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  96 97 [98] 99 100   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 8:01:19 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		Paladin, I didn't know that the Yamato/Musashi group was coming back to Medan for a third consecutive night.  the RN TF was part of a rotation to protect the troops at Medan.  (A few days back, CA Quincy led some destroyers against four of the best Japanese CAs, and came out on top.)  I did know that if Yamato and friends returned for a third consectuve night, the BBs would likely be low on ammo.  Damage and slow them down and they face an ambush by SBDs and Avengers based at Langsa.  I've already seen what RN and RAN cruisers can do to Japanese battleships.  A month back, John lost two, with a third badly damaged, up at Akyab under similar circumstances - and Avengers there applied the coup-de-grace.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 2911
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 8:05:22 PM   
witpqs


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

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs
In this case, with many planes, if the base gets hit you will suffer the consequences. But you knew that when you bought your ticket, right?


Basically, yes. I know a size six field can accomodate 300 engines. I know the base force personnel are sufficient to handle the overflow at present. What I don't know is how big a deal it is to have 110 extra aircraft at the field. It's going to be very hard for John to get a bombardment TF in (he might not even try anytime soon, given the Allied navy and mines). But if he whittles down my CAP and manages to get a big daylight air strike in, I am willing to suffer the consequences.

You also suffer operating penalties when an airfield is over stacked. All just part of the bargain.

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/view/staffmonkeys/home

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 2912
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 8:16:04 PM   
Paladin1dcs


Posts: 195
Joined: 7/7/2011
From: Charleston, WV
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Paladin, I didn't know that the Yamato/Musashi group was coming back to Medan for a third consecutive night.  the RN TF was part of a rotation to protect the troops at Medan.  (A few days back, CA Quincy led some destroyers against four of the best Japanese CAs, and came out on top.)  I did know that if Yamato and friends returned for a third consectuve night, the BBs would likely be low on ammo.  Damage and slow them down and they face an ambush by SBDs and Avengers based at Langsa.  I've already seen what RN and RAN cruisers can do to Japanese battleships.  A month back, John lost two, with a third badly damaged, up at Akyab under similar circumstances - and Avengers there applied the coup-de-grace.


I completely understand guarding your troops and remember the beatdown that Quincy administered, hence why I say I don't have a problem fighting in a situation where you're outgunned. My view, now influenced by the fact that I know now why the Devonshire couldn't have been moved out, was that it seemed that you'd sacrificed a valuable CA for no real return on investment. Given that I know now that you were guarding your beachhead, I understand your actions better and while I still hate to see a CA lost, the knowledge of what you were protecting shifts the math back in your favor, especially if you're able to capitalize on the damage by pouring on the hurt with those SBD and TBM squadrons.

As for the hurt that you laid out on the IJN BBs a few weeks before, I'd point out that battle took place in almost perfect conditions to maximize the Allied advantages of radar and air power while minimizing the IJN's advantages of firepower and armor. I'd also note that those other BBs weren't the Yamato twins. I'd only feel somewhat confident in taking on those two with either a similar number of Allied fast BBs, extreme levels of SBDs and TBMs or 3:1 odds with the older Allied BBs. I may go 2:1 if I used the Colorados, New Mexicos or Tennessees, but that would not be my first choice.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 2913
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 8:49:38 PM   
jeffk3510


Posts: 4132
Joined: 12/3/2007
From: Kansas
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Paladin, I didn't know that the Yamato/Musashi group was coming back to Medan for a third consecutive night.  the RN TF was part of a rotation to protect the troops at Medan.  (A few days back, CA Quincy led some destroyers against four of the best Japanese CAs, and came out on top.)  I did know that if Yamato and friends returned for a third consectuve night, the BBs would likely be low on ammo.  Damage and slow them down and they face an ambush by SBDs and Avengers based at Langsa.  I've already seen what RN and RAN cruisers can do to Japanese battleships.  A month back, John lost two, with a third badly damaged, up at Akyab under similar circumstances - and Avengers there applied the coup-de-grace.


I would say you did what you intended to do, which was protect the troops at Medan. I would be ok with that exchange..you're also getting this from a guy who isn't afraid to take on BBs with Omaha class CLs...

_____________________________

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

Currently chasing three kids around the Midwest.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 2914
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 9:17:59 PM   
Chickenboy


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

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
Does what I have at Sabang really offend readers of John's AAR? 


No. It will "pay" for any overstacking, same as any other base. You're assuming the risk-and the game is capable of making you pay for it-so let 'er rip.

_____________________________


(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 2915
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 9:31:04 PM   
pws1225

 

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

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
Does what I have at Sabang really offend readers of John's AAR? 


No. It will "pay" for any overstacking, same as any other base. You're assuming the risk-and the game is capable of making you pay for it-so let 'er rip.


+1

If you accept the risk, you are entitled to any reward that may come from it.

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 2916
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 9:33:55 PM   
Chickenboy


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

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Dan, not a fan of either Allies or Japanese, but I'll offer my opinion.

The airfield is overloaded. If it is hit, you will suffer the consequences. That's built in to the programming. Period.

A looong time ago I was part of a larger discussion with TheElf about number of squadrons and planes at airfields versus the number 'supported'. Basically, the consequences of going beyond the numbers that are shown as supported are built in to the game as a way of inflicting on the player more of the problems encountered during the war IRL. many posters expressed angst over the battle to keep airfields from being over loaded in one way or another (aviation support, number of squadrons, number of planes, et al). Elf made it clear that they want you to be stuck with the consequences of over loading as part of a damper on the pace of operations.

In this case, with many planes, if the base gets hit you will suffer the consequences. But you knew that when you bought your ticket, right?


Gah! That's what I said. After you did.

ETA: This post was a deliberate effort to stoke the post count of this thread with wanton disregard to forum etiquette and fair play.

_____________________________


(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 2917
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 9:35:37 PM   
pws1225

 

Posts: 1166
Joined: 8/9/2010
From: Tate's Hell, Florida
Status: offline 		Gives a whole new meaning to +1, doesn't it?!

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 2918
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 9:40:40 PM   
Paladin1dcs


Posts: 195
Joined: 7/7/2011
From: Charleston, WV
Status: offline 		+1


(in reply to pws1225)
Post #: 2919
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 9:45:40 PM   
Chickenboy


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

ORIGINAL: obvert
Anyone playing the Japanese side should be most upset by how little he has done here so far to challenge you, and thus give you the opportunity to create a fortress there. Most Japanese players would have had 2-3 air HQ hubs in the area and a plethora of supporting bases ready and waiting for your invasion as early as day 1.


Well put, obvert. I find myself 'irritated' as a JFB reviewing John's preparations and responses in the region.

_____________________________


(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 2920
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 9:46:37 PM   
Chickenboy


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

ORIGINAL: Paladin1dcs

+1




+1

Wait-what are we "plus one-ing"?

_____________________________


(in reply to Paladin1dcs)
Post #: 2921
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 9:49:31 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		What a great day!  Profligate posting and I haven't even had to resort to my "sex topic" yet.  I still have arrows in my quiver!  (And, I think my winsome and wholesome ways combined with my supple and rugged form, sometimes leave Andre aquiver.)

< Message edited by Canoerebel -- 7/10/2013 9:50:02 PM >

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 2922
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 9:52:31 PM   
Chickenboy


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

Was "the sex topic" that you hoped to spur discussion on here that of your own alleged virility? Ugh.

Unsubscribed!





_____________________________


(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 2923
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 9:54:41 PM   
Encircled


Posts: 2024
Joined: 12/30/2010
From: Northern England
Status: offline 		Did someone mention "sex topic"?



_____________________________


(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 2924
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 9:56:08 PM   
MAurelius


Posts: 152
Joined: 6/28/2012
Status: offline 		what??? - where....

_____________________________

formerly known as SoliInvictus202

(in reply to Encircled)
Post #: 2925
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 9:57:56 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline 		Paladin, I have not been impressed with the Yamato and Musashi as modeled in this game. They do not seem to be the uber-BBs that they should be. Cap Mandrake and Adm. Lord Sprior nearly sank Yamato in a fair close-range fight with BB Warspite. The latter was sunk, but Yamato was so badly damaged it was finished off next day. Warspite's vintage 15" guns were penetrating Yamato's side armour. Similarly, I have seen AARs where Yamato succumbed to a mere 4 aerial torpedoes [as opposed to ~20 IRL] and in one extremely skilled attack personally directed by Greyjoy, one of his PTs sank Yamato with a single torp.
I have also seen these monsters shrug off dozens of hits by 1000 lb bombs only to go down from the fires they spawned. Then there is the fact that they are bears to support in fuel and reammunitioning.

Bottom line, the way the game models them the Allied player willing to risk ships need not flee in fear from them.

_____________________________

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 Paladin1dcs)
Post #: 2926
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 10:05:16 PM   
JuanG


Posts: 906
Joined: 12/28/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Paladin, I have not been impressed with the Yamato and Musashi as modeled in this game. They do not seem to be the uber-BBs that they should be. Cap Mandrake and Adm. Lord Sprior nearly sank Yamato in a fair close-range fight with BB Warspite. The latter was sunk, but Yamato was so badly damaged it was finished off next day. Warspite's vintage 15" guns were penetrating Yamato's side armour. Similarly, I have seen AARs where Yamato succumbed to a mere 4 aerial torpedoes [as opposed to ~20 IRL] and in one extremely skilled attack personally directed by Greyjoy, one of his PTs sank Yamato with a single torp.
I have also seen these monsters shrug off dozens of hits by 1000 lb bombs only to go down from the fires they spawned. Then there is the fact that they are bears to support in fuel and reammunitioning.

Bottom line, the way the game models them the Allied player willing to risk ships need not flee in fear from them.


Well, much would depend on engagement ranges - realistically, the 15in/42 should be able to penetrate Yamato's belt at ranges below ~16,000yards, with some variation depending on the exact shell model. A lot of the engagements in the game take place at fairly short range, so typically even the most protected BB's are vulnerable at times.

The torpedo issue is a separate and known issue, and as a result I believe DaBabes and some other scenarios (inlcuding RA I suspect) have tuned down the effect ratings on torpedoes to alleviate this.

< Message edited by JuanG -- 7/10/2013 10:11:55 PM >

_____________________________


Coral Sea HDM
AltWNT Scenarios

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 2927
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 10:09:21 PM   
Paladin1dcs


Posts: 195
Joined: 7/7/2011
From: Charleston, WV
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Paladin1dcs

+1




+1

Wait-what are we "plus one-ing"?

+1

Pointless posts to pass Senior Penguin's post count.

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 2928
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 10:12:34 PM   
Paladin1dcs


Posts: 195
Joined: 7/7/2011
From: Charleston, WV
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Paladin, I have not been impressed with the Yamato and Musashi as modeled in this game. They do not seem to be the uber-BBs that they should be. Cap Mandrake and Adm. Lord Sprior nearly sank Yamato in a fair close-range fight with BB Warspite. The latter was sunk, but Yamato was so badly damaged it was finished off next day. Warspite's vintage 15" guns were penetrating Yamato's side armour. Similarly, I have seen AARs where Yamato succumbed to a mere 4 aerial torpedoes [as opposed to ~20 IRL] and in one extremely skilled attack personally directed by Greyjoy, one of his PTs sank Yamato with a single torp.
I have also seen these monsters shrug off dozens of hits by 1000 lb bombs only to go down from the fires they spawned. Then there is the fact that they are bears to support in fuel and reammunitioning.

Bottom line, the way the game models them the Allied player willing to risk ships need not flee in fear from them.

Yamato sunk by a single PT boat??? That makes me extremely curious as to the actual combat effectiveness of these ships, especially considering how much of a fuel hog they are reported to be and how restricted their repair slips are going to be.

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 2929
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 10:55:26 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		The person who PM'd me yesterday about OpSec concerns has offered to contact John to explain the situation.  I've asked him to do so and provided the following information in hopes that it might thoroughly address all aspects of this sticky subject:

Yes, please do get in touch with John. I think it's better coming from you than me.

You are welcome to copy and paste the following or modify to suit your taste, but this is how I understand the issue developed:

1. You posted in John's AAR encouraging him to commit to a strong night-bombing campaign.
2. Just a few hours later, in reading my AAR you were surprised to note a sudden flurry of discussion about night bombing, where there hadn't been any before.
3. Concerned that there might have been an OpSec violation by a reader of my AAR, you contacted me by PM to aprise me of the situation.
4. The timing for the raising of the issue in my AAR seemed suspicious, but the person who raised it denies reading John's AAR and is a known proponent of night bombing. So whether there was an OpSec violation or not isn't known, though you remain skeptical.
5. In alerting me to what you felt was an OpSec violation, you unintentionally informed me that John's AAR was actively discussing night bombing. So now I'm aware that John may be considering it.

While I don't know whether there was an OpSec violation in my AAR, I have decided on a strong course of action so that I can avoid even the hint of impropriety. I am accordingly acting as though the issue wasn't raised in my AAR. I will continue to act "oblivious" unless and until something happens that would reasonably raise the issue fresh. IE, I will continue to conduct operations at Sabang as I have.

One final comment. I feel strongly that uber nighttime attacks were not possible in the war. I do not use them nor have I ever used them in a game. I do not intend to use them in this game and would prefer that John not do so. Others in my AAR have rules limiting nighttime attacks to one squadron per theater. I would be open to something like that.

(in reply to Paladin1dcs)
Post #: 2930
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 10:59:12 PM   
crsutton


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

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Paladin, I have not been impressed with the Yamato and Musashi as modeled in this game. They do not seem to be the uber-BBs that they should be. Cap Mandrake and Adm. Lord Sprior nearly sank Yamato in a fair close-range fight with BB Warspite. The latter was sunk, but Yamato was so badly damaged it was finished off next day. Warspite's vintage 15" guns were penetrating Yamato's side armour. Similarly, I have seen AARs where Yamato succumbed to a mere 4 aerial torpedoes [as opposed to ~20 IRL] and in one extremely skilled attack personally directed by Greyjoy, one of his PTs sank Yamato with a single torp.
I have also seen these monsters shrug off dozens of hits by 1000 lb bombs only to go down from the fires they spawned. Then there is the fact that they are bears to support in fuel and reammunitioning.

Bottom line, the way the game models them the Allied player willing to risk ships need not flee in fear from them.


Which is just like it was in real life. No effective fire control system and no effective radars made them less than super ships. At night or in a haze Warspite would have sunk her....Well maybe not in 42 but 44 for sure.


_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 2931
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 11:00:16 PM   
crsutton


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

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Paladin, I didn't know that the Yamato/Musashi group was coming back to Medan for a third consecutive night.  the RN TF was part of a rotation to protect the troops at Medan.  (A few days back, CA Quincy led some destroyers against four of the best Japanese CAs, and came out on top.)  I did know that if Yamato and friends returned for a third consectuve night, the BBs would likely be low on ammo.  Damage and slow them down and they face an ambush by SBDs and Avengers based at Langsa.  I've already seen what RN and RAN cruisers can do to Japanese battleships.  A month back, John lost two, with a third badly damaged, up at Akyab under similar circumstances - and Avengers there applied the coup-de-grace.


My experience is that BBs really have no business in night fights and I look to see them show up in the enemy TF. Moonlight is a factor but they usually do not hit when they shoot and they are vulnerable to torpedoes. Ship size is a factor, so a damaged BB will spend a lot more time in the yard than a CA. One torpedo hit might not do so much damage but it might take 90 days to repair 15 flotation on a super BB.

I like it when valuable assets such as BBs are risked vs mines, PTs, and DDs, You would have to sink 20 Allied DDS to make up the VP loss of the Yamato.

By 1944 when the Allies have better radar and working TTs, the old Japanese BBs don't have a chance in a surface fight.

Canoe is right. He can lose 2-1 in planes and 2-1 in ships in this campaign but if he is still sitting in Sabang come May 1943, he has won the game.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 2932
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 11:04:25 PM   
crsutton


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

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

[Note to Self: Super-Secret strategy to insert controversy into AAR to heighten interest so that I can overtake GreyJoy is working! Remember to introduce sex into discussion tomorrow.]


No, not sex! You had me at super-secret strategy...


_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 2933
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 11:12:28 PM   
Schlemiel

 

Posts: 154
Joined: 10/20/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Encircled

I've logged on to see if there are any posts about sex yet.

A bit disappointed to be honest, unless OPsec is a euphemism I'm not aware of.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

What a great day!  Profligate posting and I haven't even had to resort to my "sex topic" yet.  I still have arrows in my quiver!  (And, I think my winsome and wholesome ways combined with my supple and rugged form, sometimes leave Andre aquiver.)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Wait....

Was "the sex topic" that you hoped to spur discussion on here that of your own alleged virility? Ugh.

Unsubscribed!







In the context of this conversation, I suspect the definition of OPsec is as follows: Oversized Prophylactic service exercise case. Was OPsec breached by canoe's purported virility?

(in reply to Encircled)
Post #: 2934
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 11:42:46 PM   
JohnDillworth


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

The person who PM'd me yesterday about OpSec concerns has offered to contact John to explain the situation. I've asked him to do so and provided the following information in hopes that it might thoroughly address all aspects of this sticky subject:

Yes, please do get in touch with John. I think it's better coming from you than me.

You are welcome to copy and paste the following or modify to suit your taste, but this is how I understand the issue developed:

1. You posted in John's AAR encouraging him to commit to a strong night-bombing campaign.
2. Just a few hours later, in reading my AAR you were surprised to note a sudden flurry of discussion about night bombing, where there hadn't been any before.
3. Concerned that there might have been an OpSec violation by a reader of my AAR, you contacted me by PM to aprise me of the situation.
4. The timing for the raising of the issue in my AAR seemed suspicious, but the person who raised it denies reading John's AAR and is a known proponent of night bombing. So whether there was an OpSec violation or not isn't known, though you remain skeptical.
5. In alerting me to what you felt was an OpSec violation, you unintentionally informed me that John's AAR was actively discussing night bombing. So now I'm aware that John may be considering it.

While I don't know whether there was an OpSec violation in my AAR, I have decided on a strong course of action so that I can avoid even the hint of impropriety. I am accordingly acting as though the issue wasn't raised in my AAR. I will continue to act "oblivious" unless and until something happens that would reasonably raise the issue fresh. IE, I will continue to conduct operations at Sabang as I have.

One final comment. I feel strongly that uber nighttime attacks were not possible in the war. I do not use them nor have I ever used them in a game. I do not intend to use them in this game and would prefer that John not do so. Others in my AAR have rules limiting nighttime attacks to one squadron per theater. I would be open to something like that.

In the spirit of full disclosure I read both AAR's and expounded on the possibility of night bombing and placing a night CAP. In my heart of hearts, I do not think this was influenced by reading both AAR's but I think I committed the kind of mild, unconscious infraction that you warned of. The thought might not have come up had I not raised it.

Additionally, in the sprite of full disclosure, I'd like to declare I was not the person that PM'ed Dan. If I have something to say I generally post it openly. I'd like to apologize for any breach I may have caused, not matter how minor, or how unintentional. I have learned my lesson and will don the penguin mask of shame.....and nothing else. I throw myself on the mercy of the forum and deserve at least a round of insults. I submit myself to your collective mercy .

_____________________________

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 #: 2935
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/10/2013 11:50:47 PM   
obvert


Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline
quote:

One final comment. I feel strongly that uber nighttime attacks were not possible in the war. I do not use them nor have I ever used them in a game. I do not intend to use them in this game and would prefer that John not do so. Others in my AAR have rules limiting nighttime attacks to one squadron per theater. I would be open to something like that.


I had some trouble with massed night raids in my game with Torsten. They were shutting down size 6 airbases in one night's bombing and torching dozens of planes, both in the air and on the ground, and those fields were not overstacked.

Subsequently I read a bit about night bombing in the war and I agree with you, it doesn't seem it was exactly possible at those levels (150-250+ planes), especially early. Later of course the B-29s did it well, but basically those were 'manpower' raids, not accurate drops on airfields. This was written about night bombing by the British in Europe; ""Rather than nighttime raids, the US Army Air Forces were dedicated to daytime bombing over Germany and Axis allies, that statistically were much more effective. The British night-bombing raids showed a success rate of only one out of 100 targets successfully hit." And that is with many hundreds of bombers usually.

We have now adopted an HR: no more than 50 planes night bombing per target. This eliminates the uber raid and still allows some night bombing, which the Japanese did quite a lot with small numbers and the Allies did sporadically, both mostly against city targets. So far I'm happy with it.

_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to Schlemiel)
Post #: 2936
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/11/2013 1:12:50 AM   
The Sandman

 

Posts: 7
Joined: 6/30/2013
Status: offline 		Are any of the bases in Sumatra and on the western islands that you either currently hold or are likely to take close enough to either or both of Palembang and Singapore for you to be able to send torpedo-loaded bombers with fighter escort to hit ships in or transiting near the ports?

Because that seems to be the really critical thing here.

Also, to what extent can you lock down any other ports he might try to use if you can make those two too dangerous for regular use?

And for those who have the game and thus know more about the relevant details, would it be a good idea to have some units start prepping for Port Blair and Cocos Island? The former seems like a must-have, while the latter would help protect your LOC in the Indian Ocean and possibly be a stepping-stone towards a later invasion of Java.

...come to think of it, how difficult would it be to render Port Blair unusable by exhausting its supplies (and fuel, if aircraft also need that as well as ships)? Given that you should have Rangoon fairly shortly and that the Strait of Malacca is now full of mines and warships, getting resupply transports to the Andamans should be pretty difficult for John.

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 2937
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/11/2013 2:51:38 AM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		There are limitless ideas for ways to exploit and invasion like this one, but the cold, hard light of day shows that options are actually limited:

1) It will be a long time before Allied bombers pose a real threat to Palembang, Singapore, etc. Right now, my two airfields have to be devoted nearly entirely to defensive operations. This is true becuase I have to protect my key base and it's ships, with a few offensive strikes perhaps now and then; also, I have to carefully marshall my airforce, especially fighters. So I can ill afford to try offensive strikes into the teeth of strong enemy CAP. Bottom Line: Sumatran airfield really don't become stable offensive platforms until the Allies win the overall campaig to secure the northern end of the island.

2) The Allies have to feed all available troops in SEAC (other than those committed to Burma and thus remote from the nearest port) into Sumatra. My divisional units in Sumatra have suffered tremendous degredation. I'm going to have to begin resting them soon, and I'm going to need everything I can squeeze in from India. Most troops in India are restricted and must be bought. I only have 450 PP at the moment. Port Blair has been strongly held, probably has lots of forts, and has a powerful airforce. For obvious reasons, this is beyond Allied capability or need at the moment. Better to, as you noted, starve out Port Blair by enforcing a semi-impermeable blockade.

(in reply to The Sandman)
Post #: 2938
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/11/2013 2:53:34 AM   
Chickenboy


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

In the interests of maintaining OPSEC, I should tell you that I posted in John's AAR some questions that I had been meaning to ask him about. My list included:

1. Recommendations to rail transport the 10th ID from Tandjoen to Medan as soon as possible.
2. A query about pool levels of P-38E/G models in his scenario. For purposes of Allied swap-out with "upgraded" lesser fighters of course.
3. The limitations of the Colombo shipyards to repair damaged shipping from proximate surface fighting.

On a completely unrelated note, where are your carriers?









_____________________________


(in reply to The Sandman)
Post #: 2939
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 7/11/2013 2:59:49 AM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		Thanks for the laugh, Andre! Lighthearted is much appreciated right now.

(This game has been amazingly stressful of late, I'm not sleeping well at night, and I swear I feel like a crack addict that knows he's got to stop for his own sake, for pity's sake, but can't quite pull the trigger. What a ride! What a game!)

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 2940
Page:   <<   < prev  96 97 [98] 99 100   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  96 97 [98] 99 100   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

0.672