Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: BillBrown

And then they get mad when the Allied does some kind of Sir Robin Defense.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: BillBrown

And then they get mad when the Allied does some kind of Sir Robin Defense.

I played a DBB game this past winter with a gent who doesn't hang around here. I didn't know him beforehand, and he was a top player with a hyper-optimized (four games that didn't go beyond 1942) opening. It was the game I have alluded to where he sank Saratoga at the pier before I had entered orders for my first turn. It was my first DBB game and first with SLs.

I didn't play great, but I played at what the forum would probably judge average to advanced average. When I resigned in 1942 he had, from memory, 12 IDs in Oz plus massive tank formations. Almost no strat VPs yet, so he had 6k-10k more on the table easy. Perth and Brisbane fell the same week. In DBB Oz can't form full divisions, and their armor arrives 80% disabled. The hyper-optimized DEI route got him to three sides of Oz very quickly. I'm sure there are folks here who could have done better, but not me.

I can hear Symon snorting about 12 IDs in Oz.

quote:

ORIGINAL: richlove

Let's talk about the bitter end for a minute. Assume Lowpe loses all his troops - how catastrophic is that? I've never played Japan, so I don't have a sense of where they'd be deployed, or what they should be doing at this point of the game. How does that change if he gets half of the troops out? Is his fuel or supply use off the charts? What does that mean to the later game?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wargmr

These specialized attacks are interesting but I think ultimately the reason they are not done often is that strategically they really dont gain much.

There is no significant infrastructure or resources at Hawaii that merits the taking of this island group. It is far out from Japan and it's fuel resources and needs to be defended with extra logistics.

Australia seems to be much the same. There is some industry at Perth but little to no oil and resources can be gained much closer to the Japanese homeland.

Australia, the PH and the WC are just too far for Japan to hold late into the game and base points are only calculated at the end.

Lowpe pulled all his forces to the right side of the map and Joc is making a logical move to attack the weak area.

My take on the specialized moves is if they are not used in a coordinated way to diminish the allied Naval and carrier power then they are largely wasted efforts.

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wargmr

These specialized attacks are interesting but I think ultimately the reason they are not done often is that strategically they really dont gain much.

There is no significant infrastructure or resources at Hawaii that merits the taking of this island group. It is far out from Japan and it's fuel resources and needs to be defended with extra logistics.

Australia seems to be much the same. There is some industry at Perth but little to no oil and resources can be gained much closer to the Japanese homeland.

Australia, the PH and the WC are just too far for Japan to hold late into the game and base points are only calculated at the end.

Lowpe pulled all his forces to the right side of the map and Joc is making a logical move to attack the weak area.

My take on the specialized moves is if they are not used in a coordinated way to diminish the allied Naval and carrier power then they are largely wasted efforts.

Well, I think a quick stab to take SD or LA if it can be done is well worth it. But then I would cut and run, or even as Lokasenna suggests just abandon the troops if the American fleet is around. Taking out even one of these two aircraft production centers would be a brutal blow to the Allied player and help set the Japanese player up for a good endgame. LA would probably be fatal. Seattle would hurt but the Allies can win without the superfort. Next game I will focus on building these bases up first. That said. This tactic is a gaming tactic and has no connection to reality. The Americans would have recovered quickly enough and moved production to other safer locations and still pounded the hell out of Japan. So if my Japanese opponent pulled it off, I would probably resign, give them a hearty "good game" and never play them again.

quote:

What, you wouldn't return the favor by landing at some coastal hex in Japan in June 1943 to destroy a bunch of factories?

quote:

ORIGINAL: poodlebrain

quote:

What, you wouldn't return the favor by landing at some coastal hex in Japan in June 1943 to destroy a bunch of factories?

I think I'm detecting critical levels of sarcasm here. What Pacific Coast cities of Japan have major aircraft factories that are not Heavy Urban terrain? The Allies can only contemplate a mad dash for a specific city, a quick dump of the ground forces and hope they brought enough for a quick capture. There won't be any USN hanging around to provide air support.

quote:

ORIGINAL: poodlebrain

I would gladly trade 4 Japanese infantry divisions and support troops in April 1942 for the Allied aircraft production of Los Angeles and San Diego alone. Throw in the shipping that also never becomes part of the Allied arsenal, and it is a no brainer. It is the equivalent of sacrificing pawns for major pieces in a game of chess. Without the long range aircraft produced in L.A. and S.D. the Allies ability to mount offensive operations are limited to smaller radii of more limited LBA fighters. The operations of the US CVs will have to be increased to compensate, and it will have to be done without any of the shipping that would have been produced in L.A. or S.D. That is the loss of of several hundred xAK, AK, APA, LSD, LSM and various DD & DE.

A successful Japanese raid on the West Coast in early 1942 turns one of the JFB what if games into a what if game on steroids. The Japanese get more than they got in real life, and the Allies get much less. The West Coast invasion is an economically feasible opportunity for Japan to redfefine the respective orders of battle to their advantage.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wargmr

These specialized attacks are interesting but I think ultimately the reason they are not done often is that strategically they really dont gain much.

There is no significant infrastructure or resources at Hawaii that merits the taking of this island group. It is far out from Japan and it's fuel resources and needs to be defended with extra logistics.

Australia seems to be much the same. There is some industry at Perth but little to no oil and resources can be gained much closer to the Japanese homeland.

Australia, the PH and the WC are just too far for Japan to hold late into the game and base points are only calculated at the end.

Lowpe pulled all his forces to the right side of the map and Joc is making a logical move to attack the weak area.

My take on the specialized moves is if they are not used in a coordinated way to diminish the allied Naval and carrier power then they are largely wasted efforts.

Well, I think a quick stab to take SD or LA if it can be done is well worth it. But then I would cut and run, or even as Lokasenna suggests just abandon the troops if the American fleet is around. Taking out even one of these two aircraft production centers would be a brutal blow to the Allied player and help set the Japanese player up for a good endgame. LA would probably be fatal. Seattle would hurt but the Allies can win without the superfort. Next game I will focus on building these bases up first. That said. This tactic is a gaming tactic and has no connection to reality. The Americans would have recovered quickly enough and moved production to other safer locations and still pounded the hell out of Japan. So if my Japanese opponent pulled it off, I would probably resign, give them a hearty "good game" and never play them again.

What, you wouldn't return the favor by landing at some coastal hex in Japan in June 1943 to destroy a bunch of factories?

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

Air losses
_____________________________________________________________________________

Another good day. No P47s lost. Jeff has started intercepting my transports to SD. Sadly I can´t sweep my own base but I got a full RGT in short of their 105mm guns.

I´ll give it a break for a couple of day before trying again. At least it will keep a portion of his air force busy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wargmr

These specialized attacks are interesting but I think ultimately the reason they are not done often is that strategically they really dont gain much.

There is no significant infrastructure or resources at Hawaii that merits the taking of this island group. It is far out from Japan and it's fuel resources and needs to be defended with extra logistics.

Australia seems to be much the same. There is some industry at Perth but little to no oil and resources can be gained much closer to the Japanese homeland.

Australia, the PH and the WC are just too far for Japan to hold late into the game and base points are only calculated at the end.

Lowpe pulled all his forces to the right side of the map and Joc is making a logical move to attack the weak area.

My take on the specialized moves is if they are not used in a coordinated way to diminish the allied Naval and carrier power then they are largely wasted efforts.

Well, I think a quick stab to take SD or LA if it can be done is well worth it. But then I would cut and run, or even as Lokasenna suggests just abandon the troops if the American fleet is around. Taking out even one of these two aircraft production centers would be a brutal blow to the Allied player and help set the Japanese player up for a good endgame. LA would probably be fatal. Seattle would hurt but the Allies can win without the superfort. Next game I will focus on building these bases up first. That said. This tactic is a gaming tactic and has no connection to reality. The Americans would have recovered quickly enough and moved production to other safer locations and still pounded the hell out of Japan. So if my Japanese opponent pulled it off, I would probably resign, give them a hearty "good game" and never play them again.

What, you wouldn't return the favor by landing at some coastal hex in Japan in June 1943 to destroy a bunch of factories?

Actually, there was a minor fix in the last patch that makes carrier raids on oil and factories very easy for either player. Prior to the fix you could not target factories or oil with carrier bombers that were out of range. You had to move into range and then sit there for a day while you targeted the hex for the next turn. This gave the other player a full turn to detect and react by moving fighters and bombers to the threatened hexes before the raid was launched. Now with the change a player can target oil and factories from outside of range and then do a full speed run in and let fly. Japan can do it as well but the effects and chances for Japanese raids are not the same. Now the Allies can raid Japanese DEI oil early in the game and do the same massive carrier raids against the homeland later in the game. More historical but not something that works in Japans favor. I think if the Japanese player commits to a major drive for Pearl, I would just counter by raiding oil centers in Java. Japanese resources are stretched pretty thin in 1942 as well. Many times these bases are left virtually undefended in that time period. The counter for Japanese over expansion is to hit her economy and then be patient.

quote:

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth
Sorry, 2 beers in and watching baseball. How did you destroy all those Zeros on the ground?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wargmr

These specialized attacks are interesting but I think ultimately the reason they are not done often is that strategically they really dont gain much.

There is no significant infrastructure or resources at Hawaii that merits the taking of this island group. It is far out from Japan and it's fuel resources and needs to be defended with extra logistics.

Australia seems to be much the same. There is some industry at Perth but little to no oil and resources can be gained much closer to the Japanese homeland.

Australia, the PH and the WC are just too far for Japan to hold late into the game and base points are only calculated at the end.

Lowpe pulled all his forces to the right side of the map and Joc is making a logical move to attack the weak area.

My take on the specialized moves is if they are not used in a coordinated way to diminish the allied Naval and carrier power then they are largely wasted efforts.

Well, I think a quick stab to take SD or LA if it can be done is well worth it. But then I would cut and run, or even as Lokasenna suggests just abandon the troops if the American fleet is around. Taking out even one of these two aircraft production centers would be a brutal blow to the Allied player and help set the Japanese player up for a good endgame. LA would probably be fatal. Seattle would hurt but the Allies can win without the superfort. Next game I will focus on building these bases up first. That said. This tactic is a gaming tactic and has no connection to reality. The Americans would have recovered quickly enough and moved production to other safer locations and still pounded the hell out of Japan. So if my Japanese opponent pulled it off, I would probably resign, give them a hearty "good game" and never play them again.

What, you wouldn't return the favor by landing at some coastal hex in Japan in June 1943 to destroy a bunch of factories?

Actually, there was a minor fix in the last patch that makes carrier raids on oil and factories very easy for either player. Prior to the fix you could not target factories or oil with carrier bombers that were out of range. You had to move into range and then sit there for a day while you targeted the hex for the next turn. This gave the other player a full turn to detect and react by moving fighters and bombers to the threatened hexes before the raid was launched. Now with the change a player can target oil and factories from outside of range and then do a full speed run in and let fly. Japan can do it as well but the effects and chances for Japanese raids are not the same. Now the Allies can raid Japanese DEI oil early in the game and do the same massive carrier raids against the homeland later in the game. More historical but not something that works in Japans favor. I think if the Japanese player commits to a major drive for Pearl, I would just counter by raiding oil centers in Java. Japanese resources are stretched pretty thin in 1942 as well. Many times these bases are left virtually undefended in that time period. The counter for Japanese over expansion is to hit her economy and then be patient.

You COULD target while out of range before, but it depended on how far you moved in the last turn. And the TF they were in couldn't be ordered to be following another. You could move at full and set the target from 16+Extended range before, now it's just 2*Cruise + extended range (so typically 8+extended).

If Japan is off invading India at a date as late as what's going on here, a smash and grab (and more smash) on Honshu could be in the cards with ease. Some Japan players don't leave hardly anything behind, throwing it all forward as fast as possible in a mad rush to gain as much ablative territory as possible.

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

I don't think you could. Not until the Dec. 25, 2014 patch. I never successfully did it before then. This is note 31 from the read me file for that patch. 31. Allow carrier based groups to pick out of range city attack. Inline with port/af attack

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

quote:

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth
Sorry, 2 beers in and watching baseball. How did you destroy all those Zeros on the ground?

Its from Zuiho. Any planes destroyed on board ships show up as destroyed on the ground.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

I don't think you could. Not until the Dec. 25, 2014 patch. I never successfully did it before then. This is note 31 from the read me file for that patch. 31. Allow carrier based groups to pick out of range city attack. Inline with port/af attack

You definitely could. Against MM, I was able to set a city attack target out to 26 hexes due to moving 16 hexes in a turn, and SBD-5 range being 10 hexes. I'm fairly certain I posted about it because one of my TFs was set to follow, and none of the bombers in that TF could set a target at all (as if they hadn't moved). I just can't remember whether I posted in my AAR or in tech support.

Found it, here's the thread. I think this may have prompted the change.
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3773552&mpage=1&key=city%2Cattack�

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton
Launched a nasty attack on undefended Soerjaba and virtually wiped out all oil production. Felt so guilty about it that I have declined doing it any more-for now anyways.

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

I don't think you could. Not until the Dec. 25, 2014 patch. I never successfully did it before then. This is note 31 from the read me file for that patch. 31. Allow carrier based groups to pick out of range city attack. Inline with port/af attack

You definitely could. Against MM, I was able to set a city attack target out to 26 hexes due to moving 16 hexes in a turn, and SBD-5 range being 10 hexes. I'm fairly certain I posted about it because one of my TFs was set to follow, and none of the bombers in that TF could set a target at all (as if they hadn't moved). I just can't remember whether I posted in my AAR or in tech support.

Found it, here's the thread. I think this may have prompted the change.
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3773552&mpage=1&key=city%2Cattack�

But that thread is dated 12/31/2014. The patch note is dated 12/25/2014. Prior to that patch, you could not set a city attack with a carrier bombing unit if they were out of range. I note that you said you noticed it two weeks prior but is it possible that you were using a later beta where the change had already been implemented? Note, that I did have the same problem as you getting all units to set to city attack. But I fiddled with it and eventually got all of them to work. I think I just moved them a few hexes into the max run in range but it has been a while. Launched a nasty attack on undefended Soerjaba and virtually wiped out all oil production. Felt so guilty about it that I have declined doing it any more-for now anyways.

quote:

Ground combat at Los Angeles (225,76)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 101541 troops, 2007 guns, 4332 vehicles, Assault Value = 3356

Defending force 68384 troops, 972 guns, 848 vehicles, Assault Value = 1428

Allied adjusted assault: 1372

Japanese adjusted defense: 2689

Allied assault odds: 1 to 2

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

Japanese ground losses:
1765 casualties reported
Squads: 21 destroyed, 226 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 59 disabled
Engineers: 2 destroyed, 28 disabled
Guns lost 84 (28 destroyed, 56 disabled)
Vehicles lost 32 (8 destroyed, 24 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
1124 casualties reported
Squads: 7 destroyed, 250 disabled
Non Combat: 3 destroyed, 50 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 21 disabled
Guns lost 47 (8 destroyed, 39 disabled)
Vehicles lost 144 (13 destroyed, 131 disabled)

Assaulting units:
13th Armoured Division
3rd Marine Division
5th Armoured Division
7th Motorized Division
41st Infantry Division
6th Armoured Division
640th Tank Destroyer Battalion
40th Infantry Division
36th Infantry Division
LA Harbor Defense
8th Motorized Division
2nd Armored Division
Provisional Tank Brigade
29th USN Special Construction Battalion
503rd Coast AA Regiment
24th MAG
181st Field Artillery Battalion
144th Field Artillery Regiment
21st Base Maint Engineer Battalion
Los Angeles USN Base Force
603rd Coast AA Regiment
168th Field Artillery Battalion
204th Coast AA Regiment
511th Coast AA Regiment
54th Coastal Artillery Regiment
37th US Naval Construction Battalion
I US Corps
3rd USN Naval Construction Regiment
352nd Construction Regiment
183rd Field Artillery Battalion
214th Coast AA Regiment
165th Field Artillery Battalion
21st US Naval Construction Battalion
19th Base Maint Engineer Battalion
188th Field Artillery Battalion
II USA Corps

Defending units:
16th Division
1st Division
12th Division
9th Division
2nd Tank Division
6th Guards Division
2nd RF Gun Battalion
2nd Air Defense AA Regiment
22nd Fld AA Gun Co
8th RF Gun Battalion
3rd Air Defense AA Regiment
9th RF Gun Battalion
1st Air Defense AA Battalion
11th RF Gun Battalion
15th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
15th Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion
5th RF Gun Battalion
10th RF Gun Battalion
2nd Hvy.Artillery Regiment
15th Air Defense AA Regiment
12th Ind.AA Gun Co
7th Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
7th Air Defense AA Regiment
18th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
9th Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
3rd Hvy.Artillery Rgt /1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

I don't think you could. Not until the Dec. 25, 2014 patch. I never successfully did it before then. This is note 31 from the read me file for that patch. 31. Allow carrier based groups to pick out of range city attack. Inline with port/af attack

You definitely could. Against MM, I was able to set a city attack target out to 26 hexes due to moving 16 hexes in a turn, and SBD-5 range being 10 hexes. I'm fairly certain I posted about it because one of my TFs was set to follow, and none of the bombers in that TF could set a target at all (as if they hadn't moved). I just can't remember whether I posted in my AAR or in tech support.

Found it, here's the thread. I think this may have prompted the change.
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3773552&mpage=1&key=city%2Cattack�

But that thread is dated 12/31/2014. The patch note is dated 12/25/2014. Prior to that patch, you could not set a city attack with a carrier bombing unit if they were out of range. I note that you said you noticed it two weeks prior but is it possible that you were using a later beta where the change had already been implemented? Note, that I did have the same problem as you getting all units to set to city attack. But I fiddled with it and eventually got all of them to work. I think I just moved them a few hexes into the max run in range but it has been a while. Launched a nasty attack on undefended Soerjaba and virtually wiped out all oil production. Felt so guilty about it that I have declined doing it any more-for now anyways.

Responded in that thread, but we were using the previous beta prior to the change.

The change made it more reliable as you always get 2*Cruise + Extended Range for setting the target now, but actually reduced the potential range for a raid like that (at least for the Allies, who can afford to run at full speed for 2 days without major fuel/bunker issues).