Slitherine

quote:

A lot of work, more than playing if you do it frequently.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Bill, perhaps I'm doing something wrong. BBs North Carolina, Iowa and New Jersey refuse all entreaties. I'll fiddle with settings and see if I can figure something out. But Naga should reach level 5 in two weeks.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I need a staff.

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

At this point it is pretty hard to pull of a miracle. Should have been attempted sooner by John. In my last campaign and current, I really can't say I won a single carrier fight. But never lost one enough to do me much harm and attrition to the Japanese fleet eventually did the job. John could win the next fight 3-2 in carriers and still will have lost. Because he does not get much more and the Allied faucet flows til then end. I know the Japanese get more to play with here but he is reaching the point of total inferiority. Fact is, he hates to lose his carriers but at this point the Japanese player is playing for time, not ships and should be ready to lose ships in droves if it can be strategically useful. Some say the Sam will be the great equalizer but I doubt it because by late 44-Japanese carriers become glass cannons no matter the planes on them.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termite2

You need one of those 5400 AE/AKE's to rearm those 16"/50's; or for a lvl 4 port 1058 naval support squads. 5/1020 6/940

Rearm cost for a 16"/50 is 5400 The weapon Rearm cost must be "less than or equal to" the tender cargo capacity.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termite2

You need one of those 5400 AE/AKE's to rearm those 16"/50's; or for a lvl 4 port 1058 naval support squads. 5/1020 6/940

Rearm cost for a 16"/50 is 5400 The weapon Rearm cost must be "less than or equal to" the tender cargo capacity.

Try rearming the Mushashi!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I think every AAR player is surprised when he learns the truth about the strength or weakness of his opponent's situation, the things his opponent most feared, etc. That's part of the game, unless a player is basically a savant or gifted with second-sight.

If you took it as a criticism I certainly didn't mean it that way.

I've done one AAR and probably won't do another. A lot of work, more than playing if you do it frequently. But I found it did grow a little tiring to listen to advice from onlookers who didn't know the full picture. The value of AARs is as teaching tools, and this one has amazing graphics and flow. But readers would be better served to be 90% consumers, and 10% contributors, especially in the late war.

I believe the hardest thing to do in the game is play the Allies in 1944-45. Harder than running the Japanese economy. There, inputs are under full control and outputs are exactly as expected. The degree of detail required to be managed in a Fun House is staggering, and those who haven't tried to do it should read and learn. Tossing off "you should go grab Vietnam" isn't realistic and borders on insane. That would be the work of months.

If I have stopped contributing here it's in large part for this reason. I've got nothing to add over what you're already doing. But I am learning things.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

I have been able to rearm Yamato in early May 1942 with Japanese AKE's (which are less capable than most USN versions) in a port too small to even allow the AKE's to dock . With Yamato and the 16 in guns of modern USN BB's you can usually only rearm one magazine at a time, even with multiple AKE's.


Be aware that refuleing also eats up op points and there is a test based on the size of the BB and the size of the AKE. Below a certain size, a smaller AKE cannot rearm the biggest BB's. Also, the AKE's expend op points so there is a limit to how much work they can do in one day. Lastly, they need to be loaded with supply points using the "load tender" button. Put the AKE's in a SUPPORT TF and set to DO NOT UNLOAD.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termite2

Doesn't rearming also works if the AE/AKE's are disbanded in port? I always disband them in a port and it seems to work, also easier using the"load tender" button

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termite2

In RA, there are Japanese 6615 AK's that can convert to AKE's which can rearm the Yamato's

quote:

ORIGINAL: jwolf

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I need a staff.

No kidding! You're doing singlehandedly what was actually done by dozens, if not hundreds, in real life. Granted that a lot of their work is abstracted into the game, still it is am immense organizational effort. You can't really blame yourself for an occasional mild snafu such as the non-withdrawal from Pearl.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

I have been able to rearm Yamato in early May 1942 with Japanese AKE's (which are less capable than most USN versions) in a port too small to even allow the AKE's to dock . With Yamato and the 16 in guns of modern USN BB's you can usually only rearm one magazine at a time, even with multiple AKE's.


Be aware that refuleing also eats up op points and there is a test based on the size of the BB and the size of the AKE. Below a certain size, a smaller AKE cannot rearm the biggest BB's. Also, the AKE's expend op points so there is a limit to how much work they can do in one day. Lastly, they need to be loaded with supply points using the "load tender" button. Put the AKE's in a SUPPORT TF and set to DO NOT UNLOAD.

Not supposed to work I believe.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I took it as an observation. :)

You're right about the level of detail. I sent a turn to John last night. It took me three hours. That included about 45 minutes to an hour resetting Death Star and the Herd to follow a new ASW TF (forced on me by the AI, as I explained earlier) and then checking each TF twice to make sure the orders were correct. That process was such an agonizing click-fest that I couldn't go through the carrier TFs to reset all the aircraft squadrons from range 4 to range 5 in order to strike shipping at Tarakan. I should have, but that would've taken at least another hour and perhaps considerably more.

I can easily spend four to six hours on turns now. Not uber complicated turns, but regular turns. (I can sometimes flip in as little as 50 minutes to an hour, but those instances are increasingly rare.)

I'm having a blast, though. Part of it is because I love the planning and the unfolding of the plan. To wit: It's been tremendously gratifying to set out, from day one of this game, to weaken the Japanese navy to the point that John couldn't use it. I'm not quite there, but gracious! He hasn't felt able to commit a combat TF to the DEI in months...and only a single one to the Philippines. To play this deeply into the game so that very, very long-term plans are finally playing out is an amazingly fulfilling experience.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BillBrown

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I took it as an observation. :)

You're right about the level of detail. I sent a turn to John last night. It took me three hours. That included about 45 minutes to an hour resetting Death Star and the Herd to follow a new ASW TF (forced on me by the AI, as I explained earlier) and then checking each TF twice to make sure the orders were correct. That process was such an agonizing click-fest that I couldn't go through the carrier TFs to reset all the aircraft squadrons from range 4 to range 5 in order to strike shipping at Tarakan. I should have, but that would've taken at least another hour and perhaps considerably more.

I can easily spend four to six hours on turns now. Not uber complicated turns, but regular turns. (I can sometimes flip in as little as 50 minutes to an hour, but those instances are increasingly rare.)

I'm having a blast, though. Part of it is because I love the planning and the unfolding of the plan. To wit: It's been tremendously gratifying to set out, from day one of this game, to weaken the Japanese navy to the point that John couldn't use it. I'm not quite there, but gracious! He hasn't felt able to commit a combat TF to the DEI in months...and only a single one to the Philippines. To play this deeply into the game so that very, very long-term plans are finally playing out is an amazingly fulfilling experience.

This is why I decided to not take on a third game. I have one in April 1943 and I see my time spent per trun going up at a fast rate. I realized that I was not going to have time to do three games at one time.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Thanks.

Uh oh. I only have 643 naval support at Legaspi. Seemed like enough.

I need a staff. I find it hard to keep up with all the details. I've been through this exercise before, but it continues to elude me. Heck, it wasn't many months back that a damaged sub due for withdrawal sat at Pearl Harbor for a week because I couldn't figure out why she wouldn't withdraw.

It's my responsibility to learn and keep up with the rules. I've done a decent job, but there are gaping holes that prevent me from "optimal play" (in the words of the immortal Nemo).

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I think every AAR player is surprised when he learns the truth about the strength or weakness of his opponent's situation, the things his opponent most feared, etc. That's part of the game, unless a player is basically a savant or gifted with second-sight.

If you took it as a criticism I certainly didn't mean it that way.

I've done one AAR and probably won't do another. A lot of work, more than playing if you do it frequently. But I found it did grow a little tiring to listen to advice from onlookers who didn't know the full picture. The value of AARs is as teaching tools, and this one has amazing graphics and flow. But readers would be better served to be 90% consumers, and 10% contributors, especially in the late war.

I believe the hardest thing to do in the game is play the Allies in 1944-45. Harder than running the Japanese economy. There, inputs are under full control and outputs are exactly as expected. The degree of detail required to be managed in a Fun House is staggering, and those who haven't tried to do it should read and learn. Tossing off "you should go grab Vietnam" isn't realistic and borders on insane. That would be the work of months.

If I have stopped contributing here it's in large part for this reason. I've got nothing to add over what you're already doing. But I am learning things.

I humbly disagree .

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I think every AAR player is surprised when he learns the truth about the strength or weakness of his opponent's situation, the things his opponent most feared, etc. That's part of the game, unless a player is basically a savant or gifted with second-sight.

If you took it as a criticism I certainly didn't mean it that way.

I've done one AAR and probably won't do another. A lot of work, more than playing if you do it frequently. But I found it did grow a little tiring to listen to advice from onlookers who didn't know the full picture. The value of AARs is as teaching tools, and this one has amazing graphics and flow. But readers would be better served to be 90% consumers, and 10% contributors, especially in the late war.

I believe the hardest thing to do in the game is play the Allies in 1944-45. Harder than running the Japanese economy. There, inputs are under full control and outputs are exactly as expected. The degree of detail required to be managed in a Fun House is staggering, and those who haven't tried to do it should read and learn. Tossing off "you should go grab Vietnam" isn't realistic and borders on insane. That would be the work of months.

If I have stopped contributing here it's in large part for this reason. I've got nothing to add over what you're already doing. But I am learning things.

I humbly disagree .

I meant from his current position in the PI. Not walk there.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna


Meanwhile, I'm going elsewhere... I view it as a Morton's Fork: where all outcomes benefit you. Just one of them benefits you even more. It's a scaling up of the whole strategy of feinting.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

It's academic here, however, as I'm not moving anywhere "across the seas" in the near future.

quote:

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth

quote:

At this point it is pretty hard to pull of a miracle. Should have been attempted sooner by John. In my last campaign and current, I really can't say I won a single carrier fight. But never lost one enough to do me much harm and attrition to the Japanese fleet eventually did the job. John could win the next fight 3-2 in carriers and still will have lost. Because he does not get much more and the Allied faucet flows til then end. I know the Japanese get more to play with here but he is reaching the point of total inferiority. Fact is, he hates to lose his carriers but at this point the Japanese player is playing for time, not ships and should be ready to lose ships in droves if it can be strategically useful. Some say the Sam will be the great equalizer but I doubt it because by late 44-Japanese carriers become glass cannons no matter the planes on them.

A long shot for sure but with lots LBA, Kamikazes, the KB and a bit of luck it might be possible to push the inevitable back by a few months. Auto-Victory is off the table and Japan can not win in long run so at some point one must let the electrons fly or it will just be a game of piling up strategic bombing points. Maybe just wishful thinking on my part but deep down maybe John just wants to go down swinging