RE: Manila Falls

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: Manila Falls

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: Manila Falls

Page: << < prev 52 53 [54] 55 56 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Manila Falls - 5/4/2016 8:46:05 PM

Encircled

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

And if your thingy goes well, you could capture a absolute shed load of supply and fuel!

_____________________________

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 1591

RE: Manila Falls - 5/4/2016 8:59:08 PM

Lowpe

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

Working on my turn, I will have it for a while even without Jocke's Bay of Bengal non-surprise surprise.

I am thinking now about working torpedoes. I have really paid very little attention to sub threats, and need to get some Army squadrons up to speed for Jan 1. I may start pulling the Anns off the front lines in China and use them in choke points, since I don't make any of them anymore...and they upgrade to the armored Sonia which is a way off.

Also, in this game there are three ARDs. They are tiny things, 3000 unit capacity which is good for all but the largest destroyer. They are at Truk, Etorofu, and Babeldoab. I am going to move them back to Iwo, China, and Manchuko. They are only 3 VP, but if the game goes a long time having some repair back would be nice. I like them. Does anyone know if they can upgrade ships that fit?

Got another Tony squadron upgraded, well a splinter of 14 planes at Rangoon.

Bombing campaign of Chungking and Chengtu seems to be going well. Supplies flowing forward, etc. Lanchow oil more than 33% repaired with a cushion of 14k there.

Three more fighter squadrons assigned to the West Coast operation bringing the total of land based air squadrons to 10.

I am trying to get the operation landing on Christmas day. Lots, and lots of clicks, double checking, and triple checking. Sometimes the game feels like work.

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 5/4/2016 9:03:19 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 1592

RE: Manila Falls - 5/4/2016 9:03:13 PM

SqzMyLemon

Posts: 4239
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline

I wish you the best of luck. It's going to be a blast to follow.

Edit: Maybe I shouldn't reveal that previous tidbit...

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 5/4/2016 9:09:28 PM >

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 1593

RE: Manila Falls - 5/4/2016 9:10:06 PM

SqzMyLemon

Posts: 4239
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline

I wasn't impressed with the Tony Ki-61a in my first game, but then I may not have been using it correctly.

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 1594

RE: Manila Falls - 5/4/2016 9:19:18 PM

Lowpe

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

I wasn't impressed with the Tony Ki-61a in my first game, but then I may not have been using it correctly.

Better than a Nate!

PDU off joy!

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 1595

RE: Manila Falls - 5/4/2016 9:48:49 PM

Lokasenna

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

I've always been skeptical of the possibility of a 1944 IJA autovictory, for several large reasons. Best of luck...

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 1596

RE: Manila Falls - 5/4/2016 11:28:22 PM

Bullwinkle58

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

I've always been skeptical of the possibility of a 1944 IJA autovictory, for several large reasons.

Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!!!!!

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 1597

RE: Manila Falls - 5/4/2016 11:42:43 PM

Lokasenna

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

I've always been skeptical of the possibility of a 1944 IJA autovictory, for several large reasons.

Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!!!!!

I was on the phone/working earlier, so didn't elaborate, but I suppose I'll mention the biggest obstacle: it's nearly impossible to have a 3:1 VP ratio as Japan at some point in 1944 simply due to the sheer weight of the Allied OOB. As Japan, you would need to inflict several large disasters on the Allies not just to drive up your own VP total (the numerator), but to keep the Allied denominator low. It would require perfect anticipation of the Allied counteroffensive and a good deal of luck to pull off.

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 1598

RE: Manila Falls - 5/5/2016 12:13:58 AM

Lowpe

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

I've always been skeptical of the possibility of a 1944 IJA autovictory, for several large reasons.

Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!!!!!

I was on the phone/working earlier, so didn't elaborate, but I suppose I'll mention the biggest obstacle: it's nearly impossible to have a 3:1 VP ratio as Japan at some point in 1944 simply due to the sheer weight of the Allied OOB. As Japan, you would need to inflict several large disasters on the Allies not just to drive up your own VP total (the numerator), but to keep the Allied denominator low. It would require perfect anticipation of the Allied counteroffensive and a good deal of luck to pull off.

I think you describe any autovictory by Japan.

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 1599

RE: Manila Falls - 5/5/2016 12:15:03 AM

Lowpe

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

Allies really have the ASW working overtime off those carriers...my attempt to lure his ASW TFs into the hex failed, however.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 1600

RE: Manila Falls - 5/5/2016 12:16:37 AM

Lowpe

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

I wish you the best of luck. It's going to be a blast to follow.

Edit: Maybe I shouldn't reveal that previous tidbit...

I think an important part is for me not to go wobbly. It seems the Allies are going to punch hard here in the Bay of Bengal, and I need to keep thinking West Coast.

The temptation to pull back forces is great, but I will stay the course.

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 5/5/2016 12:56:49 AM >

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 1601

RE: Manila Falls - 5/5/2016 12:25:08 AM

witpqs

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

I've always been skeptical of the possibility of a 1944 IJA autovictory, for several large reasons.

Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!!!!!

I was on the phone/working earlier, so didn't elaborate, but I suppose I'll mention the biggest obstacle: it's nearly impossible to have a 3:1 VP ratio as Japan at some point in 1944 simply due to the sheer weight of the Allied OOB. As Japan, you would need to inflict several large disasters on the Allies not just to drive up your own VP total (the numerator), but to keep the Allied denominator low. It would require perfect anticipation of the Allied counteroffensive and a good deal of luck to pull off.

The biggest Allied disaster I have ever seen is PzB playing the Japanese. He is like The Terminator.

Anybody hear from him?

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 1602

RE: Manila Falls - 5/5/2016 2:06:20 AM

Lowpe

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

More China developments...

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Encircled)

Post #: 1603

RE: Manila Falls - 5/5/2016 8:27:36 AM

Speedysteve

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

I've always been skeptical of the possibility of a 1944 IJA autovictory, for several large reasons.

Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!!!!!

I was on the phone/working earlier, so didn't elaborate, but I suppose I'll mention the biggest obstacle: it's nearly impossible to have a 3:1 VP ratio as Japan at some point in 1944 simply due to the sheer weight of the Allied OOB. As Japan, you would need to inflict several large disasters on the Allies not just to drive up your own VP total (the numerator), but to keep the Allied denominator low. It would require perfect anticipation of the Allied counteroffensive and a good deal of luck to pull off.

The biggest Allied disaster I have ever seen is PzB playing the Japanese. He is like The Terminator.

Anybody hear from him?

Agreed. I remember his games and they were very impressive! Haven't seen John around for a while though.....

_____________________________

WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 1604

RE: Manila Falls - 5/5/2016 2:06:45 PM

Lowpe

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

The biggest Allied disaster I have ever seen is PzB playing the Japanese. He is like The Terminator.

Anybody hear from him?

Last login 3/15...perhaps PM AndyMac?

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 5/5/2016 2:08:24 PM >

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 1605

RE: Manila Falls - 5/5/2016 3:09:33 PM

mind_messing

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

I've always been skeptical of the possibility of a 1944 IJA autovictory, for several large reasons.

Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!!!!!

I was on the phone/working earlier, so didn't elaborate, but I suppose I'll mention the biggest obstacle: it's nearly impossible to have a 3:1 VP ratio as Japan at some point in 1944 simply due to the sheer weight of the Allied OOB. As Japan, you would need to inflict several large disasters on the Allies not just to drive up your own VP total (the numerator), but to keep the Allied denominator low. It would require perfect anticipation of the Allied counteroffensive and a good deal of luck to pull off.

The biggest Allied disaster I have ever seen is PzB playing the Japanese. He is like The Terminator.

Anybody hear from him?

PzB ran out of supplies. The real disaster was the Japanese economy.

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 1606

RE: Manila Falls - 5/5/2016 3:15:12 PM

Lowpe

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

PzB ran out of supplies. The real disaster was the Japanese economy.

Yep, read the first part of his AndyMac fight; and he was pretty poor on logistical planning. But in fairness, wasn't almost everyone in 2009 -- plus the game then played a lot differently than it does now.

The coordinated air strikes alone really changes the game, not to mention the hundreds of other changes.

(in reply to mind_messing)

Post #: 1607

RE: Manila Falls - 5/5/2016 3:16:43 PM

witpqs

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

_____________________________

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

(in reply to mind_messing)

Post #: 1608

RE: Manila Falls - 5/5/2016 3:21:59 PM

Lowpe

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

Turn is away, in a few scant hours the Allies will drop the hammer in the Bay of Bengal!

I have chosen to bring 9 destroyers up to Ramree, mission speed (no cause to hurry). They will sit under three sentai of fighters before disbanding. The cruisers and light cruisers will remain at Rangoon which is not under recon, nor is Ramree.

This time the destroyers are in one big task force, the better for aerial defence if the deathstar meanders south.

I moved all ships and planes from Akyab. Vals went to Magwe and are set at 7 hex strike. 3 Sentai of Betties are at Mandalay set at 9 hex strike. One sentai of Nells at Rangoon set at 14 hex strike.

The subs are setting up in the deep water northeast of Akyab. If the Allies come calling to Chittagong, they will have to go thru 3 minefields and then will encounter 3 destroyers that are running into Chittagong and then retiring to Ramree to join the other 9 destroyers.

My airlift of troops out of Imphal is proceeding nicely. So far the Allies don't seem to be in a hurry to move on Ledo -- which I would be since it allows some interesting Chinese opportunities.

I am moving the armor out of Chittagong, where they had been in reserve mode. We shall use them as mobile reserve, rear area defence.

Jocke, if true to form, will have the turn done in a few scant hours.

Moonlight is btw, 0%. A major reason why I am only sending the destroyers forward.

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 5/5/2016 3:25:10 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 1609

RE: Manila Falls - 5/5/2016 5:52:25 PM

Lowpe

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

Dec 7, 1944

Allied subs takes a few shots at APDs and a PB and all miss.

No action in the Bay of Bengal...other than sweeping Cox's in addition to Chittagong. Chittagong is bombed again by thos 4E beasties.

Those Allied screening ships are within range of the Nells from Rangoon, but they don't attack because they can't locate the target. I will shorten their range...I don't want to fly into a CAP trap over junky ships.

Prome is reconned by the Allies today, spotting 70 fighters. Ramree not looked at.

I don't see any BBs today, I suspect they are disbanded at Diamond Harbor.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 5/5/2016 5:54:12 PM >

(in reply to Encircled)

Post #: 1610

RE: Manila Falls - 5/5/2016 7:04:32 PM

Olorin

Posts: 1019
Joined: 4/22/2008
From: Greece
Status: offline

Why destroy the Chinese corps' east of Sian?

They will reappear at Chungking with 1/2 TOE in a few months. I'd let them wither on the vine and only destroy them after Chungking falls, they are pretty much irrelevant now.

< Message edited by Olorin -- 5/5/2016 7:06:15 PM >

_____________________________

"Drang nach Osten"
--A TOAWIII AAR--

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 1611

RE: Manila Falls - 5/5/2016 7:07:59 PM

Lowpe

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Olorin

Why destroy the Chinese corps' east of Sian?

They will reappear at Chungking with 1/2 TOE in a few months. I'd let them wither on the vine and only destroy them after Chungking falls, they are pretty much irrelevant now.

It will probably be 60 days before those beatup Japanese troops recover from all the disablements they suffered taking Sian.

I will assess the situation, but I could destroy them once Chunking is surrounded, then they would respawn (and I think it is 1/3rd TOE of infantry only) and kill them a second time as they further overstack Chungking. Almost borders a VP exploit getting their VP twice.

(in reply to Olorin)

Post #: 1612

RE: Manila Falls - 5/5/2016 7:11:16 PM

Lowpe

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

As near I can tell, or willing to spend the time doing the math:

Ha45 should start late 1/43.

Frank A factories really repairing now, multiple repair units per day. The best is at 73% repaired.

A6M5b and Oscar IIIa should start mid to late Jan of 1943.

I am still building full out (except for the xakl) all the Japanese merchant shipping. I have no idea how much I will lose on the West Coast. Can't wait to shut that down and bank the HI.

(in reply to Encircled)

Post #: 1613

RE: Manila Falls - 5/5/2016 7:16:47 PM

Olorin

Posts: 1019
Joined: 4/22/2008
From: Greece
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

quote:

ORIGINAL: Olorin

Why destroy the Chinese corps' east of Sian?

They will reappear at Chungking with 1/2 TOE in a few months. I'd let them wither on the vine and only destroy them after Chungking falls, they are pretty much irrelevant now.

It will probably be 60 days before those beatup Japanese troops recover from all the disablements they suffered taking Sian.

I will assess the situation, but I could destroy them once Chunking is surrounded, then they would respawn (and I think it is 1/3rd TOE of infantry only) and kill them a second time as they further overstack Chungking. Almost borders a VP exploit getting their VP twice.

I've conducted The Siege of Chungking before and my experience is that sheer numbers, even if unsupplied, will make Chungking a very tough nut to crack. But that was without stacking limits.

< Message edited by Olorin -- 5/5/2016 7:18:39 PM >

_____________________________

"Drang nach Osten"
--A TOAWIII AAR--

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 1614

RE: Manila Falls - 5/5/2016 7:20:33 PM

Lowpe

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Olorin

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

quote:

ORIGINAL: Olorin

Why destroy the Chinese corps' east of Sian?

They will reappear at Chungking with 1/2 TOE in a few months. I'd let them wither on the vine and only destroy them after Chungking falls, they are pretty much irrelevant now.

It will probably be 60 days before those beatup Japanese troops recover from all the disablements they suffered taking Sian.

I will assess the situation, but I could destroy them once Chunking is surrounded, then they would respawn (and I think it is 1/3rd TOE of infantry only) and kill them a second time as they further overstack Chungking. Almost borders a VP exploit getting their VP twice.

I've conducted The Siege of Chungking before and my experience is that sheer numbers, even if unsupplied, will make Chungking a very tough nut to crack. But that was without stacking limits.

I am in the same boat. Taken it without SL. I think the SL could really hurt...

(in reply to Olorin)

Post #: 1615

RE: Manila Falls - 5/5/2016 8:01:20 PM

Lokasenna

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Olorin

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

quote:

ORIGINAL: Olorin

Why destroy the Chinese corps' east of Sian?

They will reappear at Chungking with 1/2 TOE in a few months. I'd let them wither on the vine and only destroy them after Chungking falls, they are pretty much irrelevant now.

It will probably be 60 days before those beatup Japanese troops recover from all the disablements they suffered taking Sian.

I will assess the situation, but I could destroy them once Chunking is surrounded, then they would respawn (and I think it is 1/3rd TOE of infantry only) and kill them a second time as they further overstack Chungking. Almost borders a VP exploit getting their VP twice.

I've conducted The Siege of Chungking before and my experience is that sheer numbers, even if unsupplied, will make Chungking a very tough nut to crack. But that was without stacking limits.

With no stacking limits, then yes - you would not want to kill that stack outside Sian yet. With stacking limits... I agree that it's bordering on an exploit, but not because of the VPs. Because the Chinese have no choice but to accept the resurrection, which has enormous consequences once the stacking limit has been breached. No need to even bomb the supplies, because they won't have any. And they'll have permanently high disruption levels. If anything, it probably makes taking the city easier.

(in reply to Olorin)

Post #: 1616

RE: Manila Falls - 5/5/2016 8:14:03 PM

Canoerebel

Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline

If I went into a game with a good IJ player in which we discussed and agreed that the IJ player would look for any means possible to achieve auto victory, then I'd have no problem with this. But if I entered into a game with a good IJ player in which nothing of the sort was discussed and assumed the IJ player wouldn't go out of his way to work the game engine in weird ways that almost unforseeable in order to maximize the chances for auto victory, I'd probably think this was pretty over the top.

This kind of reminds me of Bullwinkle's game in which the IJ player (I can't remember who it was) went hunting for Saratoga on turn one. The Moose had agreed to a no house-rule's match...but still...just smelt bad.

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 1617

RE: Manila Falls - 5/5/2016 8:17:55 PM

Andav

Posts: 474
Joined: 5/8/2007
Status: offline

While I took Chunking with stacking limits (I even started late really), I was allowed to strategic bomb so that helped kill supply. You have to dedicate most of the air force to bombing it for months on end. In the end, I felt kinda sleazy because I would attack with tanks only (I think almost every tank in the Empire was in Chunking) every 3 or 4 days and then do a combined attack about every 10 days. It should be pretty well documented in witpqs AAR.

I was glad to have taken Chunking but in the end, I am not sure I would do it again. There are a couple of reasons:

1) I was not able to push the Chinese completely into Burma because of the number of troops needed to siege Chunking. This ended up causing me a lot of problems. I think I would have been better served to push on to Burma.

2) The air force (especially the level bombers) was awesome at ground attack but crappy at everything else. This especially hurt ASW efforts in 43 and 44. I think having all those bomber squadrons training and flying search and ASW would have been better. Allied subs are really a PITA once their torpedoes start to work. Subs claimed a ton of my shipping including many AOs and TKs hauling fuel and oil. Having a better trained air umbrella would have been more helpful.

3) While not needing a large army to suppress China is great, you only have so many PPs. With the HR to purchase restricted units, it takes a long time to buy out those units.

4) Many of the units I did buy out from Manchuria, I would assign to Southern Army and send to fight in China. While they did trickle outside of China eventually, I really could have used them to build a better defensive perimeter earlier. This was especially evident in my defense of the Marianas and much of the Central Pacific not to mention all the islands closer to the HI which are currently being overrun.

In the end, I think bottling up everyone in Chunking and letting them spawn on top of each other is probably good enough.

As always, only my opinion and past performance does not guarantee future results yadda yadda ...

Wa

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 1618

RE: Manila Falls - 5/5/2016 8:19:42 PM

mind_messing

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

If I went into a game with a good IJ player in which we discussed and agreed that the IJ player would look for any means possible to achieve auto victory, then I'd have no problem with this. But if I entered into a game with a good IJ player in which nothing of the sort was discussed and assumed the IJ player wouldn't go out of his way to work the game engine in weird ways that almost unforseeable in order to maximize the chances for auto victory, I'd probably think this was pretty over the top.

This kind of reminds me of Bullwinkle's game in which the IJ player (I can't remember who it was) went hunting for Saratoga on turn one. The Moose had agreed to a no house-rule's match...but still...just smelt bad.

This is the point where the whole "game vs simulation" debate rears its head up. I went full circle on house rules. I started off playing under them, and since came to the view that you don't need any.

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 1619

RE: Manila Falls - 5/5/2016 8:28:25 PM

Canoerebel

Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline

Yeah, I'm not a fan of house rules either. And I know many players won't agree with my thoughts. But I think a tortured use of the gaming system to generate an advantage (militarily and/or VP, in this case both) is not going to sit well with some players.

In American law there's a standard that requires attorneys and judges to "avoid even the appearance of impopriety." Lawyers make a habit of not understanding that, but there is merit. (Politicians, the clergy, and many other groups would do well to self-impiment the same standard.)

(in reply to mind_messing)

Post #: 1620