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: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A)

 
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: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) Page: <<   < prev  23 24 [25] 26 27   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) - 7/25/2012 11:06:36 PM   
AcePylut


Posts: 1494
Joined: 3/19/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

3/3/42

North America: The KB tried to sneak around and raid the channel far south of San Diego. My plane-less carriers are down there, but will slide off map and take refuge at Balboa. In harm's way is the TF carrying the figher squadrons from Pearl to West Coast. I think this TF can win the race to map's edge. I'm leaning towards moving her to Balboa, then sending the planes to East Coast,then back to West Coast.


I would strongly advise against using the map edge as some magical "you can't get me" border. If your ships are being chased by the KB then suffer the losses.... don't cheese the map edges to make your units magically stay alive.


_____________________________


(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 721
RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) - 7/25/2012 11:49:55 PM   
JohnDillworth


Posts: 3100
Joined: 3/19/2009
Status: offline
quote:

Another Betty raid against Calgary does some manpower damage and starts some fires, but all looks "repaired" now.

Hope these gals are OK. Elevator operators at the Eaton, 1942. Hope the fires weren't cows being barbecued on the hoof.


Yikes! Nice snapshot. Sometimes in these small towns you get get some "inter-mingling" Looks like there are at least a couple of "cousins" here.

_____________________________

Today I come bearing an olive branch in one hand, and the freedom fighter's gun in the other. Do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. I repeat, do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. - Yasser Arafat Speech to UN General Assembly

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 722
RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) - 7/26/2012 1:30:54 AM   
khyberbill


Posts: 1941
Joined: 9/11/2007
From: new milford, ct
Status: offline 		What if the KB is using the map edge to "herd" the ships? And also I would like to point out that every Japanese player I have played against has used the map edge to position subs to catch ships coming "on" the map from Balboa or Abadan-the exact hex they appear. Not once have I heard a complaint regarding this use of the map edge.

_____________________________

"Its a dog eat dog world Sammy and I am wearing Milkbone underwear" -Norm.

(in reply to AcePylut)
Post #: 723
RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) - 7/26/2012 1:39:04 AM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		I think Acepylut's comment was a quick off-the-cuff comment - a visceral reaction without knowing all the ins and outs of what's going on here.

My TFs would be steaming much further east if there was room to do so. Also, committing ships to the Balboa Channel is a two-fold risk. First, they can't turn around, so it takes them "out of commission" for several weeks or longer.

Secondly, if I order a TF to move from Balboa to San Diego, I can't recall it. Therefore, it shows up eight days or so later no matter what the circumstances are. If the KB has steamed in to raid and is parked right there, tough cookies.

Morever, as khyberbill notes, Steve can and has parked subs right around the channel between SD and the Balboa Channel. This includes Glens, which I'm essentially powerless to stop from spying on my ships and ports. How realistic is that?

So the Panama Canal Zone is a tough thing to manage in the game. Full of some risks. For these reasons and others, I feel not the slightest compunction in using the Channel. I haven't done anything to hang my head over.

< Message edited by Canoerebel -- 7/26/2012 1:40:51 AM >

(in reply to khyberbill)
Post #: 724
RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) - 7/26/2012 3:12:25 AM   
AcePylut


Posts: 1494
Joined: 3/19/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I think Acepylut's comment was a quick off-the-cuff comment - a visceral reaction without knowing all the ins and outs of what's going on here.



Totally. It sounded from your description that the KB was "coming" and you kinda were looking to "make it to the edge just in the nick of time" to escape losing the ships.

To avoid the channel you speak of, don't order your ships to go straight from Balboa to SD. Order them from Balboa to "parts beyond" (like Tokyo) and wait for them to enter the map, then re-route them. They wont show up in that 3-4 hex channel. That's what I've done to avoid that trap in that portion of the map. Of course, the decision is "do I want a couple days delay getting from Balboa to SD, or do I risk the run". Well for my important ships, I'm all fine on waiting for the delay, and if things are too thick, I can head to Pearl, Tahiti, etc. etc.

_____________________________


(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 725
RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) - 7/26/2012 5:21:13 AM   
erstad

 

Posts: 1944
Joined: 8/3/2004
From: Midwest USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: khyberbill

What if the KB is using the map edge to "herd" the ships? And also I would like to point out that every Japanese player I have played against has used the map edge to position subs to catch ships coming "on" the map from Balboa or Abadan-the exact hex they appear. Not once have I heard a complaint regarding this use of the map edge.


Of course, there's no particular reason the Allied player has to use the same hex every time they enter the map. Positioning a sub on the most direct path from off map isn't all that different than "I'm going to put a sub directly between Palembang and Nagasaki" or "I'm going to put a sub directly between San Francisco and Pearl Harbor". You can choose to always take the shortest distance between two points but if an opponent assumes or infers that and acts accordingly, I'm not sure that's a problem.

(in reply to khyberbill)
Post #: 726
RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) - 7/27/2012 3:44:38 PM   
jeffk3510


Posts: 4132
Joined: 12/3/2007
From: Kansas
Status: offline 		I don't see anything wrong with the play.

IF the map was the entire world, he woulnd't be able to corner you, AND he wouldnt be able to hover around an entry area.



_____________________________

Life is tough. The sooner you realize that, the easier it will be.

Currently chasing three kids around the Midwest.

(in reply to erstad)
Post #: 727
RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) - 7/27/2012 3:51:03 PM   
Cap Mandrake


Posts: 23184
Joined: 11/15/2002
From: Southern California
Status: offline 		Also, the game engine does not model all the fine ASW assets at Tiajuana, Ensenada and Cabo San Lucas.

(in reply to AcePylut)
Post #: 728
RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) - 7/28/2012 2:30:31 AM   
zuluhour


Posts: 5244
Joined: 1/20/2011
From: Maryland
Status: offline 		removed due to content southern gents just should'ent hear.

< Message edited by zuluhour -- 7/28/2012 3:15:14 PM >

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)
Post #: 729
RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) - 7/28/2012 4:29:39 PM   
Cap Mandrake


Posts: 23184
Joined: 11/15/2002
From: Southern California
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: zuluhour

removed due to content southern gents just should'ent hear.



I knew you were going to get a PM.


How are things going? Is Alberta under the Rising Sun yet?

(in reply to zuluhour)
Post #: 730
RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) - 7/28/2012 4:41:01 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		3/5/42 and 3/6/42

I think we'll know very, very soon what Steve is up to. The picture is beginning to come into focus.

North America: The KB moved south again, then disappeared. I think she's moving north, but there's a chance she moved off to the waters between SoCal and Hawaii. I have nothing out there whatsoever. No enemy air raids recently. Alliford Bay is up to level five airfield and is crammed with aircraft.

Oz: 144th Regiment is landing at Port Moresby. Steve is just about in position to move on southwestern Oz or northeastern Oz or both if he's ever going to do so. I'm getting lots of SigInt about units prepping for Melbourne, but I consider that unlikely.

Indian Ocean: Wow, we picked up four solid reports of subs south of Cocos Island. Steve either knows my carriers are there or he strongly suspects it. Indeed, their right in the middle of the nest, so they'll move west. I might even place them south of Sabang in position to hit any enemy invasion force that might move for Langsa or Medan. Cocos Island has 260 AV now. That's good enough to stand for quite some time even against a large-scale commitment of troops. We have good info that three of the eight IJA divisions once at Clark Field are committed to DEI - 38th just took Koepang and SigInt reports 4th and Imperial Guards aboard marus bound for Batavia. These could be going a variety of places, but they aren't going to North America. A sub took out a troop-carrying xAK in a huge enemy transport convoy in the South China Sea. I suspect this TF is moving for western Sumatra. Hence my decision to move my carriers. If the enemy moves in a big way on Oz, the Allies will move to reinforce Sumatra. If the enemy moves in a big way towards western Sumatra (or India, which I consider just about out of the question now), I'll figure out where I go from there.

China: 59th Division is way, way, way out west and is having trouble handling the relatively weak Chinese garrison at Hami. That's a huge commitment of enemy troops in the middle of nowhere. We now know of at least four IJA divisions north or northwest of Lanchow. Obviously this is an all-out effort.

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)
Post #: 731
RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) - 7/28/2012 5:12:19 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		Steve dropped a tiny para fragment (three squads) on Port Blair. Thus he gets complete information as to what I have there and the actual AV. That's just flat lame.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 732
RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) - 7/28/2012 5:44:41 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		3/7/42

North America: Very quiet except a big Zero sweep over Coal Harbor. No sign of the KB.

Oz: 144th Regiment shock attacks and fails at Port Moresby. Steve will probably have to bring more, which will slow him just a bit. Several TFs moving southest from Timor towards Exmouth or Port Headland vicinity. Not sure whether carriers are present. Surface combat ships will respond, includng CA Australia, to sniff things out.

Indian Ocean: Wow, yet more subs south of Cocos Island. There are at least six and probably many more as it looks like Steve has a solid line placed to detect any moves I might make. My carriers will have to cross this line, but so be it. Another Clark Field divisions (38th) reported on a maru bound for Batavia. Also, we were able to build on the SigInt report yesterday that part of 4th Div. was aboard Panama Maru bound for Batavia. Today a sub tangled with the massive transport TF in the Suoth China Sea and Panama Maru is included. This TF is bearing SE on a heading for Batavia. There's no reason to bring these guys this way if they are heading for Oz. They could've just slid down past Timor instead. So likely destinations are Cocos Island, western Sumatra, west towards India, or very unlikely to mop up resistance in Java (that would be using dynamite to kill flies). Could Steve be looking toward India after all this? That would be a surprise, but it would also be at long odds since the Allies have been preparing for such a move all along. Perth would be his best move, I think. Cocos Island, Sabang or Port Blair would be a huge commitment for a slow and relatively small return. So Perth makes the most sense to me.

China: Three IJA divisions crossed a river and shock attacked three Chinese units in the forest east (true) of Ankang. The Chinese held, which was a huge victory. Two more Chinese units are crossing the forest from Sian to Ankang and need about six days to complete the journey. At that point Steve will need significant reinforcements to prevail along that vector. Four divisions are across the river from Hengyang, but my biggest worry is that they will assault the agricultural hex to the south. In that strength, they would sever the railroad between Hengyang and Kweilin. I'm in decent position to counter the threat, but any four-division crossing by good IJA divisions is a threat. Steve has alot of divisions spread out across China, so this is clearly a major emphasis for him. Thus far the Chinese have really done well, but the stakes are high.

Port Blair: His use of paratroops in tiny numbers really bugs me.



< Message edited by Canoerebel -- 7/28/2012 5:46:09 PM >

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 733
RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) - 7/28/2012 11:12:37 PM   
castor troy


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

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Steve dropped a tiny para fragment (three squads) on Port Blair. Thus he gets complete information as to what I have there and the actual AV. That's just flat lame.



typical and well known...

_____________________________


(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 734
RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) - 7/28/2012 11:28:10 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		I've found Steve gracious and thoughtful in this game. We have no house rules, but when something comes up we discuss it and figure out a mutually agreeable way to handle it. I don't like this particular tactic, but I'm sure we'll handle it the same way. I'm lucky to have an opponent of his caliber, in every way.

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 735
RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) - 7/29/2012 2:32:46 PM   
castor troy


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

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I've found Steve gracious and thoughtful in this game. We have no house rules, but when something comes up we discuss it and figure out a mutually agreeable way to handle it. I don't like this particular tactic, but I'm sure we'll handle it the same way. I'm lucky to have an opponent of his caliber, in every way.



well, hopefully you can sort these things out, others haven't been and mini para drops won't be the only thing you will find strange (hopefully not) in the course of the game

_____________________________


(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 736
RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) - 7/29/2012 3:32:32 PM   
Cap Mandrake


Posts: 23184
Joined: 11/15/2002
From: Southern California
Status: offline 		A mini para drop might well be considered kosher if the attacker had limited intel on the target and might plausibly have concluded that it was ungarrisoned or even had no combat troops.

After all, the historical attack on Palembang was a small force.

(in reply to AcePylut)
Post #: 737
RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) - 7/29/2012 3:45:54 PM   
Historiker


Posts: 4742
Joined: 7/4/2007
From: Deutschland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Steve dropped a tiny para fragment (three squads) on Port Blair. Thus he gets complete information as to what I have there and the actual AV. That's just flat lame.



typical and well known...


And he complained about me putting the PH ships into TFs to avoid them getting hit on a second strike...
Just hillarious!

_____________________________

Without any doubt: I am the spawn of evil - and the Bavarian Beer Monster (BBM)!

There's only one bad word and that's taxes. If any other word is good enough for sailors; it's good enough for you. - Ron Swanson

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 738
RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) - 7/29/2012 4:04:47 PM   
Q-Ball


Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I've found Steve gracious and thoughtful in this game. We have no house rules, but when something comes up we discuss it and figure out a mutually agreeable way to handle it. I don't like this particular tactic, but I'm sure we'll handle it the same way. I'm lucky to have an opponent of his caliber, in every way.


I am playing PanzerJ Hortlund in a game as Japan, and I haven't seen anything I would consider an exploit. He knows the engine very well, so will do stuff like park a low-value TF in a hex with LR CAP over it to draw in your bombers, rather than CAP the base (as CAP can be swept, LRCAP cannot), but I consider this tactic within bounds.

Para Fragments for purposes of recon or odds lowering is, however, crossing the line IMO, and is definitely gamey. I would address that.

PS: Historiker, was that really an issue, forming TFs at PH on day 2? I can't imagine anyone would even complain about that. Why was that an issue? The only thing I can think of is that IJN player may set airgroups to "Nav Attack/Port Attack"; Allied player can form TFs of low-value ships, which means the airgroups will attack those as Nav Attack has priority, and ignore the BBs in port. Other than that, I can't think of what the problem is.....

RE: CHINA: That attack vector is interesting, and you can see what he is trying to do: Cut you off from all the fuel. This is a major problem for you; if he reaches Lanchow, I think he'll stop OIL and RESOURCE production, even if he doesn't take it. This will eventually stop Fuel production, which will eventually stop HI production which will put a crimp on your supplies. He also gets that stack of 30 units closer to Chengtu/Chungking, which if he gets in that plain it's the end of Chinese supply production.

Maybe you can get a couple units around his rear and interdict those super-long supply lines?

< Message edited by Q-Ball -- 7/29/2012 4:15:44 PM >

_____________________________


(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 739
RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) - 7/29/2012 4:26:45 PM   
Historiker


Posts: 4742
Joined: 7/4/2007
From: Deutschland
Status: offline
quote:

PS: Historiker, was that really an issue, forming TFs at PH on day 2? I can't imagine anyone would even complain about that. Why was that an issue? The only thing I can think of is that IJN player may set airgroups to "Nav Attack/Port Attack"; Allied player can form TFs of low-value ships, which means the airgroups will attack those as Nav Attack has priority, and ignore the BBs in port. Other than that, I can't think of what the problem is.....

It was.
I also sunk a Jap CVL on turn two with Force Z off Kuching. There, he said I misued the intel I gained from this AAR here. He knew that I'm reading it, I asked him whether that is ok and whether it was ok to read his AAR against Canoe as well. He said: "It is fine"

I spotted a TF off Kuching on turn 1, so I sent in Force Z to intercept. I saw nothing wrong there, as he never said "I am going to do EXACTLY what I do in the other game" - and even if he had, am I supposed to retreat Force Z wich I always use offensively?

He then accued me to exploit the game by preventing my ships getting sunk on turn 2 in PH and wasn't happy about Kuching. When I explained, he said "you are getting defensive"...

Well, I decided it was best to end it there.

_____________________________

Without any doubt: I am the spawn of evil - and the Bavarian Beer Monster (BBM)!

There's only one bad word and that's taxes. If any other word is good enough for sailors; it's good enough for you. - Ron Swanson

(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 740
RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) - 7/29/2012 4:29:03 PM   
artuitus_slith

 

Posts: 141
Joined: 11/22/2009
Status: offline 		Personally I wouldn't be too angry about this, consider them commandos. And then when you are ready to go on the offensive use small fragements from your subs to scout islands in enemy hands-turn about is fair play after all. And the game doesnt model commandos or sub recon currently (often in the course of a patrol a sub would be sent to take pictures of an enemy held island/port ect), so this is one solution. Best way to proceed would be to discuss it with your opponent and work out an agreement, but I for one would let it slide and use it against him as well.

regards;
Gmoney

(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 741
RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) - 7/29/2012 4:30:05 PM   
Walloc

 

Posts: 3141
Joined: 10/30/2006
From: Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

A mini para drop might well be considered kosher if the attacker had limited intel on the target and might plausibly have concluded that it was ungarrisoned or even had no combat troops.

After all, the historical attack on Palembang was a small force.


As in this case considering that 3 squads wouldnt take the island from the original garrison, well i'd consider this highly unlikely. Whether he has or not reconned the island i have no knowledge of.
Also while i think u have a point Cap, i'd say there are potential problems in that approche. The ultimate consequence of ur line of thot, not to say its the case here. Is that it doesnt pay to recon. Via recon u can only gather X much information. If u dont recon u can at leased to one self justify small para drops as a result of "the attacker had limited intel on the target and might plausibly have concluded that it was ungarrisoned or even had no combat troops." Gaining much more information.

Then you are in my opinion walking a very thin line of what is kosher or not. Making the IMHO military fact that reccing is a near military necesity before attacking and its a flaw attacking with out trying to gather as much info as possible on the enemy. Not that it always happens in real life and u can find exceptions where teh opposite might even be true. In games even more so cuz of the hindsight factor and the fact we all know alot of what is on the other side.

U could ofc argue that the mini para drop is reccing but then the whole validity of the original arguement is invalid.
To me this is sub invasions all over again, just in another from, with the reservation that i dont necesarily know all the facts nor Steve's thinking.

Kind regards,

Rasmus

< Message edited by Walloc -- 7/29/2012 6:28:00 PM >

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)
Post #: 742
RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) - 7/29/2012 4:49:23 PM   
Historiker


Posts: 4742
Joined: 7/4/2007
From: Deutschland
Status: offline 		Simple thing Canoe:

Don't complain about it - remember it!

You'll have enough invasions ahead that could use a little sub invasion recon...

_____________________________

Without any doubt: I am the spawn of evil - and the Bavarian Beer Monster (BBM)!

There's only one bad word and that's taxes. If any other word is good enough for sailors; it's good enough for you. - Ron Swanson

(in reply to Walloc)
Post #: 743
RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) - 7/29/2012 5:25:58 PM   
princep01

 

Posts: 943
Joined: 8/7/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline 		Canoe, I am not of the "Don't get mad, get even" persuasion when it comes to a game.  I am much more inclined to just discuss the issue with opponents and reach an agreement.  Failing that, then some of the sub recon, para pay back solution could be used.  However, continuing a festering problem is not how I would approach this and, based on your previous comments, I know you are not of that ilk either.

It's all in good sport and for fun.....I'm sure this can be worked out if it needs to be worked out.

However, saying that and as noted above, I would say that the Japanese did us small paradrops in Sumatra and, in particular, around Palembang.  I do not rememeber the exact force size that was dropped (recollection was it was a battalion size drop).  Commandos and rangers were frequently dropped in small drops for recon on comms purposes.  Also, are we actually sure that paradrops do reduce the defensive value of the defenders?  There has been discussion stating both yes and no in the forums.  I think it once did that, but that later patches removed that affect.

Anyway, I am certain that players of goodwill such as yourself, can easily settle on a solution.  Good luck with that.  This is an interesting game, so I trust you guys can resolve it.

(in reply to Historiker)
Post #: 744
RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) - 7/29/2012 6:20:18 PM   
Cap Mandrake


Posts: 23184
Joined: 11/15/2002
From: Southern California
Status: offline 		Good point Princep. He could send Congressman Weiner style photos of himself via email instead of the game file.

That would probably be really annoying.

Considering the one-way mission of mini-subs and the later use of Kamikazes, it seems not a stretch for the IJA to drop 50 men with radios. Of course, then, like Walloc noted, it is purely recce in nature.

(in reply to princep01)
Post #: 745
RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) - 7/29/2012 7:03:42 PM   
princep01

 

Posts: 943
Joined: 8/7/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline 		LOL, Cap.  As usual a fitting reply.  However, Mr Weiner's, the most aptly named Congress-geek in history. photo would undoubtly start some of the most interesting replies seen in the Forum in awhile.  Still laughing at the thought:). 

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)
Post #: 746
RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) - 7/29/2012 7:25:10 PM   
Walloc

 

Posts: 3141
Joined: 10/30/2006
From: Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

Good point Princep. He could send Congressman Weiner style photos of himself via email instead of the game file.


<Makes u think of what might be in store for those reading a certain AAR, and a certain some ones liking of assorted pictures>


quote:


Considering the one-way mission of mini-subs and the later use of Kamikazes, it seems not a stretch for the IJA to drop 50 men with radios. Of course, then, like Walloc noted, it is purely recce in nature.


I dont think. That any one thinks, that this is in any way is a stretch of what is possible to do. Problem, if deemed a problem, comes in the form that those 50 men in this particular situasion gives a "100%" accurate OOB, AV str of units, full disclosesure of forts levels and so on. Normal recon doesnt do that. Hench the whole sub invasion debate in witp.
I fully agree with others that i would talk this over with Steve. No reason get mad at all. Either u find a solution or its just that the gloves are off doing the same back later on. Its only if that then become a problem later on that any thing needs to become "problematic".

Kind regards,

Rasmus

< Message edited by Walloc -- 7/29/2012 7:27:35 PM >

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)
Post #: 747
RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) - 7/29/2012 8:11:03 PM   
MAurelius


Posts: 152
Joined: 6/28/2012
Status: offline 		I know some people see issues with this - but I personally see a lot more problems with deliberately exploiting something like leaky cap or LRCAP over TFs to get bombers killed - as there is no way to interfere with their target-selection- things which are simply game-engine related - than some form of "recon".... using paratroopers for that - there is no other way in game to get something like really close intel - no spies etc... so I believe this to be a lesser issue than others...

< Message edited by MAurelius -- 7/29/2012 8:12:12 PM >

_____________________________

formerly known as SoliInvictus202

(in reply to Walloc)
Post #: 748
RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) - 7/30/2012 8:31:08 AM   
castor troy


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

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

A mini para drop might well be considered kosher if the attacker had limited intel on the target and might plausibly have concluded that it was ungarrisoned or even had no combat troops.

After all, the historical attack on Palembang was a small force.



3 squads = how many soldiers? Why not sending John Rambo alone?

_____________________________


(in reply to Cap Mandrake)
Post #: 749
RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) - 7/30/2012 4:25:10 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		3/8/42

North America: KB (or part thereof) shows up just SW of San Diego. IJN strike aircraft sink two YP at a cost of a few Vals downed by leaky CAP from Los Angeles. Steve's carriers have been off the West Coast for weeks now flying a multitude of small missions against the occasional YP, xAK and DD. He's got to be low on sorties, or possibly he's rotating in successive carrier patrols. I'll have to shift a few fighters south from San Fran/Portland to beef up protection of LA and SD.

Oz: Enemy combat TF with trailing troop transport TF nearing Port Hedland. The Allies have a five-DD TF parked there with two more TFs enroute from Perth, but probably not arriving until the day after tomorrow. No obvious signs of enemy carriers.

Indian Ocean: Massive number of enemy subs west of Cocos Island. Undboutedly, Steve is following their detection level readings to figure out whether I have carriers present and where, plus the chance of a strike and the trip-wire effect. Steve may be mounting an all-out effort for Cocos Island (or, much less likely, towards India). I can't stop an all-out effort vs. Cocos, but forcing Steve to mount a maximum effort is in itself a victory of sorts. Cocos has 271 AV behind nearly two forts with an Indian CD unit present. It's not a freebie.

India: I will know within ten days whether or not Steve has grand plans for India. If he doesn't, the Allies can begin shifting forward troops. I've already changed the two Marine regiments at Karachi to strat mode. They'll move forward to the Burma frontier if Steve isn't coming for India. I have two USA RCT in Capetown. They're ready to come to India (or possibly Sumatra), though I only have enough PP to buy one of them at the moment.

China: I don't think I can realistically expect to stop Steve from laying siege to Lanchow and thus stopping production. I will, of course, try to interdict his long, tenuous supply line. The main thing I will concentrate on doing is establishing strong redoubts and Lanchow and, if necessary, the bases to the east to prevent an enemy breakthrough that would threaten Chungking. Right now, I think the Chinese have performed well. There is a chance that Steve can overwhelm with numbers, but I think we can drag things out a long time. I have 2,000 Chinese AV at Lanchow with some good terrain to work with. I have something like 3,000 to 4,000 AV around the Nanyang/Ankang/Sian sector to draw on for reinforcement using interior lines. If Steve were to get stymied way out around Lanchow it would take him weeks or months to recalibrate his forces and get them somewhere else.

Para Fragments: Steve and I have discussed this at length. Bottom line is that we have mutually agreed not to use tiny fragments of paras or sub-born infantry to engage purely in reonnaissance missions. I explained to Steve that my defination of "lame-gamey play", which I am just now trying to define in my own mind, is two-fold: (1) is the move wildly unrealistic and/or does it offer a side a unrealistic result; and (2) is there an effective counter to the move. If a move is wildly unrealistic (such as providing complete garrison/AV/fort information by para-fragment assault) and if there is no way to counter the move, it's suspect.

That's why I don't have a problem with the use of picket ships. It provides a reasonable amount of knowledge not otherwise obtainable though it should have been historically and my opponent can counter the use of pickets. However, I have come to rely more and more on patroling ships (DDs, small ASW TFs, small minelayer TFs) as opposed to merchants. I still employ the latter, but lean more towards the former. There is no freaking way Japan could have used massed carriers just off the West Coast in March 1942 without the Allies knowing about it; but in this game it's totally possible unless I post picket ships.

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 750
Page:   <<   < prev  23 24 [25] 26 27   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) Page: <<   < prev  23 24 [25] 26 27   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

1.266