Misc. Rookie Questions (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> The War Room



Message

Atilla60 -> Misc. Rookie Questions (3/27/2010 10:14:05 PM)

Hi all
Me and a friend of mine bought this game 'bout 2 months ago. After a week of reading and learn by doing, we decided to get our hands dirty and started a PBEM test game (tough way to learn, but effective too).
Anyway, when we reached December 21, 41 we agreed to stop and start a new game. This time, hopefully, to the bitter end (me as Jap).

We'll be starting on Monday, needless to say I'm a little pressed on time. So I hope you guys can help me out on a few issues that remains unclear to me. Actually there's tons of issues and I could ask questions all day and then some. But for now I'll limit it a few questions on basics that is important for the opening moves.

1) Barges.
Initially I planned on taking a number of dot-bases early on by creating an amphibious TF with a number of smaller SNLF units on it. Then creating a supply transport to follow it. The idea was to unload all troops on one dot-base, then create barges from the transport TF to invade adjectant dot-bases.
However, from what I've read on this board (and what I've learned so far), Barges are now created from the base screen, and it seems I'll have to reconsider my approach on this.
Question is: Will I have to unload the supply transport onto a dot-base, and then create the barges from there? If yes, how much supplies will be required?
Or is there a smarter way that I've missed?

2) Base supply range.
Where is it displayed? Or is there a formula? I've not been able to find any info about this in the manual. I've also been searching on this board, but with no luck.

3) CAP altitude (secondary mission)
Let's say I order 50% of a fighter squadron a airfield attack mission, altitude 1.000 feet.
The remaining 50% is assigned CAP. At which altitude will those on CAP be flying?

4) Strategic considerations
While I have my strategy worked out, I am aware that I'm a rookie. I can't go into detail, here in the open, as to what my plans are (loose lips sink ships and all that [:)]). However, if any vet. Japanese players have some "do vs. don't do" tips, I'm all ears.

Edit:
Oops I forgot to mention, We are playing scenario 1




Mynok -> RE: Misc. Rookie Questions (3/27/2010 10:48:28 PM)


Hmmmm....barges are less useful for ferrying troops because of their limited range. You should be aware that there is a feature of the game wherein dot bases adjacent to regular bases of yours will randomly but regularly fall into your control. Frankly, I wouldn't worry much about the dot bases. Few of them are worth the effort.

Supply range isn't base-related. It's path-related. You need to understand the cost of the intervening hexes. There is a nice section in the manual on calculating supply path. It gives all the different costs for terrain.

1000'. Why are you having fighters airfield attack? They have minimal bomb loads and are MUCH more useful doing Escort or Sweep missions.

Your biggest challenge as a Jap is your economy. You have lots of decisions to make about how you will setup your merchant fleet to haul resources and (in my opinion the best choice) oil to your homeland. There are several threads in this forum on the Japanese economy. You would do well to read them thoroughly.




findmeifyoucan -> RE: Misc. Rookie Questions (3/27/2010 11:09:21 PM)

Agreed, the Japanese economy is a game in itself and making sure you have enough resources to keep the economy going of course.

Just to answer the question but also to say I also think it silly to bomb with fighters. If you set bombing at 1000 feet then the other half of your fighter that are going CAP will also be flying at 1000 feet. Easy picking for any enemy fighters coming in on you. LOL



Atilla60 -> RE: Misc. Rookie Questions (3/28/2010 12:09:08 AM)

Thanks for your responds guys

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok
Hmmmm....barges are less useful for ferrying troops because of their limited range.


Agreed, that's why I find them use full in a hex to hex invasion of none defended atolls. But at the end of the day that's not really the issue (IMO). The situation is this. I have my eyes on a number of atolls around in the Pacific. Some of them are adjacent, some are not (sorry for being vague, but I have to). I want to siege them ASAP and start building ports, in general, airfields in particular.

Now, I could create numerous amphibious TFs to do the job, but that would require a lot of supporting/covering TFs as well, cause I'll never ever send an unescorted amphibious out on a mission. I know.. This is a matter of opinion, but nevertheless, that's my "doctrine". In addition, these TFs would burn a lot of fuel, compared to barges doing the same job. As you mention yourself, Jap economy is a major issue.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok
You should be aware that there is a feature of the game wherein dot bases adjacent to regular bases of yours will randomly but regularly fall into your control. Frankly, I wouldn't worry much about the dot bases. Few of them are worth the effort.

I am aware that dot-bases will eventually fall into my control. But "eventually" is of zero value to me. I want them ...ehhh..Yesterday.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok
Supply range isn't base-related. It's path-related. You need to understand the cost of the intervening hexes. There is a nice section in the manual on calculating supply path. It gives all the different costs for terrain.

Thanks man, I actually read that, but for some reason I never connected it with base supply ranges.
....My bad [;)]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok
1000'. Why are you having fighters airfield attack? They have minimal bomb loads and are MUCH more useful doing Escort or Sweep missions.


I could come up with a number of reasons why I would want to do that, but that's not the issue, I was just wandering what altitude planes on a CAP mission would be flying, when the primary mission is anything but CAP. Example a (as mentioned) a strafe mission.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok
Your biggest challenge as a Jap is your economy. You have lots of decisions to make about how you will setup your merchant fleet to haul resources and (in my opinion the best choice) oil to your homeland. There are several threads in this forum on the Japanese economy. You would do well to read them thoroughly.


I know and trust me, this is where my main efforts have been concentrated in the past 3 weeks.

Like I said, I have scores of questions, but for now I'm limiting it to a few.



findmeifyoucan -> RE: Misc. Rookie Questions (3/28/2010 12:18:32 AM)

Well, it's your game so of course you do what you want. But escorting everything?? Taking little or no risk will not get you far. As the American player the Japanese will get very far indeed and as the Japanese player not very far at all against an able American player. Talking of course whether you will do better or worse than historical. :-))



Atilla60 -> RE: Misc. Rookie Questions (3/28/2010 12:33:36 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: findmeifyoucan
Well, it's your game so of course you do what you want. But escorting everything??

Basicaly? Yes.

That's why I'm looking for solutions to keep the "everything" down to a minimum. See, I happen to know my opponent very well

Besides, reading AArs on this board tells horrible stories of what happens to the IJN when he meets a bold allied player in the early stages.

quote:

ORIGINAL: findmeifyoucan
Taking little or no risk will not get you far. As the American player the Japanese will get very far indeed and as the Japanese player not very far at all against an able American player. Talking of course whether you will do better or worse than historical. :-))

I hear you, But it's not about me being unwilling to take risks. On the contrary, I'm just not going to present an open buffet to him either.



pompack -> RE: Misc. Rookie Questions (3/28/2010 12:36:31 AM)

Atilla:

As you will quickly find, for every strategic or tactical concept you can imagine you will find one person who thinks it is the only possible way and someone else who thinks it is the absolute worst thing to do[:)]. Just make your own mistakes and soon you too will have absolute, inflexible opinions like everybody else[:D]

Now as to rules, unfortunately there is a lot of opinion there as well since in many ways the rules are rather obscure. But as to you questions,

3) when you set an altitude for an a/c unit that altitude applies no matter how the unit's effort is split among the various possible simultaneous missions;

2) the maximum supply length is 100 "units": start at a base and trace a path to a unit that needs supply, you start with 100 and reduce the figure of merit by the hex supply cost (see table in section 8.3.1) for each hex traversed. When you get to zero, no supply movement is possible. Also the lower the figure of merit the less supply is delivered to the unit; this FoM looks like a percentage and it may actually be one but no one is sure. The supply distribution process is actually much, much more complex than this but this is close.



Atilla60 -> RE: Misc. Rookie Questions (3/28/2010 1:03:24 AM)

Hi pompack

Thanks for contributing. You just sent me back to the drawing board, but thank you nevertheless [:D]


Also, this:

quote:

ORIGINAL: pompack
As you will quickly find, for every strategic or tactical concept you can imagine you will find one person who thinks it is the only possible way and someone else who thinks it is the absolute worst thing to do[:)]. Just make your own mistakes and soon you too will have absolute, inflexible opinions like everybody else[:D]

Is beyond any question or doubt, the wisest of words I've heard for a very long time. [&o][:D]



Mynok -> RE: Misc. Rookie Questions (3/28/2010 2:43:40 AM)


I'm not sure why you are so interested in dot bases. Most are really not worth the effort. Most are 0 (0) airbases and contribute nothing to your efforts.



Atilla60 -> RE: Misc. Rookie Questions (3/28/2010 5:51:52 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok


I'm not sure why you are so interested in dot bases. Most are really not worth the effort. Most are 0 (0) airbases and contribute nothing to your efforts.


Don't get me wrong, it's not like I'm fixated on dot-bases.

Look at it this way, a x(x) base is a potential x+3(x+3) base. So, in the long run, what's the importance of the individual base and what would be worth the effort?

Can we agree that it's a matter of opinions? [;)]



jejo68 -> RE: Misc. Rookie Questions (3/28/2010 4:07:50 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Atilla60

4) Strategic considerations
While I have my strategy worked out, I am aware that I'm a rookie. I can't go into detail, here in the open, as to what my plans are (loose lips sink ships and all that [:)]). However, if any vet. Japanese players have some "do vs. don't do" tips, I'm all ears.




Aww come on you wuz[:D]



Atilla60 -> RE: Misc. Rookie Questions (3/28/2010 6:59:52 PM)

He he, okay then.

I'm gonna samurai your @rse out of Burma, India, China, Borneo, DEI and then...That's where the real whoop @ss will begin. - That's the plan. [:D]



freeboy -> RE: Misc. Rookie Questions (3/28/2010 8:50:24 PM)

lol, u guys seem to have great repoir, please do an aar!
I am primarily an allied player... you have a huge advantage in 41/42, use it, go wild, BUT do not break up the fleets too m uch and get careless inviting losses you cannot replace and the allies can.. its a challenge, use your forces and risk them but not  too much, streatch the limit, oops not too much.. get it?



Atilla60 -> RE: Misc. Rookie Questions (3/29/2010 12:28:55 AM)

Hi freeboy
Thanks for the eads up. Got you [:)]

Edit:
Re the AAR, I've been thinking about it, and I'll try to make one, to the extend time RL events allows it.



Nemo121 -> RE: Misc. Rookie Questions (4/4/2010 1:07:26 PM)

Atilla,

When you see Allied players "go wild" in the early stages usually one of two things has happened:

1. The Japanese player has been insufficiently bold early on or

2. The Allied player has had a gameplan from day 1 to wrest the initiative.


I wouldn't worry too much about the 2nd option. If you have someone who combines the ambition to do the 2nd AND the ability to carry it through you are pretty much screwed no matter what you do.

You CAN do something about the first point though....


What do you need to do as the IJN player? Well, when I first read an AAR and find it interesting I usually ask the following question: "What's your strategic plan?" Depending on the answer I either continue to read or give the AAR up as a lost cause. As the Japanese player you NEED to be thinking and talking at least 18 months ahead, ideally you should have a firm plan 18 months in advance and a reasonably vague plan for 36 months in advance. If you don't plan at least 18 months ahead or aren't able to say how an operation on 8th December 1941 fits into the situation you plan to find yourself in on the 8th July 1943 when I ask about the strategic plan then you're simply not going to put up a good game as Japan and it isn't worth my time reading the AAR.

So, basically, what bases do you NEED to be holding in July 1943 in order to maintain the cohesiveness of your industry and your SLOCs ( Sea Lines of Communication ) running from the areas of resource production to the Home Islands? Will that front line trace keep your important bases free from harrassment by enemy bombers, naval and ground forces? If not, modify the front line trace until it does.

At that point in time you need to figure out how to express your plan in 3 to 4 sentences. When Kesselring issued the order to pull back to the Gothic line in Italy he sent a 79 word communique to his troops. That order set the bones for the movement of 250,000 troops ( 3,000 soldiers per word ). If you can't be as succinct and brief then you don't have your priorities clear in your head.


E.g. in my current AAR my plan could be summed up as:

Hold or maximise damage to Palembang, pin as many IJA troops in China as possible, minimise enemy advances in the Pacific and seek to create assymetric points of contact which interfere with enemy OODA loops as frequently as possible. Only engage in favourable attrition but when favourable engage in it fearlessly. Above all maximise the potential for the enemy to misallocate strategically decisive resources.


There, that's it.
Maximise damage to or hold Palembang - Well that governs the expenditure of about 50 or so xAKs/xAPs to evacuate Singers and reinforce Sumatra. It also provides the rationale for the concentration of the Royal Navy,British, Indian and Oz reinforcements.

Pin as many troops in China as possible - provides the rationale for the current action in Burma.

Assymetric points of contact - Since the enemy has aerial superiority but KB is a limited resource I've created points of contact which cannot be easily retaken with just the support of LBA. They can be easily retaken using CV airpower as support but using CV airpower in such a way is a strategic waste. Same thing in Burma... The enemy has total air superiority. I have a total of 14 bombers in the theatre, yet my forces are pushing his back. Why? His aerial superiority is meaningless in the face of my ground superiority.

OODA loops- All of my recent counter-attacks have been designed to mess with OODA loops.

The Japanese can replace aerial losses more easily than I. Thus we haven't seen much aerial combat. I can replace ships lost more easily than he can - we've seen a lot of ship losses gladly accepted since that attrition favours me.

Maximise the potential for the enemy to misallocate strategically decisive resources - again, a simple sentence which underpins a lot of operations which are designed to create a given reaction by a given force --- said reaction always helping my strategic goals.



If you can't say in 3 or 4 sentences what your priorities are then you haven't thought your strategic plan through enough IMO.... Without such thought no amount of advice or discussion here will avail you any advantage. You can play a poor game tactically and operationally but if you are strategically good you'll do very well indeed. The converse is not true.



Atilla60 -> RE: Misc. Rookie Questions (4/4/2010 3:20:58 PM)

Hi Nemo
Thanks for commenting, it's very much appreciated.

I've been following your AAR, can't say I've read it from beginning to end. But I've read most of it (interesting read BTW).
And yes, I had your game in mind when I referred to "bold allied player" above. Just in case you were wondering. [;)]



quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121
When you see Allied players "go wild" in the early stages usually one of two things has happened:

1. The Japanese player has been insufficiently bold early on or

2. The Allied player has had a gameplan from day 1 to wrest the initiative.

I wouldn't worry too much about the 2nd option. If you have someone who combines the ambition to do the 2nd AND the ability to carry it through you are pretty much screwed no matter what you do.

I believe that if you, as allied player, gain the initiative in the early stages, say prior to mid/late 42, then it's not because you took it, but because the Japanese player handed it over to you.
I know there's a lot of - but/if and then again - to that notion. Nevertheless, when the day has gone, the fat lady has song and the smoke has cleared. The allied player has got neither the hardware nor quality personnel to take the initiative in terms of a large scale engagement with the IJN, early on.

Having your ongoing game in mind, I'll submit that if the Japanese player chooses to concentrate the best and the majority of his naval assets in one theatre, considering the central pacific a "left hand job". And if the allied player has prepared (which you evidently have) for such a scenario, then the game is bound to develop into a war on allies premises soon.
A combination of your item 1 and 2 so to speak.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121
What do you need to do as the IJN player? Well, when I first read an AAR and find it interesting I usually ask the following question: "What's your strategic plan?" Depending on the answer I either continue to read or give the AAR up as a lost cause. As the Japanese player you NEED to be thinking and talking at least 18 months ahead, ideally you should have a firm plan 18 months in advance and a reasonably vague plan for 36 months in advance.

We're on the same page here, Long term planning is essential.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121
The Japanese can replace aerial losses more easily than I. Thus we haven't seen much aerial combat. I can replace ships lost more easily than he can - we've seen a lot of ship losses gladly accepted since that attrition favours me.

Exactly, and it proves the point that the game is being played on your premises already.



Nemo121 -> RE: Misc. Rookie Questions (4/4/2010 10:20:09 PM)

I think that it is VERY dangerous ground to say that one cannot gain the initiative before mid-42 unless the Japanese player grants it to one. That sort of thinking closes the mind to the possibility of creating a situation in which you do gain the initiative. IMO one of the mistakes many of us make is that we close our minds to possibilities and never truly examine them. Then because we say "it can't be done", no-one ever does it and so our preconception becomes experiential truth.... until someone comes along and says, "Hey, just cause you guys think it can't be done doesn't mean it can't be done. I'm going to try."

Whenever the initiative changes hands there's a complex interplay of one person ceding it and another taking it.... also the acme of operational art is not gaining the initiative but guiding one's opponent to use his initiative to put his own hand into a meat grinder.... I certainly wouldn't say I have the initiative in my game but I would argue that it is unfolding as per my plan with the action occurring, mostly, in the places of my choosing with the force correlations and assynchronicity of my choosing. That's a small difference but a crucial one.


In any case don't assume you can't gain the initiative... Once you assume that you stop trying to gain it and it becomes a self-fullfilling prophecy. Assume you can gain it ( or manipulate it at least ) and you might surprise yourself.



Atilla60 -> RE: Misc. Rookie Questions (4/5/2010 2:58:57 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121
I think that it is VERY dangerous ground to say that one cannot gain the initiative before mid-42 unless the Japanese player grants it to one.

I'm not advocating that anything is given from the get go.
Certainly, everything is possible, and only fools doesn't evaluate and explore what might be openings as the war unfolds.

What I'm saying is that as the allied player, (IMHO), when doing your initial planning, you have to realize that in the early phase of the war, you are in disadvantage on almost every aspect of warfare. For you to wrest the initiative, or at least gaining an influence on the development of things, the Japanese player has to present the opportunity to you.
If I were the allied player, I would look for that opportunity on a daily basis, but I sure as heck wouldn't plan on it to appear.



Nemo121 -> RE: Misc. Rookie Questions (4/5/2010 6:41:58 PM)

Atilla60, I think you undervalue the extent to which even an inferior force can shape the battlefield. I wouldn't go to Monty's level of valuing the shaping of the battlefield but I do think that shaping the battlefield ( or the strategic problem you pose the enemy ) in order to cause the enemy to tend towards previously forecast and prepared for courses of action is possible for all forces almost irrespective of how inferior they are.

I suppose that's the difference between us... You would watch for an opportunity to appear and react to it. I believe that I can proactively create such opportunities on my terms no matter the correlation of forces.


Playing the game will determine which of us was right and all of these different approaches make discussions about the game interesting. It'd be boring if we all thought the same way.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.96875