Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: szmike

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Okay turn is away, and we have three separate solid naval intercepts and one potential naval air attack...but other than that it is all Japan right now!

Do you mean by that, that you have created 3 separate transport TFs each comprised of only merchantmen and you are sending them directly to a Japanese port which displays an enemy TF icon present, or to the ocean hex which displays an enemy TF icon?

If you keep sending single xAK TFs to enemy ports, the enemy combat TFs may never have sufficient OPS/ammo to leave port after combat. That's one way to keep your valuable combat TFs safe from naval intercepts.

Alfred

Also a useful tactic offensively as chaff in major fleet engagements - IJN DD's seem to love expending Long Lances on freighters. Much more comforting fighting IJN ships knowing the big damage dealers have been expended.

I would consider it gamey at best.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ushakov

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy
That was a minesweeper at Townsville - look to the right for the location.

In game, yes - but the real-life Dubbo was a Bathhurst-class under construction in Sydney at this point in the war: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMAS_Dubbo_(J251). Not sure if it was a deliberate decision in DB to move her to Townsville?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Well, she is gone now...and I am starting to have 2nd doubts about trying to save Perth. The better option seems to me to delay and retreat in Australia without losing too many units till some better devices come along. No tanks is a real handicap currently.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Well, she is gone now...and I am starting to have 2nd doubts about trying to save Perth. The better option seems to me to delay and retreat in Australia without losing too many units till some better devices come along. No tanks is a real handicap currently.

Australia has a couple of Tank Attack units with 37mm guns that will stop these early IJ tanks. Another unit or two from the US, or better still a TD battalion or two would do wonders. Not sure how easily Japan can replace those early tanks though. Certainly having scarce supply in Australia will be one of their problems - that should result in no replacement of devices.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Well, she is gone now...and I am starting to have 2nd doubts about trying to save Perth. The better option seems to me to delay and retreat in Australia without losing too many units till some better devices come along. No tanks is a real handicap currently.

Australia has a couple of Tank Attack units with 37mm guns that will stop these early IJ tanks. Another unit or two from the US, or better still a TD battalion or two would do wonders. Not sure how easily Japan can replace those early tanks though. Certainly having scarce supply in Australia will be one of their problems - that should result in no replacement of devices.

Not finding those, right now only seem to have some 2pounder AT guns, which seem defensively fine, but not usable on offense.

Also, will have some American Howitzers too.

I need to read some of the AARs where Perth was attacked so to avoid common mistakes...

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Well, she is gone now...and I am starting to have 2nd doubts about trying to save Perth. The better option seems to me to delay and retreat in Australia without losing too many units till some better devices come along. No tanks is a real handicap currently.

Australia has a couple of Tank Attack units with 37mm guns that will stop these early IJ tanks. Another unit or two from the US, or better still a TD battalion or two would do wonders. Not sure how easily Japan can replace those early tanks though. Certainly having scarce supply in Australia will be one of their problems - that should result in no replacement of devices.

Not finding those, right now only seem to have some 2pounder AT guns, which seem defensively fine, but not usable on offense.

Also, will have some American Howitzers too.

I need to read some of the AARs where Perth was attacked so to avoid common mistakes...

A two pounder is a 37mm. British practice was to name the gun by shell weight, while other armies used the bore caliber.
The RN 2-pounder AA would be about 37-40mm caliber. The 17 pounder arty would be about 80mm/3.2" while the 25 pounder would be about 88 mm/3.5 inch.
The naval 12 pounder would be a 3"/75mm weapon.

Barrel length is also important - the German 88mm Flak had a long barrel to reach high altitudes, and that also made it a very effective AT weapon.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Xargun

I am late to the show here, but what map mod is that ?

Xargun

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

The Intel summary page indicates not many points lost for IJ ships - so those important ships likely did not go down. Probably mine hits that did damage - the sunk ships page seems to always include (initially) any ship that had a mine or torp hit without any consideration of ability to survive.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


.. I can't find a unit that takes the M3 Lee Tank...any ideas? ...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


I was really referencing the lack of any offensive antitank guns...where I could attack and force them out.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


I was really referencing the lack of any offensive antitank guns...where I could attack and force them out.

Technically, no game AT gun is an offensive weapon. None participate in the bombardment phase.

Alfred