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: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

 
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: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent Page: <<   < prev  14 15 [16] 17 18   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 1/25/2013 3:09:16 PM   
Crackaces


Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline
quote:

which is attriting the enemy


I am not sure the Allies can win a game not ended because of SCLS or a IJ disaster and resignation through a strategy of attrition. If the goal is 2:1 VP's before the 1946 deadline, I contend that attrition alone does not get the Allies there ...

None of the AAR's I have read from your perspective has ever got into the 1944 stage. But in reading PzB vs. Andy Mac and my one PBEM experince that got to 1944 .. given blood, space, and time .. Space in terms of taking IJ premium (the denominator) and Allies Premium (the numerator) bases is certainly the factor as this game rewards the base points the most. You can shoot down 2:1 of aircraft and get 5,000 points but that does not come close to matching the opportunities in base points. Greyjoy shot down thousands of IJ aircraft yet Radier had thousands more to lose to get to that 1946 goal. Thus time to achieve this goal is surely against the Allies as the material to match the IJ strength does not begin to become overwhelming until March 44. The IJ can match blood all the way until the end of the game.

The attrition of certain key assets might be the path to victory because the IJ resign, but I do not think this works against an IJ player willing to truly work toward 1946 ...

_____________________________

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so"

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 451
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 1/25/2013 4:56:14 PM   
crsutton


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

ORIGINAL: Capt. Harlock

quote:

80% of practicing attorneys would change professions if they could.


That's interesting -- from what I hear, 50% of today's Law students are going to get that wish whether they have articulated it or not. The prediction is that there will be jobs for only half of the students currently in the system.


Yes, but that is still a better percentage than English majors...


_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Capt. Harlock)
Post #: 452
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 1/25/2013 5:07:18 PM   
crsutton


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

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

quote:

which is attriting the enemy


I am not sure the Allies can win a game not ended because of SCLS or a IJ disaster and resignation through a strategy of attrition. If the goal is 2:1 VP's before the 1946 deadline, I contend that attrition alone does not get the Allies there ...

None of the AAR's I have read from your perspective has ever got into the 1944 stage. But in reading PzB vs. Andy Mac and my one PBEM experince that got to 1944 .. given blood, space, and time .. Space in terms of taking IJ premium (the denominator) and Allies Premium (the numerator) bases is certainly the factor as this game rewards the base points the most. You can shoot down 2:1 of aircraft and get 5,000 points but that does not come close to matching the opportunities in base points. Greyjoy shot down thousands of IJ aircraft yet Radier had thousands more to lose to get to that 1946 goal. Thus time to achieve this goal is surely against the Allies as the material to match the IJ strength does not begin to become overwhelming until March 44. The IJ can match blood all the way until the end of the game.

The attrition of certain key assets might be the path to victory because the IJ resign, but I do not think this works against an IJ player willing to truly work toward 1946 ...


Well, the Allied objective is to wreck the Japanese economy and get close enough to start bombing Japan. Once you start the bombing then the strategic VPs comes in spades. So few get that far.

I will say that in my campaign with Ark, I never look at victory points. Makes no difference to me what the VP count is at the end. I will know if I won or lost------- Just checked and I am about 10,000 ahead as the Allies in 1/45. I really have no clue how that translates as far as Allied progress goes. I am playing scen #2 so my own expectations are different as he still has a decent fleet and for all purposes his air power is still fairly strong.


_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Crackaces)
Post #: 453
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 1/25/2013 5:22:25 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		Crackaces may have read too much into my "attrition" comment.  I wasn't referring to attrition as a step towards a VP win, but rather as an important component in bleeding Japan efficiently to reduce it combat effectiveness.

In previous AARs I've laid out my general guideline to the game, which goes like this:

1941:  The Year of Surprise
1942:  The Year of Japanese Expansion
1943:  The Year of Attrition
1944:  The Year of Allied Expansion
1945:  The Year of Allied Victory

In the late '42 and in '43, I want to have places where I can effectively meet Japan in battle.  Those battles will be bloody.  The Allies may come out on the short end quite often.  But, in the end, what matters is attriting Japan's combat power - especially in CAs, BBs and CVs.

I also agree with a philosophy I first saw articulated by Q-Ball:  The Allies have to close on Japan and/or the DEI to engage in effective war against industry/economy.  So, as part of the "effective attrition" campaign, I also want to advance properly towards those two objectives, putting myself in an appropriate position for the endgame.

As far as VP, I care nothing about them once auto victory is off the table.  I love auto vic - LOVE IT - but once it's no longer possible, it's just the ebb and flow of the game I pay attention to.

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 454
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 1/25/2013 6:03:12 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		2/25/42
 
NoPac:  Continued signs John is reinforcing.  I think there's a decent chance the Allies will win the base-building race up here.  Akutan and Cold Bay both have engineers, so I hope I can build the airfields more quickly than John can build his.

West Coast:  Ent and Lex recovered their fighter squadrons.  The carriers, currently seven hexes SSW of San Fran, will proceed towards Tahiti.

Pacific:  Quiet.

DEI:  The forlorn hope xAKL is still alive and undetected, but dodging some combat TFs left her still two days from Singers.  Two IJN combat TFs sank one other forlorn hope xAKL and two ML.  Singers down to 4k supply.  The AA is still exacting a good toll - the Allied points lead in aircraft is nearing 100.  I hate to lose this asset.

India:  Man, one of the Indian divisions at Chittagong has experience level 20!  Taking all factors into consideration, I'm starting to feel good about India.

China:  The MLR is intact.  The IJN "way out there/not big enough to do anything/not strong enough to pose a threat" army defeated the solo Chinese corps in rough terrain far to the NE of Chungking (with a big assist from bombers).  Unless I'm missing something, this campaign is meaningless.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 455
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 1/25/2013 6:30:34 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline 		Isn't there a supply trail from Russia that assists the Chinese? Could that far north unit be out to cut that, or maybe aiming at Urumchi which, IIR, has resources, industry and aircraft.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 456
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 1/25/2013 6:54:01 PM   
Crackaces


Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Crackaces may have read too much into my "attrition" comment.  I wasn't referring to attrition as a step towards a VP win, but rather as an important component in bleeding Japan efficiently to reduce it combat effectiveness.

In previous AARs I've laid out my general guideline to the game, which goes like this:

1941:  The Year of Surprise
1942:  The Year of Japanese Expansion
1943:  The Year of Attrition
1944:  The Year of Allied Expansion
1945:  The Year of Allied Victory

In the late '42 and in '43, I want to have places where I can effectively meet Japan in battle.  Those battles will be bloody.  The Allies may come out on the short end quite often.  But, in the end, what matters is attriting Japan's combat power - especially in CAs, BBs and CVs.

I also agree with a philosophy I first saw articulated by Q-Ball:  The Allies have to close on Japan and/or the DEI to engage in effective war against industry/economy.  So, as part of the "effective attrition" campaign, I also want to advance properly towards those two objectives, putting myself in an appropriate position for the endgame.

As far as VP, I care nothing about them once auto victory is off the table.  I love auto vic - LOVE IT - but once it's no longer possible, it's just the ebb and flow of the game I pay attention to.



I am not as experinced as any of the members of this group N=2 PBEM games -- Both scenrario #1. But I do not see 1943 as attrition per se but limited Allied offenses with the intent of pushing on the big bowl of jelly toward the big picture offense in 1944 rather than calculate "3 P38's killed 5 Tojo's today" although some limit of losses is in the back of my mind. I have been more focused on what offensive moves will cause the IJ the greatest consternation at the least costs. "Hit 'em where they an'it" That includes what moves will influence IJ deployment and economics. It might seem a nit, but I read AAR's with daily body counts of ships, planes, and squads, and yet the IJ are still in a very powerful position to continue the war effort. Thus I am not sure that a total focus on exchaning platforms as opposed to gaining critical postions where the IJ are weak is the objective in 1943.

Thus the logic in my first AAR of seizing the Gilberts and Marshalls early and then buying units to put pressure in Burma completly ignoring the Solomon's where I might have gotten better attrition of the IJ forces. The focus on seizing certain objectives at a cost that leads to further weaking of the IJ position.

BTW) It is quite possible if the IJ do not seal Burma at the India border to acheive an Allied victory in 1944.

_____________________________

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so"

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 457
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 1/25/2013 8:00:22 PM   
paullus99


Posts: 1985
Joined: 1/23/2002
Status: offline 		@Crackaces - 1943 is the year where the Allied player picks and chooses his targets to force the Japanese player to commit irreplaceable resources to prevent the "Expansion" phase - hence calling this the "Year of Attrition."

_____________________________

Never Underestimate the Power of a Small Tactical Nuclear Weapon...

(in reply to Crackaces)
Post #: 458
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 1/25/2013 8:11:01 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		Thanks, Paullus.  Crackaces is reading too much into my use of the word "attrition," I think.

(in reply to paullus99)
Post #: 459
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 1/25/2013 8:54:44 PM   
Crackaces


Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Thanks, Paullus.  Crackaces is reading too much into my use of the word "attrition," I think.


yes I think you are right. My only emphasis is that 1943 is not the time to enagage in a McNamara like body count assessment of victory. "I swept ABC today ans shot down 8 Tojo's for 4 P38's" OK .. but how does that connect to 1944 ?? As I stated .. I read AAR's (inlcuding my first AAR ) with a focus on daily body count -- i.e squads, planes, and ships particularly in the 1943 phase with little thought on how this proceeds on to victory before 1946.[I do know that you have a plan .. I an writing in general terms] I think paullus99 has the point in which picking objectives that the IJ has to comitt and take risks with irreplacemable asests is the major part of the equation.

< Message edited by Crackaces -- 1/25/2013 8:56:30 PM >

_____________________________

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so"

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 460
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 1/26/2013 3:52:12 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		2/26/42
 
Body Counts:  Speaking of these, you may notice that I seldom if ever post "body count" things - like my subs sinking the occasional xAK, or routine air battles, or the like.  Those are "attrition" in the sense that I think Crackaces thought I was referring to.  Paullus is correct in that I refer to attrition in a strategic sense - the bleeding of important enemy assets (mainly capital ships, because that's Japan's achilles heel) to permit effective operations as the game goes on.

NoPac:  Plenty of enemy activity up here, though I don't think I've drawn the carriers.  John is clear anticipating the spring weather, so it's possible the Allied operation drew some important attention and assets.

West Coast:  QE will prepare to sail with SYS damage at 14 (that's fine).  She should be ready in a couple of days and I'll then buy out 27th/C Div.

Pacific:  27th/B Div., aboard "regular" transports, will scoot by Tahiti tonight and make for Melbourne by way of Dunedin.  No sign of an enemy move on Luganville, Noumea or Fiji yet, but such wouldn't be a surprise.

Oz:  27th/A Div. will depart Melbourne and help with the defense of Perth.

DEI:  A forlorn hope made it all the way to Singers, but a DD and an APD dispatched her before she could unload supplies.  Drat!  The Allies are looking at Cocos Island, which I suspect (really nothing more than a hunch) might have 200 AV.  With a stacking limit of 15k, I think I can bring an Aussie division, one RCT of Americal, plus one Marine raider battalion.  These forces are prepping.  What I would look for is sufficient prep to coincide with availability of my carriers and knowledge that enemy carriers are far away.  Singers is down to 4k supply.  This is a sad thing.

India:  The Allis have prepared a much more elaborate forward defense, including Chittagong, Calcutta and Viz, with a defense in depth of all the dot hexes and small bases that would mess up my LOC if any fell.

China:  MLR is intact.  AVG is present and awaiting an opportunity to ambush a Japanese air raid once a pattern develops.

(in reply to Crackaces)
Post #: 461
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 1/26/2013 6:34:20 PM   
Crackaces


Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline
quote:

Body Counts: Speaking of these, you may notice that I seldom if ever post "body count" things - like my subs sinking the occasional xAK, or routine air battles, or the like. Those are "attrition" in the sense that I think Crackaces thought I was referring to. Paullus is correct in that I refer to attrition in a strategic sense - the bleeding of important enemy assets (mainly capital ships, because that's Japan's achilles heel) to permit effective operations as the game goes on


Exactly my point. Although something for discussion. Its 1943 and the choice is between occupying Kusaie and Ponape Islands at minimal risk or exchange capitial ships with the IJ .. I would take the former, and thus my discussion around objectives vs. attrition on that level. I think there are some critical objectives to find in 1943 ...

quote:

The [Allies] have prepared a much more elaborate forward defense, including Chittagong, Calcutta and Viz, with a defense in depth of all the dot hexes and small bases that would mess up my LOC if any fell.


In my opinion Warazup [Jungle,55K stacking] and Kalemyo [jungle rough, 40K stacking] are the two most important dot bases in the Burma theater. Hidden away my IJ opponents ignored them. Once built up they can stock up on supply and act as a supply head for any Allied Burma thurst. These bases can be built up to level 9 and 7 respectively. The terrain makes them very formiable obsticles to attack

_____________________________

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so"

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 462
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 1/26/2013 9:50:35 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		Crack, pardon me for swerving into potential, "I can nitpick anything anybody says" territory, but the examples you cite have lots of important exceptions.  In one game I had, for instance, I had just about wiped out enemy cruisers in '43.  Under the same scenario, surviving cruisers might be far more important than islands in the mid Pacific.  Also, Burma can be very relevant or totally irrelevant, depending upon which strategy the Allied player adopts.

But your larger point is made and received.

(in reply to Crackaces)
Post #: 463
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 1/27/2013 2:30:58 AM   
Capt. Harlock


Posts: 5358
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
quote:

A forlorn hope made it all the way to Singers, but a DD and an APD dispatched her before she could unload supplies.  Drat! 


Hmm, something may need to be modified in the game. IRL the 15" coast defense guns would have blown the Japanese ships out of the water.

_____________________________

Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

--Victor Hugo

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 464
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 1/27/2013 2:48:10 AM   
Cribtop


Posts: 3890
Joined: 8/10/2008
From: Lone Star Nation
Status: offline 		I was thinking the same thing, Capt H.

_____________________________


(in reply to Capt. Harlock)
Post #: 465
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 1/27/2013 8:35:39 AM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Cribtop

I was thinking the same thing, Capt H.


We did a complete analysis of the Singers CD installations about a year ago in one thread or another. It might even have been CR's AAR with PH.

There were only a couple of 15in guns emplacements and they were at each end of the strait. They didn't cover the inner harbor, which was I think was mostly 6in stuff.

The discussion was in a thread talking about whether there should be an HR disallowing Japanese transit of the strait to the IO before Singers fell.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Cribtop)
Post #: 466
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 1/27/2013 8:39:10 AM   
Cribtop


Posts: 3890
Joined: 8/10/2008
From: Lone Star Nation
Status: offline 		I recall it well, Moose. But, did anything shoot at the DD/APD TF, CR?

_____________________________


(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 467
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 1/27/2013 9:43:50 AM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline 		Singapore is not classified as as being on a narrow strait (unlike say Bataan/Manila) therefore there is no guarantee whatsoever that it's CD guns would always shoot at anything which is passing by.

Remember that the naval base is on the northern shore but the commercial port, at which all cargo/troop unloading occurred is on the southern side. The total "height" of the island is just about equal to the range of the 15" guns which were located in two batteries predominantly to protect the base, although 4 of the 5 guns did have full traverse. Defense of the commercial port was left primarily in the hands of smaller callibre guns situated in C19th fortifications.

Nimble DDs could conceivable get in and out of the commercial port without facing the 15" guns which were tasked primarily with anti BB bombardment missions and if necessary anti landing operations, all of which would last longer than a nimble DD darting in and out.

Which I think is why the game does not have Singapore as a narrow strait. Try to land an invasion force, you come up against the CD installations. Dart in and out at night, not so certain you present a viable target.

Alfred

(in reply to Cribtop)
Post #: 468
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 1/28/2013 3:16:19 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		2/27/42
 
John's Most Recent Email Message:  "SOOOOOOOOOOO close. Excellent idea Sir!  Time to re=start the Steamroller. Haven’t doing much STEAMING OR ROLLING but that is OK. Time to change this.  Home and working on the garage. We’ll be able to do 2-3 tomorrow."

My Interpretation:  Based upon the current disposition of enemy infantry, this threat rings hollow.  I think John is speaking of moving in force upon Singers and/or Clark plus some bold move with his carriers.  Unless I've missed something, though, John isn't going anywhere right now.  And there's one thing I've learned in this game:  carrier power is just like air power; it can sting; it can strike; it can hurt; but the infantry are the ones who apply the coup de grace.  And there aint no infantry available to Japan at the moment.

NoPac:  Japanese base building is ongoing, with Adak and Attu just reaching level one airfields.  Winter ends in two days, so we'll see who wins the base-building race.  I think the Allies did real good to seize those two forward bases (Akutan and Cold Bay).

West Coast:  QE will depart LA tomorrow night wtih 27th/C Div.  The American carriers are now far to the south and will make a fueling stop at Tahiti.

Solomons:  Some enemy dot-hex occupation work ongoing, including Shortlands.

Oz:  The threat at Perth/Geraldton unclear at the moment.  I don't think John has the "oomph" to do a land campaign, but a combo land/sea campaign wouldn't be a surprise.  I have 300 AV at Geraldton, but only 100 at Perth until 27th/A Div. (125 AV) arrives in a couple of days.

DEI:  Singers down to 2k supply.  Dutch patrol boats at Batavia are bringing in a trickle of supply each day.  But Batavia and Singers should fall sometime in March - the latter later, the former sooner.

Cocos Island:  7th Oz Div. at Socatra has 21 prep for this target.  That division has more than 15k men, which is the stacking limit at Cocos.  I also have two Americal regiments at Capetown prepping for Cocos.  Am I better:  (1) going with the Aussies only; (2) going with two Americal regiments, raiders, tanks, and engineers; (3) sending in raiders first to gauge the strength of the enemy, followed immediately by a strong force (probably 7th Aussie Div.)?  I am very willing for this operation to be "quick scrub" mission - ie, a serious attempt to take Cocos, but retire and leave behind troops on the beach if things look impossible.

Port Blair:  Out of supply and 300 AV.  I feel sure John's coming here soon.

India:  The defense in depth around Calcutta and on the vulnerable dot hexes and small bases to the north continues.  Two Indian brigades arrive soon, which will help me better configure the "in depth" part.

China:  MLR intact.  John's "SOOOOOO close" comment was in refernce to an AVG ambush of unescorted enemy raids against Changsha and adjacent bases.  I must have had my fighters set too high, becuase not one of the three intercepts engaged.  A shame, because those lambs were ready for the slaughter.

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 469
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 1/28/2013 5:17:35 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		2/28/42
 
NoPac:  Lots of enemy activity.  Can't tell yet whether its defensive or offensive.

West Coast:  QE will loading tonight.  Some APs will also load, primarily to shift some to destinations where they will be available for Cocos Island (most of my APs ended up at Seattle, which wasn't great planning).

South Seas:  CA Aoba led a combat TF to Fiji.  John's showed a moderate amount of interest in this area, especially considering the KB's cruise last month, but right now his closest base is Lunga.  If he's coming this way, he's got lots of ground to cover.

Oz:  IJA 16th Army HQ was two hexes from Geraldton, but now appears to be retiring.  I think John is reconsidering this land move....or this is the left side of a pincer movement that will include an amphibious landing in the Perth area.

DEI:  Another forlorn hope is in the Java Sea.  At this point I have no hope it will make it, but it probably doesn't worry John just a bit.  I forgot to evacuate Madoein airfield before it fell, which cost me 24 Dutch bombers.  Poor Singers is down to 200 supply, but man did she exact a toll on enemy aircraft today - 12 downed by flak (mostly Nells and Betties) and more due to ops.

India:  Quiet.  A company of US Army troops has arrived at Capetown from Balboa.  Originally, I had this unit slated for the African mainland base near Socatra, but I think I'll send it to either Addu or to India proper.

China:  The presence of the AVG persuaded John to shut down air operations temparily.  Changsha forts are at 4.92, so this could be a big help.  I think John may push around Kwielin and possibly in the terrible terrain west (true) of Ichang.  The latter seems like a fool's errand, to me.  No roads and good defensive terrain means it will take forever and the Chinese can easily shift to meet any potential breakout into good territory.  I"m also sniffing around in the NW sector to see if John might try a flanking movement on the Lanchow sector.  Thus far I'm not seeing anything going on.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 470
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 1/28/2013 6:45:47 PM   
Schlemiel

 

Posts: 154
Joined: 10/20/2011
Status: offline 		Does having troops in the hex allow him to have possible pilot rescue like, say, a sub would? Not sure on the rules for that.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 471
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 1/28/2013 7:37:28 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		Schlemiel, I don't know what hex your referring to.  IE, I can't answer your question, because I don't understand the question. 

(in reply to Schlemiel)
Post #: 472
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 1/28/2013 8:16:41 PM   
Houtje

 

Posts: 172
Joined: 6/19/2006
From: Netherlands
Status: offline 		He's probably referring to Singers; having a sub there reduces the number of pilots lost when aircraft are shot down (IIRC); having LCU's there might also have that effect.


< Message edited by Houtje -- 1/28/2013 8:17:15 PM >

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 473
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 1/28/2013 10:04:24 PM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Houtje

He's probably referring to Singers; having a sub there reduces the number of pilots lost when aircraft are shot down (IIRC); having LCU's there might also have that effect.



Having a sub in Singers' base hex usually reduces the number of subs.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Houtje)
Post #: 474
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 1/28/2013 10:14:47 PM   
pws1225

 

Posts: 1166
Joined: 8/9/2010
From: Tate's Hell, Florida
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

quote:

My Interpretation: Based upon the current disposition of enemy infantry, this threat rings hollow. I think John is speaking of moving in force upon Singers and/or Clark plus some bold move with his carriers. Unless I've missed something, though, John isn't going anywhere right now. And there's one thing I've learned in this game: carrier power is just like air power; it can sting; it can strike; it can hurt; but the infantry are the ones who apply the coup de grace. And there aint no infantry available to Japan at the moment.


Maybe yes, maybe no. By the end of February, any good thrifty JFB has had time to accumulate enough PP to buy out some additional infantry units from China, Korea, or Kwangtang. Just something to consider.


(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 475
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 1/29/2013 1:09:00 AM   
JeffroK


Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline 		Cocos Island: 7th Oz Div. at Socatra has 21 prep for this target. That division has more than 15k men, which is the stacking limit at Cocos. I also have two Americal regiments at Capetown prepping for Cocos. Am I better: (1) going with the Aussies only; (2) going with two Americal regiments, raiders, tanks, and engineers; (3) sending in raiders first to gauge the strength of the enemy, followed immediately by a strong force (probably 7th Aussie Div.)? I am very willing for this operation to be "quick scrub" mission - ie, a serious attempt to take Cocos, but retire and leave behind troops on the beach if things look impossible.

IMVHO, These units are better used in India, Australia or any other threatened places.

Once you get Cocos where are you going??

JIII is going nowhere from Cocos and might be a useful base which false intel could be used against.

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to pws1225)
Post #: 476
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 1/29/2013 5:32:17 AM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		3/1/42 and 3/2/42
 
NoPac:  A sizeable IJ TF moved toward my side of the Aleutians, but I breathed a sigh of relief when it proved to be a convoy carrying reinforcements to Umnak Island.  My two forward bases have decent garrisons, but not enough to stand against a major assault.

West Coast:  QE and 27th/C Div. are long gone from Los Angeles.  The American carriers are perhaps six days north of Tahiti.

South Seas:  Nothing happening at the moment.

Oz:  The little Japanese army is just "hovering" a hex north of Geraldton.  John is clearly waiting on something - probably an amphibious group.  27th/A Div. has reach Perth, but my AV there is only a bit more than 150.

DEI:  Singers is out of supply, though the units still have residual levels.  Thus, the AA continues to fire effectively.  John's losing many planes every day.  Imperial Guards returned here after licking its wounds for two weeks.  AV is 125.  :)

India:  Quiet.  Engineers just reach Addu Atoll.  Engineers will reach Diego in two days.  Another detachment just arrived at Chittagong.

China:  It looks like John's big play is in the Kweilin sector.  I've got terrain to work with plus the railroad from the Hengyang region, but I don't have enough over here to feel any sense of confidence.  I don't know exactly what's coming.  John has been working China harder than I had expected.  Still, I can say the MLR is intact.

IJA Divisions:  I say that I don't have to worry about a big play right now only because I know that so many divisions are tied up in operations that will take awhile.  Yes, John can free up two or four or six or perhaps even eight to attack, but those kind of numbers are not enough to threaten the well being of India or Oz.  John's going to attack and will succeed, but those attacks will not be the game unhinging types of attacks I might fear this earl in 1942.

Cocos Island:  Cocos can play a major role in the game in any of a variety of ways.  Suffice to say it's a key hex in this game - if I reclaim it. If I don't, then it won't be.


(in reply to JeffroK)
Post #: 477
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 1/29/2013 4:14:21 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		3/3/42 and 3/4/42
 
Email Security Lapse:  John emailed this a.m.:  "Pretty much done with anything associated with the land aspect of this war..."  Security breaches have been discussed ad nauseum in many threads, but here's another example of a major breach.  Does John not know how much help this gives me?  (I consider this to be a candid admission by John rather than "dissembling.")
 
NoPac:  Japan continues to reinforce Umnak Island.

South Seas:  Quiet.  John continues to attend to the dot hexes in the Solomons and north New Guinea.

DEI:  Singers AA continued to fire with good effect, but this may have been the last time.  John has four divisions here now (including IG at 125 AV).  A deliberate attack dropped forts from 1 to 0 and inflicted more casualties on the Allies.  John is not one for patience, so he'll probably try a shock attack soon.  It should either succeed or set him back for 10 days.

Luzon:  Clark Field brushed aside an IJA deliberate attack, doing much more damage to Japan (51 squads destroyed).  With 14k supply, this base could hold for several more weeks and maybe longer (longer if John doesn't ramp up air operations against the base).

China:  MLR intact.  Heavy concentrations of Japanese bombers are hitting bases in and near the Changsha to Liuchow sector of the MLR.  One base has suffered 15 and then 28 supply hits.    Is that reasonable?  I mean, for Japan to be able to wipe out 50% of a base's supply in two days?  This kind of strike looks like the rule rather than the exception.  I'll keep an eye on things, but this is troubling.


(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 478
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 1/29/2013 4:21:01 PM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline 		Japan has not wiped out 50% of the base's supply in 2 days.

Alfred

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 479
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 1/29/2013 4:22:11 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		I asked John via email how he thought the ground war was going. 

His reply:  "SUCKS! Am ready to fall on the sword OR sweep of every General’s head. Nearly FOUR ID’s cannot get even a 1-1 in Singers. Look at it this way all offensive plans for this war are probably done. This might be a very weird war for me to fight...meaning in near historical boundaries..."

Ouch!  John is giving me very helpful info here (if I don't think I need to guard against a deep thrust, I can fight further forward and begin to transition to some offensive operations).

More importantly, this serves as a cautionary tale.  I haven't done anything unusual or spectacular at Singers or at Clark Field.  Very routine, very run-of-the-mill defenses for the Allies.  So the wounds are entirely self-inflicted.  As Q-Ball (and no doubt many others) have stated, there are reasons to attend to Singapore immediately and effectively.  (An experienced player who knows exactly what he's doing and why he's doing it can ignore the fortress as part of a specific plan, but otherwise it's critical that Japan not allow this to become a problem.)

On the other hand, Clark can be safely ignored against all but elite level Allied players who might conceivably manage to make it a problem.  Wait unit supply runs out and then attend to Clark in March of '42 is fine.  But not Singers.  Get in and take it ASAP.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 480
Page:   <<   < prev  14 15 [16] 17 18   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent Page: <<   < prev  14 15 [16] 17 18   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

2.750