Any thoughts on this? The game mechanics are probably not going to allow a successful attack or breakup of these killer stacks. I suppose the strategy becomes sending your CV groups to another side of the Pacific until you build enough CV's to take on this stack....
Japan's 1st Air Fleet, also know as Kidō Butai, was a grouping of about 6 CVs plus escorts. This fleet stayed together until the battle of Midway when obviously a lot of the CVs were sunk.
So I would consider it pretty historical that Japan would keep the majority of its CVs together in a single fleet. If Midway had not occurred, the Allies would have been hard pressed to really do any advancing until sometime in '43. Simply due to the power of the Kidō Butai.
If Midway had not occurred, the Allies would have been hard pressed to really do any advancing until sometime in '43. Simply due to the power of the Kidō Butai.
+1
Which is one problem with the 1942 scenario, since Midway is vanishingly unlikely to happen as it did historically. There are a number of situations where events occurred only because of the stupidity/incompetence of one or other of the protagonists: the loss of PoW and Repulse and the premature surrender of Singapore come to mind. The game deals with these in the 1941 scenario by allowing a fair chance of successful first turn airstrikes on the UK capital ships in port and by the special Singapore supply rules. It is more difficult to see how a similar historical rebalancing could take place for 1942 to reflect the devastating loss of the four Japanese carriers at Midway.
Maybe one answer would be to have another scenario also starting in 1942, but immediately after a historical Midway battle has taken place. This would allow a comparison of what might have happened if the Japanese had kept their carriers with the situation with a post Midway balance of forces
The strategy that's worked best for me as the allies is to put as much land-based air in the Solomons as I can, with naval air advancement. It can wear down the Japanese CV stack enough that your own CVs will have a chance.
I'll have to look into those advancements for land based aircraft. I was using mine for the CV air-to-air, thinking that would alleviate Jap CV strikes. Given the size of the area between New Guinea and the Solomon's, it is difficult to "be where the Japs aren't", since the 6 CV's can quickly move there if you try to strike at the Japs at New Guinea.
I have 4 land based air craft at Guadalcanal, but still haven't sunk a Jap CV, with the loss of 2 CV's so far (several others damaged over the course of the game). I think I got the deck of the Soryu wet with a near miss... I'll have to play more to see if it is balance, bad luck, bad strategy.
On Japanese "historical" setting, it was my understanding that the Japanese did NOT keep their fleets together in one large group. There are numerous instances of Japanese spreading forces, Midway immediately comes to mind.
If Midway had not occurred, the Allies would have been hard pressed to really do any advancing until sometime in '43. Simply due to the power of the Kidō Butai.
+1
Which is one problem with the 1942 scenario, since Midway is vanishingly unlikely to happen as it did historically. There are a number of situations where events occurred only because of the stupidity/incompetence of one or other of the protagonists: the loss of PoW and Repulse and the premature surrender of Singapore come to mind. The game deals with these in the 1941 scenario by allowing a fair chance of successful first turn airstrikes on the UK capital ships in port and by the special Singapore supply rules. It is more difficult to see how a similar historical rebalancing could take place for 1942 to reflect the devastating loss of the four Japanese carriers at Midway.
Maybe one answer would be to have another scenario also starting in 1942, but immediately after a historical Midway battle has taken place. This would allow a comparison of what might have happened if the Japanese had kept their carriers with the situation with a post Midway balance of forces
That's what I was assuming when I began - that Midway occurred. I very much agree that if Midway did NOT happen, there would have been a stalemate into 1943 until the US put out another several CV's and built up the southern Solomon's.
Do CVL's count against the max stacking of 6 CV's? Haven't tried it to see yet.
For the Japanese 6 CV stacks are probably the best tactic for the AI. To use less requires the Play to make some pretty good guesses ass to what the US has in range.
What do you think about a 1942 Post-Midway scenario?
Great idea. I would want to give the Japanese extra victory points, because once they lose their CVs they are only defending against an ever increasing enemy.
Japan before Dec 7th really did not mass their CVs. After Dec 7th until May they kept the 6 together. Yamamoto agreed to send 2 CVs to support the invasion of Port Moresby so he could get his operation Midway approved. It was a horrible mistake.
As one book correctly put it, "In the Pacific there are two types of objectives. Those that are important enough that you should use all of your CVs and those that are unimportant and you should not use any CVs. There is nothing in between."
On Japanese "historical" setting, it was my understanding that the Japanese did NOT keep their fleets together in one large group. There are numerous instances of Japanese spreading forces, Midway immediately comes to mind.
Joe
These are the CVs that were part of the 1st Air Fleet. The 5th Carrier Division was split off to support the PM invasion which resulted in the Coral Sea battles.
The other six CVs were always together until they were sunk at Midway.
So having a 6+ CV fleet running around in the game is one thing that is historical.
In War in the Pacific as Japan, I try and keep this fleet together as long as I can Typically I can keep them until mid '43 when it starts to become a 'use them or lose them' situation for Japan.
Not sure how WPP handles the Essex CVs coming online, but once they start appearing in WitP, it is pretty much 'game over' for CV versus CV battles for Japan.
On Japanese "historical" setting, it was my understanding that the Japanese did NOT keep their fleets together in one large group. There are numerous instances of Japanese spreading forces, Midway immediately comes to mind.
Joe
These are the CVs that were part of the 1st Air Fleet. The 5th Carrier Division was split off to support the PM invasion which resulted in the Coral Sea battles.
The other six CVs were always together until they were sunk at Midway.
So having a 6+ CV fleet running around in the game is one thing that is historical.
In War in the Pacific as Japan, I try and keep this fleet together as long as I can Typically I can keep them until mid '43 when it starts to become a 'use them or lose them' situation for Japan.
Not sure how WPP handles the Essex CVs coming online, but once they start appearing in WitP, it is pretty much 'game over' for CV versus CV battles for Japan.
Well, historical - if you count a half a year up to Coral Sea.
As for the Essex class, not sure if it matters much if the US tries to take on the killer stack and loses a few CV's. In the Solomon campaign, I think the US gets 5 CV's over the course of the game as reinforcements. But it's easy to lose a few to the "Death Star". I suppose the strategy for the US is to maintain a CV force in being until the Essex class arrives (I think three of them) and then you can have a 8 or 9 CV v 6 CV battle? Does it come down to that???
At any rate, I think the game does show what would happen if Midway didn't occur. US can't go beyond Guadalcanal until the Essex class arrives in mid-1943 and the huge CV battle clears away some of the Jap CV's.
That is what typically happens In War in the Pacific when I play
This is why Japan kept them together in the real war. They wanted a decisive battle where they had the upper hand. Of course that did not work out too well for them either lol.
Since no Japanese player is going to split these CVs up due to the 'fleet in being' doctrine (or they should not anyway ), it will be up to the US player to determine, a) how many ships are they willing to lose including CVs, and b) does the US have a strategic need to risk these losses now.
The big problem with any PTO game, is the boredom for the Allies. Unlike the real war, we KNOW the outcome. So the Allies can simply wait until mid to late '43 before doing anything to stop Japan. By that point the Allies will be seriously outproducing ships/planes/troops so even if the US loses 4-5 CVs in a major battle, they will have the 'bench' to make up any losses way better than Japan.
Here is a great link comparing the two sides in production efforts. If the US/Japan cannot match this level of production in the game, then that is something else that should be looked into as well.
Chancellor Gorkon to Captain James T. Kirk: You don't trust me, do you? I don't blame you. If there is to be a brave new world, our generation is going to have the hardest time living in it.
Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Warplan Pacific >> Killer CV stacks 
Killer CV stacks - 
Typically I can keep them until mid '43 when it starts to become a 'use them or lose them' situation for Japan. 
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