RE: Turnaround? Lowpe (J) vs Tiemanj (A) Stock

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: Turnaround? Lowpe (J) vs Tiemanj (A) Stock

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: Turnaround? Lowpe (J) vs Tiemanj (A) Stock

Page: << < prev 186 187 [188] 189 190 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Turnaround? Lowpe (J) vs Tiemanj (A) Stock - 8/1/2015 6:45:12 AM

JocMeister

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrKane

Best defence of B-29 was altitude, they were flaying high and most of Japan fighters did not have time and climb ability to reach them before they drop bombs and turn back. However it seems to me that in this game nobody is using them this way, most of players are using them the same way as they use B-24. If you flaying B-29 at 10k is is not surprise they will get broken by empire fighters ;) They role is to bomb city form high altitude or low at night. They are not tactical bombers in game as they were not RL.

I remember watching an interview with a B29 pilot that flew a lot of missions over the HI. He said they never, ever worried about Japanese fighters. He said they were flying in low though (don�t think he specified what he meant by "low") and could usually see Japanese fighters trying to climb to intercept altitude long after they already dropped their bombs. But the B29 were so fast the fighters could never catch up.

In my experience flying with B29s in daytime (even at high altitude) is a death sentence. As I said before the game doesn�t seem to take the bombers speed into account and losses will be exactly the same as if you were flying 100MPH slower B24s. The few times I tried this my RoT of 1 lost 4E for each airborne fighter was spot on.

Kind of funny how it works in the game. Currently reading a book on the Guadalcanal campaign. On several occasion small number of B17s shot down a lot of Japanese fighters. Can�t remember the exact event but 8 B17s shot down 7 Zeroes while on anti shipping duty up the slot for no own losses. In the game this role is reversed.

< Message edited by JocMeister -- 8/1/2015 7:51:44 AM >

(in reply to MrKane)

Post #: 5611

RE: Turnaround? Lowpe (J) vs Tiemanj (A) Stock - 8/1/2015 9:01:09 AM

MrKane

Posts: 790
Joined: 3/9/2013
From: West Poland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrKane

Best defence of B-29 was altitude, they were flaying high and most of Japan fighters did not have time and climb ability to reach them before they drop bombs and turn back. However it seems to me that in this game nobody is using them this way, most of players are using them the same way as they use B-24. If you flaying B-29 at 10k is is not surprise they will get broken by empire fighters ;) They role is to bomb city form high altitude or low at night. They are not tactical bombers in game as they were not RL.

I remember watching an interview with a B29 pilot that flew a lot of missions over the HI. He said they never, ever worried about Japanese fighters. He said they were flying in low though (don�t think he specified what he meant by "low") and could usually see Japanese fighters trying to climb to intercept altitude long after they already dropped their bombs. But the B29 were so fast the fighters could never catch up.

In my experience flying with B29s in daytime (even at high altitude) is a death sentence. As I said before the game doesn�t seem to take the bombers speed into account and losses will be exactly the same as if you were flying 100MPH slower B24s. The few times I tried this my RoT of 1 lost 4E for each airborne fighter was spot on.

Kind of funny how it works in the game. Currently reading a book on the Guadalcanal campaign. On several occasion small number of B17s shot down a lot of Japanese fighters. Can�t remember the exact event but 8 B17s shot down 7 Zeroes while on anti shipping duty up the slot for no own losses. In the game this role is reversed.

Crew B-17 had tendency to report a lot of kills usually twice or triple more enemy fighters than they were actually facing :).
As you can assume being under attack and busy fighting for life does no help keeping track. And not only B-17 crews, it was general rule during WWII.
A few examples:
- 12th June 1943, 77 Zeros were send to attack allied shipping near Guadalcanal. They were intercepted by ~50 allied fighters.
Allied pilots reported 31 confirmed kills, however Japan report says: 3 Zeros return due malfunction, 9 did not return at all.
- 16th June 1943, 24 D3A escorted by 70 Zeros were send again to attack allied ships around Guadalcanal. Allied reports says: 32 confirmed D3A kills and 49 Zeros. As you can see they shoot down more Vals than Japanese actually send on this mission.

This kind of pattern is repeat itself on both side during whole conflict.

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 5612

RE: Turnaround? Lowpe (J) vs Tiemanj (A) Stock - 8/1/2015 9:17:26 AM

Sangeli

Posts: 1132
Joined: 3/29/2012
From: San Francisco
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe
Alfred has chimed in from time to time. Given all the variables, and unknowns, I don't see how you could test in conclusively. Perhaps enough for some guidelines.

The same way you would test any scientific hypothesis. Control the variables and take lots of samples.

EDIT: You could test this on a given Japanese base configuration and running bombing missions at different heights on the same turn over and over. Maybe in a scenario it could be pretty easily done. I'm actually very curious about the bombing accuracy as a function of altitutde because I don't think anyone here has the slightest clue to be honest.

< Message edited by Sangeli -- 8/1/2015 10:22:06 AM >

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 5613

RE: Turnaround? Lowpe (J) vs Tiemanj (A) Stock - 8/1/2015 10:08:58 AM

JocMeister

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrKane

Crew B-17 had tendency to report a lot of kills usually twice or triple more enemy fighters than they were actually facing :).
As you can assume being under attack and busy fighting for life does no help keeping track. And not only B-17 crews, it was general rule during WWII.
A few examples:
- 12th June 1943, 77 Zeros were send to attack allied shipping near Guadalcanal. They were intercepted by ~50 allied fighters.
Allied pilots reported 31 confirmed kills, however Japan report says: 3 Zeros return due malfunction, 9 did not return at all.
- 16th June 1943, 24 D3A escorted by 70 Zeros were send again to attack allied ships around Guadalcanal. Allied reports says: 32 confirmed D3A kills and 49 Zeros. As you can see they shoot down more Vals than Japanese actually send on this mission.

This kind of pattern is repeat itself on both side during whole conflict.

True of course.

(in reply to MrKane)

Post #: 5614

RE: Turnaround? Lowpe (J) vs Tiemanj (A) Stock - 8/1/2015 10:16:29 AM

JocMeister

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sangeli
EDIT: You could test this on a given Japanese base configuration and running bombing missions at different heights on the same turn over and over. Maybe in a scenario it could be pretty easily done. I'm actually very curious about the bombing accuracy as a function of altitutde because I don't think anyone here has the slightest clue to be honest.

This is the way I usually test things. I make a small scenario with what I need and run it a couple of hundred times. Its very easy to set up once you get the hang of the editor. And with the small area and low number of units processing the turn takes only a couple of seconds. So you can cram a lot of test runs in only a couple of hours.

Without having tested altitude outside my actual PBEM with Erik I can say that at least night accuracy drops off tremendously above 10-12k. At 20k you will seldom hit anything. And considering you will still lose 20-30 B29s to NFs and OPS its better to go down low as the small increase in losses to AA pales in comparison to OPS/NFs.

(in reply to Sangeli)

Post #: 5615

RE: Turnaround? Lowpe (J) vs Tiemanj (A) Stock - 8/1/2015 11:39:39 AM

Lowpe

Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

April 31, 1944

More night bombing goodness courtesy of the Allies. They seem fixated on Nagoya, this time it is with Ventura's which haven't proved too deadly in night bombing attacks in the past.

Today they come in around 13K; the radar gives plenty of just enough time for the Irvings to arrive in dribs and drabs but all manage to intercept.

A Pete wanders too close and is shot down by 50 calibers on a Ventura. No Venturas' are lost but many damaged. No damage to Nagoya.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 5616

RE: Turnaround? Lowpe (J) vs Tiemanj (A) Stock - 8/1/2015 11:45:41 AM

Lowpe

Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

Over Honshu, two sweeps of Tokyo by Spitfires, and we manage to inflict some good losses on them for once! The first squadron loses all but a few planes. The Spitfires are really tough, especially when they cooperatively sweep with big numbers, but when they arrive in a single squadron first I really nailed them.

Perhaps my fear of them has been based on the fact that they often arrive late, after several sweeps from other planes, and thus they are diving into a depleted, tired, fighter CAP.

The Thunderbolts sweep Gifu...several squadrons.

Over in Indochina, my targeted LRCAP misses bombers, as the Allies concentrate on the open hex of death. Shucks.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 5617

RE: Turnaround? Lowpe (J) vs Tiemanj (A) Stock - 8/1/2015 11:56:40 AM

Lowpe

Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

Only one attack in Indochina, against the recently cut off 4th ID, now bolstered by the presence of the 4th Tank Rgt and about 6 units of heavy artillery. These units are 23 miles into their retreat to the clear hex of death, and then onto Bangkok.

The weary Japanese meet the even more weary Commonwealth & Yanks in the Jungle and manage to get a 1-12 result, disabling a fair number of tanks, but not killing them. I may issue orders for a bombardment next turn, and perhaps I can knock out some of the disabled afvs.

Retreat going very well...although I am worried about the 2000 AFVs at Rahaeng; the 800 AFVs against the 4th ID are held in check for now by a combination of terrain and heavy artillery, but I suspect there might be a tense fight in the clear hex of death NW of Bangkok, unless I get my timing down perfect.

The clear hex of death saw the might of the Allied airforces bomb them in the afternoon. I am cycling in fresh divisions from Bangkok, and moving out disrupted divisions to Bangkok. 2 days for an ID to make the move; 1 day for the 1st Tank Div thanks to the excellent roads. The 14th ID arrived in the clear hex today. Without this tactic, there is no way I could hold the clear hex of death, plus most of the losses received are merely disablements and disruptions while the Japanese flak works overtime and drops a few bombers each day (especially divebombers which the Allies are very fond of using).

The positions North and East of Bangkok are shaping up nicely, 1500 AV on the jungle road, 700 AV in Bangkok and the town to the north (Ayuthia) and some reserves east of Ayuthia. A very nasty line; I don't like it one bit, and probably won't try to hold it for long. The Vinh line is getting troops that have been thru the grinder, plus almost all support troops and is shaping up nicely.

I have the feeling it will take the Allies a month to re-organize, before they can make another big push.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 8/1/2015 1:04:15 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 5618

RE: Turnaround? Lowpe (J) vs Tiemanj (A) Stock - 8/1/2015 12:14:12 PM

Lowpe

Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

Once upon a time I had nice troops positioned...but now there are a lot of splinters as Japan pulls from the extended Empire. That the Allies have let me do this, pretty much uncontested, must go down as one of the greatest mistakes of the war.

Most of the serious combat units and AA are back already, and here we see the plethora of construction units returning. The Engineers are needed on the islands and on Honshu where digging in still happening.

It is enough to drive anyone with OCD crazy. Crazier.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 5619

RE: Turnaround? Lowpe (J) vs Tiemanj (A) Stock - 8/1/2015 12:54:32 PM

Lowpe

Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sangeli
because I don't think anyone here has the slightest clue to be honest.

+1. Just imperfect memory and anecdotal evidence.

(in reply to Sangeli)

Post #: 5620

RE: Turnaround? Lowpe (J) vs Tiemanj (A) Stock - 8/1/2015 2:26:05 PM

Lowpe

Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

Turn is away, nothing really risky today.

Moving the Tone surface group from Singers to fast transport some troops out of the Andamans; moving a destroyer group to the Bonins to pull out another unit.

Tanker convoy spotted at Cam Ranh Bay -- put up a good CAP there.

Moved some Nick Ds down to Nagoya.

Looking to sweep; sent 40K of supplies to China; looking to replenish supplies in Bonins, Okinawa, Luzon and Formosa.

Sent the KB to Nagsaki for minor repairs...no recon on Nagasaki at present.

Wiped out 400 Chinese squads yesterday. Still more to go, but every VP is golden.

China, the gift that keeps on giving. I moved a full division to Pakhoi...worried about coastal invasions.

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 8/1/2015 3:27:38 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 5621

RE: Turnaround? Lowpe (J) vs Tiemanj (A) Stock - 8/1/2015 3:10:30 PM

Alpha77

Posts: 2116
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrKane

Best defence of B-29 was altitude, they were flaying high and most of Japan fighters did not have time and climb ability to reach them before they drop bombs and turn back. However it seems to me that in this game nobody is using them this way, most of players are using them the same way as they use B-24. If you flaying B-29 at 10k is is not surprise they will get broken by empire fighters ;) They role is to bomb city form high altitude or low at night. They are not tactical bombers in game as they were not RL.

I remember watching an interview with a B29 pilot that flew a lot of missions over the HI. He said they never, ever worried about Japanese fighters. He said they were flying in low though (don�t think he specified what he meant by "low") and could usually see Japanese fighters trying to climb to intercept altitude long after they already dropped their bombs. But the B29 were so fast the fighters could never catch up.

Not entirely true, you can watch videos on youtube eg. about downed B29s

Later Jap planes were quite good, but low in number and training suffered too.

Also later the altitude of B29s were changed to lower, you can read the reasons also in the nets. I can�t remember right now.

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 5622

RE: Turnaround? Lowpe (J) vs Tiemanj (A) Stock - 8/1/2015 3:13:04 PM

Alpha77

Posts: 2116
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline

Noted more Jap side experts in the AARs, so please can you read that thread, esp. the question regarding production... thanks. I have arm and veh points in the pool but seems not much is produced :( Ca. over 40000 arm points, they just pile up it seems. More detail: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3905893

Edit: Put the question here too:

"
It seems I do not produce much if anything for the weapons & squads pools. I have veh&arm points however. Some stuff is produced but consumed right away again, even if I turned reinforcements OFF to all my units. Reason I wanted to pool some stuff and then give it to the units I want or that need them most.... While the engine & plane part of production works fine and stuff goes to the pool to be consumed like I want to....I also learned meanwhile that repairing the damaged research center will take ages so the Jap does not really get advanced plane a year or so earlier...

Is there some kind of threshold of points I need before eg. tanks, med art or better squads are produced ? Yes I have some non Jap squads in the pool....

ALSO: Is there a list how much eg. a tank type or as 15cm how cost in arm points ? And the production of this stuff is pre-programmed or random ? Seems I cannot influence it what I wanna have build, eg. no AA guns but therefore arty " quote end

< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 8/1/2015 4:37:19 PM >

(in reply to Alpha77)

Post #: 5623

RE: Turnaround? Lowpe (J) vs Tiemanj (A) Stock - 8/1/2015 3:35:09 PM

leehunt27@bloomberg.net

Posts: 533
Joined: 9/6/2004
Status: offline

Lowpe- on your point about withdrawing Japanese troops back to the Home Islands from around the Empire- I found it relatively easy to withdraw as well-- too easy. Seems like its very difficult for the Allies to recon troop movements off islands or be aware of transport planes-- that's probably a minor issue with the game engine (though very minor, its the greatest wargame ever). Like 50 Topsy transport planes flying in and out of a cut off island should come up somehow on the Allied intel report. In my next game as the Allies I will be sure to try and prevent such well managed retreats. My opponent has landed several times with division(s) at various bases to find them virtually empty. Very satisfying as the Japanese player and immensely frustrating as the Allies! I'm guessing your opponent will do that a few times as well. I noticed you highlighted a bunch of islands to put brigades on- this begs another question- do you spread out your defenses and try to hamper his every effort, or concentrate on a few islands with strong airbases?

Interesting points on the B-29's over the last couple pages 187-188. In my mid 1944 game my opponent's B-29's have proven somewhat useless and I managed to shoot down 1/3 of a squadron once (he admitted as much). I was terrified of them coming, but now not so much. That might change by mid 1945, but hopefully I can keep them at a distance till then.

_____________________________

John 21:25

(in reply to Alpha77)

Post #: 5624

RE: Turnaround? Lowpe (J) vs Tiemanj (A) Stock - 8/2/2015 2:04:04 AM

Lowpe

Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

Noted more Jap side experts in the AARs, so please can you read that thread, esp. the question regarding production... thanks. I have arm and veh points in the pool but seems not much is produced :( Ca. over 40000 arm points, they just pile up it seems. More detail: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3905893

Edit: Put the question here too:

"
It seems I do not produce much if anything for the weapons & squads pools. I have veh&arm points however. Some stuff is produced but consumed right away again, even if I turned reinforcements OFF to all my units. Reason I wanted to pool some stuff and then give it to the units I want or that need them most.... While the engine & plane part of production works fine and stuff goes to the pool to be consumed like I want to....I also learned meanwhile that repairing the damaged research center will take ages so the Jap does not really get advanced plane a year or so earlier...

Is there some kind of threshold of points I need before eg. tanks, med art or better squads are produced ? Yes I have some non Jap squads in the pool....

ALSO: Is there a list how much eg. a tank type or as 15cm how cost in arm points ? And the production of this stuff is pre-programmed or random ? Seems I cannot influence it what I wanna have build, eg. no AA guns but therefore arty " quote end

Most Japanese production is built and send into the field, built for demand, not to the pools.

Demand can come from reinforcing units arriving or units drawing replacements -- then the appropriate costs are paid and the device enters the map.

Costs (in HI, Arm, Vehicle points) are detailed in the manual. You might need tracker to see individual load costs per device.

Do some searches it is pretty well laid out in the forum. I have a turn to watch, perhaps tomorrow I will give a more detailed answer....

(in reply to Alpha77)

Post #: 5625

RE: Turnaround? Lowpe (J) vs Tiemanj (A) Stock - 8/2/2015 2:12:42 AM

Lowpe

Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

April 1, 1944

Another month done! Woohoo.

More night bombing in Nagoya. The Nick Ds I flew there last turn don't fly, that seems to be a constant game routine, the first night following a base transfer and the NF don't fly. Good to know....

I think we nailed one Ventura, lots evaded. Stat wise the Ventura isn't great in a head to head comparison versus the Irving Sa. The squadron of Irving Sa are being flown by Tracom guys...so pilot differential can't be that great. The Ventura pilots must have great defense skill, although I have heard tell that only applies to fighter planes.

Guess it is just a crackerjack squadron with night modifiers...perhaps radar will help in two months?

Look at the paltry bomb load!

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 5626

RE: Turnaround? Lowpe (J) vs Tiemanj (A) Stock - 8/2/2015 2:15:54 AM

Lowpe

Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

All torps miss versus a destroyer. I think they are heading east.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 8/2/2015 3:17:35 AM >

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 5627

RE: Turnaround? Lowpe (J) vs Tiemanj (A) Stock - 8/2/2015 2:20:39 AM

Lowpe

Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

George, let me count the ways I love you!

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 5628

RE: Turnaround? Lowpe (J) vs Tiemanj (A) Stock - 8/2/2015 2:32:31 AM

Lowpe

Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

A good day in the air, almost....the 4E beasties were shot down over Nagoya.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 5629

RE: Turnaround? Lowpe (J) vs Tiemanj (A) Stock - 8/2/2015 2:35:11 AM

Lowpe

Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

Complacency bites me once again.

20 B29s attack the Port at Tientsen. 2 BB repairing damage and 3 empty CVE go down. In truth, I guess I forgot about them...and didn't think they had been spotted.

No port is safe now.

That was 200 500# bombs. If I would drop 200 250kg bombs I would never get the same result; I know because I have done it.

PS: I guess this stupid move earns me the Blunder Hat

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 8/2/2015 4:00:27 AM >

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 5630

RE: Turnaround? Lowpe (J) vs Tiemanj (A) Stock - 8/2/2015 2:55:24 AM

Lowpe

Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

Well the retreat continues. The 4th ID looks like they are in trouble as about 2000 additional Allied AV enters there hex today.

They are 34 miles into their retreat...dare I switch them into a faster mode of travel and try to avoid the lopsided attack? 13 miles on good roads into a clear hex. The clear hex of death was bombed, but that was all the action here for today.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 5631

RE: Turnaround? Lowpe (J) vs Tiemanj (A) Stock - 8/2/2015 12:08:59 PM

ny59giants

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

I don't understand the use of his carrier capable Corsairs for land based sweeps. IMO, they are best use on my CVs as CAP only planes. They are better than Hellcats and should make any efforts by you against his CVs even more costly.

"IF" you try to move 4th ID faster in Thailand, you will pay the price.

_____________________________

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 5632

RE: Turnaround? Lowpe (J) vs Tiemanj (A) Stock - 8/2/2015 12:57:17 PM

JocMeister

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Complacency bites me once again.

20 B29s attack the Port at Tientsen. 2 BB repairing damage and 3 empty CVE go down. In truth, I guess I forgot about them...and didn't think they had been spotted.

No port is safe now.

That was 200 500# bombs. If I would drop 200 250kg bombs I would never get the same result; I know because I have done it.

PS: I guess this stupid move earns me the Blunder Hat

Ouch, that hurts.

Btw, didn�t someone very recently warn you that the greatest B29 asset was their range? Wonder who that was...

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 5633

RE: Turnaround? Lowpe (J) vs Tiemanj (A) Stock - 8/2/2015 2:51:08 PM

Alpha77

Posts: 2116
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

Noted more Jap side experts in the AARs, so please can you read that thread, esp. the question regarding production... thanks. I have arm and veh points in the pool but seems not much is produced :( Ca. over 40000 arm points, they just pile up it seems. More detail: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3905893

Edit: Put the question here too:

"
It seems I do not produce much if anything for the weapons & squads pools. I have veh&arm points however. Some stuff is produced but consumed right away again, even if I turned reinforcements OFF to all my units. Reason I wanted to pool some stuff and then give it to the units I want or that need them most.... While the engine & plane part of production works fine and stuff goes to the pool to be consumed like I want to....I also learned meanwhile that repairing the damaged research center will take ages so the Jap does not really get advanced plane a year or so earlier...

Is there some kind of threshold of points I need before eg. tanks, med art or better squads are produced ? Yes I have some non Jap squads in the pool....

ALSO: Is there a list how much eg. a tank type or as 15cm how cost in arm points ? And the production of this stuff is pre-programmed or random ? Seems I cannot influence it what I wanna have build, eg. no AA guns but therefore arty " quote end

Most Japanese production is built and send into the field, built for demand, not to the pools.

Demand can come from reinforcing units arriving or units drawing replacements -- then the appropriate costs are paid and the device enters the map.

Costs (in HI, Arm, Vehicle points) are detailed in the manual. You might need tracker to see individual load costs per device.

Do some searches it is pretty well laid out in the forum. I have a turn to watch, perhaps tomorrow I will give a more detailed answer....

Thanks no need to explain more, figured it out meanwhile. And good luck with the game....

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 5634

RE: Turnaround? Lowpe (J) vs Tiemanj (A) Stock - 8/2/2015 2:51:46 PM

Lowpe

Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

Yeah, Joc, just call me stupid.

I deserve it.

This is like the fourth time he has done a long range port attack. I think about all the ships I threw away thru stupid stunts, undefended ports and goofy bombardments and it really shames me.

Turn is away...not much to report. Over 12.7K AV on Honshu now. I still have lots of dribs and drabs and heavy device units to retreat all over the map. Just so many clicks...sigh.

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 5635

RE: Turnaround? Lowpe (J) vs Tiemanj (A) Stock - 8/2/2015 2:53:38 PM

Lowpe

Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

I don't understand the use of his carrier capable Corsairs for land based sweeps. IMO, they are best use on my CVs as CAP only planes. They are better than Hellcats and should make any efforts by you against his CVs even more costly.

"IF" you try to move 4th ID faster in Thailand, you will pay the price.

I took your advice, after initially thinking about moving them to a faster mode. I suspect they will get shock attacked...and it won't go well; but better than if I put them into another mode and they got attacked.

I have been so ineffective at attacking his ships, I don't think he cares...

(in reply to ny59giants)

Post #: 5636

RE: Turnaround? Lowpe (J) vs Tiemanj (A) Stock - 8/2/2015 3:07:26 PM

witpqs

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

quote:

I don't understand the use of his carrier capable Corsairs for land based sweeps. IMO, they are best use on my CVs as CAP only planes. They are better than Hellcats and should make any efforts by you against his CVs even more costly.

Depends on his pools. He might have to. At this point he has a lot of Corsair production and might feel he has to help out on land with them. P-47D25 production has been running for a month, but will only be for three more months. He might be budgeting his a/c.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to ny59giants)

Post #: 5637

RE: Turnaround? Lowpe (J) vs Tiemanj (A) Stock - 8/2/2015 5:10:57 PM

JocMeister

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

I don't understand the use of his carrier capable Corsairs for land based sweeps. IMO, they are best use on my CVs as CAP only planes. They are better than Hellcats and should make any efforts by you against his CVs even more costly.

Depends on his pools. He might have to. At this point he has a lot of Corsair production and might feel he has to help out on land with them. P-47D25 production has been running for a month, but will only be for three more months. He might be budgeting his a/c.

Yeah, if he has done any research he will know of the abysmal USAAF replacement rate in late 44.

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 5638

RE: Turnaround? Lowpe (J) vs Tiemanj (A) Stock - 8/3/2015 2:33:00 PM

Lowpe

Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

April 1st, 1944

No night bombing. Allies sweep Honshu. Sweeping multiple bases and not hitting my strong points. Another 20 top line Allied fighters lost for 40 Japanese ones.

Over in Indochina, I don't try to race out of the jungle road, and the troops stand up to a 12-1 attack with surprisingly light losses, they are now 1 mile away from making it to the clear hex of death, and should be in Bangkok in two days. Everyone there.

On reflection, if I would have had the 4th ID change their movement mode, they would have made it to the clear hex, but not in combat mode.

Any which way you look at it, I am happy. I believe I will have a complete withdraw from the forward positions without any units being cut off.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 5639

RE: Turnaround? Lowpe (J) vs Tiemanj (A) Stock - 8/3/2015 2:36:44 PM

Lowpe

Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

New line in Indochina...

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 5640

Page: << < prev 186 187 [188] 189 190 next > >>

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Turnaround? Lowpe (J) vs Tiemanj (A) Stock