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: 18 Feb 42 report

 
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: 18 Feb 42 report Page: <<   < prev  11 12 [13] 14 15   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/2/2019 11:15:52 PM   
Anachro


Posts: 2506
Joined: 11/23/2015
From: The Coastal Elite
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

Just another FYI.

If your opponent is aware of it he can go a long way to defeating your attempted points win just by using his many engineers to increase his base sizes. All those points will add up, and you'll need three or four to overcome each one.


+1 Should be standard practice for every Allied player from Day 1. Upgrade, upgrade, upgrade. I build out every airfield and port I possible can on the west coast just for the VP gain! Then I build up some backwater places as well on the main map. It makes no sense not to given how supply is free for the Allies, esp on the mainland.

< Message edited by Anachro -- 12/2/2019 11:16:27 PM >

(in reply to rustysi)
Post #: 361
RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/2/2019 11:47:56 PM   
jdsrae


Posts: 2716
Joined: 3/1/2010
From: Gandangara Country
Status: offline 		Best to keep engineers busy building stuff and not sitting around idle on South Pacific islands...

_____________________________

Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no SolInvictus): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655

(in reply to Anachro)
Post #: 362
RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/3/2019 4:17:44 AM   
PaxMondo


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

ORIGINAL: jdsrae

Best to keep engineers busy building stuff and not sitting around idle on South Pacific islands...

Yes, but remember it all costs supply which is a finite resource. so don't build anything that you don't need. Over building wastes supply.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to jdsrae)
Post #: 363
RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/3/2019 4:23:43 AM   
jdsrae


Posts: 2716
Joined: 3/1/2010
From: Gandangara Country
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

quote:

ORIGINAL: jdsrae

Best to keep engineers busy building stuff and not sitting around idle on South Pacific islands...

Yes, but remember it all costs supply which is a finite resource. so don't build anything that you don't need. Over building wastes supply.


Sorry Pax I was referring to real life!
As an IJA Gensui I will not be allocating supply to build resorts on Pacific Islands!



_____________________________

Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no SolInvictus): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 364
RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/3/2019 11:38:52 AM   
obvert


Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo


quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

The fundamental problem with Judy is range, until the D4Y4 and Grace. It gives the allies a real advantage in a CV fight, one that almost always turns out costly for the IJ.

For me, after Oct '42, I really don't want a CV duel as IJ. I want to fight allied CV's with LBA using KB as bait. The KB is very brittle, I've lost so many CV's to a single hit.



quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

SBD-5 is 9 hex with 1000lb, SBD-6 is 10 hex. AND their fighters have better range than the A7M … after 10/42 you are fighting with a range DISADVANTAGE, which mean they can hit you and you cannot retaliate. THat is the scenario you enjoy right now until 10/42.



Not sure what you mean here Pax. CV battles are limited regardless of airframe range, right? Allies to 7 hexes and IJ to 8 hexes. So range is not so important as long as planes can cary their biggest bomb to those ranges, and the Judy can with drop tanks.



No, there are always probabilities for longer range IF the aircraft are capable. There was a dev discussion way, way back about this. You can have combat at up to 10 hex, but probabilities are low. DL has a lot to do with it, other factors as well. The discussion was triggered IIRC, but a 9 hex strike ….


If there are probabilities they certainly haven't been shown in AARs I've read or in games I've played. Has this ever happened with you?

I've made numerous 8 hex strikes as Japan, completely confident (and as it turned out rightly so) that the Allies could not respond. Jockmeister was particularly upset by this feature, and I've heard other Allied players rail against it too. So until shown otherwise I will take the 7 hex Allied and 8 hex IJN as solid and predictable range lints to act upon.

Now, reaction can move Allied CVs closer, but many Allied commanders do not use reaction as it also threatens to break up the DS and fragment CV strikes. I've definitely seen that happen too.

If you find a link to that discussion (or if Alfred can be summoned for his extensive knowledge and magical ability to find the exact thread referenced) then maybe I'll have to reconsider.

_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 365
RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/3/2019 12:39:28 PM   
Anachro


Posts: 2506
Joined: 11/23/2015
From: The Coastal Elite
Status: offline 		@Obvert You can read the relevant discussion here: Strike range for CV AC LINK

Relevant quotes from michaelm75au provided. This discussion is all new to me as well (though I feel like I've had strikes beyond 7 hexes before and this thread confirms it might be possible).

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm75au

There are a few items that are in the original WITP that were carried over and not changed apart from the map scale:
1. There is code that limits the strike range to that flown in 6 hours (based on cruise speed).
2. Limits carrier launched strikes to 7 and 8 respectively for Allied and Japanese.

These limits are used when deciding the best TF to attack.


quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm75au

Good experience and morale can push the group's max range out a random one or two hex for an attack.
This means that sometimes an attack will take place slightly outside the expected range of the aircraft.



(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 366
RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/3/2019 12:54:45 PM   
ITAKLinus

 

Posts: 630
Joined: 2/22/2018
From: Italy
Status: offline 		Ok. Let's suppose it's in the way posted above, meaning that's possible to do strikes at a longer range we (me, Obvert and others) thought.


Is it a reliable thing? Is it somehow possible to force that to happen? I personally have never seen it happen. Maybe, I'm just unexperienced, but it can also be that it's something which simply doesn't happen anyhow often.

Personally, I'd never take it into account in my evaluations over embarked planes, doctrines, strategies and tactical setups.

_____________________________

Francesco

(in reply to Anachro)
Post #: 367
RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/3/2019 1:12:10 PM   
GetAssista

 

Posts: 2732
Joined: 9/19/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ITAKLinus
Is it a reliable thing? Is it somehow possible to force that to happen? I personally have never seen it happen. Maybe, I'm just unexperienced, but it can also be that it's something which simply doesn't happen anyhow often.

It is not a reliable thing at all. Assuming it is still there in the last patch/beta, which I doubt
AI players like me can attest to it with more confidence than PBEM guys because we usually run around with very experienced and morally sound CV force sinking hapless AI left and right. If overly long CV strikes exist with some non-trivial probability they are bound to happen now and then when you have 6+ individual strikes a turn for several turns running around a mass of AI ships lighted up by LBA. I've never seen those in the recent years of me playing AI (including no-fog-of-war games)

(in reply to ITAKLinus)
Post #: 368
RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/3/2019 1:26:21 PM   
obvert


Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Anachro

@Obvert You can read the relevant discussion here: Strike range for CV AC LINK

Relevant quotes from michaelm75au provided. This discussion is all new to me as well (though I feel like I've had strikes beyond 7 hexes before and this thread confirms it might be possible).

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm75au

There are a few items that are in the original WITP that were carried over and not changed apart from the map scale:
1. There is code that limits the strike range to that flown in 6 hours (based on cruise speed).
2. Limits carrier launched strikes to 7 and 8 respectively for Allied and Japanese.

These limits are used when deciding the best TF to attack.


quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm75au

Good experience and morale can push the group's max range out a random one or two hex for an attack.
This means that sometimes an attack will take place slightly outside the expected range of the aircraft.





Awesome. Thanks for the link!

As I've already mentioned, this will be a VERY rare occurrence if it ever happens at all to you. I am about to test the A6M models and I can put this factor into the calculations as well. I'll be shocked after 20 iterations if even one strike goes beyond the CV strike limits. I've definitely done more than 20 myself at 8 hex range and never had it happen, but maybe that's also because I don't set planes beyond that limit due to torpedo ranges and escort ranges. So I'll try.

The Allies have certainly never hit me (and when I've played them I've never hit) beyond 7 hexes.

Testing is the only way to be sure though, so I'll give it a shot soon.

< Message edited by obvert -- 12/3/2019 1:27:04 PM >

_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to Anachro)
Post #: 369
RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/3/2019 1:43:09 PM   
Anachro


Posts: 2506
Joined: 11/23/2015
From: The Coastal Elite
Status: offline 		The other issue I have for this is the matter coordination. Does this mean individual air groups might split off from the coordinated strike and hit father? Is it instead a calculation based on the morale/experience of the full coordinated strike? Etc. I wouldn't want piecemeal bomber groups, experienced at that, going off farther than everyone else and dying to enemy CAP.

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 370
RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/3/2019 4:01:09 PM   
obvert


Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Anachro

The other issue I have for this is the matter coordination. Does this mean individual air groups might split off from the coordinated strike and hit father? Is it instead a calculation based on the morale/experience of the full coordinated strike? Etc. I wouldn't want piecemeal bomber groups, experienced at that, going off farther than everyone else and dying to enemy CAP.


Well, as stated it looks like group experience would control that group, so yes, coordination.

_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to Anachro)
Post #: 371
RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/4/2019 10:50:27 AM   
Hanzberger


Posts: 921
Joined: 4/26/2006
From: SE Pennsylvania
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo


quote:

ORIGINAL: jdsrae

Best to keep engineers busy building stuff and not sitting around idle on South Pacific islands...

Yes, but remember it all costs supply which is a finite resource. so don't build anything that you don't need. Over building wastes supply.

What is your supply level looking like at this point? I'm glad Pax mentioned this, something I need to revisit in my current AI game. How far down do you guys go with supply before pulling back on the stick? (In Japan) I'm currently down to 500k 2/19/42.

< Message edited by Hanzberger -- 12/4/2019 10:53:21 AM >

_____________________________

Planning for #17 Ironman Tier2

Japan AC wire chart here
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2769286&mpage=1&key=?

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 372
RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/4/2019 11:32:35 AM   
jdsrae


Posts: 2716
Joined: 3/1/2010
From: Gandangara Country
Status: offline 		Sounds similar to my game now.
I haven’t had 500k supply at Tokyo since about 8 Dec 42!
I bottomed it out at about 120k at Tokyo by about Christmas 42 and it’s been rising since.
Up to the dizzy heights of about 160k now. Plenty of cities have 15-20k in them so probably close to 500k all up in Japan.

_____________________________

Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no SolInvictus): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655

(in reply to Hanzberger)
Post #: 373
RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/4/2019 5:31:32 PM   
ITAKLinus

 

Posts: 630
Joined: 2/22/2018
From: Italy
Status: offline 		There is a misunderstanding maybe: are we talking about the supply level in Tokio or the supply level for Japan as a whole?


With 500k as a whole I think I'd have to stop operating in maximum a couple of turns.


If they are in Onshu... Well, not a big problem even going much lower than that: it's supplies distribution across the map which matters at the beginning. Having 4M in Tokio doesn't really matter if you then do not have sufficien supplies to your frontline units. And having a "dispersed" stock is quite useful until the mid-game because of the more efficient logistics of such an approach.

_____________________________

Francesco

(in reply to jdsrae)
Post #: 374
RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/4/2019 5:52:08 PM   
jdsrae


Posts: 2716
Joined: 3/1/2010
From: Gandangara Country
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ITAKLinus

There is a misunderstanding maybe: are we talking about the supply level in Tokio or the supply level for Japan as a whole?


With 500k as a whole I think I'd have to stop operating in maximum a couple of turns.


If they are in Onshu... Well, not a big problem even going much lower than that: it's supplies distribution across the map which matters at the beginning. Having 4M in Tokio doesn't really matter if you then do not have sufficien supplies to your frontline units. And having a "dispersed" stock is quite useful until the mid-game because of the more efficient logistics of such an approach.


I’m not sure exactly how much supply I have in Japan (excluding Hokkaido) as I don’t use tracker. I’d have to manually add the supply to find out and I’m not doing that!
I’ve been prioritising industry repair until recently with relatively little supply exported to support operations yet, so keeping >10k supply at many cities, usually 15-20k to help ensure industry repair isn’t stunted by lack of supply in hex.
I have never had a yellow or red warning mark in Japan and supply is growing in Tokyo which is the “indicator city” for this economic zone.

With supply use for industry expansion calming down (for now) I am about to start exporting some supply to China and Burma to support operations.

Manila still has a decent supply stockpile of about 80k that I am going to send to a few places like Miri for oil repair, Java to support its capture and PNG to support 14th Army ops there.

My luck with capturing industry intact just ran out at Sian. All industry was completely zeroed. Bummer because I could definitely have used the extra supply that an undamaged Sian would have produced. Ah well, I’ve had a good run with those random die rolls so far.

< Message edited by jdsrae -- 12/4/2019 5:54:02 PM >

_____________________________

Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no SolInvictus): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655

(in reply to ITAKLinus)
Post #: 375
RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/5/2019 1:54:32 AM   
Hanzberger


Posts: 921
Joined: 4/26/2006
From: SE Pennsylvania
Status: offline 		I thought expanding and repairing of industry for Japan was a player No No.

_____________________________

Planning for #17 Ironman Tier2

Japan AC wire chart here
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2769286&mpage=1&key=?

(in reply to jdsrae)
Post #: 376
RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/5/2019 3:44:15 AM   
jdsrae


Posts: 2716
Joined: 3/1/2010
From: Gandangara Country
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Hanzberger

I thought expanding and repairing of industry for Japan was a player No No.


Hi Hanz, I probably use the word “industry” too broadly, for everything from LI/HI to all forms of war machine production.

I am not expanding HI or LI as I don’t believe the return on investment is worth it. I am also not repairing any HI/LI or refineries that are captured damaged.
Some have different opinions, but to me expanding HI/LI would take supply out of the early years, when I have higher priorities for it, with a vague promise of future returns that probably won’t change the outcome anyway.

To clarify, I’ve spent a lot of supply setting up engine and aircraft factories and now just need to expand a few of my main ones to meet demand over time.
That has come at the expense of moving oodles of supply to support early operations but the field armies are getting by so far, mostly on the local stockpiles that they started the war with.

Burma needs regular supply runs from now on though, as it doesn’t produce anywhere near enough to sustain an army there.

< Message edited by jdsrae -- 12/5/2019 7:46:23 AM >

_____________________________

Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no SolInvictus): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655

(in reply to Hanzberger)
Post #: 377
RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/5/2019 5:17:50 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: GetAssista

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo
quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert
Not sure what you mean here Pax. CV battles are limited regardless of airframe range, right? Allies to 7 hexes and IJ to 8 hexes. So range is not so important as long as planes can cary their biggest bomb to those ranges, and the Judy can with drop tanks.

No, there are always probabilities for longer range IF the aircraft are capable. There was a dev discussion way, way back about this. You can have combat at up to 10 hex, but probabilities are low. DL has a lot to do with it, other factors as well. The discussion was triggered IIRC, but a 9 hex strike ….

That would be new to me. And to Alfred too https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3245238&mpage=1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred
1. TF Reaction has nothing to do with plane operations. It deals only wih the movement of the ships in the TF itself.

2. Aircraft, whether land based or carrier based, will only launch a naval strike against enemy enemy task forces if the detection level is high enough and they fall within the range set for the aircraft unit.

3. There is a hard coded maximum limit at which carrier aircraft will launch; 7 hexes for the Allies, 8 hexes for Japan.

You should read pages 217-221 of the manual for how spotting works and how it operates.
Alfred





and this is where Alfred is once again wrong. Not sure why everyone thinks he would know all and everything. In my ongoing PBEM vs Mundy Kates from KB attacked from a range of 9 hexes in early 42. And I have seen enough AAR where the IJ player tried to stay 10 hexes from the enemy to fly strikes with Graces from that range. I've done the same. Never heard or seen evidence of CV strikes of 10+ hexes.

_____________________________


(in reply to GetAssista)
Post #: 378
RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/5/2019 6:11:48 PM   
PaxMondo


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

ORIGINAL: castor troy


quote:

ORIGINAL: GetAssista

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo
quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert
Not sure what you mean here Pax. CV battles are limited regardless of airframe range, right? Allies to 7 hexes and IJ to 8 hexes. So range is not so important as long as planes can cary their biggest bomb to those ranges, and the Judy can with drop tanks.

No, there are always probabilities for longer range IF the aircraft are capable. There was a dev discussion way, way back about this. You can have combat at up to 10 hex, but probabilities are low. DL has a lot to do with it, other factors as well. The discussion was triggered IIRC, but a 9 hex strike ….

That would be new to me. And to Alfred too https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3245238&mpage=1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred
1. TF Reaction has nothing to do with plane operations. It deals only wih the movement of the ships in the TF itself.

2. Aircraft, whether land based or carrier based, will only launch a naval strike against enemy enemy task forces if the detection level is high enough and they fall within the range set for the aircraft unit.

3. There is a hard coded maximum limit at which carrier aircraft will launch; 7 hexes for the Allies, 8 hexes for Japan.

You should read pages 217-221 of the manual for how spotting works and how it operates.
Alfred





and this is where Alfred is once again wrong. Not sure why everyone thinks he would know all and everything. In my ongoing PBEM vs Mundy Kates from KB attacked from a range of 9 hexes in early 42. And I have seen enough AAR where the IJ player tried to stay 10 hexes from the enemy to fly strikes with Graces from that range. I've done the same. Never heard or seen evidence of CV strikes of 10+ hexes.

That was written quite some time ago … Alfred is looking into it to see when/if there was an update.

Like you, I am sure I have had launches at 9 hex and maybe 10 as well. Nothing beyond 10 though. I also recall a thread about it where it was all clarified. Hopefully Alfred will find it.

< Message edited by PaxMondo -- 12/5/2019 6:12:39 PM >

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 379
RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/5/2019 6:40:56 PM   
jdsrae


Posts: 2716
Joined: 3/1/2010
From: Gandangara Country
Status: offline 		The game date has skipped ahead to 25 Feb, with Batavia captured. I had it surrounded so everything surrendered.
Industry was captured intact which I’m happy with as I need the local supply generation.
I won’t get any details up until the weekend, but the timer on the amphibious bonus is running out.
I’ll do a theatre by theatre run down after the 1 Mar turn, maybe next weekend, but here’s a summary from each.

Japan: supply is ticking up, a few major port expansions still going but no airfields yet. About 10 days until I have enough PP to buy out 53rd Div.

Manchukuo: garrison is at 8100/8000. 14th/B Div is next to move forward once it gets to about 8200/8000
China: Supply has reached Sian where the victors are having a few days of leave. A few Chinese units are moving to try and flank but I have some small units along the main routes to keep the supply lines open. Forces are closing together for a large assault river crossing SW of Changsha. In the mountains, Kunming is still mine and he airfield damage is down into the 50s. Once it drops <50 I should be able to fly in non-para reinforcements.

Burma: 54th Div and support captures Akyab easily. 33, 55 and 56 Divs are pushing into central Burma.
Sumatra: only one coastal town left with 5th Div RCTs closing overland.
Java: Batavia captured. 4th Div is already at Tjilitjap with the main body to move towards it and on to Soerabaja.
Borneo: clear apart from allied stragglers, with 5th Air Div units replacing IJNAF groups that will move to SEAF

Most of 14th Army at Manila is on transports now moving to PNG. Southern Army reserves at Manila will move to either Java or south towards he Celebes and Timor.

PNG: Finschafen is captured with Zeros now flying local CAP while engineers expand the airfield. I’ve spotted allied movement from Port Moresby towards Kokoda/Buna. I will take Buna once I can fly LRCAP out of Lae to protect it, near the time that 14th Army comes ashore at Milne Bay and PM.
Solomons: no more expansion here yet with naval engineers concentrating on Rabaul and soon Lae airfield. the Allied CA task force had a go at Tulagi recently doing no damage and showing about 5CA 3CL to me. VADM Nagumo is planning a surprise meeting for mid March. I have a fair few subs in defensive patrols but no success yet. I expect Townsville and Noumea are the main allied bases for rearming CAs.
4th Fleet: the 6#th Naval Guard Units are nearing Truk. From there they will move forward on to scattered island garrison roles. The allied BB was spotted a few days in a row at Wake Island but now seems to have left.

NEAF/5th Fleet: the Kuriles have received a few 5#th Naval Garrison units but no push into the Aleutians yet.

< Message edited by jdsrae -- 12/5/2019 7:07:36 PM >

_____________________________

Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no SolInvictus): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 380
RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/5/2019 6:51:03 PM   
ITAKLinus

 

Posts: 630
Joined: 2/22/2018
From: Italy
Status: offline 		How have you been able to get more than 4000 out of Manchiuria in just 3 months?


Don't you have pp rules?

_____________________________

Francesco

(in reply to jdsrae)
Post #: 381
RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/5/2019 7:08:47 PM   
jdsrae


Posts: 2716
Joined: 3/1/2010
From: Gandangara Country
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ITAKLinus

How have you been able to get more than 4000 out of Manchiuria in just 3 months?

Don't you have pp rules?


No PP rules. No house rules at all in this game.

_____________________________

Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no SolInvictus): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655

(in reply to ITAKLinus)
Post #: 382
RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/5/2019 7:38:21 PM   
ITAKLinus

 

Posts: 630
Joined: 2/22/2018
From: Italy
Status: offline 		My bad I thought for some unknown reason PP rules were on. I'm so used to them that I never think in different terms. Thanks for the reply!

_____________________________

Francesco

(in reply to jdsrae)
Post #: 383
RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/5/2019 8:40:48 PM   
rustysi


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

ORIGINAL: Hanzberger

I thought expanding and repairing of industry for Japan was a player No No.


This is what most say. I'm different. I maintain that in certain areas it could be done in moderation.

To me the payback is in fuel, as its more efficient to ship supplies than resources. Taiwan for instance is one such area.




< Message edited by rustysi -- 12/5/2019 9:10:26 PM >

_____________________________

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 Hanzberger)
Post #: 384
RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/5/2019 8:56:12 PM   
rustysi


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

There is a misunderstanding maybe: are we talking about the supply level in Tokio or the supply level for Japan as a whole?


With 500k as a whole I think I'd have to stop operating in maximum a couple of turns.



quote:

I’m not sure exactly how much supply I have in Japan (excluding Hokkaido) as I don’t use tracker. I’d have to manually add the supply to find out and I’m not doing that!


As I imagine we all know Empire wide supply levels may be found in the 'Intelligence Screen'.

In my current game I've had it down to 1.7M, which I found too low to sustain my ongoing field ops. Hey, its against the AI and I wanted to find the 'bottom'. I have played with it down to about 1.85M before and found it 'challenging' to maintain ops, but doable. I'm currently in 7/43 and supply Empire wide is >4M and rising.

_____________________________

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 rustysi)
Post #: 385
RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/5/2019 9:07:59 PM   
rustysi


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

Manchukuo: garrison is at 8100/8000. 14th/B Div is next to move forward once it gets to about 8200/8000


Careful here Jamie. That's too close to the minimum. I've seen fluctuations here of over 100 AV on a normal bases. There's even at least one ground that I've seen withdraw in mid-43 of 140 AV. You don't want to activate the Soviets do you? I recommend you leave at lest 8500 to cover such occurrences. For me its no chances in this aspect of the game.

BTW reinforcements in the area are few and far between. In addition to that they tend to have small AV's.


_____________________________

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 rustysi)
Post #: 386
RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/5/2019 9:15:54 PM   
ITAKLinus

 

Posts: 630
Joined: 2/22/2018
From: Italy
Status: offline 		I disagree with the general supply level.


Due to my stupidity, in my last pbem as Japan I made a mess with game files. Result: got many hundred thousands HI less than supposed to be and few supplies. I reached little bit more than 1M (something like 1.1M) and I was still able to sustain major operations.

I have done huge fights in China to break Chinese defensive system in changsha area and reach chungking. Many fights well over SL and over 500 2E in daily bombing runs.
On top of that I am in the process of conquering Australia. At the lowest peak I begun Sidney siege.


I found that, even at that level, I could still run operations with no major constraints.
You need to know pretty well Japanese economy functioning and logistics to stretch that much your economy. Now I solved my industrial problem (my advice: NEVER MESS WITH FILES ahahah) and I'm consistently having a surplus of +8k daily.

I strongly advice against stretching the economy that much, though. You really need to have everything under perfect control to work so tight. I don't use the tracker at all so I don't know whether it might help is these situations.



Problem with supplies in 42 is never ever "how many they are", rather than "where they are". Later in the game stock level plays an important role and so the overall numbers are at least as important as supplies distribution.





On industrial expansion.

A part from engines and planes, I generally do expand:
- NavShipyards to reach 1.400 points
- HI in Singapore, Java, HK and Shanghai
- Vehicles to, at least, 150
- RepairShipyard in Singapore and eventually also Soerabaja. For Singapore, massively.

It's extremely dependent on the game I am playing though. I went as far as 350 vehicles for example or 1.700 NavShipyard points. Both have been very wild matches.

HI in the said locations and vehicles to 150 are the only ones I always advice to do.

_____________________________

Francesco

(in reply to rustysi)
Post #: 387
RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/5/2019 10:52:10 PM   
jdsrae


Posts: 2716
Joined: 3/1/2010
From: Gandangara Country
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

quote:

Manchukuo: garrison is at 8100/8000. 14th/B Div is next to move forward once it gets to about 8200/8000


Careful here Jamie. That's too close to the minimum. I've seen fluctuations here of over 100 AV on a normal bases. There's even at least one ground that I've seen withdraw in mid-43 of 140 AV. You don't want to activate the Soviets do you? I recommend you leave at lest 8500 to cover such occurrences. For me its no chances in this aspect of the game.

BTW reinforcements in the area are few and far between. In addition to that they tend to have small AV's.



That’s a fair point, there are a few units that withdraw so I will check dates and AV, but total Manch garrison AV is still rising slowly as some starting squad disablements are still repairing.
As these AV moves can be planned for I am comfortable keeping it just above 8k as every bit extra I can get into China helps.
I do not want the Soviets to activate early though, so will be keeping my merchant ships well out of Soviet waters!


_____________________________

Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no SolInvictus): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655

(in reply to rustysi)
Post #: 388
RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/5/2019 11:06:20 PM   
RADM.Yamaguchi


Posts: 765
Joined: 6/30/2019
Status: offline 		Have you used all those units in China or have you moved some elsewhere?


< Message edited by RADM.Yamaguchi -- 12/5/2019 11:07:50 PM >

(in reply to jdsrae)
Post #: 389
RE: 18 Feb 42 report - 12/6/2019 1:53:24 AM   
jdsrae


Posts: 2716
Joined: 3/1/2010
From: Gandangara Country
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: RADM.Yamaguchi

Have you used all those units in China or have you moved some elsewhere?



All Manch units to China so far.
PP are being used to buy Divs out of Japan as they can’t walk anywhere.

_____________________________

Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no SolInvictus): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655

(in reply to RADM.Yamaguchi)
Post #: 390
Page:   <<   < prev  11 12 [13] 14 15   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: 18 Feb 42 report Page: <<   < prev  11 12 [13] 14 15   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.156