RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> The War Room



Message

Nail78 -> RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day (2/11/2006 4:51:00 PM)

What role did PG and PC type ships play in WWII?



Mike Solli -> RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day (2/12/2006 12:31:42 AM)

I'd say they were targets for the most part.



Mike Solli -> RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day (2/12/2006 12:32:31 AM)

Ok. Cheap AA & ASW ships. Escorts for all those mundane convoys that kept Japan alive - for a time.



Nail78 -> RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day (2/13/2006 8:01:40 AM)

When I dock an aircraft carrier do I need too bring the squadrons ashore for them too replenish their numbers?



dtravel -> RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day (2/13/2006 8:20:46 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nail78

When I dock an aircraft carrier do I need too bring the squadrons ashore for them too replenish their numbers?


No.



niceguy2005 -> RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day (2/13/2006 8:39:30 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nail78

What role did PG and PC type ships play in WWII?

They were the work horses of the back alleys of the war. They were coastal patrol, ASW, escort to frieghters, etc. While the capital ships were grabbing all the headlines in major battles, these ships were conducting guerilla warfare.



niceguy2005 -> RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day (2/13/2006 8:40:00 PM)

Also, they helped provide close in cover fire for smaller invasions.



Nail78 -> RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day (2/14/2006 5:05:57 PM)

Is there any point in the game where withdrawing an air squadron or disbanding one would benefical? ie good strategy?



tsimmonds -> RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day (2/14/2006 6:07:13 PM)

As IJ I disband air units all the time, starting on turn 1. It is the best way to get trained pilots into front-line units, particularly into the carrier units.



niceguy2005 -> RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day (2/14/2006 6:34:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nail78

Is there any point in the game where withdrawing an air squadron or disbanding one would benefical? ie good strategy?

As the allies I will often disband a squadron and reform it later to put some planes back in the replacement pool. When my Brewster squadrons get very low on planes I do it. Might as well have 2 squadrons of 10 places instead of 10 squadrons of 2 planes each. Be aware though that when the squadron does reform in 90 days, it has to draw planes out of the replacement pool, which can suddenly shift a lot of planes to the rear bases.



Nail78 -> RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day (5/2/2006 10:59:32 PM)

What enhancements too the game does the Nik Mod, I keep hearing about add too the game?



Bobthehatchit -> RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day (5/3/2006 2:25:38 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nail78

What role did PG and PC type ships play in WWII?

They were the work horses of the back alleys of the war. They were coastal patrol, ASW, escort to frieghters, etc. While the capital ships were grabbing all the headlines in major battles, these ships were conducting guerilla warfare.


There are four PC with a range of 8000 which are some of the best asw ships available to japan. They are worth looking out for and using as a dedicated asw groups.



aletoledo -> RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day (5/3/2006 5:30:05 PM)

NikMod probably does a lot of things, but the two things that really stand out to me are, air combat and china bases.

the air combat has had a few nice things done to it. He's rearranged some of the statistics of the planes and thus have made the air-to-air combat a little less bloody. this way a CAP of 100's of planes won't completely obliterate incoming waves of planes and some planes are bound to slip through. also he's adjusted the numbers of the land-based AA, so it actually has an effect against allied bombers now.

the china bases have been modifiec a bit with removing some resources and increasing the forts to 9. this was done to slow down the japanese advance in china, though IMO it doesn't change a lot.

if you play NikMod you're doing it for the changes in the air combat.



Nikademus -> RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day (5/3/2006 5:36:50 PM)

quote:

though IMO it doesn't change a lot.

if you play NikMod you're doing it for the changes in the air combat.


have you conquored China? Not a sarcastic comment...but a ears tilted foward comment. Some players have commented that they think the China changes made things too hard for Japan though one or two say that it just takes longer to make progress in China (which was the idea behind the changes)

For Nali - There's a FAQ included in the mod download that lists all the changes. In addition to A2A and China, there were OOB adjustments, production tweaks and surface combat tweaks.




aletoledo -> RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day (5/3/2006 9:19:35 PM)

well have I conquered all of china? no, but I feel I have knocked china out of the rest of the war.

my opponent was a bit aggressive initially and perhaps catching his corps outside of the cities and pinning them in the field is what really helped me take the cities.

this is the situation 3/20/43


[image]local://upfiles/15405/AD3ECAB2E67846F5A4734C600F8C240C.jpg[/image]



moses -> RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day (5/3/2006 9:27:10 PM)

quote:

have you conquored China? Not a sarcastic comment...but a ears tilted foward comment. Some players have commented that they think the China changes made things too hard for Japan though one or two say that it just takes longer to make progress in China (which was the idea behind the changes)


Don't know if you are refering to your mod or stock. As far as stock is concerned:

In my last two games playing as allied(one starting from 1.6 and the other newly begun under 1.8.) I have had little trouble defending china. My opponent is quite aggressive but not an expert at ground combat. In the 1.6 game I held the bulk of China and had begun invading Malaysia with Chinese forces by jan 43. In my more recent game I seem to be in very good shape although we are still in dec.

In last two games as Japan I have made decent progress although it is not the rout it used to be.

I think that a normal player who simply masses at Changsa will be able to hold off most Japanese players. Japanese players who dream of easy conquest and therefore overpress can be hurt very badly.

The model is far from perfect but play balance in this theater seems to have been established.



Nikademus -> RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day (5/3/2006 11:46:05 PM)

Was referring to my mod. The goal was to address the complaint that China was not so much unbalanced but "too active" right from the gate.

quote:


well have I conquered all of china? no, but I feel I have knocked china out of the rest of the war.

my opponent was a bit aggressive initially and perhaps catching his corps outside of the cities and pinning them in the field is what really helped me take the cities.

this is the situation 3/20/43


Wow....you did a good job.



Rob Brennan UK -> RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day (5/4/2006 2:50:18 AM)

Gotta say ( no offence to you ) you opponent didnt play china very well at all for that to happen ! can you give me his e-mail as im thining of starting a jap game under nik mod myself soon [:D]



moses -> RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day (5/4/2006 5:43:24 PM)

Actually he's a good player and we ended that game as we agreed that while I had won on land I was pretty much crushed at sea.

My point was focused on the balance in China.

In the initial version of the game just about any Japanese player who put forth an effort could crush an expert allied player with relative ease.

Now, under 1.8, it appears that the Japanese player must be very careful to launch sound well-prepared conservative offensives in China. Attempts by Japan to quickly rout China seem to invite real problems.



aletoledo -> RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day (5/4/2006 5:50:37 PM)

I don't think he played china poorly, the only thing he really did different was attack canton and the cities to the west at the beginning and didn't just turtle his units. perhaps this was a bit too aggressive, but I don't know what china can honestly do to stop japan.

if china doesn't do some sort of counterattacking, then japan can really concentrate its troops into a single location and sweep through the higher fort levels. if china does counterattack then they'll leave themselves open other places and run the risk of getting their troops cut off.

I think my original point though was despite NikMod adding the high fort levels and the removal of resources, I don't think it changes the situation too drastically over the stock game. sure it slows things down, which Nik said was the intention, but I think in the end it'll still be hard for the chinese to defend. if anything was to create a real stalemate in china, it would be to either modify the chinese units (better morale/experience) or to increase the number of chinese troops. either way it changes the historical picture of what we'd expect chinese troops to be or the real numbers deployed.



Nikademus -> RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day (5/4/2006 6:36:35 PM)

quote:

I think my original point though was despite NikMod adding the high fort levels and the removal of resources, I don't think it changes the situation too drastically over the stock game sure it slows things down, which Nik said was the intention, but I think in the end it'll still be hard for the chinese to defend


yep...that was the goal...exactly. I don't believe personally that China "must" be a military stalemate..otherwise Ichi-Go would not have been possible. The goal was to eliminate the "bum's rush" from Turn 1 on out by Japan mainly due to the way the rail system works in the game (allowing a quick massing of japanese armies before the China player can react)

The resource removal was simply to prevent strategic bombing of Chinese resources which is rather easy in the game (even DB's can do it). Just wanted to give the Allied player a chance to react and plan.



niceguy2005 -> RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day (5/4/2006 6:44:11 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: aletoledo

I don't think he played china poorly, the only thing he really did different was attack canton and the cities to the west at the beginning and didn't just turtle his units. perhaps this was a bit too aggressive, but I don't know what china can honestly do to stop japan.

if china doesn't do some sort of counterattacking, then japan can really concentrate its troops into a single location and sweep through the higher fort levels. if china does counterattack then they'll leave themselves open other places and run the risk of getting their troops cut off.

I think my original point though was despite NikMod adding the high fort levels and the removal of resources, I don't think it changes the situation too drastically over the stock game. sure it slows things down, which Nik said was the intention, but I think in the end it'll still be hard for the chinese to defend. if anything was to create a real stalemate in china, it would be to either modify the chinese units (better morale/experience) or to increase the number of chinese troops. either way it changes the historical picture of what we'd expect chinese troops to be or the real numbers deployed.

I am learning that china is a move/counter-move situation. You are right, the chinese must be willing to attack to keep Japan honest. I have 2 games going right now. In one we are close to stalemated, the chinese can't attack effectively but they are in a really strong defensive position. In the other, the Chinese still have some bite, but I have been too aggressive and gotten myself out of position.

If I were starting a game from day 1 again, I would hole up as the Chinese for the first year. I would only committ to offensive feint attacks until supplies start pouring in from India in 43. It is critical though for the Chinese to try and hold on to the rail lines. As long as you have at least parts of it you can move/counter move effectively. Get pushed back onto the roads though and you will have trouble. Get pushed into the country side and your done for.



Nail78 -> RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day (5/12/2006 11:35:51 PM)

I know there was a guideline written in another thread so forgive me for probably trying too cover old territory I can't find the thread now. What is the rule of thumb as far as disruption and fatigue for a ground unit too be on the defensive in a occupied hex, or too attack?



Nikademus -> RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day (5/12/2006 11:54:33 PM)

high disruption = bad (above 50....not good....above 70 really not good idea to attack)




niceguy2005 -> RE: Nail's Newbie Question of the Day (5/13/2006 1:18:34 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

high disruption = bad (above 50....not good....above 70 really not good idea to attack)



If I had my choice I would wait until disruption is below 20 to attack.



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.71875