Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Oh my stars and garters!

Shock attack at Nagoya,1-2 odds,no forts, total bloodbath!

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs


Can we see the whole report for that battle (starting counts & such)?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Commander Cody

In an old job I used to do sales calls at Kawasaki Heavy in Gifu and Mitsubishi Heavy in Nagoya. That's a big chunk of industry at stake there in Nagoya. Has the loss of industry in the Home Islands been noticeable?

Cheers,
CC

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

I want to clarify a point. It is my thought that the conventional wisdom is for the Allies to get as close to the Home Islands as possible
and get 4E's and 2E bombers reaping strategic points. The sooner the better.

It is my opinion that this game has data to suggest that the Allies cannot
just simply drop in on the home islands, and a rather depleted IJ in this case in hindsight
had plenty of opportunity to teach the Allies a harsh lesson.

There were more then a few days of the Allies losing lots of 4E's that in 1944 it is quite possible to exhaust the pool.

Thus I believe the best strategy is to fight the IJ in places where multiple platforms can be launched at a single unsupported target.
Once the IJ have been thoroughly depleted of supply needed to reap airframes from the pool -- then start hitting locations with close supporting bases.

Wiptqs AAR is a good example of this strategy in my opinion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

I want to clarify a point. It is my thought that the conventional wisdom is for the Allies to get as close to the Home Islands as possible
and get 4E's and 2E bombers reaping strategic points. The sooner the better.

It is my opinion that this game has data to suggest that the Allies cannot
just simply drop in on the home islands, and a rather depleted IJ in this case in hindsight
had plenty of opportunity to teach the Allies a harsh lesson.

There were more then a few days of the Allies losing lots of 4E's that in 1944 it is quite possible to exhaust the pool.

Thus I believe the best strategy is to fight the IJ in places where multiple platforms can be launched at a single unsupported target.
Once the IJ have been thoroughly depleted of supply needed to reap airframes from the pool -- then start hitting locations with close supporting bases.

Wiptqs AAR is a good example of this strategy in my opinion.

Oh, for Franks in mid 43 and not 2/44.

quote:

ORIGINAL: panzer cat

Are you able to keep the ground forces in Japan supplied?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs


Can we see the whole report for that battle (starting counts & such)?

Ground combat at Nagoya (111,60)

Allied Shock attack

Attacking force 72584 troops, 968 guns, 2065 vehicles, Assault Value = 2869

Defending force 68525 troops, 932 guns, 520 vehicles, Assault Value = 1746

Allied adjusted assault: 1522

Japanese adjusted defense: 1893

Allied assault odds: 1 to 2 (fort level 0)

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), disruption(-), preparation(-), experience(-)
Attacker: shock(+)

Japanese ground losses:
4452 casualties reported
Squads: 57 destroyed, 362 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 56 disabled
Engineers: 10 destroyed, 32 disabled
Guns lost 69 (4 destroyed, 65 disabled)
Vehicles lost 104 (32 destroyed, 72 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
1756 casualties reported
Squads: 7 destroyed, 170 disabled
Non Combat: 3 destroyed, 84 disabled
Engineers: 2 destroyed, 25 disabled
Vehicles lost 188 (21 destroyed, 167 disabled)

Assaulting units:
775th Tank Battalion
1st USMC Tank Battalion
2nd Marine Division
1st Marine Division
44th Tank Battalion
4th Armoured Brigade
7th Australian Division
4th USMC Tank Battalion
3rd NZ Armoured Sqn
3rd USMC Tank Battalion
193rd Tank Battalion
1st Cavalry (Spec) Cavalry Division
9th Australian Division
3rd USMC Field Artillery Battalion
4th USMC Field Artillery Battalion
2nd USMC Field Artillery Battalion
XIV Corps Artillery
XI Corps Artillery
8th USMC Field Artillery Battalion

Defending units:
66th Ind.Mixed Brigade
38th Ind.Mixed Brigade
9th Tank Regiment
2nd Raiding Regiment
54th/A Division
73rd Division
10th Ind.Infantry Brigade
58th Ind.Mixed Brigade
52nd Ind.Mixed Brigade
27th Tank Regiment
1st Ind.Tank Co
4th Ind.Mixed Regiment
9th Ind.Mixed Regiment
18th Tank Regiment
124th Infantry Regiment
11th Tank Regiment
54th/B Division
34th Ind.Mixed Brigade
54th/C Division
67th JAAF AF Bn
9th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
Kanto JNAF Base Force
21st AA Regiment
7th Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
49th JAAF AF Bn
157th JAAF AF Bn
63rd JNAF AF Unit
22nd Medium Field Artillery Regiment
72nd Air Flotilla
158th JAAF AF Bn
16th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
11th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
2nd JAAF AF Bn
77th Field AA Battalion
25th Ind. Field Artillery Battalion
2nd RF Gun Battalion
29th Ind. Engineer Regiment
58th JNAF AF Unit
29th Army
20th RF Gun Battalion
8th Ind. Field Artillery Battalion
96th JAAF AF Bn
Gifu JAAF Base Force

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

What really hurt, are the combined ops that led up to the attack.

Almost every bomber hitting my troops. Not nice.

But even worse, are these faux invasion bombardment taskforces with 1 APD and a ton of bombardment style ships. They really lay devastation down on my artillery which is the main counter to the Allied tanks.

To counter I have shipped even more 47mm rapid fire cannons and more armored units-- they don't seem to engage the APD and hopefully can counter the Allied tanks some.

To think I have 4 more months of daily bombardments by 8 BB and company is quite depressing. I did however manage to counteract that but the amphibious TF bombarding and of course massed 4e at 7K are tough.

Perhaps the Allies will run low on supplies. Not likely, but you never know.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Commander Cody

Is the faux amphibious bombardment a serious problem requiring an HR, or can it be counteracted? Maybe you can show us some combat results of that.

Cheers,
CC

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: Commander Cody

Is the faux amphibious bombardment a serious problem requiring an HR, or can it be counteracted? Maybe you can show us some combat results of that.

Cheers,
CC

The only way I can think of that this is advantageous to just doing a direct bombardment attack is that the "amphibious" TF will (mostly) just shoot back at the units shooting at it - so essentially targeting the units with guns. This may happen anyway in a bombardment attack, and shots aren't "wasted" on AF/port/industry facilities.