Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

lousy troops

 
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 >> lousy troops Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
lousy troops - 8/9/2005 11:12:54 PM   
Gem35


Posts: 3420
Joined: 9/12/2004
From: Dallas, Texas
Status: offline 		My good and faithful RCT, least I thought they were.....

This unit also help capture Tarawa, landed on Nauru Island, captrued it and now lost it to remnant Japs on the Island.
I love how the japs can win a battle without any guns.


Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 337 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles

Defending force 1535 troops, 25 guns, 0 vehicles

Japanese assault odds: 2 to 1 (fort level 0)

Japanese forces CAPTURE Nauru Island base !!!


Japanese ground losses:
86 casualties reported

Allied ground losses:
2778 casualties reported
Guns lost 39


_____________________________

It doesn't make any sense, Admiral. Were we better than the Japanese or just luckier?


Banner By Feurer Krieg
Post #: 1
RE: lousy troops - 8/9/2005 11:16:48 PM   
Feinder


Posts: 6589
Joined: 9/4/2002
From: Land o' Lakes, FL
Status: offline 		I'm sorry, but this somehow seems funny to me.

You mean to say that

You captured the island (so you had 2-1 at some point).
The IJA didn't surrender however (seems odd).
They counterattacked, and killed you? (how could they possibly have gotten 2-1, when they lost to begin with?)

-F-

_____________________________

"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me


(in reply to Gem35)
Post #: 2
RE: lousy troops - 8/9/2005 11:33:05 PM   
Oznoyng

 

Posts: 818
Joined: 4/16/2004
From: Mars
Status: offline 		Unit Types, Experience, Morale, Leader skill ratings, Preparation points, Supply level, disruption and fatigue of all of the above units please. All of the preceding are factors in determining if the result is plausible.

As Mogami demonstrated against Erik Rutins at Laman Bay, Japanese SNLF's, Nav Gd's, and NLF's are nasty beyond the number of troops. They are almost all combat troops. I would take on an understrength RCT fatigued from previous battles at Tarawa, with low prep points for the current target, left on an island with no supply, disrupted from repeated attacks, with an IJN SNLF with combat tested veterans, a good knowledge of the terrain(prep points), good leadership, decent supply, and good morale. All it takes is a sub force dropping off some supply, a few turns rest, and neglect on the part of the allied player to turn the tide.

_____________________________

"There is no Black or White, only shades of Grey."
"If you aren't a part of the solution, you're a part of the problem."

(in reply to Gem35)
Post #: 3
RE: lousy troops - 8/10/2005 1:12:18 AM   
mc3744


Posts: 1957
Joined: 3/9/2004
From: Italy
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Oznoyng

Unit Types, Experience, Morale, Leader skill ratings, Preparation points, Supply level, disruption and fatigue of all of the above units please. All of the preceding are factors in determining if the result is plausible.

As Mogami demonstrated against Erik Rutins at Laman Bay, Japanese SNLF's, Nav Gd's, and NLF's are nasty beyond the number of troops. They are almost all combat troops. I would take on an understrength RCT fatigued from previous battles at Tarawa, with low prep points for the current target, left on an island with no supply, disrupted from repeated attacks, with an IJN SNLF with combat tested veterans, a good knowledge of the terrain(prep points), good leadership, decent supply, and good morale. All it takes is a sub force dropping off some supply, a few turns rest, and neglect on the part of the allied player to turn the tide.


Not conviced.
I mean, obviously it can happen in the game, Gem just told us about it, but it doesn't make much sense to me.
We all know that defending is much 'easier' than attacking, especially when in a base (= prepared positions and ground knowledge).
Now, a unit not strong enough to hold on defence is a little while later able to win on attack!?! Nah, doesn't sound right to me ... funny? Yes, it does Sorry Gem

_____________________________

Nec recisa recedit

(in reply to Oznoyng)
Post #: 4
RE: lousy troops - 8/10/2005 1:15:46 AM   
Gem35


Posts: 3420
Joined: 9/12/2004
From: Dallas, Texas
Status: offline 		Yes, Feinder, that's what happened, I do admit though that the RCT was a bit under supported. The japs had 2 eng units and one very very weak infantry unit there. It is funny but still, how can japs win without guns?

_____________________________

It doesn't make any sense, Admiral. Were we better than the Japanese or just luckier?


Banner By Feurer Krieg

(in reply to mc3744)
Post #: 5
RE: lousy troops - 8/10/2005 1:22:38 AM   
Tom Hunter


Posts: 2194
Joined: 12/14/2004
Status: offline 		Gem,

Do fill us in on the details. Saying I sent an RTC actually means very little, since the important factors are not the RTC but the various things mentioned by Oznoyng.

It is kind of funny.

Posts like this make me more and more interested in overwhelming force.

(in reply to Gem35)
Post #: 6
RE: lousy troops - 8/10/2005 1:29:26 AM   
Oznoyng

 

Posts: 818
Joined: 4/16/2004
From: Mars
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Gem35

Yes, Feinder, that's what happened, I do admit though that the RCT was a bit under supported. The japs had 2 eng units and one very very weak infantry unit there. It is funny but still, how can japs win without guns?


Guns means Artillery. It doesn't mean infantry rifles. One way you can win without Artillery is to get in close enough that employing artillery was as dangerous to the enemy's health as to your own. Failing that, bayonet's existed for a reason.

_____________________________

"There is no Black or White, only shades of Grey."
"If you aren't a part of the solution, you're a part of the problem."

(in reply to Gem35)
Post #: 7
RE: lousy troops - 8/10/2005 1:41:34 AM   
Oznoyng

 

Posts: 818
Joined: 4/16/2004
From: Mars
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mc3744
Not conviced.
I mean, obviously it can happen in the game, Gem just told us about it, but it doesn't make much sense to me.
We all know that defending is much 'easier' than attacking, especially when in a base (= prepared positions and ground knowledge).
Now, a unit not strong enough to hold on defence is a little while later able to win on attack!?! Nah, doesn't sound right to me ... funny? Yes, it does Sorry Gem

Supply can make a huge difference. Imagine an RCT that landed with enough ammo to take the base, but expended their supply taking the base and received no supply after taking it. When a group goes out of supply, they fight at 25% combat efficiency. So between the disruption increase from the inital attack and lost effectiveness from lack of supply, the 2 to 1 odds that won the battle the first time could turn into less than 0.5 to 1 odds for the Alllies (2 to 1 or better for the IJN forces). The tables would then be turned.

As for having a hard time believing it, I can think of lots of times where armies took territory that they were unable to hold due to losses and supply constraints. It is not far-fetched to me that the situation might occur, and the lesson is not one of overwhelming force, it is "Supply and support your units!"

< Message edited by Oznoyng -- 8/10/2005 1:43:40 AM >

_____________________________

"There is no Black or White, only shades of Grey."
"If you aren't a part of the solution, you're a part of the problem."

(in reply to mc3744)
Post #: 8
RE: lousy troops - 8/10/2005 1:54:18 AM   
Gem35


Posts: 3420
Joined: 9/12/2004
From: Dallas, Texas
Status: offline 		There were 3k or so supplies at the base, unit was the 153rd regimental combat team, prep points were around 50.. It had 50 support the rest was destroyed during the initial landings and subsequent fighting. It's fatigue and disruption are unknown, I didnt look at it closely enough, I figured I had the base and didnt think I would lose it. I guess I should have saved this battle in a different slot, it's been saved over now a few turns. As far as this not happening? why would I post a make believe story? I'll get even with the Japs , perhaps i will drop an A-bomb on Nauru just for fun later on.

_____________________________

It doesn't make any sense, Admiral. Were we better than the Japanese or just luckier?


Banner By Feurer Krieg

(in reply to Oznoyng)
Post #: 9
RE: lousy troops - 8/10/2005 2:07:46 AM   
Ron Saueracker


Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline 		Land combat is probably the weakest desin aspect of this game. No joy in sight either.

_____________________________





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

(in reply to Gem35)
Post #: 10
RE: lousy troops - 8/10/2005 2:32:39 AM   
RUPD3658


Posts: 6922
Joined: 8/28/2002
From: East Brunswick, NJ
Status: offline 		Could be inaccurate intel on the true number of enemy troops, poor leadreship, or just the element of suprize. There are many cases of a smaller force defeating a larger better equiped force for just these reasons.

Still sucks to be on the losing end. I guess the moral here is that no island is secure until every last Jap is dead.

_____________________________

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has limits"- Darwin Awards 2003

"No plan survives contact with the enemy." - Field Marshall Helmuth von Moltke


(in reply to Ron Saueracker)
Post #: 11
RE: lousy troops - 8/10/2005 5:23:29 AM   
Feinder


Posts: 6589
Joined: 9/4/2002
From: Land o' Lakes, FL
Status: offline 		About all I can say is, if the initial attack was one of those where the attacker suffers massive casualties, it -might- be plausable. I know that since v1.5(?) attack casualties have gone up. And in my China game vs. Dude, there was a group of my guys that he would get 8-1 odds against, and HIM still suffer more casualties. Eventually, he beat them down, but he my point being that, if his RCT suffered massive casualties on the initial attack, it might be possible that the defending unit (suffering much less), could counter attack.

Mathematically, it doesn't make sense. If he won at 2-1, with no reinformcents for the defender, the defenders should never be able to attack him at better than 1-2 odds. But again, I've seen some wierd results where the attacker gained the 2-1 odds, but lost scads of guys. If the attackers strenght was so dimished, the defender could attack, and litterally "beat the odds".

Very odd tho. I can only imagine the "WTF????!!!!" expression on your face when that happened.

_____________________________

"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me


(in reply to RUPD3658)
Post #: 12
RE: lousy troops - 8/10/2005 7:29:58 AM   
Gem35


Posts: 3420
Joined: 9/12/2004
From: Dallas, Texas
Status: offline 		I am just glad it happened against the AI and not a pbem game because if that were the case I suppose I would have been angry. I am soundly thumping the AI , and after I see this war through, perhaps it's time to take on a human opponent.

_____________________________

It doesn't make any sense, Admiral. Were we better than the Japanese or just luckier?


Banner By Feurer Krieg

(in reply to Feinder)
Post #: 13
RE: lousy troops - 8/10/2005 11:46:00 AM   
LargeSlowTarget


Posts: 4443
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: Hessen, Germany - now living in France
Status: offline 		The Japanese don't need guns, they have 'spirit' . But what are you doing on Nauru in the first place? It's a worthless piece of rock in the middle of nowhere.

_____________________________

AE Mod "Bottlenecks" UPDATED 01/2022

(in reply to Gem35)
Post #: 14
RE: lousy troops - 8/10/2005 12:25:45 PM   
Marten


Posts: 336
Joined: 12/14/2004
From: Gdansk, Poland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget
But what are you doing on Nauru in the first place? It's a worthless piece of rock in the middle of nowhere.


he was probably looking for those tiny thai girls with small boo.... errr...

_____________________________


(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)
Post #: 15
RE: lousy troops - 8/10/2005 2:45:44 PM   
Speedysteve

 

Posts: 15998
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline 		He's looking in the wrong place then

_____________________________

WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to Marten)
Post #: 16
RE: lousy troops - 8/10/2005 3:12:29 PM   
WhoCares


Posts: 653
Joined: 7/6/2004
Status: offline 		Long way from Nauru to Bangkok, indeed

Did the RCT suffer from bombardments (naval and/or air)?

(in reply to Speedysteve)
Post #: 17
RE: lousy troops - 8/10/2005 4:40:31 PM   
Arkan

 

Posts: 90
Joined: 10/20/2004
Status: offline
quote:

he was probably looking for those tiny thai girls with small boo....

Boats?

(in reply to Marten)
Post #: 18
RE: lousy troops - 8/10/2005 5:15:45 PM   
LargeSlowTarget


Posts: 4443
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: Hessen, Germany - now living in France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Marten

he was probably looking for those tiny thai girls with small boo.... errr...


Ah, that would explain why the Japanese were so determined to take Nauru back again .

_____________________________

AE Mod "Bottlenecks" UPDATED 01/2022

(in reply to Marten)
Post #: 19
RE: lousy troops - 8/10/2005 7:36:31 PM   
Gem35


Posts: 3420
Joined: 9/12/2004
From: Dallas, Texas
Status: offline 		Excuse me LargeSlowTarget, but who's playing my game, me or you? What difference does it make where I attack? The Island was taken by me and retaken by the Japs with the same forces I defeated three turns earlier. The Japs sent a few bombers to hit the Island from Kwaj. on one of the turns.

_____________________________

It doesn't make any sense, Admiral. Were we better than the Japanese or just luckier?


Banner By Feurer Krieg

(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)
Post #: 20
RE: lousy troops - 8/10/2005 7:51:05 PM   
Tom Hunter


Posts: 2194
Joined: 12/14/2004
Status: offline 		Excuse me Gem35, but if you post your defeats and victories in the forums then we get to comment on your manuevers, be they brilliant, bone headed or just amazingly unlucky.


(in reply to Gem35)
Post #: 21
RE: lousy troops - 8/10/2005 8:45:22 PM   
Bradley7735


Posts: 2073
Joined: 7/12/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Hunter

Excuse me Gem35, but if you post your defeats and victories in the forums then we get to comment on your manuevers, be they brilliant, bone headed or just amazingly unlucky.





Speaking of which..... Tom, where's your next AAR post??!?!? Your thread is like cocaine to me. I need my next fix!!!!!!!

< Message edited by Bradley7735 -- 8/10/2005 8:47:31 PM >

_____________________________

The older I get, the better I was.

(in reply to Tom Hunter)
Post #: 22
RE: lousy troops - 8/10/2005 9:23:48 PM   
Gem35


Posts: 3420
Joined: 9/12/2004
From: Dallas, Texas
Status: offline 		Ok Tom, I'll go make fun of your AAR and all the dumb moves you made....

_____________________________

It doesn't make any sense, Admiral. Were we better than the Japanese or just luckier?


Banner By Feurer Krieg

(in reply to Bradley7735)
Post #: 23
RE: lousy troops - 8/10/2005 10:09:19 PM   
Rob322

 

Posts: 578
Joined: 8/16/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Feinder

About all I can say is, if the initial attack was one of those where the attacker suffers massive casualties, it -might- be plausable. I know that since v1.5(?) attack casualties have gone up. And in my China game vs. Dude, there was a group of my guys that he would get 8-1 odds against, and HIM still suffer more casualties. Eventually, he beat them down, but he my point being that, if his RCT suffered massive casualties on the initial attack, it might be possible that the defending unit (suffering much less), could counter attack.

Mathematically, it doesn't make sense. If he won at 2-1, with no reinformcents for the defender, the defenders should never be able to attack him at better than 1-2 odds. But again, I've seen some wierd results where the attacker gained the 2-1 odds, but lost scads of guys. If the attackers strenght was so dimished, the defender could attack, and litterally "beat the odds".

Very odd tho. I can only imagine the "WTF????!!!!" expression on your face when that happened.



C'est la guerre. You can always dig up real world examples of small forces beating the crap out of bigger forces. These things have been known to happen. Still, I've found sending in one RCT to an island defended by both infantry and engineers to be insufficient. While I eventually took and held the island the original RCT was so badly chewed up I couldn't use it for months and the second one I hastily sent over to reinforce also got very rough treatment. Japanese forces rarely surrender, they need to be bludgeoned. Maybe if your gut tells you to send an RCT then you need to send a division.

(in reply to Feinder)
Post #: 24
RE: lousy troops - 8/10/2005 10:28:37 PM   
Tom Hunter


Posts: 2194
Joined: 12/14/2004
Status: offline 		Gem35: "Ok Tom, I'll go make fun of your AAR and all the dumb moves you made.... " Your more than welcome too, though when I do bone headed things I try to admit them.

When we ask for others opinions we take the risk that they will not be flattering, that is just the way things go.

Bradley I only got one turn from Blackwatch yesterday and not a whole lot happened. I am still waiting for the next turn, but I am out from 4:45 to 9pm or later, so if it does not come soon there won't be much happening.

And in case your wondering I still hold Nauru...
A whole island of solidified bird dung, and its mine, all mine!

(in reply to Gem35)
Post #: 25
RE: lousy troops - 8/10/2005 10:47:48 PM   
Feinder


Posts: 6589
Joined: 9/4/2002
From: Land o' Lakes, FL
Status: offline 		I'm not sure which is worse:
Nauru being an island of solidified bird dung (true enough, according to CIA factbook), or
Baker being an island of solidified rat dung (also true).

Just another mission for one of Gem35's bombers over Nauru...

-F-




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me


(in reply to Tom Hunter)
Post #: 26
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> lousy troops 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

1.016