Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Powloon

With Formosa in your control does this put the HI (or parts of them) in range of your fighters?

I think I noticed from one of your earlier screenshots that Canton / HK etc still had some LI and HI. Have you any plans to neuter his industry there and exacerbate his supply problems in China?

quote:

Ground combat at Clark Field (79,76)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 105575 troops, 2157 guns, 2429 vehicles, Assault Value = 3975

Defending force 37702 troops, 525 guns, 387 vehicles, Assault Value = 616

Allied engineers reduce fortifications to 5

Allied adjusted assault: 1188

Japanese adjusted defense: 322

Allied assault odds: 3 to 1 (fort level 5)

Allied Assault reduces fortifications to 5

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), forts(+), disruption(-), preparation(-)
supply(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
4747 casualties reported
Squads: 236 destroyed, 118 disabled
Non Combat: 34 destroyed, 133 disabled
Engineers: 19 destroyed, 27 disabled
Guns lost 164 (70 destroyed, 94 disabled)
Vehicles lost 54 (13 destroyed, 41 disabled)
Units destroyed 1

Allied ground losses:
961 casualties reported
Squads: 10 destroyed, 161 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 17 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 8 disabled
Guns lost 35 (1 destroyed, 34 disabled)

Assaulting units:
4th Marine Division
1st Cavalry (Spec) Cavalry Division
XI Corps Combat Engineer Regiment
25th Infantry Division
38th Infantry Division
77th Infantry Division
31st Infantry Division
34th Combat Engineer Regiment
754th Tank Battalion
I Corps Cmbt Engineer Regiment
37th Infantry Division
XIV Corps Combat Engineer Regiment
1st Marine Division
2nd USMC Field Artillery Battalion
16th NZ AA Bde
South Pacific
X Corps Artillery
X US Corps
1st Medium Regiment
147th Field Artillery Regiment
I US Corps
IX Corps Artillery
251st Field Artillery Battalion
XIV US Corps
2nd RAA Jungle Regiment
Sixth US Army
XXIV CorpsArtillery
1 USMC Seacoast Art
225th Field Artillery Battalion
XXIV US Corps
III US Amphib Corps
10th USMC Field Artillery Battalion
XI Corps Artillery
9th USMC Field Artillery Battalion
XIV Corps Artillery
I Corps Artillery
694th Field Artillery Battalion
205th Field Artillery Battalion
XI US Corps
Southwest Pacific
33rd Medium Regiment

Defending units:
56th Ind.Mixed Brigade
1st Tank Division
102nd Division
56th Division
8th Division
61st Ind.Mixed Brigade
8th Exped. Force
158th JAAF AF Bn
157th JAAF AF Bn
91st JAAF AF Bn
28th JNAF AF Unit
21st JAAF Base Force /2
16th Army
27th JAAF AF Bn
216th Naval Construction Battalion
56th JNAF AF Unit
60th JNAF AF Unit
23rd Medium Field Artillery Regiment
12th JNAF AF Unit
15th Ind. Engineer Regiment
3rd Rocket Gun Battalion
21st Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion
20th Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion
33rd Ind. Engr Rgt /1

quote:

Transports flying to Cam Ranh Bay intercepted by 1st ACG/6th FS (C)
1LT Holt U. of 1st ACG/6th FS (C) is credited with kill number 2
1LT Andrews O. of 1st ACG/6th FS (C) is credited with kill number 2
2LT Anderson T. of 1st ACG/6th FS (C) is credited with kill number 2
2LT Anderson T. of 1st ACG/6th FS (C) is credited with kill number 3
Transports flying to Cam Ranh Bay intercepted by 80th FG/90th FS
1LT Cruickshanks, G.W. of 80th FG/90th FS is credited with kill number 4
2LT Jones J. of 1st ACG/6th FS (C) is credited with kill number 4
1LT Boain L. of 1st ACG/6th FS (C) is credited with kill number 2
2LT Ellstrom, G.O. of 80th FG/90th FS is credited with kill number 2
Transports flying to Cam Ranh Bay intercepted by 80th FG/90th FS
1LT Young J. of 80th FG/90th FS is credited with kill number 2
2LT Vogel, J.E. of 80th FG/90th FS is credited with kill number 2
Transports flying to Cam Ranh Bay intercepted by 23rd FG/76th FS
1LT Jones, C.L. of 80th FG/88th FS is credited with kill number 5
1LT Jones, C.L. of 80th FG/88th FS attains ace status!!
Transports flying to Cam Ranh Bay intercepted by 23rd FG/76th FS
2LT Gray A. of 80th FG/88th FS is credited with kill number 5
2LT Gray A. of 80th FG/88th FS attains ace status!!
2LT Dionne B. of 80th FG/90th FS is credited with kill number 2
2LT Hart, G.E. of 80th FG/90th FS is credited with kill number 3
2LT Gray A. of 80th FG/88th FS is credited with kill number 6
Transports flying to Cam Ranh Bay intercepted by 80th FG/88th FS
2LT Anderson, W. of 80th FG/88th FS is credited with kill number 3
Transports flying to Cam Ranh Bay intercepted by 1st ACG/6th FS (C)
1LT Young J. of 80th FG/90th FS is credited with kill number 3
MAJ Jenkins V. of 1st ACG/6th FS (C) is credited with kill number 2
Transports flying to Cam Ranh Bay intercepted by 23rd FG/76th FS
1LT Sees, M.R. of 23rd FG/76th FS is credited with kill number 2
MAJ Jenkins V. of 1st ACG/6th FS (C) is credited with kill number 3

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

quote:

ORIGINAL: Barb

Hi,
why are you trying to smash your head against the strongest part of the wall? Why all allies think they just can do with force and without brain? Have you read any of the military classics? Sun Tzu, Clausewitz, 36 stratagems? Couldn't you find a single sentence, that you can use for your game?
Is really frontal assault the best thing you can up with at this stage of war????

just my 2 Euro cents

As I wrote in my post (I quoted it below as you seem to have missed it...): The limiting factor is prep time and prep time doesn´t care one bit about "Sun Tzu, Clausewitz, 36 stratagems"...

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister
Here is where I really hate the prep system and how clumsy and inflexible it is. In the real war commanders would probably have looked at this (Formosa) and decided its not worth it. But I started prepping for it 2 months ago when there were only about 75k troops on Formosa. If I want to go somewhere else now I would need almost 3 months of new prepp time. Not an option at this stage when the clock is ticking...

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

quote:

ORIGINAL: Barb

Hi,
why are you trying to smash your head against the strongest part of the wall? Why all allies think they just can do with force and without brain? Have you read any of the military classics? Sun Tzu, Clausewitz, 36 stratagems? Couldn't you find a single sentence, that you can use for your game?
Is really frontal assault the best thing you can up with at this stage of war????

just my 2 Euro cents

As I wrote in my post (I quoted it below as you seem to have missed it...): The limiting factor is prep time and prep time doesn´t care one bit about "Sun Tzu, Clausewitz, 36 stratagems"...

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister
Here is where I really hate the prep system and how clumsy and inflexible it is. In the real war commanders would probably have looked at this (Formosa) and decided its not worth it. But I started prepping for it 2 months ago when there were only about 75k troops on Formosa. If I want to go somewhere else now I would need almost 3 months of new prepp time. Not an option at this stage when the clock is ticking...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

Land somewhere he isn't prepped for and your prep amount doesn't matter, either .

But hey, it's your game! If you head for Formosa, you're in for an epic smashup. Maybe you can provide us with kami tests in the betas!

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

I´m sure my landing will provide a very good testbed for the BETAs and kamis. I hope it won´t be too unpleasant for me!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

I´m sure my landing will provide a very good testbed for the BETAs and kamis. I hope it won´t be too unpleasant for me!

I'm going to venture here into the air model stuff where I usually get muddy. But here goes:

There's a lot of discussion about "beta" this and "beta" that and kamis. So far as I understand the betas have changed the last official patch in the areas of strike coordination. And that only. The rest of the air changes relating to altitude or anything else I thought were in the data changes Andy and Symon did off-line and which can be added to the game pre-start. (Along with the AA and ASW stuff from DBB.)

I am not here referring to the massive air data changes Symon is discussing now in the Scenario sub-forum. These were changes Andy discussed in various threads related to his Ironman work. For Lokasenna, I'm referring to the stuff we inserted into Scenario 2 in our game just before starting. Not the betas.

So, for this game, on-going now for years, I think there's only beta changes, not aircraft data changes, right? And all the betas do is affect coordination, not altitude effects. (4000 feet versus 100 feet, etc.) Kamis may not now, under the betas, come in 500 planes packages. But five 100-plane packages still wear down CAP's op points.

Am I really confused on this?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

I´m sure my landing will provide a very good testbed for the BETAs and kamis. I hope it won´t be too unpleasant for me!

I'm going to venture here into the air model stuff where I usually get muddy. But here goes:

There's a lot of discussion about "beta" this and "beta" that and kamis. So far as I understand the betas have changed the last official patch in the areas of strike coordination. And that only. The rest of the air changes relating to altitude or anything else I thought were in the data changes Andy and Symon did off-line and which can be added to the game pre-start. (Along with the AA and ASW stuff from DBB.)

I am not here referring to the massive air data changes Symon is discussing now in the Scenario sub-forum. These were changes Andy discussed in various threads related to his Ironman work. For Lokasenna, I'm referring to the stuff we inserted into Scenario 2 in our game just before starting. Not the betas.

So, for this game, on-going now for years, I think there's only beta changes, not aircraft data changes, right? And all the betas do is affect coordination, not altitude effects. (4000 feet versus 100 feet, etc.) Kamis may not now, under the betas, come in 500 planes packages. But five 100-plane packages still wear down CAP's op points.

Am I really confused on this?

I think it would be more like 10 50-plane packages than 5 100-plane packages, at least from what I've seen. Even with an HQa present, it can be really hard to get LBA strike packages to go in all at once. I've seen units of 18 get split into 3 strikes with elements of other units in the same package, and all flying from the same base! It gets weird, but perhaps a better approximation of reality.

But yes, the point is that even though you won't see 500-plane strikes just thundering through CAP before they can shoot enough down, your CAP will still be worn out/scattered from the 5-10 strikes that come in instead.


@Joc - you must've gotten unlucky with that 95% disablements in a non-base hex. I did it recently with ~750 AV and only suffered about -30 or -40 AV. Early war, as Japan, I frequently land with minimal prep for the base I'm landing at. Losses occur, but they aren't that bad. If you find a weak point in his line where you can land 3000 AV with plenty of supply, and you suffer even say 500 AV in disablements on the landing, but he only has a few hundred there and has to scramble to get back to you... I'm just saying I'd rather do something like that than smash my fist into the wall that is Formosa.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

@Joc - you must've gotten unlucky with that 95% disablements in a non-base hex. I did it recently with ~750 AV and only suffered about -30 or -40 AV. Early war, as Japan, I frequently land with minimal prep for the base I'm landing at. Losses occur, but they aren't that bad. If you find a weak point in his line where you can land 3000 AV with plenty of supply, and you suffer even say 500 AV in disablements on the landing, but he only has a few hundred there and has to scramble to get back to you... I'm just saying I'd rather do something like that than smash my fist into the wall that is Formosa.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

Says the man who HAS 200 fighters.

quote:

ORIGINAL: poodlebrain
He has to capture someplace that is useful for future operations, and Formosa certainly meets that requirement. At this point in the game Formosa is likely a wall with the thickness of an eggshell. It likely has no reserve force to reinforce any landing site, and any such force would be forced to move through clear terrain while within easy range of 2E bombers operating from northern Luzon. His landing force may suffer some casualties, but the ground campaign to follow should be very one-sided.

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

@Joc - you must've gotten unlucky with that 95% disablements in a non-base hex. I did it recently with ~750 AV and only suffered about -30 or -40 AV. Early war, as Japan, I frequently land with minimal prep for the base I'm landing at. Losses occur, but they aren't that bad. If you find a weak point in his line where you can land 3000 AV with plenty of supply, and you suffer even say 500 AV in disablements on the landing, but he only has a few hundred there and has to scramble to get back to you... I'm just saying I'd rather do something like that than smash my fist into the wall that is Formosa.

I think I took a screen of that in the AAR? In the DEI. Before I landed on Java. That ID is still recovering and will for quite some time.

Are you sure the Ampib bonus wasn´t active when you landed? But yes you do have a valid point. But at this stage suffering only 20% disablements would mean thousands of AV. And to be honest there isn´t that much places left to land.

quote:

Ground combat at Clark Field (79,76)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 111999 troops, 2171 guns, 2596 vehicles, Assault Value = 3871

Defending force 30555 troops, 375 guns, 129 vehicles, Assault Value = 395

Allied engineers reduce fortifications to 4

Allied adjusted assault: 1725

Japanese adjusted defense: 151

Allied assault odds: 11 to 1 (fort level 4)

Allied forces CAPTURE Clark Field !!!

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), forts(+), disruption(-), preparation(-)
supply(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
12919 casualties reported
Squads: 393 destroyed, 47 disabled
Non Combat: 792 destroyed, 31 disabled
Engineers: 79 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 231 (218 destroyed, 13 disabled)
Vehicles lost 132 (129 destroyed, 3 disabled)
Units retreated 17
Units destroyed 2

Allied ground losses:
493 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 50 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 7 disabled
Engineers: 2 destroyed, 25 disabled
Vehicles lost 6 (1 destroyed, 5 disabled)

Defeated Japanese Units Retreating!

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

Morning guys!

Man I love weekend mornings. Maria is home so I don´t have to take care of Ida. I can read the forum and do the turn in peace and quiet. Aaaah!

ART, I´m trying to get intel from the NOPAC area. I guess weather is bad because the planes won´t fly!

Lokasenna, If I´m not mistaken the whole Amphib bonus is about prep levels? It gives the Japanese the ability that every landing counts like they have 100% prep? The reason I don´t like the bonins is simple. Atolls. Yuck!

JeffK, I´m sorry but I don´t understand!

quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffK

You have to learn to stalk strine!

While I would have recommended Formosa before you landed on Luzon, I think that the best time has passed, but you have limited options as lines of approach to japan are limited.

You also have to prep, can you afford to waste a few months to change targets. I sometimes hate the prep process but understand the reasons. However is it more realistic to have Army level HQ prep and after paying PP to reassign LCU takeon the prep the HQ has done. This would allow a bit more flexibility but also costs a lot. Similar to the USN 3rd Fleet & 5th Fleet, same ships, different staffs.

I also noted on the more positive writings in a time where you are liberating bases against the time when your aircraft pools were showing zeroes!

quote:

move your US divisions into China mainland (through Cam Ranh bay or Haiphong - not to land in Jap controlled port), free Chinese troops, and try to conquer Korea and activate soviets earlier.