub


Posts: 6674
Joined: 10/9/2005
From: Lulea, Sweden
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

CenPac:  Talk about a goof up!  I had transferred all my CVE TFs from NoPac (Adak Island) to SoPac (Auckland) with a scheduled stopover at Christmas Island to refuel.  After a few days I realized one of my CVE TFs was very tardy.  I tracked it down short of Christmas Island totally out of fuel (yes, I had checked to see that it had enough fuel before departing - or at least I think I did.  ).  Wow, these ships had very high SYS damage!  I diverted them to Palmyra, which was only four hexes away.  They are refueling now and I'll probably send them to Pearl to recover the SYS damage.

Been there, done that. When this happened to me, I think I came to the conclusion that it was caused by flight operation fuel expenditure not being taken into account for TF range calculations.

I actually had the Lexington creeping around around at 0 knots ... luckily, no sub found her before I could refuel.

_____________________________

“Not mastering metaphores is like cooking pasta when the train is delayed"

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 873
Pant, pant, wheeze, wheeze - 2/4/2010 4:18:41 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		Pant, pant, wheeze, wheeze:  It's not often that Miller gives me a shot as his combat ships, but I may have one now.  He has a CA/CL TF guarding some transports at Port Moresby.  The Allied carriers are in a perfect position to cut them off and hit them hard.  This isn't without risk:

1)  Mller might have the Mini-KB nearby.  I think my carriers (Wasp, Saratoga, Essex, Victorious, and three CVEs) can handle that threat - or at least give as good as they get.

2)  There are Japanese airbases at Port Moresby and Milne Bay (and to a lesser extent, because more distant, at Lae and Rabaul) that could factor in.  The Allies have been steadily hammering both PM and Milne for months, so I question whether Miller would utilize them for fear of Allied LBA.

This ambush "feels right" for the Allies.  If Miller has out-thought me, so be it. 




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Canoerebel -- 2/4/2010 4:22:05 PM >

(in reply to Grollub)
Post #: 874
RE: Pant, pant, wheeze, wheeze - 2/4/2010 4:36:24 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Up and At 'Em!  Good Luck!


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 875
RE: Pant, pant, wheeze, wheeze - 2/4/2010 5:10:27 PM   
Zacktar


Posts: 169
Joined: 6/23/2009
Status: offline 		That's the spirit -- toujours l'audace!

_____________________________

Never hold discussions with the monkey when the organ grinder is in the room.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 876
RE: Developments - 2/4/2010 5:56:26 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

Your game started just after AE came out. You have had to deal with a lot of problems that have been addressed in patches and hotfix (but possibily not all). The issue of pilot training is a major one. I think my first patch of recruits trained up in Japan will take about 2 months to complete (70 experience in only one area). They will go to into the Reserve and replace carrier daitais first.

A truer test of this game will be when you play the second time and the learning curve is more forgiving. You have done us all a big favor by bringing up issues from this game and getting the developers to look at and make changes. By AE's one year anniverary, it should be a relatively stable game, IMO.


I am not sure how it works for Japan, but if they can train pilots at the same speed as the US, then we AFBs are screwed...The air war turned in late 42 because Japan was running out of skilled pilots more than anything else.



_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 877
RE: Developments - 2/4/2010 6:07:28 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton


quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

Your game started just after AE came out. You have had to deal with a lot of problems that have been addressed in patches and hotfix (but possibily not all). The issue of pilot training is a major one. I think my first patch of recruits trained up in Japan will take about 2 months to complete (70 experience in only one area). They will go to into the Reserve and replace carrier daitais first.

A truer test of this game will be when you play the second time and the learning curve is more forgiving. You have done us all a big favor by bringing up issues from this game and getting the developers to look at and make changes. By AE's one year anniverary, it should be a relatively stable game, IMO.


I am not sure how it works for Japan, but if they can train pilots at the same speed as the US, then we AFBs are screwed...The air war turned in late 42 because Japan was running out of skilled pilots more than anything else.




This is correct but a good Japanese player can do better work at training and deployment that historically. I would EXPECT the Japanese player to be tougher then the historical situation. Beyond the reasons mentioned earlier think about how we--Japanese--players use the Army and Naval Air Forces interchangeably. Those two services rarely got along and even more rarely actually cooperated...by using them together the air war is much tougher.



_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 878
RE: Developments - 2/4/2010 6:24:23 PM   
Chickenboy


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

ORIGINAL: crsutton


quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

Your game started just after AE came out. You have had to deal with a lot of problems that have been addressed in patches and hotfix (but possibily not all). The issue of pilot training is a major one. I think my first patch of recruits trained up in Japan will take about 2 months to complete (70 experience in only one area). They will go to into the Reserve and replace carrier daitais first.

A truer test of this game will be when you play the second time and the learning curve is more forgiving. You have done us all a big favor by bringing up issues from this game and getting the developers to look at and make changes. By AE's one year anniverary, it should be a relatively stable game, IMO.


I am not sure how it works for Japan, but if they can train pilots at the same speed as the US, then we AFBs are screwed...The air war turned in late 42 because Japan was running out of skilled pilots more than anything else.



I agree, crsutton. This is the achilles heel of the current allied AE aerial model, I fear.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I understand that the WiTP incremental improvement of 'basic' pilots fresh out of training school is gone. All pilots from the USAA or USN or Commonwealth come in at the same pathetic levels (it's 35, isn't it?) throughout the war. In WiTP, entry-level pilots for the USN, for example would be something like 60-65 in 1945. This higher caliber of replacement pilots was (and still is) very important for the allies.

About the only advantage that I see for the allies is the larger number of on-map GROUPS now present for training pilots. One can pump them full of crappy entry level pilots and train up to '70' EXP or specific skill in a few months. Then they can rotate them into 'General Reserve' for assignment (as the IJ player does now). Eventually (with attendant onerous micromanagement of pilot pools), the allies can field formidable replacement pools to quickly refill those ranks of pilots attritted through frontline combat.

BUT

If the allied player doesn't rejoice in such tremendous pilot micromangement (and who could blame them, really?), the only way they'll be able to bring decent pilots continuously to the fore is by rotating whole groups into action and rotating whole groups out of the action in their entirety. This requires a larger number of groups closer to the action and probably doesn't provide for homogenous good pilot cadres to be constructed in the rebuilding groups / squadrons.

I think that the poor entry skills of allied aviators is problematic. They should be at least 15-20 points higher than Japanese entry level skills, particularly as the war rolls on into 1943-1945 and the pilot training machine that was the USAAF and USN pumps out decent pilots en masse.

Airframes 'feel' about right, a/c durability and capabilities 'feel' about right, CAP 'feels' about right, but the incessant ability of the IJNAF and IJAAF to field superior pilots late into the war at the expense of the allies feels very much wrong.

It's too easy for the IJ to keep pace in the air war with pilot quality. Training is too fast, too easy. It shouldn't be so.

My two bits...

_____________________________


(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 879
RE: Developments - 2/4/2010 6:41:16 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Do we have any Japanese players who have advanced far enough into AE to comment to the Chicken on this? 

_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 880
RE: Developments - 2/4/2010 6:49:29 PM   
Canoerebel


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

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

I agree, crsutton. This is the achilles heel of the current allied AE aerial model, I fear.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I understand that the WiTP incremental improvement of 'basic' pilots fresh out of training school is gone. All pilots from the USAA or USN or Commonwealth come in at the same pathetic levels (it's 35, isn't it?) throughout the war. In WiTP, entry-level pilots for the USN, for example would be something like 60-65 in 1945. This higher caliber of replacement pilots was (and still is) very important for the allies.

About the only advantage that I see for the allies is the larger number of on-map GROUPS now present for training pilots. One can pump them full of crappy entry level pilots and train up to '70' EXP or specific skill in a few months. Then they can rotate them into 'General Reserve' for assignment (as the IJ player does now). Eventually (with attendant onerous micromanagement of pilot pools), the allies can field formidable replacement pools to quickly refill those ranks of pilots attritted through frontline combat.

BUT

If the allied player doesn't rejoice in such tremendous pilot micromangement (and who could blame them, really?), the only way they'll be able to bring decent pilots continuously to the fore is by rotating whole groups into action and rotating whole groups out of the action in their entirety. This requires a larger number of groups closer to the action and probably doesn't provide for homogenous good pilot cadres to be constructed in the rebuilding groups / squadrons.

I think that the poor entry skills of allied aviators is problematic. They should be at least 15-20 points higher than Japanese entry level skills, particularly as the war rolls on into 1943-1945 and the pilot training machine that was the USAAF and USN pumps out decent pilots en masse.

Airframes 'feel' about right, a/c durability and capabilities 'feel' about right, CAP 'feels' about right, but the incessant ability of the IJNAF and IJAAF to field superior pilots late into the war at the expense of the allies feels very much wrong.

It's too easy for the IJ to keep pace in the air war with pilot quality. Training is too fast, too easy. It shouldn't be so.

My two bits...


Gulp. This is a very worrisome situation (and very good summary by Roosterlad [getting him back for the KayakJohnnie comment only because it took me about three days to realize what he did. )

This is exactly what I seem to be facing in my game:

1. Japanese pilots of high quality (at least they seem to be outperforming the Allies regularly).

2. Allied pilots of low quality.

3. I hate micromanaging pilot pools, so I'm following the second route suggested by Pulletyouth - rotating out entire squadrons at the front lines. I probably have twenty to twenty five fighter squadrons around Darwin and I shuffle them between there and the island bases.

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 881
RE: Developments - 2/4/2010 7:21:22 PM   
Chickenboy


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

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Do we have any Japanese players who have advanced far enough into AE to comment to the Chicken on this? 

I'm playing two PBEMs as the IJ, John 3rd. That's the way I sees it.

_____________________________


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 882
RE: Developments - 2/4/2010 7:55:29 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		I'm working on the next turn now - the one that may include the Allied carriers springing an ambush near Milne Bay, or perhaps blundering into an ambush near Milne Bay.  Four things:

1)  coastwatchers reported CV Shokaku at Gasmata.  I think she (and probably Zuikaku and other carriers) are providing LRCAP for the Japanese ships at Port Moresby.  Are these carriers here purely in a defensive posture, or is Miller planning his own ambush?

2)  the Japanese combat TF at PM includes CAs Myoko, Takao, and Atago and CLs Yura, Nagara, and Natori.  A tempting target indeed.

3)  one of my CVEs (Copahee) has Corsairs aboard.  Can CVEs handle Corsairs?  I wonder because I previously had a Corsair unit on Long Island and the Corsairs did NOT fly CAP or escort during the initial assault against Paramushiro.  Does anybody know for certain?

4)  As best I can tell Japanese patrol aircraft from Lunga did not pick up the Allied carrier TFs.  I don't think Miller knows they are in the area.

What do you guys think?  Should I spring the ambush or should I flee?  I'm inclined to give battle.

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 883
RE: Developments - 2/4/2010 8:08:03 PM   
jackyo123

 

Posts: 697
Joined: 2/4/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy



Correct me if I'm wrong, but I understand that the WiTP incremental improvement of 'basic' pilots fresh out of training school is gone. All pilots from the USAA or USN or Commonwealth come in at the same pathetic levels (it's 35, isn't it?) throughout the war. In WiTP, entry-level pilots for the USN, for example would be something like 60-65 in 1945. This higher caliber of replacement pilots was (and still is) very important for the allies.




I am quite certain that, when digging around in the scenario editor for one of the stock scenarios (maybe #1?) that the Japanese pilots begin to drop dramatically in starting experience in 1943 - goes something like

1941 - 35
1942 - 35
1943 - 35
1944 - 35
1945 - 35

and the US flyers have something like

1941 - 40/30 (navy, army)
1942 - 40/30
1943 - 40/35
1944 - 40/35
1945 - 50/40

This stuff is buried under one of the last couple of tabs in the SCENARIO tab, NOT under the PILOTS tab,in the scenario editor.

The replacement rate of the pilots is also listed there, and Japan is something like 1/10th that of the US.

Now is this (admittedly from memory) enough of a range gap? No way, IMHO. In 1944, the Japanese should be something like 30, maybe even 25, and the US should be 45/50. By 45, it should be 55/60 for the US, and 15/20 for the Japs.

Easy enough to mod. But would like to see it adjusted for all official scenarios.


(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 884
RE: Developments - 2/4/2010 8:16:50 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline 		Besides those air units that are restricted to"General Defense" commands in Japan and Formosa, they have those tied up in Manchuria that they can use to train up pilots. KB and Army fighters are going to benefit the most in the coming months. I "think" I just finished resizing my last eligible Val from 2 to 27 planes. Once I finish filling out my shortage in KB, there is a lot of NavB experienced pilots that will be highly trained by mid-42.

Developers may need to do:
1) Limit experienced gained by Japanese pilots through training to somewhere between 50 and 60.
2) Disallow those air units restricted from changing commands in Manchuria from having pilots transferred to Reserve until the Russians are activated. Right now you can train up a significant number with Nates.
3) Increase pilots op losses while in training mode.
4) "enter yours here"

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 885
RE: Developments - 2/4/2010 9:36:10 PM   
Chickenboy


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

ORIGINAL: jackyo123


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy



Correct me if I'm wrong, but I understand that the WiTP incremental improvement of 'basic' pilots fresh out of training school is gone. All pilots from the USAA or USN or Commonwealth come in at the same pathetic levels (it's 35, isn't it?) throughout the war. In WiTP, entry-level pilots for the USN, for example would be something like 60-65 in 1945. This higher caliber of replacement pilots was (and still is) very important for the allies.




I am quite certain that, when digging around in the scenario editor for one of the stock scenarios (maybe #1?) that the Japanese pilots begin to drop dramatically in starting experience in 1943 - goes something like

1941 - 35
1942 - 35
1943 - 35
1944 - 35
1945 - 35

Where's the dramatic drop in starting experience in 1943?

Agree with the allied starting experience. Way too low by comparison. I also agree that starting stats for IJNAF and IJAAF should erode in 1944 and 1945 to below 35 by comparison.

_____________________________


(in reply to jackyo123)
Post #: 886
RE: Developments - 2/4/2010 9:40:29 PM   
Chickenboy


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

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I'm working on the next turn now - the one that may include the Allied carriers springing an ambush near Milne Bay, or perhaps blundering into an ambush near Milne Bay.  Four things:

1)  coastwatchers reported CV Shokaku at Gasmata.  I think she (and probably Zuikaku and other carriers) are providing LRCAP for the Japanese ships at Port Moresby.  Are these carriers here purely in a defensive posture, or is Miller planning his own ambush?

2)  the Japanese combat TF at PM includes CAs Myoko, Takao, and Atago and CLs Yura, Nagara, and Natori.  A tempting target indeed.

3)  one of my CVEs (Copahee) has Corsairs aboard.  Can CVEs handle Corsairs?  I wonder because I previously had a Corsair unit on Long Island and the Corsairs did NOT fly CAP or escort during the initial assault against Paramushiro.  Does anybody know for certain?

4)  As best I can tell Japanese patrol aircraft from Lunga did not pick up the Allied carrier TFs.  I don't think Miller knows they are in the area.

What do you guys think?  Should I spring the ambush or should I flee?  I'm inclined to give battle.

While the KB present may be distracted by providing LRCAP to the PM forces, it stands to reason that the KB may, in turn, be LRCAP'ed by Rabaul, Lae or other IJ bases in the area. I believe that Betty torpedo range is 17, so if you've venturing near Gasmata in an attempt to engage his carriers, you may come into easy Betty range out of Rabaul.

When you get near PNG, New Georgia or the Solomons, you're entering a comparative region of strength for Miller's forces. Unless you have some other visible means of support for your carriers, I'd advise caution in this position.

_____________________________


(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 887
RE: Developments - 2/4/2010 9:44:50 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jackyo123

The replacement rate of the pilots is also listed there, and Japan is something like 1/10th that of the US.

Now is this (admittedly from memory) enough of a range gap? No way, IMHO. In 1944, the Japanese should be something like 30, maybe even 25, and the US should be 45/50. By 45, it should be 55/60 for the US, and 15/20 for the Japs.

Easy enough to mod. But would like to see it adjusted for all official scenarios.


The bold part might be the key - when you have drawn all the pilots at the stated (I think you said 35) experience level, then you get the ones that are still in training and even lower than that. Go to the intel screen, replacement pilots, and look at the progression of basic training (not on-map training) versus experience.

(in reply to jackyo123)
Post #: 888
RE: Developments - 2/4/2010 9:49:57 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		Hmmm, the intention isn't to tangle with Miller's carriers.  I wouldn't mind taking on a Mini-KB with my current force, but I don't want to tangle with a force of unknown strength that would include at least the two fleet carriers (Shokaku and Zuikaku).

My intention is to tangle with the combat TF at Port Moresby.  I can do that by placing my carriers fout or five or six hexes south of Milne Bay.  That is a long way from Rabaul and Lunga, but if Miller has a massive carrier force and moves them to that general area I could get hosed.

So, to roll the dice or not?

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 889
RE: Developments - 2/4/2010 9:50:40 PM   
Chickenboy


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

ORIGINAL: witpqs


quote:

ORIGINAL: jackyo123

The replacement rate of the pilots is also listed there, and Japan is something like 1/10th that of the US.

Now is this (admittedly from memory) enough of a range gap? No way, IMHO. In 1944, the Japanese should be something like 30, maybe even 25, and the US should be 45/50. By 45, it should be 55/60 for the US, and 15/20 for the Japs.

Easy enough to mod. But would like to see it adjusted for all official scenarios.


The bold part might be the key - when you have drawn all the pilots at the stated (I think you said 35) experience level, then you get the ones that are still in training and even lower than that. Go to the intel screen, replacement pilots, and look at the progression of basic training (not on-map training) versus experience.

Ah, but the IJ (or allied) player will get more pilots of the 35 experience level by pumping up his TRACOM commitment. I don't know what the formula is (The Elf specifically maintained secrecy re: the formula), but clusters of 10 TRACOM instructors provide additional pilots at 35 exp. so that one doesn't have to get the 20-25 exp. ultra-sucky pilots.

I've got about 20 TRACOM fighter pilots in there now and it helps, but I really can't say how much...

_____________________________


(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 890
RE: Developments - 2/4/2010 9:54:46 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		I've got to make the call in just a few minutes.  I think I'm going to roll the dice and try to nab the Japanese combat TF.  My thinking:

1)  The KB recently retired from a raid on Adak Island in which Miller took massive losses to his divebomber squadrons.  I don't think the KB could have retired to Japan (or Truk) and replaced those losses and made it to the Coral Sea.

2)  I don't think Miller would strip the DEI of carriers with a massive Allied force sitting at Darwin.  He probably expects a move on Timor at any moment.

3) So my best guess is that he has some carriers around Rabaul providing support for his ships, not in anticipation of a major carrier battle.

Miller could be outguessing me here - he might be expecting this move or he might have decided to commit all his available carriers to try to clobber BB Royal Sovereign.  But I'm betting not.

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 891
RE: Developments - 2/4/2010 10:15:43 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		Here's the final plan:

1)  In two days, the Allied carriers should reach a point six hexes SE of PM, six hexes SW of Milne, and five hexes north of Cooktown.  This position should allow the carriers to hit anything at PM or moving west toward Milne.  This position is 15 hexes south of Rabaul, hopefully distant enough to discourage Bettys from flying.  I have one squadron of P-38Es that will provide some LRCAP.

2)  I've loaded up the airfields at Horn Island, Portland Roads, Coen, Cooktown, and Cairns with bombers.  B-17s are set to hit the airfields at Milne and PM.  Most B-24s are similarly targeted, with two squadrons set for naval attack.  B-25s are set for naval attack.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 892
RE: Developments - 2/4/2010 10:16:14 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline 		Get 'em Tiger.



_____________________________


(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 893
RE: Developments - 2/4/2010 11:36:55 PM   
LoBaron


Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline 		Looking forward to this!
Good luck Canorebel. I kinda suspect that he assumes your CV´s are still licking their wounds on WC...


_____________________________


(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 894
RE: Developments - 2/4/2010 11:54:42 PM   
Cathartes

 

Posts: 2155
Joined: 1/5/2001
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel


3)  one of my CVEs (Copahee) has Corsairs aboard.  Can CVEs handle Corsairs?  I wonder because I previously had a Corsair unit on Long Island and the Corsairs did NOT fly CAP or escort during the initial assault against Paramushiro.  Does anybody know for certain?


If the squadron says "carrier-capable" you're good to go. However, I don't think the first corsair models you get are carrier-capable.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 895
RE: Developments - 2/5/2010 1:44:56 AM   
JeffroK


Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline 		Can you LRCAP your TF out of Cairns, Cooktown & Portkand Roads??

P38 & maybe P47 should cover them, even Beaufighters & Havocs can help absorb some of the blow.

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to Cathartes)
Post #: 896
RE: Developments - 2/5/2010 1:53:34 AM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		1) Uh oh on the Corsairs.  I doubt they are going to fly CAP.

2)  I do have one squadron of P-38s flying LRCAP from Cooktown.  I have P-40s and F4F-4s that won't have the legs to provide decent LRCAP at a distance of five hexes.  But if things break down and my ships take damage, they're set to retire to Cooktown, so they'll benefit some from land-based fighters.

3)  I have my Hellcats set at 30k and 60% CAP.  The Victorious fighters (Marlets and Sea Hurricanes) are set at 70% at 15k.  A handful of low experience F4F-4s are set at 5k just for the fun of it.  The Corsairs are set at about 37.5k, but as noted above I don't think they're going to fly.

(in reply to JeffroK)
Post #: 897
Unrequited Love - 2/5/2010 3:31:46 AM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		Have you ever put all your desire and creativity into setting a trap sure to snare the heart of the the pretty girl you've set your heart on, only to learn in the end it was all for naught?  Oh, the heartache!

Well, that's just happened to me.  It was probably the best series of moves I had made in the game.  I had used CLs to draw bigger Japanese CAs to the Port Moresby area.  Then I had employed Royal Sovereign to up the ante, knowing it would draw bigger ships and possibly the Mini-KB.  Then I moved the Allied carriers to Noumea so they would be in position to set the hook if Miller took the bait.

He took the bait and my carriers were in perfect position.  Miller loaded up Milne Bay with Bettys, but I knew he would and had 4EB set to clobber the airfield.  I had thought of everything....

But only 18 Avengers sortied and none of them scored hits against the Japanese cruiser TF.  That's right:  zero for eighteen.

Meanwhile, Bettys sortie and score hits against a variety of merchant ships around Cooktown and Portland Roads.

It wasn't all bad - some Bettys and Zeros came after the Allied carriers and got chewed alive.  The Allied 4EB also destroyed some Japanese aircraft on the ground.

I'm actually not that disappointed.  I'm glad my carriers didn't bumble into a trap, and I think it's good that Miller know's they are not too far from the DEI - it'll keep him honest.

So I'll probably send the carriers over toward Suva where they can help with the Tarawa invasion.  Tarawa has about 25k troops - I'm guessing two mixed brigades and some base force personnel?  I have three Marine regiments, one Army regiment, one Army separate battalion, and a few other units.  As I type this I realize that this doesn't sound like enough to me - how about you?  I probably ought to stand down and await the new Army division that is at San Diego.  I can prep it for Tarawa and move on that base later in the game.

So, I'll send the carriers somewhere safe and await arrival of four CVs and at least two CVLs in the next 40 days.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 898
RE: Unrequited Love - 2/5/2010 3:52:51 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		I've certainly been there in our games Sir!

As I see it there was no great disaster and that is a good thing.  You've got tons of extra shipping by this point in the war so no great loss.  You certainly spooked him and that might lead to more opportunities.  Could you pull back to Noumea instead?  Would put you in a lot closer to this Theatre while being in good support range of Tarawa.

As to Tarawa, I would--this is strange for me--advise caution and get that Infantry Division before moving...


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 899
RE: Developments - 2/5/2010 7:45:35 AM   
LoBaron


Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs


quote:

ORIGINAL: jackyo123

The replacement rate of the pilots is also listed there, and Japan is something like 1/10th that of the US.

Now is this (admittedly from memory) enough of a range gap? No way, IMHO. In 1944, the Japanese should be something like 30, maybe even 25, and the US should be 45/50. By 45, it should be 55/60 for the US, and 15/20 for the Japs.

Easy enough to mod. But would like to see it adjusted for all official scenarios.


The bold part might be the key - when you have drawn all the pilots at the stated (I think you said 35) experience level, then you get the ones that are still in training and even lower than that. Go to the intel screen, replacement pilots, and look at the progression of basic training (not on-map training) versus experience.

Ah, but the IJ (or allied) player will get more pilots of the 35 experience level by pumping up his TRACOM commitment. I don't know what the formula is (The Elf specifically maintained secrecy re: the formula), but clusters of 10 TRACOM instructors provide additional pilots at 35 exp. so that one doesn't have to get the 20-25 exp. ultra-sucky pilots.

I've got about 20 TRACOM fighter pilots in there now and it helps, but I really can't say how much...


I think the real issue here is that the Allied players don´t find the triggers yet that force a war of attrition.
1/10 in pilot replacements entering from basic training is a factor that can tilt the balance after 43 and let it increase in the years after.

20 TRACOM aces don´t change anything there. If used properly the gap gets wider and wider.

If the Allied player can
- open a multi front war in range of Japanese ressources
- so force the Japanese player into a war of attrition because he has to defend with what he has
- balance the airframes from the beginning to get the maximum numbers of airframes into combat
- keep the pressure because he can cope with losses

then the effect should be brutal with 1/10 pilot replacement rate, no mater how big the difference in exp is when they leave basic training.

What the Japanese player can do to counter this:
- don´t fight a war of attrition
- fight only when the numbers are available to assure favourable loss rates
- put the pight on his own turf to minimize pilot losses
- build up a pool of ressources that he can afford to give up seemingly valuable areas

Historically the attrition began in ´43 in NG and Burma, in game this could be the same area if the Japanese player plans on
longer terms than ´44. To start fighting when the Allies push to DEI could be too late.
I think Canorebel is VERY close to the point where the fight starts to tilt in the attrition direction. If the push to DEI is a success, which I´m
already nearly sure, then Miller is in big trouble, maybe even faster than historical. No CV´s needed for occasional island hopping there.
And as soon as the bases are ready for 4eng to advance deep into the area its close to end-game.

I think we all get misleaded atm because the Allied players still are ready to accept much higher losses than they historically did and
the Japanese tries to minimize the losses because he knows whats coming at him. But I would still bet that the above points lead
to a Japanese breakdown even faster than in WWII if its done right, including the need to either send untrained pilots into
combat or accepting high ground losses due to bombing raids.

Canorebel, when you get deeper into the DEI´s theres not much space Miller can pull back to anymore.

_____________________________


(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 900
Page:   <<   < prev  28 29 [30] 31 32   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Developments Page: <<   < prev  28 29 [30] 31 32   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

0.656