RE: Battle for Bangkok begins!

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: Battle for Bangkok begins!

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: Battle for Bangkok begins!

Page: << < prev 70 71 [72] 73 74 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Battle for Bangkok begins! - 10/14/2013 6:06:56 PM

JocMeister

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

Guys, I bow before the gathered wisdom.

I�ll kill off the superstack. I�ll leave the arty in place and turn back some of the forces I started moving south. The 4Es need a few days rest and once they are ready I�ll get cracking.

Princep, I�ll do some sandboxing tonight and see how high alt bombing works over big manpower cities like Tokyo. Previously this hasn�t worked at all. But the sheer number of Manpower there might make it worthwhile. You do make a good point on Bangkok too. If he flees the city he will lose the aircover and I can send the 4Es in.

No turn from Erik tonight so I get some time to sandbox a bit. I did some quick trial runs trying to hit specific factories. Results where not encouraging. Looks like there is a very, very small chance to hit them. But once you hit they do go down fast.

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 2131

RE: Battle for Bangkok begins! - 10/14/2013 6:15:09 PM

JocMeister

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

If it hadn�t been a river crossing and I closed the hexsides using HQ units and whatever. No one would object?

Strictly to answer your question and not to belabor the point, my own comment had nothing to do with it being a river crossing.

It's really between you and your opponent.

In the situation where I closed the escape for his superstack moving a BDE to flip the hexside you wouldn�t have? If not. Why? A specific amount of AV to close the side? Or is it the "manipulating" of the hexsides you don�t like?

Not trying to start an argument or anything. I�m genuinely curious.

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 2132

RE: Battle for Bangkok begins! - 10/14/2013 6:44:02 PM

witpqs

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

If it hadn�t been a river crossing and I closed the hexsides using HQ units and whatever. No one would object?

Strictly to answer your question and not to belabor the point, my own comment had nothing to do with it being a river crossing.

It's really between you and your opponent.

In the situation where I closed the escape for his superstack moving a BDE to flip the hexside you wouldn�t have? If not. Why? A specific amount of AV to close the side? Or is it the "manipulating" of the hexsides you don�t like?

Not trying to start an argument or anything. I�m genuinely curious.

The only comment I made was in response to your mention of an EAB. I think it was Moose who posed the example of 100 AV BDE.

I suppose I would feel the same about an HQ as about an EAB. But the fact is that the game engine does not allow the detailed resolution to deal with combat at the scale of blocking movement between hexes. When I say that I mean, for example, a force of 5x divisions wants to move and a Bn is in the way. I say "in the way" in the sense that it is (in this example) the only unit that crossed that hex side. There is no way for the (or part of the) 5x divisions to attack through the Bn and move on. Of course, if the Bn is the only enemy in hex then it can be done. But if the Bn entered through the left hex side and 10x divisions entered through the right hex side, the Bn gets to be defended by the 10x division!

Now, that is just a limitation of the granularity - the level of detail - of the game engine. How players deal with that is strictly up to them. I have zero - and I mean zero - problem with whatever they decide in their game. If I were playing a game with Moose as 'no HR' (which is darn close to my own preference) I would be fine with doing that with an HQ (or EAB) and not feel the least ire if he did that. I would also feel free to do it. In other games against other opponents I would not do it.

My original comment was in the spirit of what I think I have come to understand about this game between you and your opponent, seeing the various complaints you've made to each other about this or that. I believe it is strictly between the two of you; there is no technically, ethically, or morally objective way that is best. The only ethical issue would be if a player was violating the trust of his/her opponent, which is a whole different thing of course.

BTW, there have been plenty of historical examples of small forces holding off larger forces either temporarily or until the larger force gave up and did something else. The stand of the 300 is the most famous example.

< Message edited by witpqs -- 10/14/2013 6:45:01 PM >

_____________________________

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

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 2133

RE: Battle for Bangkok begins! - 10/14/2013 6:55:56 PM

JocMeister

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

Thanks for the response. As I said I was curious on your personal view.

Incidentally Erik actually sent me a pretty long email today to clear the air a bit between us. There has been some tension going on lately and we have kept communication pretty short and to the point for the last month or so. Its hard to stay objective and not get upset at this stage of the game and I think we both have been very quick to jump to conclusions and see "exploits" and whatnot where there is none.

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 2134

RE: Battle for Bangkok begins! - 10/14/2013 7:31:17 PM

aztez

Posts: 4031
Joined: 2/26/2005
From: Finland
Status: offline

The PBEM is between yourself and your opponent. So, I wohn't comment on those things.

However you have very good advice here and take those into your heart.

You will suffer B29 losses even in higher alltitudes. Personally cut my losses and went in low mostly since despite the losses they are actually hitting something.

Once you get more of those B29's I would not bomb Manpower.. well maybe Tokyo and few other cities but would go for more specific targets instead.

Also get in the range so you can use your 4E bombers againts Japan. To recap "B29 will hurt him a lot eventually but it will be B17's B24's along with P51 that will utterly destroy his economy).

That is kind of blunt but really would say as much after completing two games.

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 2135

RE: Battle for Bangkok begins! - 10/14/2013 8:11:53 PM

House Stark

Posts: 184
Joined: 4/30/2011
Status: offline

Joc, I wouldn't rush to kill off the superstack. It might be crippled, but I don't think it will die easily. Aren't units that are surrounded in defensive terrain sometimes quite hard to kill? I'm pretty sure I've seen AARs with Chinese units surrounded in forests that just refuse to die. Bombard away and gradually kill off those squads disabled in the attack, but I don't think you should move units back to kill the superstack until you've taken Thailand and Vietnam all the way to the coasts and linked up with your Philippines offensive. That way you will have your entire ground army at your disposal for whatever the objective is, be it the superstack, Luzon, China, Formosa, Malaya or whatever else.

Why not send the units that were freed up by the superstack's failed shock attack to siege Bangkok, allowing your better units to continue the advance. If you're entering the hex from Aluythia, he can't leave that way. If you don't suicide some EABs, then he has the option to leave the hex, but that might not be bad for you. (Also negates any charges of gameyness). If he leaves to the west, he has a decently long walk through bad roads to the nearest railhead. Then those troops will be out of the way, unless they choose to harass your lines, but if they enter clear terrain you can punish them for it. Maybe in mid 1945 you can get some shipping together and invade Malaya and finish off whatever is left there for VPs. If he leaves to the east then he has to cross into clear terrain, or the forest. If you put maybe 1000 AV in the forest to the East of Bangkok then he has to choose between shocking into that, or crossing into clear terrain and getting bombed by 4Es in the open while caught between your armies. And if he stays in Bangkok your second-rate troops can maintain the siege while you gradually chip away at it with bombardments and bombers.

(in reply to aztez)

Post #: 2136

RE: Battle for Bangkok begins! - 10/14/2013 8:30:00 PM

Bullwinkle58

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Now, that is just a limitation of the granularity - the level of detail - of the game engine. How players deal with that is strictly up to them. I have zero - and I mean zero - problem with whatever they decide in their game. If I were playing a game with Moose as 'no HR' (which is darn close to my own preference) I would be fine with doing that with an HQ (or EAB) and not feel the least ire if he did that. I would also feel free to do it. In other games against other opponents I would not do it.

For those of us average (tm) at best in the land game, does the unit crossing have to have a non-zero AV for the hexside to close? Or is that a shock attack thing? Something else? I recall there is a rule about no-AV units, such as HQs.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 2137

RE: Battle for Bangkok begins! - 10/14/2013 8:33:41 PM

witpqs

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Now, that is just a limitation of the granularity - the level of detail - of the game engine. How players deal with that is strictly up to them. I have zero - and I mean zero - problem with whatever they decide in their game. If I were playing a game with Moose as 'no HR' (which is darn close to my own preference) I would be fine with doing that with an HQ (or EAB) and not feel the least ire if he did that. I would also feel free to do it. In other games against other opponents I would not do it.

For those of us average (tm) at best in the land game, does the unit crossing have to have a non-zero AV for the hexside to close? Or is that a shock attack thing? Something else? I recall there is a rule about no-AV units, such as HQs.

I think it does have to have non-zero AV. Support units vary in that, for example some base forces have 6 or 8 squads for guard duty.

An uncertainty on my part is that sometimes a unit that river crosses and shock attacks suffers an 'attack collapses' result and retreats to its original hex. I don't know what happens to hex side ownership in those cases.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 2138

RE: Battle for Bangkok begins! - 10/14/2013 9:04:59 PM

JocMeister

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: House Stark

Joc, I wouldn't rush to kill off the superstack. It might be crippled, but I don't think it will die easily. Aren't units that are surrounded in defensive terrain sometimes quite hard to kill? I'm pretty sure I've seen AARs with Chinese units surrounded in forests that just refuse to die. Bombard away and gradually kill off those squads disabled in the attack, but I don't think you should move units back to kill the superstack until you've taken Thailand and Vietnam all the way to the coasts and linked up with your Philippines offensive. That way you will have your entire ground army at your disposal for whatever the objective is, be it the superstack, Luzon, China, Formosa, Malaya or whatever else.

Why not send the units that were freed up by the superstack's failed shock attack to siege Bangkok, allowing your better units to continue the advance. If you're entering the hex from Aluythia, he can't leave that way. If you don't suicide some EABs, then he has the option to leave the hex, but that might not be bad for you. (Also negates any charges of gameyness). If he leaves to the west, he has a decently long walk through bad roads to the nearest railhead. Then those troops will be out of the way, unless they choose to harass your lines, but if they enter clear terrain you can punish them for it. Maybe in mid 1945 you can get some shipping together and invade Malaya and finish off whatever is left there for VPs. If he leaves to the east then he has to cross into clear terrain, or the forest. If you put maybe 1000 AV in the forest to the East of Bangkok then he has to choose between shocking into that, or crossing into clear terrain and getting bombed by 4Es in the open while caught between your armies. And if he stays in Bangkok your second-rate troops can maintain the siege while you gradually chip away at it with bombardments and bombers.

We certainly think alike you and I!

This was actually precisely what I intended to do initially. I made some small adjustments to that. I�m still sending a lot of the forces down towards Bangkok but I will keep an Indian division to help reduce that stack. I�m also a bit worried about the actual reduction of the stack. He is in 3x terrain and its just a massive amount of troops. So I�m going to do a lot of softening up I think. Not going to jump right into deliberate attacks.

At least this will give the 4Es something to do while my fighter pools recover. Have to be careful so he doesn�t throw up a massive LRCAP from Bangkok though. 770 fighters there now.

I�ll try to throw up a map tomorrow showing a little bit more what I intend to do.

(in reply to House Stark)

Post #: 2139

RE: Battle for Bangkok begins! - 10/14/2013 9:36:25 PM

Lokasenna

Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

I have closed hex sides using things like AA units, which don't have any AV. I did not try it with river crossings though, because they'd get murdered in a forced shock (I assume).

< Message edited by Lokasenna -- 10/14/2013 9:37:18 PM >

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 2140

RE: Battle for Bangkok begins! - 10/14/2013 9:42:41 PM

JocMeister

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: aztez

The PBEM is between yourself and your opponent. So, I wohn't comment on those things.

However you have very good advice here and take those into your heart.

You will suffer B29 losses even in higher alltitudes. Personally cut my losses and went in low mostly since despite the losses they are actually hitting something.

Once you get more of those B29's I would not bomb Manpower.. well maybe Tokyo and few other cities but would go for more specific targets instead.

Also get in the range so you can use your 4E bombers againts Japan. To recap "B29 will hurt him a lot eventually but it will be B17's B24's along with P51 that will utterly destroy his economy).

That is kind of blunt but really would say as much after completing two games.

What was your hit rate when going after specific targets like say an engine factory? I�ve been fiddling a bit in a sandbox and it seem REALLY hard to hit anything when you chose a specific factory?

(in reply to aztez)

Post #: 2141

RE: Battle for Bangkok begins! - 10/14/2013 9:47:43 PM

Bullwinkle58

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

I have closed hex sides using things like AA units, which don't have any AV. I did not try it with river crossings though, because they'd get murdered in a forced shock (I assume).

Look at us! Three guys (me , you, witpqs) with, combined, probably 12 years playing this game, and we're still wondering about stuff like this.

It would help if the map made it easier to see the "inside door" and "outside door" at higher rez. I know witpqs uses a magnifying glass, but I can never seem to keep one around.

I'm pretty sure too a no-AV LCU won't work. Some AA has some though.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 2142

RE: Battle for Bangkok begins! - 10/14/2013 10:04:40 PM

JocMeister

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

I have closed hex sides using things like AA units, which don't have any AV. I did not try it with river crossings though, because they'd get murdered in a forced shock (I assume).

Look at us! Three guys (me , you, witpqs) with, combined, probably 12 years playing this game, and we're still wondering about stuff like this.

It would help if the map made it easier to see the "inside door" and "outside door" at higher rez. I know witpqs uses a magnifying glass, but I can never seem to keep one around.

I'm pretty sure too a no-AV LCU won't work. Some AA has some though.

Just tried. A EAB unit won�t flip the side. So I added a single squad (1 AV) to it. Still no flip. So there must be something more to it that triggers the flip.

When I tried yesterday using full RGT they also got completely wiped out in the crossing. But they did flip the hexside in the process!

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 2143

RE: Battle for Bangkok begins! - 10/15/2013 1:47:07 AM

Lokasenna

Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

I have closed hex sides using things like AA units, which don't have any AV. I did not try it with river crossings though, because they'd get murdered in a forced shock (I assume).

Look at us! Three guys (me , you, witpqs) with, combined, probably 12 years playing this game, and we're still wondering about stuff like this.

It would help if the map made it easier to see the "inside door" and "outside door" at higher rez. I know witpqs uses a magnifying glass, but I can never seem to keep one around.

I'm pretty sure too a no-AV LCU won't work. Some AA has some though.

Just tried. A EAB unit won�t flip the side. So I added a single squad (1 AV) to it. Still no flip. So there must be something more to it that triggers the flip.

When I tried yesterday using full RGT they also got completely wiped out in the crossing. But they did flip the hexside in the process!

I will check again, but I did it to Sydney against the AI with a couple of small AA Rgts. The ones with about 24 guns each, nothing else but Support squads. It's possible I was under latest official.

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 2144

RE: Battle for Bangkok begins! - 10/15/2013 6:07:08 AM

JocMeister

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

I have closed hex sides using things like AA units, which don't have any AV. I did not try it with river crossings though, because they'd get murdered in a forced shock (I assume).

Look at us! Three guys (me , you, witpqs) with, combined, probably 12 years playing this game, and we're still wondering about stuff like this.

It would help if the map made it easier to see the "inside door" and "outside door" at higher rez. I know witpqs uses a magnifying glass, but I can never seem to keep one around.

I'm pretty sure too a no-AV LCU won't work. Some AA has some though.

Just tried. A EAB unit won�t flip the side. So I added a single squad (1 AV) to it. Still no flip. So there must be something more to it that triggers the flip.

When I tried yesterday using full RGT they also got completely wiped out in the crossing. But they did flip the hexside in the process!

I will check again, but I did it to Sydney against the AI with a couple of small AA Rgts. The ones with about 24 guns each, nothing else but Support squads. It's possible I was under latest official.

I tried using an AA unit just now. The problem is that it has no AV. They don�t even trigger a combat sequence. They just "bounce back" with losses, just as the EAB.

EDIT: Now I got it to work. I made an error in the editor regarding the units already in place in the hex I was crossing into. I can flip the hex side both using an AA unit and a EAB. None with AV. Since they lack AV they don�t initiate regular shock attack and don�t get destroyed. Bug/Exploit?

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 2145

RE: Battle for Bangkok begins! - 10/15/2013 6:29:23 AM

JocMeister

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

I also have some non game related news!

Turns out baby number two is due in early April!

I really hope Erik and I have wrapped this up by then. Because the saying goes: One baby is heaven and two is hell! I don�t think one baby is heaven so I really don�t want to find out what the version of hell is in the saying!

Wasn�t really planned to have two babies so close together but it looks like my "little soldiers" are potent ones!

Puts the game a bit into perspective when you realise I might have TWO children during the one and same PBEM!

< Message edited by JocMeister -- 10/15/2013 6:58:21 AM >

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 2146

RE: Battle for Bangkok begins! - 10/15/2013 7:05:16 AM

koniu

Posts: 2763
Joined: 2/28/2011
From: Konin, Poland, European Union
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

I also have some non game related news!

Turns out baby number two is due in early April! I really hope Erik and I have wrapped this up by then. Because the saying goes: One baby is heaven and two is hell! I don�t think one baby is heaven so I really don�t want to find out what the version of hell is in the saying!

Wasn�t really planned to have two babies so close together but it looks like my "little soldiers" are potent ones!

Puts the game a bit into perspective when you realise I might have TWO children during the one and same PBEM!

Congratulations.

_____________________________

"Only the Dead Have Seen the End of War"

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 2147

RE: Battle for Bangkok begins! - 10/15/2013 7:59:47 AM

Speedysteve

Posts: 15998
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline

Congrats JocMeister. Great news

_____________________________

WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to koniu)

Post #: 2148

RE: Battle for Bangkok begins! - 10/15/2013 9:01:12 AM

JeffroK

Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline

One's an accident,

Two is being careless

Its only the next 25 years that are the problem!

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to Speedysteve)

Post #: 2149

RE: Battle for Bangkok begins! - 10/15/2013 12:26:14 PM

catwhoorg

Posts: 686
Joined: 9/27/2012
From: Uk expat lving near Atlanta
Status: offline

Congratulations.

And yes two kids during a single game is definitely a perspective mover.

(in reply to JeffroK)

Post #: 2150

RE: Battle for Bangkok begins! - 10/15/2013 12:31:20 PM

Encircled

Posts: 2024
Joined: 12/30/2010
From: Northern England
Status: offline

Tactical success but bad strategic planning!

Seriously, as a dad of two (seventeen months apart, now 6 & 4) you will love it.

Not sure how your gaming is going to go though!

_____________________________

(in reply to catwhoorg)

Post #: 2151

RE: Battle for Bangkok begins! - 10/15/2013 12:37:17 PM

JocMeister

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

Stratigic bombing - Problems and dilemmas
______________________________________________________________________________

So I spent a good amount of time trying stuff out. Probably done a couple of hundred bombings with different setting now. Boring as hell but very enlightening. I have found some big problems with my current plan/idea.

All test were done at extended range using 10 B29 squadrons totalling 100 planes.

We have some facts that are set in stone that limits us and what we can do:

-We can only bomb during the night.

This was definitively confirmed in my tests. Just as the regular 4Es the B29s were apparently built using papermach�. Against a CAP of 100 fighters (mix of Georges, Franks and Tonys) I lost 40-70 B29 per raid regardless of altitude (5k-35k). This is obviously unsustainable and impossible.

So all further testing was done at night. The following facts emerged:

- Aircraft factories are very close to immune. Both by fire and direct attack. The hit rate on these factories were abysmal on direct attack. This is ruled out.

- HI is very, very hard to hit directly too. While not as hard as aircraft factories it is still not worthwhile to pursue them directly. This is also ruled out.

- Manpower is the only thing worthwhile to hit with a night bombing campaign. But only when manpower and HI are concentrated in very big numbers. This leaves only 2 targets viable where the returns justify the losses. Tokyo and Osaka/Kobe.

It won�t take Erik long to realise what targets I go after and concentrate his NFs at these location. It can�t be helped as this is the only viable option right now. But I might throw in an occasional direct HI attack from time to time just to stay a bit unpredictable.

Obviously the data will change once I can get closer and start operations within normal radius. That will not only double the bombload but also quicken the pace of operations as plane and pilot fatigue will drop.

This has led to some frantic action at Allied HQ. I�ve given operation "Hulk Smash" the go ahead. More on that tonight. Its quick, crude and dirty but I hope it will speed up the fall of Luzon considerably.

< Message edited by JocMeister -- 10/15/2013 12:46:54 PM >

(in reply to JeffroK)

Post #: 2152

RE: Battle for Bangkok begins! - 10/15/2013 12:49:09 PM

Uncivil Engineer

Posts: 1014
Joined: 2/22/2012
From: Florida, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

Stratigic bombing - Problems and dilemmas
______________________________________________________________________________

So I spent a good amount of time trying stuff out. Probably done a couple of hundred bombings with different setting now. Boring as hell but very enlightening. I have found some big problems with my current plan/idea.

All test were done at extended range using 10 B29 squadrons totalling 100 planes.

We have some facts that are set in stone that limits us and what we can do:

-We can only bomb during the night.

This was definitively confirmed in my tests. Just as the regular 4Es the B29s were apparently built using papermach�. Against a CAP of 100 fighters (mix of Georges, Franks and Tonys) I lost 40-70 B29 per raid regardless of altitude (5k-35k). This is obviously unsustainable and impossible.

So all further testing was done at night. The following facts emerged:

- Aircraft factories are very close to immune. Both by fire and direct attack. The hit rate on these factories were abysmal on direct attack. This is ruled out.

- HI is very, very hard to hit directly too. While not as hard as aircraft factories it is still not worthwhile to pursue them directly. This is also ruled out.

- Manpower is the only thing worthwhile to hit with a night bombing campaign. But only when manpower and HI are concentrated in very big numbers. This leaves only 2 targets viable where the returns justify the losses. Tokyo and Osaka/Kobe.

It won�t take Erik long to realise what targets I go after and concentrate his NFs at these location. It can�t be helped as this is the only viable option right now. But I might throw in an occasional direct HI attack from time to time just to stay a bit unpredictable.

Obviously the data will change once I can get closer and start operations within normal radius. That will not only double the bombload but also quicken the pace of operations as plane and pilot fatigue will drop.

Looking on the bright side - once he masses all his fighters at Tokyo and Osaka ALL THE OTHER HOME ISLAND BASES ARE UNDEFENDED. Unless he pulls back all his fighters from Bangkok and Manila, he likely does not have enough to cover everything.

Your findings here strengthen the case for taking Formosa - you need those bases to get shorter legged 4E into the fight.

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 2153

RE: Battle for Bangkok begins! - 10/15/2013 1:01:33 PM

Bullwinkle58

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

Daytime needs P-51s. It's that simple. That's what they were there for. On IWO quite a bit, but they were there. Get closer. (Echooooooooo . . .

)

Manpower fires add up.

I haven't counted hexes, but are there any viable targets not in the HI that are in range? Shanghai? Canton? HK? Don't discount supply denial, and don't discount the pressure his HI bank is under from pilot tax in 1945. You don't get VPs for China, but I doubt those cities have NFs. Bottom-line, you have to stick and jab for awhile longer. Don't start milk runs over two cities.

Edit: Congrats on the baby. If you time it right you can name her "Enola." (If a boy, "Boch.")

< Message edited by Bullwinkle58 -- 10/15/2013 1:05:02 PM >

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 2154

RE: Battle for Bangkok begins! - 10/15/2013 1:10:07 PM

Speedysteve

Posts: 15998
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline

Interesting finds JocMeister. How did your B29's do on defence against CAP at night?

Obviously there's a load of factors involved (aircraft numbers and relative experience of both sets of pilots to name 2) but my latest night's raid on Tokyo was very interesting. I shot down 19 x enemy CAP for no B29 loss! This was when I raised my altitude to 20K (his CAP was lower). Only 1 night's bombing but also noticeably fewer hits on manpower and fires when bombing at 20K as opposed to 10K. Hope you don't mind me posting a segment from the CR!

Night Air attack on Tokyo , at 114,60

Weather in hex: Overcast

Raid detected at 75 NM, estimated altitude 21,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 23 minutes

Japanese aircraft
     J1N1-S Irving x 8
     Ki-43-Ic Oscar x 17
     Ki-45 KAIc Nick x 15
     Ki-61-II KAI Tony x 13

Allied aircraft
     B-29-1 Superfort x 21

Japanese aircraft losses
     J1N1-S Irving: 1 destroyed
     Ki-43-Ic Oscar: 1 destroyed
     Ki-45 KAIc Nick: 1 destroyed
     Ki-61-II KAI Tony: 2 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
     B-29-1 Superfort: 5 damaged

Manpower hits 4
Fires 1668

Aircraft Attacking:
      3 x B-29-1 Superfort bombing from 20000 feet *
              City Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb
      3 x B-29-1 Superfort bombing from 20000 feet *
              City Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb
      3 x B-29-1 Superfort bombing from 20000 feet *
              City Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb
      3 x B-29-1 Superfort bombing from 20000 feet *
              City Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb
      3 x B-29-1 Superfort bombing from 20000 feet *
              City Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb
      3 x B-29-1 Superfort bombing from 20000 feet *
              City Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb
      3 x B-29-1 Superfort bombing from 20000 feet *
              City Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb

CAP engaged:
S-812 Hikotai with J1N1-S Irving (0 airborne, 6 on standby, 0 scrambling)
     2 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
     Group patrol altitude is 10000 , scrambling fighters between 10000 and 22000.
     Time for all group planes to reach interception is 14 minutes
20th Sentai with Ki-43-Ic Oscar (0 airborne, 12 on standby, 0 scrambling)
     0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 3 being recalled, 2 out of immediate contact.
     Group patrol altitude is 10000 , scrambling fighters between 10000 and 25000.
     Time for all group planes to reach interception is 21 minutes
21st Sentai with Ki-45 KAIc Nick (3 airborne, 12 on standby, 0 scrambling)
     3 plane(s) intercepting now.
     Group patrol altitude is 12000 , scrambling fighters between 24000 and 26000.
     Time for all group planes to reach interception is 10 minutes
70th Sentai with Ki-61-II KAI Tony (0 airborne, 10 on standby, 0 scrambling)
     0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 3 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
     Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters between 15000 and 23000.
     Time for all group planes to reach interception is 7 minutes

This is also using the latest Beta by the way.

_____________________________

WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 2155

RE: Battle for Bangkok begins! - 10/15/2013 1:19:18 PM

catwhoorg

Posts: 686
Joined: 9/27/2012
From: Uk expat lving near Atlanta
Status: offline

Smacking down LI through manpower fires is going to help supply considerations as well.

And at the risk of sounding like a broken Moose, they all add VPs.

(in reply to Speedysteve)

Post #: 2156

RE: Battle for Bangkok begins! - 10/15/2013 1:48:34 PM

JocMeister

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Speedy

Interesting finds JocMeister. How did your B29's do on defence against CAP at night?

Obviously there's a load of factors involved (aircraft numbers and relative experience of both sets of pilots to name 2) but my latest night's raid on Tokyo was very interesting. I shot down 19 x enemy CAP for no B29 loss! This was when I raised my altitude to 20K (his CAP was lower). Only 1 night's bombing but also noticeably fewer hits on manpower and fires when bombing at 20K as opposed to 10K. Hope you don't mind me posting a segment from the CR!

I don�t mind at all Speedy!

Here is the disastrous raid on Nagoya:

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Air attack on Nagoya , at 111,60

Weather in hex: Heavy cloud

Raid detected at 61 NM, estimated altitude 13,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 19 minutes

Japanese aircraft
J1N1-S Irving x 14
J1N1-Sa Irving x 23

Allied aircraft
B-29-25 Superfort x 17

Japanese aircraft losses
J1N1-S Irving: 1 destroyed
J1N1-Sa Irving: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
B-29-25 Superfort: 1 destroyed, 6 damaged

Manpower hits 4
Fires 2700

Aircraft Attacking:
6 x B-29-25 Superfort bombing from 9000 feet *
City Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb
2 x B-29-25 Superfort bombing from 9000 feet *
City Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb
5 x B-29-25 Superfort bombing from 9000 feet *
City Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb
3 x B-29-25 Superfort bombing from 9000 feet *
City Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb

CAP engaged:
S-804 Hikotai with J1N1-Sa Irving (9 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
9 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 10000
Raid is overhead
S-812 Hikotai with J1N1-Sa Irving (3 airborne, 9 on standby, 2 scrambling)
3 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 9000 , scrambling fighters between 3000 and 9000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 53 minutes
S-851 Hikotai with J1N1-S Irving (4 airborne, 9 on standby, 0 scrambling)
4 plane(s) intercepting now.
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 1 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 10000 , scrambling fighters between 6000 and 13000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 21 minutes

Some CAP have air radar

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Air attack on Nagoya , at 111,60

Weather in hex: Heavy cloud

Raid detected at 40 NM, estimated altitude 13,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 12 minutes

Japanese aircraft
J1N1-S Irving x 6
J1N1-Sa Irving x 19

Allied aircraft
B-29-25 Superfort x 6

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
B-29-25 Superfort: 4 damaged

Aircraft Attacking:
6 x B-29-25 Superfort bombing from 9000 feet *
City Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb

CAP engaged:
S-804 Hikotai with J1N1-Sa Irving (8 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
8 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 10000
Raid is overhead
S-812 Hikotai with J1N1-Sa Irving (9 airborne, 0 on standby, 2 scrambling)
9 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 9000 , scrambling fighters to 9000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 33 minutes
S-851 Hikotai with J1N1-S Irving (6 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
6 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 10000
Raid is overhead

Some CAP have air radar

So of the 40 planes that arrived 8 where shot down by NFs. Another 2 lost to OPS. I�ll try upping the altitude to see if I can get better results in survivability! Can�t sustain losses like that.

(in reply to Speedysteve)

Post #: 2157

RE: Battle for Bangkok begins! - 10/15/2013 1:53:26 PM

Speedysteve

Posts: 15998
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline

Hmm. Interesting. It's weird how it goes as I also had several planes damaged but none lost. On the slip side I shot some NF down but you didn't. I guess logically Erik's pilots have better experience than the ones I faced....be wary of upping the altitude as I say I noticed a marked dropping off of bomber accuracy on manpower at 20k

_____________________________

WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 2158

RE: Battle for Bangkok begins! - 10/15/2013 1:56:52 PM

Grollub

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

I also have some non game related news!

Turns out baby number two is due in early April! I really hope Erik and I have wrapped this up by then. Because the saying goes: One baby is heaven and two is hell! I don�t think one baby is heaven so I really don�t want to find out what the version of hell is in the saying!

Wasn�t really planned to have two babies so close together but it looks like my "little soldiers" are potent ones!

Puts the game a bit into perspective when you realise I might have TWO children during the one and same PBEM!

Gratulerar!

... du f�r nog dock se till att g�ra slut p� kriget innan #2 anl�nder, annars misst�nker jag att din tid f�r AE kommer att k�kas upp

_____________________________

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

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 2159

RE: Battle for Bangkok begins! - 10/15/2013 3:32:11 PM

Bullwinkle58

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: catwhoorg

Smacking down LI through manpower fires is going to help supply considerations as well.

And at the risk of sounding like a broken Moose, they all add VPs.

Only Home Islands do.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to catwhoorg)

Post #: 2160