RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A)

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: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A)

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: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A)

Page: << < prev 139 140 [141] 142 143 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 12/5/2018 11:39:37 PM

Mike Solli

Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

quote:

Any thoughts on using the 27 artillery units there to bombard more frequently than just during the assaults?

Absolutely, there's little reason to not have them bombard every turn. The only one I could think of is if you're low on supply.

These units will have no disruption and little fatigue, and will gain little of either as I'm sure his response will be virtually non-existent. At the very least you'll be adding to his disruption/fatigue levels and he'll be expending what little supply he may have or get in 'counter-battery' fire.

So, I say blast away.

That's what I've been thinking. I have plenty of supply in China. There's really not a lot going on there most of the time.

_____________________________

Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to rustysi)

Post #: 4201

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 12/7/2018 3:03:04 AM

Lokasenna

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants_MatrixForum

Hit the "D" button to bring up the Database.
Sort by Infantry.
Look at anti-armor and anti-soft values for Allied squads.
Stay away from the Marines.

I never knew that! It's brilliant!

Just another reason to use Tracker.

(in reply to Mike Solli)

Post #: 4202

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 12/7/2018 6:10:53 PM

rustysi

Posts: 7472
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants_MatrixForum

Hit the "D" button to bring up the Database.
Sort by Infantry.
Look at anti-armor and anti-soft values for Allied squads.
Stay away from the Marines.

I never knew that! It's brilliant!

Just another reason to use Tracker.

But if the 'D' key does the job....

Personally I was unaware of it myself, will try it tonight.

_____________________________

It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 4203

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 12/7/2018 10:56:03 PM

Lokasenna

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants_MatrixForum

Hit the "D" button to bring up the Database.
Sort by Infantry.
Look at anti-armor and anti-soft values for Allied squads.
Stay away from the Marines.

I never knew that! It's brilliant!

Just another reason to use Tracker.

But if the 'D' key does the job....

Personally I was unaware of it myself, will try it tonight.

It doesn't really, though. Tracker allows you to see them all in one place that's much easier to read, and to more quickly/easily sort.

(in reply to rustysi)

Post #: 4204

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 12/8/2018 6:28:36 PM

rustysi

Posts: 7472
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline

quote:

will try it tonight.

'D' key is quicker than my normal way, I usually use the button on the menu bar.

Tracker may be better, don't know, don't use it.

_____________________________

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 4205

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 12/8/2018 9:16:04 PM

mind_messing

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

Tracker also provides build rates and upgrade paths for devices in a centralised screen, which is info spread over a couple of screens in-game.

(in reply to rustysi)

Post #: 4206

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 12/12/2018 10:18:40 PM

Mike Solli

Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline

3 Dec 43

Sub War

I-18, the last of the subs chasing Bunker Hill (unsuccessfully) was caught by an ASW TF and hit once by a depth charge causing moderate damage: 12-39(22)-4(1)-0. She was already heading back to port. Now it'll be a bit slower.

5 Fleet

The BB Bombardment TF arrived in the vicinity of Umnak. The Nagato and Mutsu will bombard tomorrow, Yamato and Musashi, the day after. Lets see how they do.

I split the 19 Division into 3 regiments and learned that each regiment repaired disrupted squads as efficiently as the full division. In other words, the AC increased by 14 vs. the 4-6 a day for the division. Should have done that long ago.

Yeah, I knew that but just never got around to doing it.

4 Fleet

Bunker Hill successfully made Pearl Harbor. Remember spotting 2 carrier groups and thinking there were 2 damaged carriers? I asked Ted about it and he told me the other one was the CV TF that Bunker Hill originally belonged to. They just happened to reach Pearl at the same time.

The only thing going on here now are Corsair and Hellcat sweeps from Mili to Roi-Namur. There are about a dozen damaged fighters at Roi and the airfield is still down, but repairing.

I swept Mili from Wotje with 4 Georges and found a CAP of 2 Hellcats and 2 Corsairs. For the loss of a George, both Hellcats were shot down. Little CAP. Wish I had something to hit Mili with, but nothing is in range.

SE Fleet

Pretty quiet here. Some 100 bombers hit Rabaul for no real damage to either side.

SRA

Sixteen SBDs flying out of Darwin hit a barge TF sinking 3 barges and a Kiso PB (for fuel) for no loss at Saumlaki. Now I'll just use air transports to keep supply flowing there. Supply is good and forts are up to 5.90.

Burma

I shot down 2 Warhawks over Ledo and then my bombers went in (55, less than half). Glad got a couple and they did exactly 1 airbase damage.

This ain't working.

China

Half my bombers flew, killing 12 squads and disabling another 75.

I set my 27 artillery units to bombard. They'll continue to bombard as long as there's supply. Right now, there is a LOT of supply available.

Other Stuff

Reinforcements:

RO-115, headed to the SRA.
4 South Seas Det, a tiny one with only 27 infantry squads, Attu garrison.
MTB G-160

The S-47 was confirmed sunk at Dutch Harbor on 9/4/43 by a 16" shell, either Nagato or Mutsu during a bombardment there.

_____________________________

Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to mind_messing)

Post #: 4207

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 12/15/2018 8:33:31 PM

rustysi

Posts: 7472
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline

quote:

I split the 19 Division into 3 regiments and learned that each regiment repaired disrupted squads as efficiently as the full division. In other words, the AC increased by 14 vs. the 4-6 a day for the division. Should have done that long ago.

Oh, that's good to know. I was not sure myself and don't know why I never tried it. Thanks Mike.

quote:

4 South Seas Det, a tiny one with only 27 infantry squads, Attu garrison.

That's not the 'South Seas'.

_____________________________

(in reply to Mike Solli)

Post #: 4208

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 12/20/2018 10:57:49 AM

Mike Solli

Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline

4 Dec 43

Sub War

Good day for a change. I hit a Dutch sub twice off Balikpapan and the Escolar was hit again off Truk. She�s got heavy damage now.

5 Fleet

I bombarded with a couple of BBs causing a lot of damage to the base force but not much to the infantry regiment:

Naval bombardment of Umnak Island at 169,51 - Coastal Guns Fire Back!

Allied aircraft
no flights

Allied aircraft losses
C-47 Skytrain: 1 damaged
C-47 Skytrain: 1 destroyed on ground
Bolingbroke IV: 1 damaged
P-400 Airacobra: 1 damaged

6 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.

Japanese Ships
BB Mutsu
BB Nagato
CL Agano
DD Tokitsukaze
DD Amatsukaze
DD Maikaze

Allied ground losses:
240 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled
Non Combat: 20 destroyed, 50 disabled
Engineers: 2 destroyed, 4 disabled
Vehicles lost 19 (5 destroyed, 14 disabled)

Airbase hits 9
Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 59
Port hits 6

I�ll bombard again with Yamato and Musashi tomorrow. No ground attack yet. I didn�t do enough damage to the infantry to make me comfortable. My offensive AV is 211 to the Allied 125. I�ll take my time and do it right. There's a blizzard going on anyway. Who wants to fight in a blizzard?

4 Fleet

More Hellcats and Corsairs swept Roi-Namur. No bombing there so my airfield repaired a little more.

A few Georges swept Mili shooting down a Corsair and Hellcat for no loss.

SE Fleet

Ted was happy to bomb Rabaul�s few troops marooned there killing off the remnants an AAA battalion.

Everywhere else in the area was quiet.

SRA

Nothing to report.

Burma

My Helens hit Ledo killing a transport on the ground and damaging a few more, while doing a little airfield damage. No enemy fighters rose to meet me anywhere in Burma.

China

The artillery bombardment was a success. I�m going to continue it every day:

Ground combat at Chungking (76,45)

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 7855 troops, 434 guns, 595 vehicles, Assault Value = 6803

Defending force 337569 troops, 585 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 9583

Allied ground losses:
729 casualties reported
Squads: 44 destroyed, 27 disabled
Non Combat: 6 destroyed, 9 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

The Chinese AV is showing as 9583, down from 10,322 on 11/28/43, the last deliberate assault. Interesting. With no forts, the air bombing must be doing nice work. By the way, the air bombing killed off 7 squads while disabling another 170. We�re getting there.

Other Stuff

The Ha-43 engine R&D advanced to 11/44 (will become operational 5/44).

I got confirmation of the sinking of a good sized TK on 3/1/43 near Noumea by sub.

_____________________________

Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to rustysi)

Post #: 4209

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 12/20/2018 8:56:15 PM

rustysi

Posts: 7472
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline

quote:

There's a blizzard going on anyway. Who wants to fight in a blizzard?

Its the Aleutians in Dec, there's always a blizzard.

_____________________________

(in reply to Mike Solli)

Post #: 4210

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 12/22/2018 3:25:58 PM

mind_messing

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

From my experience it's the artillery that really makes a difference at Chungking once the defenders are out of supply. It massively increases the rate at which Chinese units get disabled/destroyed and (more importantly IMO) increases levels of fatigue/disruption. Seeing as the defenders can't use supply to take replacements or reserve mode in case of attacks, it's a real win-win for Japan. Even if the supply consumption increases as a result, it's the best value for money in terms of VP Japan is ever going to get in game.

(in reply to rustysi)

Post #: 4211

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 12/28/2018 5:51:03 PM

Mike Solli

Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline

I'm going to stick with daily artillery bombardment of Chungking. I have to agree with you that it's going to be significant to the fall of that city, especially now that the forts are gone.

_____________________________

Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to mind_messing)

Post #: 4212

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 12/28/2018 6:13:30 PM

Mike Solli

Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline

If any of you are wondering, Ted has been out of town this week and didn't expect to get any turns done. I've been toying with the idea of starting another game to try and right all the mistakes I made with this one. About a week or so ago, I approached another long time AE player and, to my surprise, he accepted! So, we're playing the campaign. Since I'm off work until next Wednesday and Ted is out living it up, I've been working on the first turn. At first, it was daunting (as usual), but I'm working through it step by step and it's going much better. I'm taking my start for this game and modifying it from my experiences.

Currently, I'm looking at the small tankers, but from a different perspective. It's a ratio, Capacity/tonnage. Turns out, the best of the little guys is the Type-1 TM with at C/T of 1.273 and 14 kt speed as a bonus! Here are the numbers:

Type-1 TM: 1.273, 6400t, 8150c, 14kt
Type-1 TS: 1.116, 1120t, 1250c, 12kt, 31 in game on 12/7
Manzyu TM: 1.112, 7150t, 7950c, 12kt, 13 in game on 12/7
Std-E: 1.000, 860t, 860c, 9kt
Std-C: 0.983, 2900t, 2850c, 12kt, 17 available to convert (June 42) on 12/7
Std-D: 0.938, 2100t, 1970c, 12kt
Std-B: 0.915, 4670t, 4275c, 14kt
Std-A: 0.877, 6600t, 5785c, 13kt

I have a lot of the Type-1 TM. I've also built a fair number of the Std-C and a handful each of the -A and -B. Next game I'll focus on the Type-1 TM and the Std-B, which is a little smaller, along with what I get at the start. I'll still build a number of the big hulls to move fuel/oil out of Singapore.

Just some random thoughts. What do you guys think?

_____________________________

Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Mike Solli)

Post #: 4213

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 12/31/2018 6:33:40 PM

Mike Solli

Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline

5 Dec 43

Sub War

Lots of Allied subs shooting unsuccessfully at my ASW TFs and my ASW TFs not dropping any depth charges.

5 Fleet

The Yamato and Musashi bombarded Umnak, hitting the support forces and missing the infantry again.

Glad I didn't do a deliberate assault. The raw Japanese AV is now up to 215 with the Allied raw AV down to 120. I'm moving some more naval support to Adak along with a couple of AKEs hoping I can get the BBs to reload their main tubes and speed up this little operation.

Night Naval bombardment of Umnak Island at 169,51

Allied aircraft
no flights

Allied aircraft losses
C-47 Skytrain: 4 damaged
C-47 Skytrain: 2 destroyed on ground
Bolingbroke IV: 1 damaged
Bolingbroke IV: 1 destroyed on ground

Japanese Ships
BB Musashi
BB Yamato

Allied ground losses:
130 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Non Combat: 31 destroyed, 40 disabled
Engineers: 5 destroyed, 1 disabled
Vehicles lost 27 (13 destroyed, 14 disabled)

Airbase hits 10
Runway hits 30
Port hits 5

4 Fleet

Nothing to report.

SE Fleet

The day started with 5 of my DDs moving to Aitape, sinking the two YMS there, and bombarding the Aussies before skedaddling successfully.

Ted bombed my rabble at Rabaul again.

SRA

My naval search found a small Allied TF west of Australia in the middle of nowhere. I'm sending 3 subs that have been hanging out near Perth and a fourth heading down there to investigate. (See below.)

Burma

Over Ledo, my Franks shot down 3 of 5 P-40N5s, then some of my Helens went in. At a cost of a couple of Helens to flak, I destroyed a transport on the ground.

Yeah, that's working well.

China

Another artillery bombardment:

Ground combat at Chungking (76,45)

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 7855 troops, 434 guns, 595 vehicles, Assault Value = 6848

Defending force 337799 troops, 583 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 9618

Allied ground losses:
725 casualties reported
Squads: 24 destroyed, 19 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 4 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Other Stuff

The Ki-84r R&D advanced to 7/44 (will become operational 2/44).

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Mike Solli)

Post #: 4214

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/2/2019 2:47:33 PM

mind_messing

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

Getting the Frank R that early in 1944 bodes well for you in the air war.

Regarding the poor results at Ledo and Umnak, are the detection levels maxed out? I've seen massively improved results from bombing missions when DL is kept consistently at 10/10. This normally requires dedicated recon squadrons at work, but Japan has plenty of those (and more once they split into A/B/C components) and I think it might help get better results.

That said, by late '43 airbase bombing is a wash-out for Japan in most tactical circumstances, especially in Burma where the British get some massive AA units with truly formidable guns. That said, I'm convinced you can generate good results if you get a good target with maxed detection levels and flying at 10k or 11k feet. You'll take a beating to flak but it keeps you out of the envelope of the omnipresent 40mm Bofors that is the woe of so many Japanese planes.

With the two Yamato's reluctance to shoot at troops, try throwing them into a fast transport TF loaded with supply. The defending units will shoot at the unloading ships, and bear the full brunt of 18.1 inch return shells.

However, a general comment about the North Pacific theatre is that you're fast approaching the point where the Allies don't need the Aleutians to assault the Kuriles - they can do it from Pearl. Every unit deployed eastwards of Paramushrio-Jima is a unit that can potentially get cut off if the Allies throw themselves ashore on the Kuriles. I'd consider examining how to get everything out and back to the Kuriles within the next three or four months. I'd also look at it as a fuel saving exercise as well - once you're back ensconced in the Kuriles, you'll be able to keep the fuel hogging battleships in port within easy sortie distance rather than roaming around NorPac

(in reply to Mike Solli)

Post #: 4215

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/3/2019 10:54:49 AM

Mike Solli

Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline

John, I'm pretty excited about getting the Frank r too. Also, it'll free up 6 R&D factories. I also finish the Oscar line in 2/44 giving me another 4 R&D factories. I'm thinking of starting them all on the J7W1. That's on my list for late war fighters, and I haven't started working on them yet.

My thought on bombing Ledo is to accelerate the downfall of Chungking. I may give up on that altogether. Artillery bombardment seems to be doing ok. That by itself will destroy more infantry than his replacements create. Coupled with 2-3 deliberate attacks a month should do him in. He's up to almost 100 transports at Ledo though. That's a decent amount of extra supply a day. I have flak at Chungking and am flying LRCAP there and I am shooting down no transports. What am I missing? I can't figure it out.

I'm almost done playing around in the Aleutians. Even with the fleet moving quite a bit, my fuel is increasing ~7-8k a day, much better than I expected by this point in the war. I currently have 3.3 million on map with another 250k on ships heading to Japan. The only place I currently had a surplus was at Singapore (the major hub) and it's being loaded now for the trek to Japan. I'm doing a nice job of keeping oil and fuel drained from the other locations.

I just offloaded a Naval HQ at Adak. I'm going to try and load the BBs there tomorrow. Keeping fingers crossed. It probably won't work because the AKEs haven't arrived yet.

_____________________________

Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to mind_messing)

Post #: 4216

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/3/2019 2:15:55 PM

Lowpe

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

I've been toying with the idea of starting another game to try and right all the mistakes I made with this one.

A never ending quest!

(in reply to Mike Solli)

Post #: 4217

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/3/2019 4:56:15 PM

mind_messing

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

quote:

John, I'm pretty excited about getting the Frank r too. Also, it'll free up 6 R&D factories. I also finish the Oscar line in 2/44 giving me another 4 R&D factories. I'm thinking of starting them all on the J7W1. That's on my list for late war fighters, and I haven't started working on them yet.

It's a good one, but it's pretty inflexible. Pretty much defensive CAP only. And IJN.

I'd put some effort in to it by all means, but I'd have a look at the Shinden versus the Ki-83. Extra cost for having two engines, but that extra range with much the same stats give the '83 that much more utility. Plus, it's IJA, so more squadrons to use it.

quote:

My thought on bombing Ledo is to accelerate the downfall of Chungking. I may give up on that altogether. Artillery bombardment seems to be doing ok. That by itself will destroy more infantry than his replacements create. Coupled with 2-3 deliberate attacks a month should do him in. He's up to almost 100 transports at Ledo though. That's a decent amount of extra supply a day. I have flak at Chungking and am flying LRCAP there and I am shooting down no transports. What am I missing? I can't figure it out.

If he's flying transport missions from Ledo, try LRCAP of Ledo itself. Sweep first to clear off the CAP then have some squadrons LRCAP the hex. If the transports are flying, they should be intercepted by LRCAP.

Either way, I'd just send the bombers to help Chungking by bombing Chungking directly. If he is flying supply in, the extra bombs landing on the airbase supply dumps will make it a pointless venture.

quote:

I'm almost done playing around in the Aleutians. Even with the fleet moving quite a bit, my fuel is increasing ~7-8k a day, much better than I expected by this point in the war. I currently have 3.3 million on map with another 250k on ships heading to Japan. The only place I currently had a surplus was at Singapore (the major hub) and it's being loaded now for the trek to Japan. I'm doing a nice job of keeping oil and fuel drained from the other locations.

I just offloaded a Naval HQ at Adak. I'm going to try and load the BBs there tomorrow. Keeping fingers crossed. It probably won't work because the AKEs haven't arrived yet.

Yeah, the time is fast approaching where the Allied machine is going to be able to grind down the Aleutians regardless of what you do, and the geography works very much against Japan in that theatre. So make sure to snatch as much as you can out of the way of the grinder beforehand! From my own past experiences I get cagey come '44 - that big Allied suckerpunch can appear just about anywhere on the map...

Those numbers look veeery good. That's roughtly, what, just less than a year surplus fuel? Solid numbers, but supply tends to be the killer.

(in reply to Mike Solli)

Post #: 4218

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/4/2019 8:31:19 PM

PaxMondo

Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

J7W v Ki-83

Personally, I don't think there is a bad decision here. They are different though. As MM points out, J7W is purely defensive, but it is really good at that. Competitive against anything the allies have late war. Ki-83 is really good as escort; it won't just be ablative armor in that role and will let you take advantage of the range that your bombers have. It can also be used in CAP, but it won't be as good as the J7W. And of course it costs twice as much to build.

IJN/IJA difference, I'm not worried about it. Particularly here. You are starting late on the RnD, so you won't get these much more than 2 months early no matter what you do. Given that, you can't possibly build enough to field more than 3 or 4 groups (of size 36-49). Now, if you were talking about getting these in May 44 where you might be able to build 1000's before game end, I might have a different opinion.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to mind_messing)

Post #: 4219

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/4/2019 9:25:16 PM

Mike Solli

Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline

Lots of opinions. I love it!

Keeps me thinking.

What I've decided (long ago) to work on for late war are 4 fighters, 2 for each service.

Shinden: purely defensive. Reason being it's IJN. My thoughts all along were to use the IJAAF as much as possible to preserve the IJNAF pilots for the carriers. I don't expect to have any effective carriers late war, so those surviving really good pilots will land based. Right now no R&D factories.

Sam: I screwed up as we all know. I have 11x30 factories repaired as follows: 9, 8, 7, 6, 6, 5, 4, 4, 3, 3, 1. I'll probably add 1 or 2 more in a few months. We'll see how that turns out. Right now I have no estimate as to when I'll get them.

Frank r: I get these in February 44. This is one of the few things I did right. Hopefully, they'll prove their worth. the "a" model is putting some serious hurting on the Allies. I'm hoping for some good things here.

Ki-201 Karyu: I started these early (possibly at the start of the war, can't remember). I currently have 6x30 factories repaired as follows: 20, 15, 15, 11, 8, 3. The problem is the NE Turbojet. I won't get them until February 45 so I can't accelerate using engines until then.

The main reason I didn't go with the Ki-83 was the cost. In retrospect, that may have been a bad decision. Unfortunately, it's too late to make any more changes.

So, I'll have the Frank r soon (yay!), the Shinden maybe a few months early (shrug), hopefully the Sam in early 45 and the Ki-201 in late 45.

I have the George 2 now, which is pretty good and will get the George 5 in May 44. That'll have to do for the IJN.

< Message edited by Mike Solli -- 1/4/2019 9:26:06 PM >

_____________________________

Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 4220

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/4/2019 11:10:51 PM

PaxMondo

Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Lots of opinions. I love it! Keeps me thinking.

What I've decided (long ago) to work on for late war are 4 fighters, 2 for each service.

Shinden: purely defensive. Reason being it's IJN. My thoughts all along were to use the IJAAF as much as possible to preserve the IJNAF pilots for the carriers. I don't expect to have any effective carriers late war, so those surviving really good pilots will land based. Right now no R&D factories.

Sam: I screwed up as we all know. I have 11x30 factories repaired as follows: 9, 8, 7, 6, 6, 5, 4, 4, 3, 3, 1. I'll probably add 1 or 2 more in a few months. We'll see how that turns out. Right now I have no estimate as to when I'll get them.

Frank r: I get these in February 44. This is one of the few things I did right. Hopefully, they'll prove their worth. the "a" model is putting some serious hurting on the Allies. I'm hoping for some good things here.

Ki-201 Karyu: I started these early (possibly at the start of the war, can't remember). I currently have 6x30 factories repaired as follows: 20, 15, 15, 11, 8, 3. The problem is the NE Turbojet. I won't get them until February 45 so I can't accelerate using engines until then.

The main reason I didn't go with the Ki-83 was the cost. In retrospect, that may have been a bad decision. Unfortunately, it's too late to make any more changes.

So, I'll have the Frank r soon (yay!), the Shinden maybe a few months early (shrug), hopefully the Sam in early 45 and the Ki-201 in late 45.

I have the George 2 now, which is pretty good and will get the George 5 in May 44. That'll have to do for the IJN.

As I say, I think either way is good and won't have a huge impact. I don't think choosing the J7W over the Ki-83 a good decision nor vice versa; they are just different. Both are good planes (very good), but they are different. I've good success with both, so seriously no worries.

Now in your next game, you may wish to think about choosing one and starting the RnD earlier. Getting the Ki-83 early '45 can be REALLY interesting and fun. I much prefer the Ki-83 armament, those Ho-5 20mm CL � they are nasty.

Another variant is to go strong for the J7W instead of A7M � meaning you acknowledge that the KB is fishing reef by the time you can get the A7M and instead focus on getting the premier LB interceptor for the IJN early. I generally like to go for the George or Jack with this strategy as well; ie an LB based IJN.

Anyway, you're fine in this game.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Mike Solli)

Post #: 4221

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/5/2019 7:48:50 PM

rustysi

Posts: 7472
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline

quote:

I have flak at Chungking and am flying LRCAP there and I am shooting down no transports. What am I missing? I can't figure it out.

Try sweeping Chungking. Someone recently posted it works.

_____________________________

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 4222

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/6/2019 1:38:05 PM

USSAmerica

Posts: 18715
Joined: 10/28/2002
From: Graham, NC, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

quote:

I have flak at Chungking and am flying LRCAP there and I am shooting down no transports. What am I missing? I can't figure it out.

Try sweeping Chungking. Someone recently posted it works.

Hey Mike, I have a vested interest in keeping you guessing about this subject, but I'll let you in on one of the Allied realities.

The range from Ledo to Chungking is 15 hexes. In 12/43, the Allies have VERY few (almost none) transports that can reach that far. You mentioned that you have almost all of the rest of China under under control, so any supply trickle into Chungking by air will be tiny. Most days there are probably no transports even flying in there for you to attempt to intercept.

_____________________________

Mike

"Good times will set you free" - Jimmy Buffett

"They need more rum punch" - Me

Artwork by The Amazing Dixie

(in reply to rustysi)

Post #: 4223

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/6/2019 6:32:24 PM

Mike Solli

Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: USSAmerica

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

quote:

I have flak at Chungking and am flying LRCAP there and I am shooting down no transports. What am I missing? I can't figure it out.

Try sweeping Chungking. Someone recently posted it works.

Hey Mike, I have a vested interest in keeping you guessing about this subject, but I'll let you in on one of the Allied realities.

The range from Ledo to Chungking is 15 hexes. In 12/43, the Allies have VERY few (almost none) transports that can reach that far. You mentioned that you have almost all of the rest of China under under control, so any supply trickle into Chungking by air will be tiny. Most days there are probably no transports even flying in there for you to attempt to intercept.

Mike, I knew there weren't a lot of transports that could reach Chungking, but those transports at Ledo are doing something, and there are almost 100 of them. Chungking is the closest place the Chinese have to Ledo. Here's a map of the remaining Chinese:

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to USSAmerica)

Post #: 4224

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/6/2019 9:04:22 PM

Mike Solli

Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline

6 Dec 43

Sub War

Nothing to report.

5 Fleet

Air bombardment of Umnak was the highlight. Japanese raw AV is just about twice the Allied raw AV at 232:117. The tank regiment is at full strength but the 19 Division is still repairing disabled squads and effective AV is only 176. Once it hits 200, I'll attack right after a massive BB bombardment.

4 Fleet

Nothing to report.

SE Fleet

Nothing on consequence here today. Just some bombing of troops at Rabaul and Hollandia.

SRA

Nothing here either. That little Allied TF I spotted west of NW Australia disappeared too, but it might just be in a gap in my naval search. I still have 4 subs headed there. Hopefully I'll pick it back up tomorrow.

Burma

Seven Hurricanes were shot down in return for 2 Franks shot down. About half a dozen more Hurricanes were apparently written off.

Over Ledo, no enemy fighters appeared. My 27 Helens put light damage on the airfield and destroyed 1 and damaged another half dozen transports, all Dakotas. There were still a few points of airfield damage at the end of the day.

China

The air bombardment of Chungking killed 8 squads while disabling another 220 squads. The artillery bombardment killed 30 squads and disabled another 48. Note that this turn happened before the discussion occurred about intercepting his transports. The turn was sent off, so I won't be able to attempt to LRCAP Ledo until I receive the next turn.

Other Stuff

Zuikaku made port today (finally) with damage of 3-62(51)-20(19)-0. I had been running her at full speed for a couple of turns and that last one increased her damage quite a bit. Looks like it'll be 151 days to repair her.

Better than losing her.

Akagi and Soryu will be completely repaired in 8 and 9 days respectively. They will join Kaga, Shokaku, Unryu, Amagi and Kasasagi to form a nice KB once again. That's in addition to all the little carriers that constitute MKB.

In addition to the carriers above, the only other damaged carrier is little Chuyo, who will be fully repaired in 15 days.

In China, my goal is to kill more than 350 infantry squads a month. This was my third artillery bombardment this month, along with the (almost) daily aerial bombardment. So far, they've killed 93 infantry steps. I'll keep track daily to see the monthly result.

_____________________________

Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Mike Solli)

Post #: 4225

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/7/2019 12:10:42 AM

ny59giants

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

I'm surprised you don't have a spreadsheet or Word document with ALL your airframe and engine factories listed with which one are going to produce what for the whole game. You have been very good to excellent on the rest of the Japanese economy, but not here.

Why not??

(in reply to Mike Solli)

Post #: 4226

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/7/2019 12:17:23 AM

Mike Solli

Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants_MatrixForum

I'm surprised you don't have a spreadsheet or Word document with ALL your airframe and engine factories listed with which one are going to produce what for the whole game. You have been very good to excellent on the rest of the Japanese economy, but not here.

Why not??

Actually, I do have a spreadsheet for airframe and engine production. The R&D part, well, that's another thing. That was my weak point since back in the WitP days and I had no clue (or thoughts, really) about it when I started this game. Once I decided on an airframe, it was easy. The hard part was (and still is) deciding on what to produce. It's so late now that I'm pretty much committed to my "plan" such as it is. Late war will be the Frank r, Sam M2 (and M3 maybe), Ki-201 and the Shinden, along with the George 5.

_____________________________

Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to ny59giants)

Post #: 4227

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/7/2019 12:27:36 AM

Mike Solli

Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline

My big mistake (in addition to not really knowing which plane stats are critical) was to not track individual factories as critically as I should have done. I kept track of the number of R&D factories assigned to each airframe, but there were a series of issues. Several factories accidentally converted to operational when I didn't want that, and I intentionally let some convert where I didn't really need to do that. Also, I have 1s & 2s allocated to airframes that are unimportant, so they're pretty much wasted. Examples: 2 on Betty, 1 on Francis, stuff like that. Not enough to really make a difference or working on models that I shouldn't bother with.

I still don't really have a handle on which stats are critical for things like air-to-air combat. Maneuverability? Speed? Armament? Durability? Armor? SR? I know they're all good, but which are the best and do some not matter? Different people say different things. Makes me crazy and the end result is what you see now.

_____________________________

Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Mike Solli)

Post #: 4228

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/7/2019 12:43:14 AM

mind_messing

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

My big mistake (in addition to not really knowing which plane stats are critical) was to not track individual factories as critically as I should have done. I kept track of the number of R&D factories assigned to each airframe, but there were a series of issues. Several factories accidentally converted to operational when I didn't want that, and I intentionally let some convert where I didn't really need to do that. Also, I have 1s & 2s allocated to airframes that are unimportant, so they're pretty much wasted. Examples: 2 on Betty, 1 on Francis, stuff like that. Not enough to really make a difference or working on models that I shouldn't bother with.

I still don't really have a handle on which stats are critical for things like air-to-air combat. Maneuverability? Speed? Armament? Durability? Armor? SR? I know they're all good, but which are the best and do some not matter? Different people say different things. Makes me crazy and the end result is what you see now.

By design, there's no one factor that you should value above all others. I base my airframe selection from the manual (pg 173 for those interested).

Speed takes primacy IMO, as it can reduce the opponent aircraft maneuverer by half if the speed difference is high enough.

Based on that, I tend to peg my aircraft (in order of importance) based on:

1. Speed
2. Altitude
3. Durability
4. Weapons

#2,3 & 4 aren't really deal-breakers in themselves, but I think speed is key.

That's relfected in other AAR's. The big killers for both the Allies (Mustang, Thunderbolt, Corsair) and Japan (Shinden, 94, 83, Frank, Sam) all top the list for max speed.

Obviously it's a bit deeper than that when you factor in altitude bands, and even more complex when you consider pilot skills, layered CAP, radar and so on.

From what I've seen and what I infer from the manual, if there's a vast disparity in speed, the other factors matter less. Where speeds are closer, the other factors come in to play. To that end, speed is good!

PS: Not forgotten the turn, currently shifting masses of pilots

(in reply to Mike Solli)

Post #: 4229

RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/7/2019 1:18:51 AM

ny59giants

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

Since you mentioned a new game about to be started, I would update your spreadsheet to include your R&D airframes. It might work out better to start with the late war airframes and work back to '41. Look at where you want to produce those '44/45 fighters and decide which major base you are going to defend the most and build them there. I know in my limited experience playing Japan, I've been too lazy to look at things form the end game back to ensure when I get there that some important factory(s) are someplace I cannot effectively defend.
I think there about 6 baseses that have to be defended. Those should have those late war factories and plan from Dec '41 to make them so.

< Message edited by ny59giants_MatrixForum -- 1/7/2019 1:19:46 AM >

(in reply to mind_messing)

Post #: 4230

Page: << < prev 139 140 [141] 142 143 next > >>

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A)