Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Defending Gilberts and Marshalls

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> The War Room >> Defending Gilberts and Marshalls Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Defending Gilberts and Marshalls - 12/11/2004 6:34:09 PM   
derwho

 

Posts: 236
Joined: 8/22/2002
From: Finland
Status: offline 		As I'm not getting the attention I want with my post in the Amphib assault thread, I decided to start my very own!

My original posting:

--[CLiP]--
Some very good comments about how to prepare assaults against positions but I'd like to hear your opinions on how to defend!

I'm especially interested in strategy and tactics on how to defend the Gilberts and Marshalls.
--[CLiP]--

Now lets widen the topic a tad. How do you prepare the Gilberts and Marshalls for defence as the IJN when playing the whole war?

Some ideas of mine:

- Build pors and airfields to their optimal capacity as quickly as possible and then switch to fortifications
- Place costal gun regiments in all important hexes
- Place AA regiments in all important hexes
- Ready bases with atleast 150-200 assault strengt of troops. Keep them at their best by rotating them away from the malaria zone.
- Mine like h311, I'm targeting 1000 mines per hex in critical locations by summer 42
- Naval search like never before
- Place elite Bettys and Zeros in bases behind likes ready to strike at anything that's spotted. Thease won't be able to hit a large CV TF but anything smaller should get beaten badly.
- Protect frontline bases with PT/DD TF's to hurt anything that want's to bombard
- Keep large assets of Kates and Vals backed up by more elite Zeros behind the front line but ready to move in quickly to a threatened sector
- Keep a substantial part of the Mobile Fleet at Truk ready to help with anything more serious
- Keep atleast one fast (28kts or better) Surface Combat TF near in a port ready to help
- Keep atleast one Fast Transport TF (30kts or better) at a base with enough reinforcements to move immediately to a location that needs help
- Keep subs nearby when a hex is assaulted defend all nearby hexes with subs

The general idea is to force the enemy to assault bases with his full might. This needs preparations and will propably give me a hint of the direction of attack. I'll try to counterattack, but if impossible I'll just try to defend a position as long as possible and reinforce nearby bases with anything that's at hand. I won't commit my assets to anything foolhardy but rather wait and ware him down and then try to assault with overwhelming force.

Do I stand a chance or is this all futile?

_____________________________

Imperial Field Service Code (senjinkun):
"Remember always the good reputation of your family and the opinion of people of your birthplace. Do not shame yourself by being taken prisoner alive; die so as to not leave behind a soiled name."
Post #: 1
RE: Defending Gilberts and Marshalls - 12/11/2004 6:47:44 PM   
Ron Saueracker


Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline 		Well, it's a complete waste of your subs to use them defensively. Use them along the sea routes away from strong LBA. I know the subs suck now but with the ASW tweaks they are decent and stand a chance.

_____________________________





Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to derwho)
Post #: 2
RE: Defending Gilberts and Marshalls - 12/11/2004 7:05:18 PM   
tsimmonds


Posts: 5498
Joined: 2/6/2004
From: astride Mason and Dixon's Line
Status: offline
quote:

Build pors and airfields to their optimal capacity as quickly as possible and then switch to fortifications


I'd be selective about airfield and (especially) port construction. Ports are nice, they help you unload faster, and if its a 3 you can disband there, but these are items of convenience, they will not help you defend. As for airfields, you need to consider how much LBA you are going to be able to commit here, and how much aviation support you will actually need. Yes, it is best to have extra capacity so you will have flexibility in your basing options. But if your defense is going to rely heavily on smaller a/c, a number of smaller airfields may be just as effective as the same number of airfields built up to level 4. The US player is inevitably going to capture them anyway; he is likely to benefit more from your construction efforts than you will. Fortifications are a much higher priority. Level 9s everywhere you can afford them.

That's another point. Can anyone confirm whether building up to any given level of fortification costs more and takes longer at a larger base than it does at a smaller one? I seem to remember a discussion of this on the UV forum (of course, my wife will confirm that I also seem to remember a lot of other sh1t that never actually happened). But if this is so, it presents a strong arguement for maxxing out fortifications in advance of any base expansion.

_____________________________

Fear the kitten!

(in reply to derwho)
Post #: 3
RE: Defending Gilberts and Marshalls - 12/11/2004 7:27:34 PM   
tsimmonds


Posts: 5498
Joined: 2/6/2004
From: astride Mason and Dixon's Line
Status: offline 		Well, according to the last paragraph of 9.4.2, "Fortification costs are based on the SPS of the airfield and port in the base, with longer time required for bases with larger potential. Construction costs also increase as the current Fortification Level increases." So, never mind.

Actually, it is not the construction cost that increases with the fortification level per se; rather it is that construction takes longer, and therefore consumes engineering effort (and supply) over a longer period of time.

"One supply point is consumed every twelve hours for each engineering squad or equivalent that is involved in construction operations"

_____________________________

Fear the kitten!

(in reply to tsimmonds)
Post #: 4
RE: Defending Gilberts and Marshalls - 12/12/2004 12:11:30 AM   
WiTP_Dude


Posts: 1434
Joined: 7/3/2004
Status: offline 		One thing I think you forgot on your list is to keep some paratroopers at a central location. They can be dropped on a base if it looks like they can make a difference.

Also, don't use the subs until your airplanes or coastal guns damage some ships. As the ships try to limp back to port, then you can have some easy pickings.

< Message edited by WiTP_Dude -- 12/11/2004 5:12:32 PM >

(in reply to derwho)
Post #: 5
RE: Defending Gilberts and Marshalls - 12/12/2004 12:15:31 AM   
dereck


Posts: 2800
Joined: 9/7/2004
From: Romulus, MI
Status: offline 		Even though I only play the Allies I can add this:

Historically the Japanese didn't interlock their island defenses which meant it was EASY for the Americans to isolate and take on a base with only what was there at the time and not have to worry about reinforcements.

_____________________________

PO2 US Navy (1980-1986);
USS Midway CV-41 (1981-1984)
Whidbey Island, WA (1984-1986)
Naval Reserve (1986-1992)

(in reply to WiTP_Dude)
Post #: 6
RE: Defending Gilberts and Marshalls - 12/12/2004 2:28:43 AM   
ragtopcars_slith


Posts: 66
Joined: 8/2/2004
Status: offline 		I would agree with many of the above posters

As the Japanese, you need forts, and you need airbases!
Large ports only give the allies advantages for unloading!
However, if you plan on moving troops out at the first sign of trouble, build them ports!

I was able to repulse a full division assualt of Wake in Mid may '42 by having forts built... I only have 2 small guards and an engineer!
Oh yeah, I should have mentioned that it helped to drive off the American fleet after a full scale CV battle!
lost the Akagi, but managed to sink both the York and Lex!

derek

(in reply to dereck)
Post #: 7
RE: Defending Gilberts and Marshalls - 12/12/2004 3:15:03 AM   
derwho

 

Posts: 236
Joined: 8/22/2002
From: Finland
Status: offline 		Larger ports are only needed to load/unload faster and possibly harbour ships. This is not a necessity in my frontline. Unloading/loading speed is only needed when under attack and I'll deal with that with my Fast Transport TF's.

I don't see any use in upgrading frontline ports, sorry if I gave this impression. Also, I don't see any use in upgrading frontline airfields to size 4 - or even that as many of the islands only are of size 1 and I'd have to invest heavily to grow them to that size.

Thanks for your comments on sub usage. I'd like to hear your comments on how to wear down/slow an ongoing assault on a base. Any special tactics that you want to share with me? I'm hoping my minefields and coastal guns will wreck havoc among the first waves but I'm not dilusional about my chances.

_____________________________

Imperial Field Service Code (senjinkun):
"Remember always the good reputation of your family and the opinion of people of your birthplace. Do not shame yourself by being taken prisoner alive; die so as to not leave behind a soiled name."

(in reply to ragtopcars_slith)
Post #: 8
RE: Defending Gilberts and Marshalls - 12/12/2004 3:15:31 AM   
WiTP_Dude


Posts: 1434
Joined: 7/3/2004
Status: offline 		I should add: is it just me or does Japan seem to have a lot more units than they had in the real war? It doesn't seem very difficult to defend the main places in strength. The real Marshalls campaign didn't involve that many Japs. Tarawa only had 4,700 defenders while Kwajalein only about 5,300. Saipan in 1944 only managed to have 25,000 defenders. Japan has a lot more units than this in the game. Where did they all go in the war?

(in reply to ragtopcars_slith)
Post #: 9
RE: Defending Gilberts and Marshalls - 12/12/2004 3:30:07 AM   
dereck


Posts: 2800
Joined: 9/7/2004
From: Romulus, MI
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: WiTP_Dude

I should add: is it just me or does Japan seem to have a lot more units than they had in the real war? It doesn't seem very difficult to defend the main places in strength. The real Marshalls campaign didn't involve that many Japs. Tarawa only had 4,700 defenders while Kwajalein only about 5,300. Saipan in 1944 only managed to have 25,000 defenders. Japan has a lot more units than this in the game. Where did they all go in the war?


They were mostly in China, Japan or maybe the Philippines. By the time the Americans got to attacking in the Central Pacific it was basically short of impossible for the Japanese to really move a lot of troops around without them being sunk. The Japanese made a lot of blunders - big and small - that game "Japanese" players have 20/20 hindsite in not making the same mistakes.

Also the Americans would attack islands which the Japanese didn't really garrison or expect them to. For instance, in the Marshals, the Japanese strengthed the garrisons of Mili, Wotje and Maloelap using forces from Kwajalein because the local Japanese commander assumed Kwajalein would be attacked last. As it was the Americans ignored the reinforced islands and just attacked Kwajalein.

_____________________________

PO2 US Navy (1980-1986);
USS Midway CV-41 (1981-1984)
Whidbey Island, WA (1984-1986)
Naval Reserve (1986-1992)

(in reply to WiTP_Dude)
Post #: 10
RE: Defending Gilberts and Marshalls - 12/12/2004 6:05:46 AM   
rtrapasso


Posts: 22653
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: dereck

quote:

ORIGINAL: WiTP_Dude

I should add: is it just me or does Japan seem to have a lot more units than they had in the real war? It doesn't seem very difficult to defend the main places in strength. The real Marshalls campaign didn't involve that many Japs. Tarawa only had 4,700 defenders while Kwajalein only about 5,300. Saipan in 1944 only managed to have 25,000 defenders. Japan has a lot more units than this in the game. Where did they all go in the war?


They were mostly in China, Japan or maybe the Philippines. By the time the Americans got to attacking in the Central Pacific it was basically short of impossible for the Japanese to really move a lot of troops around without them being sunk. The Japanese made a lot of blunders - big and small - that game "Japanese" players have 20/20 hindsite in not making the same mistakes.

Also the Americans would attack islands which the Japanese didn't really garrison or expect them to. For instance, in the Marshals, the Japanese strengthed the garrisons of Mili, Wotje and Maloelap using forces from Kwajalein because the local Japanese commander assumed Kwajalein would be attacked last. As it was the Americans ignored the reinforced islands and just attacked Kwajalein.


Scads of Japanese forces were trapped in places like Truk and Rabaul, raising vegetables trying to keep from starving to death.

_____________________________


(in reply to dereck)
Post #: 11
RE: Defending Gilberts and Marshalls - 12/12/2004 7:37:56 PM   
BlackVoid


Posts: 639
Joined: 10/17/2003
Status: offline 		Appear weak, where you are strong.
Appear strong where you are weak.

If you commit a lot of forces to someplace, chances are the enemy will try attack somewhere else or will try to cut off your strong forces.

I would not put a lot of ground troops into forward bases. Instead, invite the enemy to attack your weak spot and be ready to counterinvade with overwhelming force. Of course, this will not work if you cannot achieve local superiority in a short time (eg: enemy has more CVs with better planes)

(in reply to rtrapasso)
Post #: 12
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> The War Room >> Defending Gilberts and Marshalls Page: [1]
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

1.357