Opening 5 turns as allied in campaign

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Opening 5 turns as allied in campaign

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 >> Opening 5 turns as allied in campaign

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Opening 5 turns as allied in campaign - 1/3/2015 11:29:03 PM

kip1213

Posts: 39
Joined: 12/14/2014
Status: offline

Just some thoughts. I have had the game for a month, and I am starting over yet again!! I have done the first day step by step tutorial and followed it. It is said I should move my carrier task forces close to wake island. 4 out of 5 times the enemy task force finds my tf and sinks one carrier and sinks a bunch more of my ships. The one of the five times I had my carrier planes damage tf hitting wake island. To be safe, should I stay away from wake island and bring my carrier TF south and then to PH.

Post #: 1

RE: Opening 5 turns as allied in campaign - 1/4/2015 12:01:15 AM

pontiouspilot

Posts: 1127
Joined: 7/27/2012
Status: offline

I have never had the AI manage to catch either Lex or Ent early on. Some human opponents will try thus I run to beat hell as far south as it takes. In some human PBEM games people use house rules to avoid the hunting of these 2 CVs early on. Face it, the Japanese are not supposed to know where they are. It sounds like it is time to ignore the tutorial...you now know what can happen!

(in reply to kip1213)

Post #: 2

RE: Opening 5 turns as allied in campaign - 1/4/2015 12:49:26 AM

kip1213

Posts: 39
Joined: 12/14/2014
Status: offline

I understand, but the enemy TF that attacks PH will retreat towards wake island, after second move. This TF is the one that has sunk my carriers. I figure now, since wake island is going to fall anyway, I will head south and head back to PH after 5 or 6 turns. Just sucks putting all this time in the first 4 or 5 moves and have a carrier sunk.

(in reply to kip1213)

Post #: 3

RE: Opening 5 turns as allied in campaign - 1/4/2015 2:36:44 AM

Jim D Burns

Posts: 4013
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Salida, CA.
Status: offline

I always move towards Wake, but only so I can transfer the fighter group there onto a CV, so once the CV�s get close enough I pull out the fighters and then leave the area (I never get close to the island, just get within transfer range for the fighters). There is no place you should look for a CV engagement in the first 6-8 months of the war as the allies.

You need time for your fighter group sizes to increase, air frame replacements to accumulate so you can get F4F�s in all the groups and pilots skills to max out in training for every single CV squadron you have. Then and only then would I consider a voluntary CV engagement and even then I�d want land based air to assist so fighting a defensive battle would be my normal operating procedure into 1943.

Once F6F�s arrive then going out and looking for trouble is fine as you have a good chance to win by then. Until that time you need to be very conservative if and when you use your CV�s. KB is simply too powerful early war, it�s probably a 90% chance you�d lose a CV fight. And if you lose your starting carriers early war, you lose all of 1943 as a period of time you could be counter-attacking.

Jim

_____________________________

(in reply to kip1213)

Post #: 4

RE: Opening 5 turns as allied in campaign - 1/4/2015 3:48:35 AM

geofflambert

Posts: 14863
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline

I think it's gamey to try and intercept the US CV TFs and so does everyone else. IJN thought they'd be at PH, they weren't, there was no plan b for finding them. Do get the squadron off as it will be about 18 mo. before you start getting significant #s of fighter sqds. I tend to think the US needs to get those P-40s off of Luzon and back to Oz as it will be quite a while before they have much fighter defense in the Solomon Sea area.

(in reply to Jim D Burns)

Post #: 5

RE: Opening 5 turns as allied in campaign - 1/4/2015 3:53:32 AM

JeffroK

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

Against the AI, I regularly get in position to hit the IJN TF invading Wake.
Unescorted, they are easy meat, cony=tain a few useful warships and help gain experience. IMVHO worth the risk.

Against a live player I doubt I would do this but.....

I split my egress either North towards Dutch Harbour or south then pass south of Johnston Island.

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to Jim D Burns)

Post #: 6

RE: Opening 5 turns as allied in campaign - 1/4/2015 4:18:30 AM

Malagant

Posts: 372
Joined: 3/13/2004
Status: offline

IMO the Opening Moves spreadsheet is just that...Opening Moves. You will want to make changes to the orders within a day or two. As said above, a move to Wake to transfer the Marine Wildcats off before the island is captured is a solid idea. This also gets your CVs closer together. However, the intent is not to stay there. As also mentioned above, that leaves the CVs on the route the Japanese CVs will be taking to get home. Get the US CVs within 18 hexes, transfer the Marines off, and GTFO. You should be out of danger in 3 days or so, I think.

_____________________________

"La Garde meurt, elle ne se rend pas!"

(in reply to JeffroK)

Post #: 7

RE: Opening 5 turns as allied in campaign - 1/4/2015 4:48:51 AM

Jim D Burns

Posts: 4013
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Salida, CA.
Status: offline

I forgot to mention, I also transfer the marine dive bombers that start on board one of the CV�s to Wake on the same turn I pull the fighters off. Then on the next turn they can transfer down to Rabaul. There is too little supply available to leave them at Wake, get them off before too many get damaged by Japanese air strikes. This move means you can have dive bombers operating in the Solomon�s by the end of the first week. In my current PBEM game they managed to sink the small lone ship that was about to unload Japanese troops at either Shortlands or Buin, so the move pays off if they get down there ASAP.

Jim

_____________________________

(in reply to Malagant)

Post #: 8

RE: Opening 5 turns as allied in campaign - 1/4/2015 6:41:52 AM

Yaab

Posts: 4552
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline

kip1213, WiTP:AE without restarts is half the fun.

Here are some thoughts on the Allied CVs early use:

- move CV Lexington 18 hexes away from Wake Island. At 18 hexes, you can transfer the Wildcat detachment from Wake to CV Lexington. Mind you, the other Wildcat detachment from the same unit sits at Pearl Harbor

- move the Wildcat detachment from Pearl Harbor to CV Enterprise.

- move the Dauntless I unit from Pearl Harbor to CV Enterprise.

Congratulations! Now you have a fighter/dive-bomber combo on your CVs. Where do you put it?

Well, I put it on Christmas Island. You can try Suva or Port Moresby, if you feel adventurous.

PS. You can augment your Dauntless I pool by downgrading dive-bomber units sitting in the East Coast base.

(in reply to Jim D Burns)

Post #: 9

RE: Opening 5 turns as allied in campaign - 1/4/2015 7:21:06 AM

Chris21wen

Posts: 6249
Joined: 1/17/2002
From: Cottesmore, Rutland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

I think it's gamey to try and intercept the US CV TFs and so does everyone else. IJN thought they'd be at PH, they weren't, there was no plan b for finding them. Do get the squadron off as it will be about 18 mo. before you start getting significant #s of fighter sqds. I tend to think the US needs to get those P-40s off of Luzon and back to Oz as it will be quite a while before they have much fighter defense in the Solomon Sea area.

It is gamey to go look for the Allied CVs but so is intercepting the TF heading for Wake or not sending TF Z to intercept Japanese landings in Malaya. Anything you do in the opening few weeks of the war that impacts on the historical setup is gamey, unfortunately that's the nature of a game like this. It's your war, your planning so go find them or not, make a plan B.

(in reply to geofflambert)

Post #: 10

RE: Opening 5 turns as allied in campaign - 1/4/2015 11:24:35 AM

jmalter

Posts: 1673
Joined: 10/12/2010
Status: offline

IIRC, once of the USN CVs has a USMC airgroup destined for transfer to Wake. Make that transfer, but no way I'd try to intercept the KB as it withdraws from the PH attacks. At least one of the USN CV TFs is v. low on fuel, & their airframes & pilots compare poorly to those of the KB. Run away, live to fight another day!

I think it's called the 'fleet in being' strategy - ships that remain afloat are more useful to your future plans than ships at the bottom of the sea. Expending partial USMC airgroups at Wake is acceptable, they can do some attrition work. Losing a USN CV in 12/41 is awful, keeping these ships safe is primary to any future Allied operations.

(in reply to Chris21wen)

Post #: 11

RE: Opening 5 turns as allied in campaign - 1/4/2015 12:31:23 PM

ny59giants

Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline

Like Jim stated, option one for Lex and "E" is to head close enough to Wake to get the fighters off before heading north towards Aleutians. Option two is to head due south and try to intervene with Gilbert invasions. As Allied player, I ALWAYS add a Marine fighter group (18 planes) to all my American CVs (except Wasp). Its nice to have 45 fighters on board to increase their survivability through the first 6 months. Each CV TF has a CV, 2 to 4 CAs, and 6 to 8 DDs. Brooklyn CLs are paired up with Porter Class DDs for my SC TF.

< Message edited by ny59giants -- 1/4/2015 1:32:13 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to jmalter)

Post #: 12

RE: Opening 5 turns as allied in campaign - 1/4/2015 2:30:48 PM

Dili

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline

Then it is also Gamey take the fighter squadron from Wake.

Politically would be unsustainable.

(in reply to ny59giants)

Post #: 13

RE: Opening 5 turns as allied in campaign - 1/4/2015 3:20:35 PM

msieving1

Posts: 526
Joined: 3/23/2007
From: Missouri
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

Then it is also Gamey take the fighter squadron from Wake.

Politically would be unsustainable.

I don't think there would have been any political problems in removing the VMF squadron from Wake. In real life, though, it would have been pointless. Only four F4Fs survived opening day, and risking a CV to evacuate four fighters wouldn't be a very wise use of resources.

The USN regarded Wake as a liability, more trouble than it was worth. They'd have been happy to evacuate the entire garrison if they could. Unfortunately, the Japanese got there first.

_____________________________

-- Mark Sieving

(in reply to Dili)

Post #: 14

RE: Opening 5 turns as allied in campaign - 1/4/2015 3:33:28 PM

DeZanic

Posts: 26
Joined: 2/21/2014
Status: offline

Well I think you guys have to accept your destiny and move on. If you loose a carrier or battle its unfair to reload and start again because then you know whats gonna happen. Once you start the campaign you cannot go back in time in my opinion. I lost two carriers half a dozen of battleships and cruisers and endless amounts of destroyers and planes in the first few days so I have to deal with thoose problems, and kudos for the Japanese AI beeing so talented to do so much damage.

SO again.. dont go back in time. Its gamey. Instead plan every move wisely.

(in reply to msieving1)

Post #: 15

RE: Opening 5 turns as allied in campaign - 1/4/2015 4:15:54 PM

Numdydar

Posts: 3211
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline

Most players do not get into '44. Either against the AI or PBEM so truly do not see how 'meh' losing two CVs in '42 or '41 means. Load up the Downfall scenario as the Allies and look at just the CV list and you will understand (and be amazed).

In all honesty, the Allies could just hole up until '43 and it would not change the outcome of the game. Would it be 'fun' not really. Which is why players don't do this even though it is entirely a viable strategy.

Although the game can go past 'August '45, it really should not from a historical perceptive. Actually any WWII game should not go past August '45 simply because of the bomb.

Games that have research should have AVs based on who get the bomb first. As it pretty much means game over for the side that lost the race.

< Message edited by Numdydar -- 1/4/2015 5:16:13 PM >

(in reply to DeZanic)

Post #: 16

RE: Opening 5 turns as allied in campaign - 1/4/2015 4:58:21 PM

RogerJNeilson

Posts: 1277
Joined: 4/12/2012
From: Bedlington, Northumberland, UK
Status: offline

Currently in August 1944.

This is what I have in the way of CVs.... didn't bother listing CVEs and CVLs.

I recall losing two... way back, didn't make much difference really.

Roger

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

An unplanned dynasty: Roger Neilson, Roger Neilson 11, Roger Neilson 3 previous posts 898+1515 + 1126 = 3539.....Finally completed my game which started the day WITP:AE was released

(in reply to Numdydar)

Post #: 17

RE: Opening 5 turns as allied in campaign - 1/4/2015 5:39:19 PM

Jim D Burns

Posts: 4013
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Salida, CA.
Status: offline

The critical year for CV�s is 1943 when it comes to what losses you may or may not take early game. The CV production ramp up doesn�t start to make a difference until 1944, so if you lose all or most of your starting carriers you have no way to launch significant counter-attacks in 1943.

If Japan has a whole extra year to build up supplies and fort levels at the perimeter bases it�ll make your counter-attacks a whole lot harder. So the difference is starting 1944 with the Gilberts taken and a foothold in the Marshall�s or not. That�s a huge time window if you need to use the first half of 1944 just taking the Marshall�s and getting bases maxed out for land based air.

I�d much prefer having carriers in 1943 so you can start pushing back as soon as possible. So my advice is don�t risk them in 1942 unless it�s a defensive battle (a fight with land based air helping out) for a critical area like Pearl or New Zealand.

Jim

_____________________________

(in reply to RogerJNeilson)

Post #: 18

RE: Opening 5 turns as allied in campaign - 1/4/2015 6:58:23 PM

kip1213

Posts: 39
Joined: 12/14/2014
Status: offline

Thank you for the input guys. I figure now what ever I lose I lose. As for being gamey, I disagree if u start over if u are a new player. In my restarts,(which I am done with, I have hade different results with AI. In one game they attacked a certain base, in another they did not. I'm just going to go with the game and let it go where it go's. Thank you again. Kip

(in reply to Jim D Burns)

Post #: 19

RE: Opening 5 turns as allied in campaign - 1/4/2015 7:01:28 PM

RogerJNeilson

Posts: 1277
Joined: 4/12/2012
From: Bedlington, Northumberland, UK
Status: offline

I don't think 'gamey' is an appropriate description when you are playing the AI.You are then working against a set of circumstances and choose how 'hard' you make these. restarts can be part of the learning process.

Gamey is an oft expressed view when playing against an evil, cunning, treacherous human.

Roger

_____________________________

An unplanned dynasty: Roger Neilson, Roger Neilson 11, Roger Neilson 3 previous posts 898+1515 + 1126 = 3539.....Finally completed my game which started the day WITP:AE was released

(in reply to kip1213)

Post #: 20

RE: Opening 5 turns as allied in campaign - 1/5/2015 11:27:20 AM

HansBolter

Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kip1213

Thank you for the input guys. I figure now what ever I lose I lose. As for being gamey, I disagree if u start over if u are a new player. In my restarts,(which I am done with, I have hade different results with AI. In one game they attacked a certain base, in another they did not. I'm just going to go with the game and let it go where it go's. Thank you again. Kip

The AI follows a set of scripts that vary from game to game. The set is chosen at game start.

Sometimes when playing the AI its worth starting over just to get a different set of scripts.

_____________________________

Hans

(in reply to kip1213)

Post #: 21

RE: Opening 5 turns as allied in campaign - 1/5/2015 7:24:02 PM

btd64

Posts: 9973
Joined: 1/23/2010
From: Mass. USA. now in Lancaster, OHIO
Status: offline

First 4 or 5 days.....Ha....more like the first 4 or 5 months. minimum....Heading the CV's south is fine. As long as your opponent doesn't have a flock of subs in the way.

Right JuanG.

Ah, but it is just a game. Fun to win and lose....GP

< Message edited by General Patton -- 1/5/2015 8:25:27 PM >

_____________________________

Intel i7 4.3GHz 10th Gen,16GB Ram,Nvidia GeForce MX330

AKA General Patton

WPO,WITP,WITPAE-Mod Designer/Tester
DWU-Beta Tester
TOAW4-Alpha/Beta Tester

"Do everything you ask of those you command"....Gen. George S. Patton

(in reply to HansBolter)

Post #: 22

RE: Opening 5 turns as allied in campaign - 1/5/2015 8:17:31 PM

DeZanic

Posts: 26
Joined: 2/21/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

Most players do not get into '44. Either against the AI or PBEM so truly do not see how 'meh' losing two CVs in '42 or '41 means. Load up the Downfall scenario as the Allies and look at just the CV list and you will understand (and be amazed).

In all honesty, the Allies could just hole up until '43 and it would not change the outcome of the game. Would it be 'fun' not really. Which is why players don't do this even though it is entirely a viable strategy.

Although the game can go past 'August '45, it really should not from a historical perceptive. Actually any WWII game should not go past August '45 simply because of the bomb.

Games that have research should have AVs based on who get the bomb first. As it pretty much means game over for the side that lost the race.

I think that Ive read somewhere that in 1944 the Pentagon calculated that Japan could be defeated by 1948. However one thing was certain from the beginning of the war, the Allied had no intentions of ever accepting anything but an unconditional surrender from the Axis as we know. So for the Axis to win WWII they would have been forced to occupy all Allied territories I guess.

Well I wanted to post links and references but this site has some stupid redicilous strange rules regarding it.

< Message edited by DeZanic -- 1/5/2015 9:25:22 PM >

(in reply to Numdydar)

Post #: 23

RE: Opening 5 turns as allied in campaign - 1/5/2015 8:34:33 PM

AW1Steve

Posts: 14507
Joined: 3/10/2007
From: Mordor Illlinois
Status: offline

It's not worth picking up the planes at Wake. They are a Det. of a squadron at PH. When gone , they simply have the same effect as if you brought them to PH and re-joined their squadron. No net gain. And you are risking one or more of your precious CV's. Yet those fighters might savage a couple of unescorted Japanese bombers.

You know where the KB is on Dec 8. Your goal should be to be as far from it as you can. Sending your CV's against the KB , or even just part of it , is like sending a little boy in boxing gloves up against the heavy weight champion of the world. It can't end well.

The value of your carriers is in their FUTURE value. The most important part of a CV is it's pilots and their aircraft. Your pilots are rookies. Give them time to grow into the world beaters they can become. And your planes are for the most part, well junk. Buffalo's and Devastators are great trainers. Combat planes? Not so much.

In essence , the most effective thing you can do with almost all of your ships is RUN AWAY! At very least pull them back so they can get full air groups , cherry-picked leaders , and be consolidated into a more useful formation.

One fact as the allied player you MUST come to grips with is you are all about the future. The ships and pilots you save now , will spearhead your return. Today , unfortunately belongs to the Japanese. The more you save , preserve , train and regroup , the sooner you will be able to hit back. Good luck! I'll wish you good hunting in 6 to 9 months (of game play)!

_____________________________

(in reply to DeZanic)

Post #: 24

RE: Opening 5 turns as allied in campaign - 1/6/2015 12:00:17 PM

kip1213

Posts: 39
Joined: 12/14/2014
Status: offline

Going to play the game conservative(not use to this)and rather than risk my carriers I am going to move them south for now. Not starting this game over no more!

(in reply to AW1Steve)

Post #: 25

RE: Opening 5 turns as allied in campaign - 1/6/2015 8:31:55 PM

Jim D Burns

Posts: 4013
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Salida, CA.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kip1213

Going to play the game conservative(not use to this)and rather than risk my carriers I am going to move them south for now. Not starting this game over no more!

Make sure you turn off HI production in Australia and New Zealand or it'll drain your fuel reserves dry and your CV's will be stuck for months. Also turn off industry repairs in China, Burma, Malaya and DEI, you can't afford the supply loss for industry repairs in those areas.

Jim

_____________________________

(in reply to kip1213)

Post #: 26

RE: Opening 5 turns as allied in campaign - 1/7/2015 9:41:19 AM

Alfred

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

... Although the game can go past 'August '45, it really should not from a historical perceptive.

Why? Doing so hurts the commercial prospects of a game. Plus in this case, the oft maligned Victory Conditions already factor in this condition. The VC are objective, none of this chest pumping "I can disregard VP and the VC because I'll know when I have won" ... often uttered by people who have performed worse than the historical record.

... Actually any WWII game should not go past August '45 simply because of the bomb.

Games that have research should have AVs based on who get the bomb first. As it pretty much means game over for the side that lost the race.

Which means that in the PTO only the Allies could win. Again not something which would aid the commercial prospects of a game. Probably why in AE there is no capability to research the atomic bomb.

Alfred

(in reply to Numdydar)

Post #: 27

RE: Opening 5 turns as allied in campaign - 1/7/2015 11:45:10 AM

HansBolter

Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

Then it is also Gamey take the fighter squadron from Wake.

Politically would be unsustainable.

No more gamey than non-historical first turns that allow the Japanese to strike any target they please.

With our full knowledge of the starting positions of every defending unit exploiting that knowledge either offensively as the Japanese or defensively as the Allies is gamey.

Lets face it guys, gamey is what the GAME is all about.

It's just that we set individual limits on the extent of gameiness that is acceptable to us.

_____________________________

Hans

(in reply to Dili)

Post #: 28

RE: Opening 5 turns as allied in campaign - 1/7/2015 12:33:22 PM

mussey

Posts: 683
Joined: 12/2/2006
From: Cleve-Land
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns

quote:

ORIGINAL: kip1213

Going to play the game conservative(not use to this)and rather than risk my carriers I am going to move them south for now. Not starting this game over no more!

Make sure you turn off HI production in Australia and New Zealand or it'll drain your fuel reserves dry and your CV's will be stuck for months. Also turn off industry repairs in China, Burma, Malaya and DEI, you can't afford the supply loss for industry repairs in those areas.

Jim

Oh my, no wonder why my Oz has been going bone dry. I never thought of tinkering with the Factory/HI settings. I'm in late '42 and I'm barely getting enough fuel there. For several months in mid '42 I had to shut down my Transport runs to Port Moresby.

_____________________________

Col. Mussbu

The long arm of the law - "The King of Battle"

(in reply to Jim D Burns)

Post #: 29

RE: Opening 5 turns as allied in campaign - 1/7/2015 1:08:48 PM

Jim D Burns

Posts: 4013
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Salida, CA.
Status: offline

In addition to tweaking the bases on turn one, I also recommend allied players do the following on turn one:

Turn off replacements for all land and air units. Allied replacement pools are critically poor (study your pools carefully, learn about what you can and can�t replace some combat units can never be rebuilt, you need that knowledge before you decide to commit them) and if you fail to do this on turn one you will cripple your ability to upgrade stuff later. Also turn off upgrades for all land units. You only want to upgrade stuff you manually decide needs to upgrade one unit at a time.

Turn on stockpiling for all equipment items so nothing accidently gets sucked out of your equipment pools by reinforcing units that arrive with their replacements setting turned on. You will need to micro manage stockpiling turning it on and off for a turn to coordinate with units equipment items for units you decide you want to upgrade.

Remember to upgrade an equipment item you need a stockpile large enough to upgrade the entire stack. So if you have 300 squads of 41 equipment and want to upgrade them you need to first stockpile 300 42 squads in you replacement pool. The engine won�t use the 300 squads from your pool, but unless you have them available in the pool you will never get to upgrade the 41 stack. So don�t let your units pull stuff out of your replacement pools until after all the upgrades you want have completed first.

Things like engineers, support and air support don�t need to be stockpiled, but almost everything else the allies have should be stockpiled from day one.

Finally, NEVER allow any Chinese infantry unit to upgrade the 75 mm intrinsic guns to 105 mm guns. Save the few that get produced to upgrade the dedicated artillery units instead. There will never be enough produced to allow these upgrades to work for you in China if you allow infantry units to upgrade their guns. What will happen is eventually as losses accumulate your infantry units will simply have no intrinsic artillery as you�re not allowed to go back.

Jim

< Message edited by Jim D Burns -- 1/7/2015 2:14:38 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to mussey)

Post #: 30