RE: See you in Tokyo Bay - Apbarog(A) vs Walker(J) DBB-B Scen28

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: See you in Tokyo Bay - Apbarog(A) vs Walker(J) DBB-B Scen28

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: See you in Tokyo Bay - Apbarog(A) vs Walker(J) DBB-B Scen28

Page: << < prev 53 54 55 [56] 57 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: See you in Tokyo Bay - Apbarog(A) vs Walker(J) DBB-... - 4/14/2017 9:38:00 PM

Lowpe

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Kudos to Walker for sticking it out after his carriers were lost. As you pointed out, a very hard thing for a player who knows how much they are needed to stem the Allied tide.

Yes, I forgot to mention that.

Playing Japan is simply unforgiving.

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 1651

RE: See you in Tokyo Bay - Apbarog(A) vs Walker(J) DBB-... - 4/14/2017 9:40:27 PM

Aurorus

Posts: 1314
Joined: 5/26/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Kudos to Walker for sticking it out after his carriers were lost. As you pointed out, a very hard thing for a player who knows how much they are needed to stem the Allied tide.

Yes, I forgot to mention that. Playing Japan is simply unforgiving.

You Get No Second Chances... jajaja.

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 1652

RE: See you in Tokyo Bay - Apbarog(A) vs Walker(J) DBB-... - 4/15/2017 5:43:26 AM

apbarog

Posts: 3769
Joined: 5/23/2002
Status: offline

Summary: Aircraft Losses

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Aurorus)

Post #: 1653

RE: See you in Tokyo Bay - Apbarog(A) vs Walker(J) DBB-... - 4/15/2017 5:48:34 AM

apbarog

Posts: 3769
Joined: 5/23/2002
Status: offline

Summary: Leading Pilots

My leading pilot was Major T.J. Lynch, US Army, flying a P-47, with 13 kills.

Here's a summary by branch, with # double aces, # other aces, and most kills:

US Navy 4 69 12
US Army 4 45 13
US Marine 0 13 8
Australian 0 6 8
New Zealand 0 3 8
British 0 4 9
Dutch 0 1 6
Chinese 0 2 7
Canadian 0 3 7

Attachment (1)

(in reply to apbarog)

Post #: 1654

RE: See you in Tokyo Bay - Apbarog(A) vs Walker(J) DBB-... - 4/15/2017 4:34:51 PM

apbarog

Posts: 3769
Joined: 5/23/2002
Status: offline

PDU On or Off?

This game was PDU Off. It was my first PDU Off game, and I loved it. I enjoyed having to use older models throughout the game. It adds flavor, and feels right to me. The fights are different. It isn't always my best against your best, over and over. I like it, and would prefer PDU Off again, no matter which side I play.

Walker may have another opinion. I do feel that PDU Off favors the Allied player. With PDU On, I can make lots of units P-38, but I can't increase the production of P-38s, for example. The Japanese can make lots of Tojos or Franks, and increase the production to high levels to fill them. In a game where the goal is winning by victory points, PDU On makes sense.

I've played both now, and would play both again, but I really like PDU Off.

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 1655

RE: See you in Tokyo Bay - Apbarog(A) vs Walker(J) DBB-... - 4/15/2017 6:33:29 PM

Aurorus

Posts: 1314
Joined: 5/26/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: apbarog

PDU On or Off?

This game was PDU Off. It was my first PDU Off game, and I loved it. I enjoyed having to use older models throughout the game. It adds flavor, and feels right to me. The fights are different. It isn't always my best against your best, over and over. I like it, and would prefer PDU Off again, no matter which side I play.

Walker may have another opinion. I do feel that PDU Off favors the Allied player. With PDU On, I can make lots of units P-38, but I can't increase the production of P-38s, for example. The Japanese can make lots of Tojos or Franks, and increase the production to high levels to fill them. In a game where the goal is winning by victory points, PDU On makes sense.

I've played both now, and would play both again, but I really like PDU Off.

I agree. PDU:off is much more realistic, and it does favor the allies. The best advantage of PDU:off is that there can be no question about what is gamey and what is not in Japanese air R&D. Each unit must go through each step in upgrades. Can the Japanese game Zero research and jump directly to the A6M8 in PDU:off? Yes... but they cannot use those M8s until they have the M5c first.

(in reply to apbarog)

Post #: 1656

RE: See you in Tokyo Bay - Apbarog(A) vs Walker(J) DBB-... - 4/15/2017 7:39:12 PM

jwolf

Posts: 2493
Joined: 12/3/2013
Status: offline

Kudos to both of you for a great game. I'm sorry to see it ending now but I have to concede that it looks very grim for Japan. Apbarog launched wave after wave of offensive missions, just about perfectly planned, and never gave the Japanese much of a chance to regroup. I don't know exactly what it looked like from Walker's end, but it must have been really difficult.

(in reply to Aurorus)

Post #: 1657

RE: See you in Tokyo Bay - Apbarog(A) vs Walker(J) DBB-... - 4/18/2017 12:02:19 PM

Bif1961

Posts: 2014
Joined: 6/26/2008
From: Phenix City, Alabama
Status: offline

Sad to see it end but that gives you a fresh chance for a new adventure.

(in reply to jwolf)

Post #: 1658

RE: See you in Tokyo Bay - Apbarog(A) vs Walker(J) DBB-... - 4/18/2017 10:57:53 PM

IdahoNYer

Posts: 2616
Joined: 9/6/2009
From: NYer living in Boise, ID
Status: offline

apbaraog and Walker - REALLY enjoyed your AARs - was hoping this one would have gone longer in '43! Learned a lot watching you two go at it.

(in reply to Bif1961)

Post #: 1659

RE: See you in Tokyo Bay - Apbarog(A) vs Walker(J) DBB-... - 4/19/2017 2:23:15 AM

apbarog

Posts: 3769
Joined: 5/23/2002
Status: offline

Thanks, I've enjoyed the game and doing the AAR. It would have been interesting to see the impending invasion of Luzon, and the Chinese storming the beach at Hong Kong. :) But it was not meant to be.

I'll certainly do an AAR when (and not if) I start up a new game. It became part of doing my turn. It began as a way to keep some locals current with the game, and I enjoyed the process.

Walker may be reading this, or not, I'm not sure. He is welcome to comment also. I have some questions I'd like to ask, like whether the infantry divisions he lost at Diamond Harbour and in inland New Guinea made any difference to his plans. I've also left open a standing offer with Walker to switch sides next time.

(in reply to IdahoNYer)

Post #: 1660

RE: See you in Tokyo Bay - Apbarog(A) vs Walker(J) DBB-... - 4/20/2017 3:12:32 PM

Macclan5

Posts: 1065
Joined: 3/24/2016
From: Toronto Canada
Status: offline

Thank you both for a very very informative game.

I hope the honorable Walker joins in.

I do have a couple questions for both you.

1) @ Apbarog

Could you provide a little insight into your landing craft TF composition ?

You very often mention protecting the APA's and I suspect they were supported by AKA's; most come on line in 3/43 (in stock game) and as late as 6/43 for the AKA.

You seemed to be able to amass them and then simply "sea railroad" into every landing. Was that the tactic? Load "a mass" railroad in - unload - and move quickly out. You had a number of landings where shock attacks do not come into play - never the less - well executed.

25 APA's ? Did you intersperse the LST LCI that came along as well ?

What support ships were in these "landing craft death stars?" You seemed to use squadrons of DD CL for hit and run tactics - so I assume the landing craft TF went in with DMS and little else ??

2) @ Walker

You played very well..and I congratulate you. Very hard to defend all places.

There was of course some point when you realized the relentless wave after wave of troops were coming from Darwin north. That the Axis of attack was more concentrated than a typical attack at the edges where you were not strong. Probably after the loss of Kendari (??)

The loss of CV of course was both unlucky and hurtful to the overall plans.

What was the overall response ~ as this AAR was silent on your intentions.

Were you moving troops / LB Air "from Burma and the Solomon Sea" to shore up? (i.e. the Phillipines)

Were you contemplating an "amassed attack" in "Burma" or the Solomon Sea or China ?

Did you draw an inner line of defense and redouble fortifications or were you prone to planning to attack the Allies to disrupt ?

Curious on your thoughts.

< Message edited by Macclan5 -- 4/20/2017 3:13:06 PM >

_____________________________

A People that values its privileges above it's principles will soon loose both. Dwight D Eisenhower.

(in reply to apbarog)

Post #: 1661

RE: See you in Tokyo Bay - Apbarog(A) vs Walker(J) DBB-... - 4/20/2017 5:34:51 PM

apbarog

Posts: 3769
Joined: 5/23/2002
Status: offline

THanks Macclan5.

My landing craft composition towards the end of the game had APA's, as you say. I'd use a couple extra than absolutely needed for the load, and this usually allowed me to unload in one day. The APA's were set to not load supply, so that they could leave as soon as possible. I'd load AKA's with supply separately, and combine them into the task force for the invasion. I'd also use AKA's, or sometimes AK's or LST's for tank units. I did use the LCI's, but didn't rely on them. They are small, but have their uses. They were good for loading combat engineer units, which are small, and you want them unloading quickly.

Support ships, in the amphibious task force, always included at least one CA or CL, to soak up any gun hits, and a few destroyers. I could have used more combat ships, but typically didn't run into enemy combat ships. Instead, I had at least one combat ship task force separate, and covering the landings. Cruisers, not battleships. I used slow BB's for bombardment, and kept my fast BB's with the carriers.

I used DMS's in a separate task force, but sometimes included one in the amphibious task force, if available.

I also used LST's, AK's, and the usual xAKs and xAKLs in followup task forces, carrying supply for the invasion beaches.

If I thought that the invasion was going to be a tough one, I spent the points for an excellent invasion commander.

The key to the pace of my landings was planning way ahead of time, and staging the units for the "next invasion" close by. The APA's were retiring quickly to that base and loading up for the next invasion. This was going to continue for the upcoming Luzon invasion, then probably pause awhile, as Luzon wasn't going to fall quickly.

(in reply to Macclan5)

Post #: 1662

RE: See you in Tokyo Bay - Apbarog(A) vs Walker(J) DBB-... - 4/21/2017 5:46:43 AM

CaptBeefheart

Posts: 2301
Joined: 7/4/2003
From: Seoul, Korea
Status: offline

Well done to both players, but especially apbarog for the victory. Thanks for the entertainment and insights.

Cheers,
CC

_____________________________

Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.

(in reply to apbarog)

Post #: 1663

RE: See you in Tokyo Bay - Apbarog(A) vs Walker(J) DBB-... - 4/21/2017 8:27:43 PM

Walker84

Posts: 850
Joined: 7/5/2009
Status: offline

Wow, it feels kind of odd to be stepping on Apbarog's hallowed turf after several years of adversarial play. It's taken me a while to read through the many interesting pages to find out how the war looked from the other side.

It's been very nice to read the many complimentary and insightful comments that have accompanied our game through several years of play. I do intend to respond in more detail to Apbarog's questions... and questions and points raised by other posters, so consider this is a placeholder for now. I will try and get my thoughts together this weekend and post something more detailed in the very near future.

All the best,
Walker

_____________________________

The most advanced nations are always those who navigate the most -
Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803 -1882)

(in reply to CaptBeefheart)

Post #: 1664

RE: See you in Tokyo Bay - Apbarog(A) vs Walker(J) DBB-... - 4/24/2017 12:09:33 AM

apbarog

Posts: 3769
Joined: 5/23/2002
Status: offline

Welcome Walker! I'm looking forward to your comments and discussion. And I have to admit, it's been 9 days without a turn. Starting to have withdrawal symptoms. :)

(in reply to Walker84)

Post #: 1665

RE: See you in Tokyo Bay - Apbarog(A) vs Walker(J) DBB-... - 4/24/2017 3:21:31 PM

Macclan5

Posts: 1065
Joined: 3/24/2016
From: Toronto Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: apbarog

I'd use a couple extra than absolutely needed for the load, and this usually allowed me to unload in one day.

The APA's were set to not load supply, so that they could leave as soon as possible.

I'd load AKA's with supply separately, and combine them into the task force for the invasion.

Check

Dooohhhh... never considered that before

- That would certainly put the troops onshore "now".

Check

There are so many many variations on amphib landing and even when you think you have it mastered.... Tarawa as I say

Thank you sir.

_____________________________

A People that values its privileges above it's principles will soon loose both. Dwight D Eisenhower.

(in reply to apbarog)

Post #: 1666

RE: See you in Tokyo Bay - Apbarog(A) vs Walker(J) DBB-... - 4/24/2017 3:21:59 PM

Macclan5

Posts: 1065
Joined: 3/24/2016
From: Toronto Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Walker84

Wow, it feels kind of odd to be stepping on Apbarog's hallowed turf after several years of adversarial play. It's taken me a while to read through the many interesting pages to find out how the war looked from the other side.

It's been very nice to read the many complimentary and insightful comments that have accompanied our game through several years of play. I do intend to respond in more detail to Apbarog's questions... and questions and points raised by other posters, so consider this is a placeholder for now. I will try and get my thoughts together this weekend and post something more detailed in the very near future.

All the best,
Walker

Thank you sir.. please do.

_____________________________

A People that values its privileges above it's principles will soon loose both. Dwight D Eisenhower.

(in reply to Walker84)

Post #: 1667

RE: See you in Tokyo Bay - Apbarog(A) vs Walker(J) DBB-... - 4/24/2017 3:34:01 PM

Macclan5

Posts: 1065
Joined: 3/24/2016
From: Toronto Canada
Status: offline

Follow up @ Apbarog.

Submarine tactics.

You note a significant "search and destroy effort" as you deployed you subs. You were very attentive.. perhaps more attentive than many Allied players that actually comment on it. You were constantly seeking the "sea lane" routes of your opponent.

1) Where was the initial sub hubs in 1942 ?

You were a little silent on this.

I assume Pearl and Brisbane which is common enough but given your focus on Darwin north you wouldn't be able to move 'sub hubs' forward i.e. through the Gilbert's for example. Darwin must have been pretty busy....

2) How many subs did you finally loose...? I dont think I saw that statistic (please)

3) The no shallow water rule.

First I had seen this expressed so... really caught my attention.

There is clearly a benefit i.e. minimizing losses (ASW).

But given the strong likelihood that Ser Walker was shipping out of Soerabaja and Balikpapan prior to your conquest... worth the trade off ??

Curious as to your thoughts in the matter.

Having more subs in 1944 / 45 was clearly an objective I assume. Is the trade off of subs (mid 43) lost to ASW worth the damage to the loss of transport the home islands (mid 43) verses end game ?

_____________________________

A People that values its privileges above it's principles will soon loose both. Dwight D Eisenhower.

(in reply to Macclan5)

Post #: 1668

RE: See you in Tokyo Bay - Apbarog(A) vs Walker(J) DBB-... - 4/24/2017 6:25:20 PM

apbarog

Posts: 3769
Joined: 5/23/2002
Status: offline

The key to the Allied sub war in this game was not the subs themselves, but the submarine bases being used. In '42, my sub bases were Luganville and Townsville. Subs patrolled mainly around Truk, mostly between Truk and to the south. Since this area was hot at the time, with KB spending a significant amount of time around Rabaul, subs were also placed south of Rabaul, and also west and northwest of Rabaul. So my subs were used more tactically, as a barrier to further expansion, much as Walker did later in the war. Results were mixed. Walker didn't move south after I landed at Milne Bay. My efforts against interdicting ships into and out of Truk were poor. Bad torpedoes didn't help. One major unexpected success was sinking of a fleet carrier (I think Kaga) southeast of Truk. I got 4 torpedoes to hit and all worked, and this was still with the torpedo dud penalty.

Once Darwin was taken, it became the center of activity, including becoming the major sub base. From Darwin, subs started to cruise the South China Sea, but the distance was far, and the patrol time was short. Results were starting to trickle in. It was nice to start seeing the big tanker convoys, but not many were hit then. Other spots were patrolled, like around Balikpapan and Palembang. Walker had a major ASW effort at all times around Palembang, and it kept me away. A few attempts at mining the approaches all failed.

I lost 8 Dutch subs, 2 US "S" subs, and 4 US fleet subs. I generally stayed away from shallow water, but went there just enough to show that I would. Dutch subs were in shallow water more often. I think over half of my subs lost were in shallow water.

I don't think I was overly cautious with the subs. No more so than my caution with any of my ships. The major factors for sub effectiveness later rather than earlier were torpedo effectiveness and proximity to submarine bases, allowing for longer patrol times. I didn't make a conscious trade off to minimize sub losses at the cost of tonnage sunk.

By the end, I had at 40 or 50 subs in the South China Sea. All were bases at Balikpapan, and had independent patrol routes. Shallow waters were covered also. I didn't change my patrol routes when tankers were sighted. I had so many subs going every which direction, so I knew that I'd get them from time to time. Having a close sub base is war winning, in my opinion. I think that I could have sank most of the enemy tankers by mid 1944. Invasions were needed, but Japan was going to be crippled.

Thanks for the discussion Macclan5. I'd like to fully debrief the game with Walker and readers. Lots of AARs end when the game ends. There's more to be learned here, by me, Walker, and the readers.

(in reply to Macclan5)

Post #: 1669

RE: See you in Tokyo Bay - Apbarog(A) vs Walker(J) DBB-... - 4/24/2017 8:13:12 PM

Macclan5

Posts: 1065
Joined: 3/24/2016
From: Toronto Canada
Status: offline

Thanks Arbarog... your point on sub bases is indeed noted (mirrors my own developing thoughts in game).

I fully agree and my own "assumption" about Pearl and Brisbane in fact points out the added strategical efficiency of using Townsville / Luganville. Patrol time, patrol time, and more patrol time is equally important with effective torps.

Or quantity is its own quality in the words of Stalin.

@ Walker

Ser you yourself deployed literally dozens of subs south of Kendari during he invasion period spring out of Darwin in 1943.

I think from a map pic I saw.. IJN command could have walked sub to sub on water from Kendari - Soerabaja.

Where were your subs based from ? Manilla ? (i.e. Patrol time note above)

Were you happy with results ?

Its not obvious to the reader but it would appear Apbarog used DDs (especially Fletcher's) as quick strike SCTF - NOT ASW assets.... did ASW present you much difficulty ? I have reread the threads and I do not note a lot of IJN sub hits on Allied support vessels.

Finally had you other subs deployed in other theatres (i.e. Cont USA, Hawaii?) and did you pull them all back in 1943 ?

_____________________________

A People that values its privileges above it's principles will soon loose both. Dwight D Eisenhower.

(in reply to apbarog)

Post #: 1670

RE: See you in Tokyo Bay - Apbarog(A) vs Walker(J) DBB-... - 4/26/2017 3:57:07 PM

Walker84

Posts: 850
Joined: 7/5/2009
Status: offline

Still getting organised to provide feedback but I'll respond to macclan's questions first..

quote:

@ Walker

Ser you yourself deployed literally dozens of subs south of Kendari during he invasion period spring out of Darwin in 1943.

I think from a map pic I saw.. IJN command could have walked sub to sub on water from Kendari - Soerabaja.

Where were your subs based from ? Manilla ? (i.e. Patrol time note above)

Yes I did deploy many subs in the Java Sea / DEI to try to interdict Apbarog's progress. I used Soerabaja as a fwd base but as it came in bombing range increasingly resorted to Manila and Singapore. Benefits being quick repair times reducing the risk of being hit during surprise port raids that Ap was prone to doing to keep me guessing.

The transit times from those bases were not an issue for me.

quote:

Were you happy with results ?

Its not obvious to the reader but it would appear Apbarog used DDs (especially Fletcher's) as quick strike SCTF - NOT ASW assets.... did ASW present you much difficulty ? I have reread the threads and I do not note a lot of IJN sub hits on Allied support vessels.

Hah, anything but satisfied. Remember this is DBB and I'm fairly sure Japanese ASW values seem lower than stock although there may be compensation factors in the combat system.

At the risk of generalising, my overall experience was that Allied ASW hammered my subs to pieces with regular monotony whenever I got near either the DD escorts, or the SC TFs that AP cleverly had riding shotgun during his big offensive moves. Sure I put a torp into the odd CA and AP, but my general experience was of watching subs taking 5 - 10 hits regularly. I had a whole operation running subs with 80+ FLT damage back to Java and on to Singers via every dot base I could find. It was carnage, especially in shallow water but deep wasn't that great either.
On the other hand my ASW escorts and LBA were mainly useful at spotting US subs so I could route to avoid. I had a couple of nasty moments including losing my first fleet carrier to a sub attack in '42 somewhere west of the Gilberts. Sub evaded 34 ASW points and got several clean hits. Bye bye carrier with air group. Its fair to say this event alone didn't reduce my natural propensity to play a cautious game.

quote:

Finally had you other subs deployed in other theatres (i.e. Cont USA, Hawaii?) and did you pull them all back in 1943 ?

I allocated some subs to the Aleutians but rarely raided the west coast after the start. Partially laziness I guess as I tend to forget to do stuff that side of the map.

Towards the end I used my subs largely as pickets placing them in the path of Ap's potential forward moves. Once he commits to a plan my opponent likes to arrive very fast with multiple large supporting TFs so I needed all the early warning I could get. Usually that meant watching my picket sub on the wrong end of some ASW TF but at least I had notification. I had pretty extensive search operating but Ap still managed to get under the radar a few times so the first indication I had was when APAs started unloading on one of my island bases. These ships seem capable to unload overnight so there's little opportunity to intercept even if you had CA TF in range.

So that's a couple of preliminary points. I'll add more as I think of it.

Walker

_____________________________

The most advanced nations are always those who navigate the most -
Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803 -1882)

(in reply to Macclan5)

Post #: 1671

RE: See you in Tokyo Bay - Apbarog(A) vs Walker(J) DBB-... - 4/26/2017 10:38:11 PM

IdahoNYer

Posts: 2616
Joined: 9/6/2009
From: NYer living in Boise, ID
Status: offline

Apbarog - What really impressed me was the tempo of your '43 advance in the DEI. How did you (or did you?) get your troops objectives set in a timely manner? What was the average (or minimum) planning that you were willing accept before a landing?

(in reply to Walker84)

Post #: 1672

RE: See you in Tokyo Bay - Apbarog(A) vs Walker(J) DBB-... - 4/26/2017 10:59:18 PM

apbarog

Posts: 3769
Joined: 5/23/2002
Status: offline

The average for my landings was probably about 70. Mindanao troops were at 100. Balikpapan and Samarinda were very high also, as were Jolo and Zamboanga. The initial Java troops were 100. All of the Soerabaja troops were 100. The troops getting ready for the initial Luzon landings were only 50ish or so. Troops were already prepping for Formosa and China, and were 30ish towards that. I tried to plan far enough in advance, and was able to do this, most of the time.

I was not successful at Taberfane. I landed a reinforcement division there long ago, and it wasn't prepped, and was already badly disrupted, and couldn't contribute enough to clear the island. I pulled the division out and it was recovering in Australia. And prepping for Formosa, I think.

I try to avoid a contested landing with prep below 50, but there's many variables, and sometimes it must be done regardless.

(in reply to IdahoNYer)

Post #: 1673

RE: See you in Tokyo Bay - Apbarog(A) vs Walker(J) DBB-... - 4/29/2017 12:10:29 PM

Walker84

Posts: 850
Joined: 7/5/2009
Status: offline

quote:

2) @ Walker

You played very well..and I congratulate you. Very hard to defend all places.

There was of course some point when you realized the relentless wave after wave of troops were coming from Darwin north. That the Axis of attack was more concentrated than a typical attack at the edges where you were not strong. Probably after the loss of Kendari (??)

The loss of CV of course was both unlucky and hurtful to the overall plans.

What was the overall response ~ as this AAR was silent on your intentions.

Were you moving troops / LB Air "from Burma and the Solomon Sea" to shore up? (i.e. the Phillipines)

Were you contemplating an "amassed attack" in "Burma" or the Solomon Sea or China ?

Did you draw an inner line of defense and redouble fortifications or were you prone to planning to attack the Allies to disrupt ?

Curious on your thoughts.

Hello again! I'm enclosing my second set of comments on the game and would welcome additional questions from Abarog and any other readers on the points raised herein and any others.

Regards,
Walker

You played very well..and I congratulate you. Very hard to defend all places.

Thanks, yes the game did start to resemble whack-a-mole at times given how adept my esteemed opponent proved at advancing on multiple objectives simultaneously!

There was of course some point when you realized the relentless wave after wave of troops were coming from Darwin north. That the Axis of attack was more concentrated than a typical attack at the edges where you were not strong. Probably after the loss of Kendari (??)

The premature Japanese collapse in this game hinged on Apbarog's successful early campaign to capture Port Moresby and Buna. I had reinforced each base to divisional size with supporting elements and level 3 forts. Plus, they were in jungle terrain so I was not expecting them to fall as quickly. Obviously my air defences were taken out first. And there were plenty of softening-up naval bombardments.

As Ap has said elsewhere he took pains to ensure divisions were fully prepped against such hard targets, which speaks to his incredible planning skills and foresight. Bear in mid that, apart from Taberfane as he acknowledges, his troops were nearly fully prepped for most objectives up to and including Mindanao!

Once Ap broke out past Pt Moresby and recaptured Horn Island, I didn't have the reserves to stop a string of bases, including Darwin falling in relative short order. To be honest, I would have had more to commit given more time, but his early gains kept me on the back foot from that point on. Its also impossible to defend everywhere so he was always going to gain lodgements, especially as I didn't have the naval air strength to contest his landings where he deployed every available CV and CVE as far as I could tell.

The loss of CV of course was both unlucky and hurtful to the overall plans.

Yes I lost 1 CV to a freak torpedo attack, but Ap also managed to damage a couple of my CVs in the Solomons, which meant I was generally at little better than 1/2 KB strength for much of '42. I have seen some comments along the lines of 'If Japan doesn't react soon it will be too late!' but it was looking as if sending the KB in e.g. to defend Kendari would have been almost a turkey shoot for the Allied carriers. My best chance would have been a combined carrier and LBA action close enough to Soerabaja, but the move was botched when my depleted carrier force reacted too close to the enemy before it could be properly coordinated.

Were you moving troops / LB Air "from Burma and the Solomon Sea" to shore up? (i.e. the Phillipines)

I was doing a pretty successful job of extricating troops from the Solomons etc to shore up Mindanao, with a fortified box around Cagayan for example, but there were too many southern bases to defend them all. Plus my Port Moresby/Buna fortified box turned out to be a paper tiger in the end as well as a concentration camp for the divisions that were isolated there.

Were you contemplating an "amassed attack" in "Burma" or the Solomon Sea or China ?

I was hoping for the Allies to overextend themselves so that a massed counterattack would
be worthwhile rather than simply suicidal. my assessment is that Ap is too good a player to risk overextending himself all that much.

Did you draw an inner line of defense and redouble fortifications or were you prone to planning to attack the Allies to disrupt ?

I had been fortifying rear area bases throughout the war. I didn't expect the rear area to become the front line quite so quickly lol! At the time I surrendered, I was already shipping reinforcements to Indo China and the Philippines, knowing that once Ap broke out into the S China Sea my supply lines would be cut.

< Message edited by Walker84 -- 4/29/2017 12:15:49 PM >

_____________________________

The most advanced nations are always those who navigate the most -
Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803 -1882)

(in reply to apbarog)

Post #: 1674

RE: See you in Tokyo Bay - Apbarog(A) vs Walker(J) DBB-... - 4/29/2017 12:28:05 PM

Lowpe

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

Walker,

Avidly reading your comments for insight.

What was your final fighter production like? What were you r&d'ing (fighters).

What was your final supply, oil and fuel numbers?

Many thanks,

(in reply to Walker84)

Post #: 1675

RE: See you in Tokyo Bay - Apbarog(A) vs Walker(J) DBB-... - 5/1/2017 1:30:28 PM

Walker84

Posts: 850
Joined: 7/5/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Walker,

Avidly reading your comments for insight.

What was your final fighter production like? What were you r&d'ing (fighters).

What was your final supply, oil and fuel numbers?

Many thanks,

Hi Lowpe,

Thanks for your support and encouragement during the game. I will post the stats you have requested. Let me start by saying that Japan's economic situation was not at issue at this point, however things would start to deteriorate pretty quickly given Apbarog's recent gains in DEI and Borneo...

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

The most advanced nations are always those who navigate the most -
Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803 -1882)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 1676

RE: See you in Tokyo Bay - Apbarog(A) vs Walker(J) DBB-... - 5/1/2017 1:37:11 PM

Walker84

Posts: 850
Joined: 7/5/2009
Status: offline

Bear in mind that this was a DBB PDU off when looking at the aircraft production numbers. The upgrade paths preclude some of the options that Japanese players often rely on e.g. maxing out on Tojo production.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

The most advanced nations are always those who navigate the most -
Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803 -1882)

(in reply to Walker84)

Post #: 1677

RE: See you in Tokyo Bay - Apbarog(A) vs Walker(J) DBB-... - 5/2/2017 3:49:11 AM

apbarog

Posts: 3769
Joined: 5/23/2002
Status: offline

You had an ample supply of fighters built. We didn't engage in any kind of extended attritional war in the air, fighter versus fighter. Sometimes my heavy bombers were my best sweepers.

The two numbers I'm looking at are fuel and oil. Cutting off your oil and fuel from the Home Islands was my primary objective. Your fuel totals look higher than I expected to see. You built a decent supply. The oil supply looks low to me. And we must consider that these totals are including everywhere on the map, not just the Home Islands. Oil and fuel at Tarakan wasn't going anywhere. Oil and fuel on northern Borneo probably wasn't going anywhere. Did you have a huge amount at Palembang, or had you shipped most of it to Singapore? I was very unsuccessful interdicting shipping near Palembang. You were alert to mines and subs in general.

(in reply to Walker84)

Post #: 1678

RE: See you in Tokyo Bay - Apbarog(A) vs Walker(J) DBB-... - 5/2/2017 8:21:58 PM

Lowpe

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

Very few JFB's in a pbem ever see 8 million in supply.

I am playing pdu off too, and feel your pain there...but I think you should have put more emphasis on Frank A. 7 squadrons upgrade to it from planes prior to the Oscar IV and with the Judy and George coming so late, it seems to me that spending supply to get a decent fighter mid 43 is a must otherwise there is no counter to Lightnings, Jugs and Corsairs.

Looks like you made good use of Nicks.

(in reply to apbarog)

Post #: 1679

RE: See you in Tokyo Bay - Apbarog(A) vs Walker(J) DBB-... - 5/3/2017 6:54:09 PM

Walker84

Posts: 850
Joined: 7/5/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: apbarog

You had an ample supply of fighters built. We didn't engage in any kind of extended attritional war in the air, fighter versus fighter. Sometimes my heavy bombers were my best sweepers.

The two numbers I'm looking at are fuel and oil. Cutting off your oil and fuel from the Home Islands was my primary objective. Your fuel totals look higher than I expected to see. You built a decent supply. The oil supply looks low to me. And we must consider that these totals are including everywhere on the map, not just the Home Islands. Oil and fuel at Tarakan wasn't going anywhere. Oil and fuel on northern Borneo probably wasn't going anywhere. Did you have a huge amount at Palembang, or had you shipped most of it to Singapore? I was very unsuccessful interdicting shipping near Palembang. You were alert to mines and subs in general.

Yes, by the time you reached the tip of Java, Palembang oil and fuel was almost all shipped out to Singapore and beyond. Obviously the number of oilfields out of bomber range was shrinking rapidly in late '43. I had stored a lot of fuel in places like Manila and Taiwan to enable tankers to keep the flow moving quicker in '42/'43. This would then be shipped to HI once my other supply lines were cut.

The next big issue was going to be Allied interdiction of the S China Sea. You'd already sent at least one CA/DD raiding party.

As you say, the ability to use heavy bombers as sweepers, allied to rigorous deployment of P-38s, F6Fs and P-47s meant my fighters were often outnumbered and, once the runways were pitted, it was hard to maintain point defence for a sustained amount of time.

< Message edited by Walker84 -- 5/3/2017 6:55:36 PM >

_____________________________

The most advanced nations are always those who navigate the most -
Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803 -1882)

(in reply to apbarog)

Post #: 1680

Page: << < prev 53 54 55 [56] 57 next > >>

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: See you in Tokyo Bay - Apbarog(A) vs Walker(J) DBB-B Scen28