BTS/BTSL against John 3rd: What was Kitakami thinking?!?!?!?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

BTS/BTSL against John 3rd: What was Kitakami thinking?!?!?!?

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 >> BTS/BTSL against John 3rd: What was Kitakami thinking?!?!?!?

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

BTS/BTSL against John 3rd: What was Kitakami thinking?!... - 4/24/2018 5:55:38 PM

Kitakami

Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline

Ok...

This is not going to be the most brilliant AAR that has ever been written, not by a long shot. I do not have the time to make it so. But I will need all the help I can get, as I will be playing against John in his own mod, so any and all comments are more than welcome. In fact, I plead that you all comment and ask questions fairly often :)

I have definitely bitten more than I can chew, but I will play Between the Storms against John 3rd. He will play the Empire of the Rising Sun, and I will play the Allies. We are in the very initial stages of negotiating house rules, etc., so this will not start for a while, but I had a bit of time free and decided to at least start this. I do not know if we will play with the Yamato-class BBs or with the Owari-class BBs. I have let John choose. More surprise for the allies.

Also, many changes have come with the latest versions of BTS/BTSL. These are a few:

- IJA changeover to triangle Infantry divisions fully occurs allowing for three more ID to be created (1 in China, 1 in Manchuria, and 1 for Southern Army). This change weakens nine infantry divisions who lose their fourth regiment, but creates three more divisions, and the one thaat starts under Southern Army command might be troublesome from the start.
- The Lexington fighter squadron start with F4F-3a instead of Buffalo. To compensate, VMF-211 (Wake and Midway) lose their F4F-3a and revert to Buffalo. That means CAP over Wake and Midway is weaker, but the Lady Lex is better protected.
- A number of Dutch LCUs can now be bought out. The total is more than 25 at-start LCUs, although many of them are components of larger units.
- The 13th USA Arm Div that comes into play at the end of '42 can be bought out with PPs and sent into harm's way.
- The Chinese receive 350 infantry squads a month now.
- 300 Political Points (now 600 total) added to Allied starting number to allow more first-turn flexibility. Coupled with the increased PPs per turn, this makes for faster reinforcements.

The above are added to the Alt Hist that can be seen in the website. For those that do not know the mod, these are a few of the changes to the Allied OOB:

- New air units.
- Addition of training squadrons on mainland USA to allow for an American pilot training program.
- Enhanced aircraft production numbers.
- Additional Allied FP groups.
- New ground units.
- Additional New Zealand and Australian ships.
- A French Squadron at Tahiti.
- The CL Eendract for the DEI.
- A stronger Force Z.
- A CLAA conversion for the Omaha-CL class.
- An additional pair of USN CVLs.
- Optional conversion of the Kittyhawk Class AKV and Tangier Class AV into CVEs.

The Hepburn Board's recommendation to augmenting and expanding many Pacific Bases is heeded, and work is sped up at Wake, Midway, the Aleutians, and in the South Pacific. While work has just begun in many ways, these advances pose a tougher problem for Japan if she moves east or southeast.

- The British Asiatic Fleet is reinforced with a CA and 4 modern DDs
- The development of Cebu as an alternate anchorage has been started.
- The Scouting Force, commanded by Vc-Adm Wilson, is sent south to protect the ships helping to develop Pago Pago into a forward operating base.
- The Royal Navy moves Valiant and Queen Elizabeth from Home Fleet to Ceylon.
- HMS Renown reinforces Force Z.
- HMS Indomitable and her escorts also start at Ceylon.
- The 48th Gurkha Brigade is rushed into Singapore along with supplies and two dozen crated Hurricane Fighters. Unfortunately the other two brigades of the 17th Indian Division start in Karachi and Rangoon.

Although I mainly play the Japanese side, I have a 2-day per turn BTSL game running with Falken in which we are almost at the end of April '42, with me playing the Allies too. I have found that the Allies get much more stuff than I am comfortable facing as the Japanese, and have learned a lot. Let's see if that experience helps me with this game.

Will post more when John and I agree on House Rules.

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

Post #: 1

RE: BTS/BTSL against John 3rd: What was Kitakami thinki... - 4/24/2018 6:16:08 PM

ny59giants

Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline

Outside of John, I probably know these mods best since I've been involved with them over the years in development and changes.

Of course I want you to defeat John as quickly, but with as much pain as possible.

(in reply to Kitakami)

Post #: 2

RE: BTS/BTSL against John 3rd: What was Kitakami thinki... - 4/24/2018 6:45:43 PM

Kitakami

Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline

ROFL!!!!

I wish I had such optimism! A question... besides what I posted above, what could I be missing? I am starting my pre-game notebook notes: IJN forces, IJA forces, then Allied forces. The IJN I know decently well. The new Japanese LCUs I need to locate. Then I need to re-check the Allied side of things, especially startup locations.

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to ny59giants)

Post #: 3

RE: BTS/BTSL against John 3rd: What was Kitakami thinki... - 4/24/2018 7:20:47 PM

Canoerebel

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

John is a superb opponent that makes for a great gaming ride. He's experienced and ridiculously aggressive. That means you've just stepped into the saddle on a bronco that likes bucking, twisting and turning. Settle in carefully and enjoy the ride. You'll have fun, you'll take some lumps, and you'll find ways to counter him when the times are right.

(in reply to Kitakami)

Post #: 4

RE: BTS/BTSL against John 3rd: What was Kitakami thinki... - 4/24/2018 7:26:53 PM

Kitakami

Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline

I feel more like I am in the cockpit of an F-22... and alll the expierience I've had is flying a Cessna... once! ;p

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 5

RE: BTS/BTSL against John 3rd: What was Kitakami thinki... - 4/24/2018 7:31:14 PM

DOCUP

Posts: 3073
Joined: 7/7/2010
Status: offline

This makes me happy. I hope you keep your other game updated as much as you can. Use his aggression against him.

(in reply to Kitakami)

Post #: 6

RE: BTS/BTSL against John 3rd: What was Kitakami thinki... - 4/24/2018 7:36:48 PM

apbarog

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

Good luck Kitakami. The war is a 15 round fight. Let him come out swinging. Defend for awhile, counter punch when you can. Wear him down, and then finish him off. And have fun.

(in reply to DOCUP)

Post #: 7

RE: BTS/BTSL against John 3rd: What was Kitakami thinki... - 4/24/2018 7:59:23 PM

witpqs

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

Best of luck! I follow this side, and since I know only a smattering of things (which you just covered already) about the mod I will be more in the dark than you are.

Be tough on house rules. I think the 4EB limitations that many players agree to (Dan/CanoeRebel and perhaps others of John's opponents, for example) are total nonsense. IMO the game engine has been improved enough they are not needed. With both land and shipboard flak improvements 4EB get attrited fast if used too low except against soft targets. And soft targets are... soft targets.

That is my first and possibly most important piece of advice.

Question for you and Michael. Those ships like the BB's which, in the list above, start at Colombo: do they still withdraw? With all the increases in IJN and some in Allied naval power I am wondering how withdrawals figure into things.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Kitakami)

Post #: 8

RE: BTS/BTSL against John 3rd: What was Kitakami thinki... - 4/24/2018 8:07:48 PM

Kitakami

Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline

@witpqs: The Valiant withdraws in 427 days, the Queen Elizabeth does not withdraw. The Indomitable withdraws in 591 days. All three are present for the critical year of 1942.

As for House Rules, we will see what we agree on. Communications in that regard have but started.

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 9

RE: BTS/BTSL against John 3rd: What was Kitakami thinki... - 4/24/2018 8:39:19 PM

BillBrown

Posts: 2335
Joined: 6/15/2002
Status: offline

I agree with witpqs, be hard on the house rules. I am one that thinks there are no house rules needed. But I also think I am in the minority on that.
I would not ever agree to any restrictions on Strategic bombing at all and none on 4 engine bombers.

(in reply to Kitakami)

Post #: 10

RE: BTS/BTSL against John 3rd: What was Kitakami thinki... - 4/26/2018 1:42:25 AM

Kitakami

Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline

There are a few house rules I think make the game a bit more historical. I will let you know when the two of us finally agree on something :)

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to BillBrown)

Post #: 11

RE: BTS/BTSL against John 3rd: What was Kitakami thinki... - 4/26/2018 2:12:43 AM

jwolf

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kitakami

There are a few house rules I think make the game a bit more historical. I will let you know when the two of us finally agree on something :)

I always find these reports about house rules ironically amusing. I imagine top level negotiators for each nation haggling over conditions for the horrible war they are about to fight as soon as the treaty is signed.

(in reply to Kitakami)

Post #: 12

RE: BTS/BTSL against John 3rd: What was Kitakami thinki... - 4/26/2018 3:33:05 AM

CaptBeefheart

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

Good luck! I look forward to reading this AAR. I would also caution against too many house rules. There are counters and opportunity costs associated with just about every tactic.

Cheers,
CC

_____________________________

Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.

(in reply to jwolf)

Post #: 13

RE: BTS/BTSL against John 3rd: What was Kitakami thinki... - 4/26/2018 1:56:20 PM

Kitakami

Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline

The house rule set will probably be finished today, as I just sent a few tweaks to John. Interestingly, so you don't start ranting when you see them, the most restrictive ones were my suggestions, not John's. He only insisted on one, the last one. You will see soon.

On an entirely different topic, I have started to take a look at the OOB of both sides. They are very different from everything I have played up to this point, the BtS Lite Game I have running with Falken included. I am taking notes, and will post them here when I am finished.

Just a couple more days before turn one officially begins, I think.

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to CaptBeefheart)

Post #: 14

RE: BTS/BTSL against John 3rd: What was Kitakami thinki... - 4/26/2018 2:10:37 PM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kitakami

The house rule set will probably be finished today, as I just sent a few tweaks to John. Interestingly, so you don't start ranting when you see them, the most restrictive ones were my suggestions, not John's. He only insisted on one, the last one. You will see soon.

On an entirely different topic, I have started to take a look at the OOB of both sides. They are very different from everything I have played up to this point, the BtS Lite Game I have running with Falken included. I am taking notes, and will post them here when I am finished.

Just a couple more days before turn one officially begins, I think.

If this mod is the one with CLVs, you should know that they are good for raiding and John does love raiding!

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to Kitakami)

Post #: 15

RE: BTS/BTSL against John 3rd: What was Kitakami thinki... - 4/26/2018 3:54:54 PM

Kitakami

Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline

John is very, very aggressive, yes. I have followed his AARs on and off through the years. I wonder how best to capitalize on that. Use his strength against him.

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 16

RE: BTS/BTSL against John 3rd: What was Kitakami thinki... - 4/26/2018 5:34:23 PM

HansBolter

Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kitakami

John is very, very aggressive, yes. I have followed his AARs on and off through the years. I wonder how best to capitalize on that. Use his strength against him.

Rope-a-Dope.

Let him raid.

Be ready to counterpunch the raiders.

_____________________________

Hans

(in reply to Kitakami)

Post #: 17

RE: BTS/BTSL against John 3rd: What was Kitakami thinki... - 4/26/2018 5:43:19 PM

Kitakami

Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline

Yes... that will have to be it. Let him invade the Aleutians. Let him raid. Then look for the raiders with fleet carriers where Kido Butai is not. Good plan...

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to HansBolter)

Post #: 18

RE: BTS/BTSL against John 3rd: What was Kitakami thinki... - 4/27/2018 2:06:40 AM

BillBrown

Posts: 2335
Joined: 6/15/2002
Status: offline

Any word on the HRs yet? I am most interested in them at this time.

(in reply to Kitakami)

Post #: 19

RE: BTS/BTSL against John 3rd: What was Kitakami thinki... - 4/27/2018 3:06:52 AM

Kitakami

Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline

I am waiting for John to reply to my last email on that regard. If there is any objection from his part, it will come from me suggesting one particular rule, and then retracting it partially. My mind has not been as clear as I would wish in the last few weeks.

I will post the list here as soon as it is set in stone, but I will say that the last set did not include any strategic bombing curtailments.

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to BillBrown)

Post #: 20

RE: BTS/BTSL against John 3rd: What was Kitakami thinki... - 4/27/2018 1:30:06 PM

Kitakami

Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline

Ok... I have been notified that house rules have been approved. Here they are:

1. If we feel somethings gamey/amiss or just peeved with anything for any reason, let�s talk about as soon as it surfaces. This includes the possibility of modifying house rules.

2. Fighters can sweep at best and second-best maneuver altitude bands only.

3. Amphibious assaults can only happen at dot and regular bases. This includes submarine-borne troops.

4. Both players must pay PP to move restricted units out of the country they are in. Exceptions: Manchukuo <-> Korea and India <-> Akyab. Thai units may move up to two hexes across their national border without paying PP but must pay if they want to go farther.

5. No transfer of American units from the Philippines directly to the Chinese mainland. Air units CAN be transferred to India, for example. Then, if there is ground support for them in China, they can rebase there.

6. All Allied air forces based in China must be supported by base force units of the same nationality. In other words, if you want to base American B-17s in China, there must be an American base force and/or engineer unit at the airfield with enough AV support to handle the planes.

7. No 4E naval bombing below 7,000 feet, except for USN 4E air units.

8. B-29s cannot be used for naval attacks.

9. No new TFs can be formed on turn one. Any existing TFs can be altered.

10. Port Attacks can only be carried out by Japanese Carrier Aircraft on Turn One.

11. There are some planes that were too large for CVEs, both Allied and IJN. For Japan this HR includes any form of George, Sam, and Grace. For the Allies this means that only F4F and FM fighters can operate from USN CVEs (and their Martlet and Wildcat equivalents from RN CVEs). Both IJN and Allied CVEs can FERRY larger fighters, but they can�t OPERATE from them.

12. If at least one unit begins the game in a base containing some form of HI, LI, Oil, Resources, etc. (but not Manpower only) the hex cannot be vacated. This prevents the total destruction of installations on an auto base flip.

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)

Post #: 21

RE: BTS/BTSL against John 3rd: What was Kitakami thinki... - 4/27/2018 1:32:35 PM

Kitakami

Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline

I am waiting for the latest version of the mod before starting the analysis of the situation, but any and all thoughts are welcome, even befora that happens.

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)

Post #: 22

RE: BTS/BTSL against John 3rd: What was Kitakami thinki... - 4/27/2018 1:46:53 PM

ny59giants

Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline

1) You will face many Fast Transport TFs made up of CA/CL with DDs.

2) He will be much more aggressive in China that he has been to date. I think his game vs Canoerebel woke him up that he cannot leave that much of a force free for the end war.

3) He loves sinking merchants. He will go for them everywhere.

4) I like to convert the Clemson DDs to APDs in 2/42 and then the Wilkes Class DDs to DEs in 5/42.

5) I like my AMC and APDs formed into my own Fast Transport TF. It has its uses.

6) PBYs - pay PP to bought out some from USA and fly the to Midway and beyond via Aleutians before John takes Midway.

7) Plan for a Mersing invasion on 8th or 9th

8) India - Not because you are playing John, but I focus on forts everywhere except Delhi which is AF expansion so I can upgrade airframes

9) USA - I've further damaged/disabled industry in USA. You will not have significant amounts of supply readily available for the first one to two months unless you turn off some repairs. Plan accordingly.

10) Save your CVs. I take off the TBs for most expect Lex and Big "E" in beginning and put on extra marine fighter groups.

Good luck and happy hunting!!

< Message edited by ny59giants_MatrixForum -- 4/27/2018 1:49:00 PM >

(in reply to Kitakami)

Post #: 23

RE: BTS/BTSL against John 3rd: What was Kitakami thinki... - 4/27/2018 1:49:01 PM

Mike McCreery

Posts: 4232
Joined: 6/29/2013
Status: offline

I would be against the possible modifying of house rules.

Sure, you could agree to not do something but this comes up unilaterally as obviously one player is committing an action the other player does not like.

John was pretty abusive of house rules that were not even agreed to in his last game with CR.

_____________________________

(in reply to Kitakami)

Post #: 24

RE: BTS/BTSL against John 3rd: What was Kitakami thinki... - 4/27/2018 1:57:21 PM

HansBolter

Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline

HRs are atrocious.

70% percent of them place restrictions on Allied flexibility while I see almost no restrictions on Japanese flexibility.

If your are not familiar with Allied starts, first thing you need to do before issuing any orders is comb through every ship in every port and identify desired conversions.

Lots to convert to AKEs, AGs and even some AKVs. Don't want to get conversion candidates tied up in CS convoys.

Next get all dispersed shipping headed to supply/fuel/troop sources.

Most of all, good luck and have fun.

< Message edited by HansBolter -- 4/27/2018 2:02:01 PM >

_____________________________

Hans

(in reply to Mike McCreery)

Post #: 25

RE: BTS/BTSL against John 3rd: What was Kitakami thinki... - 4/27/2018 2:42:58 PM

Kitakami

Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter
HRs are atrocious.

70% percent of them place restrictions on Allied flexibility while I see almost no restrictions on Japanese flexibility.
<snip>

A fair thought, but think about this:

2. Fighters can sweep at best and second-best maneuver altitude bands only.
=> P-38s have the upper hand here for a long time. I will definitely send a squadron to India ASAP.

4. Both players must pay PP to move restricted units out of the country they are in. Exceptions: Manchukuo <-> Korea and India <-> Akyab. Thai units may move up to two hexes across their national border without paying PP but must pay if they want to go farther.
=> Japanese forces in China <-> Manchuria are affected the most. If John decides to reinforce China, it will be hard for me, but those units won't be going elsewhere for a time.

7. No 4E naval bombing below 7,000 feet, except for USN 4E air units.
=> This includes the IJN G5N and G8N bombers, with their ridiculously large bomb loads and huge operational ranges. I do not know if John will use them or not, but I definitely would!

11. There are some planes that were too large for CVEs, both Allied and IJN. For Japan this HR includes any form of George, Sam, and Grace. For the Allies this means that only F4F and FM fighters can operate from USN CVEs (and their Martlet and Wildcat equivalents from RN CVEs). Both IJN and Allied CVEs can FERRY larger fighters, but they can�t OPERATE from them.
=> This I requested for historical reasons. Fighters operating from USN CVEs were F4Fs.

12. If at least one unit begins the game in a base containing some form of HI, LI, Oil, Resources, etc. (but not Manpower only) the hex cannot be vacated. This prevents the total destruction of installations on an auto base flip.
=> This was John's ONLY request. I agreed to it.

With no restrictions on strategic bombing, John will have to have CAP over anything important he conquers within 4E range. That will include Miri, Palembang, Balikpapan, etc. Unless Java falls quickly, he will not get those oilfields and refineries in good shape. I think the name of the game is making him spend more supply that he would care for. If he raids heavily, he will be spending oil. If he is not careful, his long term ability to project power will be compromised.

Note than there is no altitude restriction on night bombing (it would have been ahistorical), and there is no restriction on 2E naval bombing, so there are constraints, but I do not think they will be as bad as many fear.

Having said that, please remember I am a Japanese Fan Boi (TM) at heart, so some habits die hard. I will need help to be able to think like a competent Allied player. Thanks for you comments, nt59giants, Wargmr, Hans, and all. Please keep them coming.

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to HansBolter)

Post #: 26

RE: BTS/BTSL against John 3rd: What was Kitakami thinki... - 4/27/2018 2:52:23 PM

HansBolter

Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline

It was all the restrictions in China that I see as unfair.

The base game is already heavily skewed against the Chinese and for Japan in China.

As an AFB I don't see the Japanese needing any help whatsoever in China.

Supply alone will limit any American air ops in China, the base force restriction is completely unnecessary.

Will Japanese land based naval air not be allowed to operate from IJA air bases?
Will IJA air squadrons not be allowed to operate from IJN bases?

I don't see a corresponding limit on the Japanese.

_____________________________

Hans

(in reply to Kitakami)

Post #: 27

RE: BTS/BTSL against John 3rd: What was Kitakami thinki... - 4/27/2018 3:37:27 PM

jwolf

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

Rule 6 on air base support in China does seem perverse to me. Since there is hardly any Chinese air force and never will be much of one, if the players adopt this rule then what is the point of the various Chinese air support units? And what of the AVG?

(in reply to HansBolter)

Post #: 28

RE: BTS/BTSL against John 3rd: What was Kitakami thinki... - 4/27/2018 4:28:19 PM

Kitakami

Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline

Rule 6 was a leftover from my current game with Falken. Which was a leftover from when Falken played the Allies and I played the Japanese. Not John's fault. If it comes back to haunt me, it will be my own fault.

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to jwolf)

Post #: 29

RE: BTS/BTSL against John 3rd: What was Kitakami thinki... - 4/27/2018 4:29:58 PM

Kitakami

Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline

Got the scenario files from John this morning. Now to go through them with a fine-toothed comb. Will post the main points as soon as my notes are finished.

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)

Post #: 30

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> BTS/BTSL against John 3rd: What was Kitakami thinking?!?!?!?