RE: One Weird Battle (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports



Message

Canoerebel -> RE: One Weird Battle (12/29/2010 6:22:44 PM)

That's a noxious thought, John! But it's certainly possible. I need to reconsider staging my Wake/Marcus TFs too far forward.

Below is a map of the current sitaution in India. Solid blue lines show Allied axis of advance. Dashed blue line show paratroop assaults to take place tomorrow. All orange lines show IJA paths of retreat. IJA 1st Division is several hexes north of Bombay on the coast road. Brad has to get that unit back to Bombay before he can withdraw. This is where the Allies have the best chance of catching and beating up some Japanese - combining the Allies army at Bombay (2600 AV) with the army advancing from Jalagon (about 2000 AV).

[image]local://upfiles/8143/B5FE50FF78B6437C8799B35AEBE285A2.jpg[/image]



JeffroK -> RE: One Weird Battle (12/29/2010 9:37:20 PM)

CR,

Can you get anything into Raipur, even a fragment of a regular infantry unit might scare QBall into thinking its an airlifted counterattack.

PS.  Do you intend that the Chindits and Marine Paras hold their conquests, if not, take the base and immediately plot to move down the IJA LOC, gives them a bit more use than sacraficial pawns.



Canoerebel -> RE: One Weird Battle (12/29/2010 9:41:31 PM)

Jeff, good idea re: Raipur. I don't see why I can't airlift some infantry into that base.

As for the paratroops, I'm likely to move them down a road, or possibly even into an adjacent wooded hex, to prevent them from sitting there and getting destroyed. They are meant to induce the panic of uncertainty tomorrow and for a few days thereafter, but pretty soon Brad will figure out they don't pose any real threat.



Cribtop -> RE: One Weird Battle (12/29/2010 9:49:38 PM)

Oh, my. The rout isn't on yet, but it could be soon...



witpqs -> RE: One Weird Battle (12/29/2010 9:55:08 PM)

India is so flush with roads and railways this might not be possible, but if they block the best supply route such that it causes IJA units downstream to get supply on a less frequent schedule that might influence a combat or two.

The schedule (and I never found out which one happens on which days) is

Short Range = 4 days per week
Medium Range = 2 days per week (includes Short Range units)
Long Range = 1 day per week (includes Short Range and Medium Range units)

I'm attaching a cut & paste I did of a developer post on supply movement in case it's helpful.



Canoerebel -> RE: One Weird Battle (12/30/2010 3:51:47 PM)

10/7/42

India: Brad has garrisons at the two dot hexes targeted by Allied paratroops. The 1st Marine 'Chutes were unable to take the dot hex near Naipur, but the Chindits did take the dot hex east of Poona, really roughing up an IJA armored unit in the process. That will probably do more to spook Brad than anything (assuming he's "spookable," which is debatable). Allied air continued to hit the ground troops in big numbers. Four armored units are hot on the heals of the IJA stack retreating towards Poona, but I'll halt them to allow some infantry to catch up. I'm hoping that Allied bombers will slow the IJA stack enough to allow my troops to catch up. Allied escorts probably sank two IJN subs near Karachi - a rare feat.

Norfolk Island: Everything looks good on D-Day. The bombardment TF did it's job; B-17s from Lord Howe Island flew on schedule and did their job; and about 50 AV came ashore to find a token Japanese garrison that might total 10 AV. The Allied troops will shock attack tomorrow (by then the Allied AV should be about 100). No signs of IJ opposition. I'll withdraw the combat ships tomorrow and most of the transports.

Pacific: No sign of Japanese activity. The mock Kuriles invaison force is continuing west and will be north of Attu tomorrow.



paullus99 -> RE: One Weird Battle (12/30/2010 4:11:54 PM)

Once again, I am very suprised that Q hasn't responded at this point - especially in light of happenings in India, and if he moves out of Bombay you can almost guarantee that he's going on full defense on the subcontinent (probably retreat back to a firm base to cover Calcutta/Burma under the cover of multiple airfields & try to bleed you under his fighter cover).

I've also considered that he may be emulating your own strategy with the carriers - since he still has the advantage in flight decks and experience, and waiting until you commit to a seaborne operation (the KB is now next to useless in the IO) in the Pacific.



Chickenboy -> RE: One Weird Battle (12/30/2010 5:31:52 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Jeff, good idea re: Raipur. I don't see why I can't airlift some infantry into that base.

As for the paratroops, I'm likely to move them down a road, or possibly even into an adjacent wooded hex, to prevent them from sitting there and getting destroyed. They are meant to induce the panic of uncertainty tomorrow and for a few days thereafter, but pretty soon Brad will figure out they don't pose any real threat.

CR,

Love the idea of dropping the paras on the dot hexes. It will slow his egress from theatre to a crawl if he can't rail them out.

Along those lines, can you paradrop on that city hex between Bhopal and Raipur (to the gamemap 'East' of Nampur)? If it's lightly defended and can be taken with a paradrop, that'll unhinge his flank but good. You can then rail troops into Raipur and bypass this Nampur pocket-liquidating it at your leisure.



JohnDillworth -> RE: One Weird Battle (12/30/2010 7:20:28 PM)

quote:

I've also considered that he may be emulating your own strategy with the carriers - since he still has the advantage in flight decks and experience, and waiting until you commit to a seaborne operation (the KB is now next to useless in the IO) in the Pacific.


If he is in retreat he has to ship those troops somewhere else. IF you can put any sort of threat in the Indian Ocean he almost has to put the KB there to escort his troops back. If you know where the KB will be for 2 weeks you can do a lot of damage in the Pacific. Maybe send a Brit carrier or a couple of CVE's on a raid into the India Ocean. It would almost be worth losing them to pin the KB down for a bit. Land based air might be a problem, but even getting sighted would have the desired effect.



paullus99 -> RE: One Weird Battle (12/30/2010 7:46:17 PM)

I hadn't thought of that - if he was planning on pulling a turtle & moving into a defensive posture, he's not going to want to tie down all of those troops - the whole purpose would be to release combat formations for use elsewhere. So, there would be significant shipping assets in play here, that could be vulnerable for a strike (or perhaps even an amphibious invasion on your part on Ceylon - to cut access from the sea).



JeffroK -> RE: One Weird Battle (12/30/2010 8:00:13 PM)

I cant see any evac from India being an easy target as inferred.

I would train my LCU back to a safe area, the Bangladesh (well 30 years early) area is compact and defensible, for shipment under a strong air umbrella.

Netty still rules the waves, if based out of Calcutta, Rangoon, Sabang with fighter support at these bases plus Pt Blair, will provide a very strong cover over the Bay of Bengal unless you commit the USN CV's.

If you have the strength, a push towards Vizag, Cuttack or Calcutta to cut off his land LOC could see him try a sea evac which might see KB committed. If KB is committed this would be a victory. (A night bombing campaign against Indian ports might spook out some shipping as well as a bit of recce)

This would be more of a submarine campaign than sticking your nose into trouble on the surface.



Canoerebel -> RE: One Weird Battle (12/30/2010 9:25:17 PM)

I'm going to do my best to trap and destroy enemy units in India, but I think it will prove very difficult. Alot of IJA divisions will get beat up, but he'll get them out and they'll have plenty of time to recover before they're needed. Here's my general plan over the next few months:

Plan A: The Allies are ready to invade Marcus or Wake (troops and transports are at Pearl) as soon as the KB is confirmed out of the area. If Brad uses the KB to invade someplace like Fiji, I give this the green light. If he remains on the defensive, then I'll go to Plan B.

Plan B: Allied carriers are two weeks out of Balboa. If I need to draw the KB in order to green light Wake/Marcus, the carriers will move to Tahiti and then probably to either Fiji or Auckland. Like any Japanese player, Brad really, really, REALLY wants a crack at taking out my carriers, so I'm 98% sure that wherever I send mine his will follow. The tricky part will be to make sure I don't offer battle unless I get very favorable terms.

Plan C: If the KB shows up someplace like Wake or Marcus or the Indian Ocean, the Allies will invade Noumea. This base is very lighlty guarded and prepped troops are at Melbourne and Auckland.

Plan D: In India, the Allies will use massed air, armor and infantry to try to rough up as much of the Japanese army as possible. I may use some of the RN, though here too I have to be careful. Once Brad sees my carriers in SoPac, he'll go on the offensive with battleships in the Indian Ocean.

If I'm successful in nabbing Wake and Marcus, and holding either or both into late spring '44, it should be possible to create a credible appearance of threat to NoPac, given the Allied build up in the Western Aleutians. This combination should enhance my ability to strike Sumatra sometime in mid 1943 as the KB would be far away. If things don't go well with Marcus or Wake, then I'll begin looking at options other than Sumatra.



paullus99 -> RE: One Weird Battle (12/30/2010 10:14:44 PM)

Quick question - do you have an idea of what his air assets in India look like? Is he still making runs on Bombay or has he ceded control of the air to you at the moment?

If he has pulled out his air or at least moved some of them, it could be another prep move for whatever he might have planned. Of course, if he's going after a more isolated target (like Fiji) he'll need the entire KB for support, since he won't have friendly airfields close by.

The anticipation is killing me here - can't wait to see what happens next.



Canoerebel -> RE: One Weird Battle (12/30/2010 10:21:15 PM)

I haven't seen nearly as much Japanese air lately. Regular but fairly small commitment of fighters and only sporadic, desultory commitment of bombers. I think he's keeping his airforce back until my units draw closer to his airfields - the campaign at Jalagon was too distant from any good IJ airfields.

So I think the IJ airforce is still present in big numbers in India. His airforce isn't active anywhere else on the map. But if the planes aren't in India, then the only other place that makes sense is China.



Canoerebel -> RE: One Weird Battle (12/31/2010 8:42:25 PM)

10/8/42

Norfolk Island: The Allies easily take this base - the second successful amphibious operation of the war (the other was Baker Island back during the summer). This gives the Allies an airbase in close proximity to New Caledonia. It should also lend to the impression of an impending Allied move on that island. Also, I hope that Brad is wondering if this is a diversion meant to distract his attention from NoPac.

Allied Carriers: I think that the quick and easy conquests of Baker and Norfolk Islands was due in large part to my carrier policy. If Brad knew where my carriers were, he'd play a more forward and vigorous defense. Now, though, I think I need to reveal the location of my carriers in order to proceed with the next invasions (Marcus and Wake). I think I can use them to draw Brad's full attention to New Caledonia, allowing me to proceed with the CenPac invasions using only CVE for protection. All of this is at least a month away, though, as it will take me that long to get my carriers to SoPac.

India: No major changes here - Allied bombers continue to hit retreating Japanese units, while Allied units give chase, especially to the stack pulling back towards Poona. I'm also sending an RN BB TF from Abadan to bombard 1st Division on the coastal road north of Bombay.



Canoerebel -> RE: One Weird Battle (1/3/2011 5:25:42 AM)

I've just issued another "dynamite charge" to Q-Ball - asking him for the second time in five days his intentions with respect to the game. He replied that he has lost interest but that he hopes that it will return.

In the meantime, I've asked him to do me the simple courtesy of notifying me when a turn will be coming or won't.

He sent a turn late this evening, which I'll run tomorrow, but as for now I think this game is on life support. Considering the investment both of us have put into the game, I don't think Brad is showing good sportsmanship here.

Vent over.



d0mbo -> RE: One Weird Battle (1/3/2011 8:27:13 AM)

Bad news; you have a point about being disappointed with that.



nicwb -> RE: One Weird Battle (1/3/2011 12:10:36 PM)

What a pity ! the game seemed to be moving in an unusual directtion with the fight in India.



crsutton -> RE: One Weird Battle (1/3/2011 4:31:01 PM)

Too bad, it was a blast reading both of your AARs. Seems like he is really just going through the motions now-which in itself will not make for much of a game. Perhaps now is the time to let him out of the marriage. At least he is honest about his flagging interest and you really can't be angry about that as it can happen to any of us. We get distracted or just fall for another woman. [;)] Better to just offer Brad a graceful out now. Perhaps you can find a player to take over for him. Better to just pull the plug now rather than keep getting frustrated and letting your anger grow. This stuff happens.



Nemo121 -> RE: One Weird Battle (1/3/2011 4:48:24 PM)

Well he is flagging because he never properly committed to a single strategic goal sufficiently to make it happen. Now that his lack of committment yields its inevitable end result he doesn't want to play to the end. This is unfortunate but understandable.

I think that he should, if he feels this way, concede the game and you should look for another player who is willing to take on the Japanese side. There's no point forcing him to play a game he doesn't enjoy and continuing on makes it likely the game will simply cease with no-one to take over.

Let him concede the game, chalk up a win and see if you can find someone interested in carrying on from here.

Thats' the best option for continuing an interesting game and also prevents this degenerating into something which makes you and your opponent fall out.


P.s. I'd also suggest considering winding the clock back a month or two if you restart. That way an opponent will be able to do something about some of your opponent's more egregious recent errors although little can be done to turn around the strategic lack of committment underlying this situation.



Canoerebel -> RE: One Weird Battle (1/3/2011 5:07:12 PM)

Some good suggestions in these recent posts and in a PM or two sent by others.

I'd prefer to continue the game, but if Brad does end up resigning that's fine. I just don't want to ask him to - I'd prefer he commit one way or the other of his own volition.

If he does ask for a divorce, and as soon as I hunt down and slay his paramour ([:)]), I'll have to think long and hard about continuing the game with a new opponent. I might, but I'm not sure.

I'm also intrigued by Nemo's suggestion to back up a month. What would make me relucatant is that we just had a pivotoal battle - the Jalagon Campaign - that repressented a tense "high water mark" moment. The Japanese were forced to pull back. I'd be very reluctant to back up before that, but I would be willing to consider some kind of ceasefire to allow a new opponent to address problems that might have arisen due to Brad's inattention.

Hopefully, it won't come to all of this. But I'm guessing the next thing I'll hear from Brad is "Well, you've probably noticed that I've been kind of wrapped up in WitE, so I think it's time I withdraw and give you a chance to find somebody who will play regularly."



Nemo121 -> RE: One Weird Battle (1/3/2011 5:15:21 PM)

Well, if your goal is to face good opposition and be pushed to the limit then a new opponent and backing up to a point before a recent point of decision would achieve those goals.

My advice: Don't worry about the recent victory you had. Strategically that whole campaign was pointless in any case. Your opponent's fate was strategically sealed long before that campaign. He simply dithered with his force committments for far too long. The battle you just "won" merely made that end result obvious to everyone but strategically the writing has long been on the wall.


I've had people take over games from opponents and I've taken over for others when they felt the position was poor and I always found rewinding or a 1 to 2 week ceasefire was essential to allowing the game to continue as a good competition. Most people quit immediately following a major feat and asking someone to step in at that point without a rewind or a breather is a bit unrealistic IMO.



Canoerebel -> RE: One Weird Battle (1/3/2011 5:15:57 PM)

It will also be interesting to read Brad's AAR when the time comes. Brad was pretty close to conquering India. In fact, if we played again and if I employed the same strategy, I have no doubt that he would succeed and achieve auto victory.

I really liked my strategy in this game - I developed it day one, tweaked it as time went by, and it worked against a very stiff test. But I think it's also a very risky defense. It is not the kind of defense one should employ against an aggressive and experienced Japanese player in a Scenario Two game. I also think that Australia would be more vulnerable than India - and more likely to force the Allies to commit his carriers.

In fact, I'm not sure I will play Scenario Two against an experienced IJ player again.



paullus99 -> RE: One Weird Battle (1/3/2011 5:18:27 PM)

I'd be curious to see if it would be possible to avoid auto-victory in Scenario 2 against a good Japanese player - if they are able to commit as many troops as they would like to any one target (India, Australia or Hawaii) & the allies are so weak to start.

I have no doubts that Nemo wouldn't have a problem (lol) but given the game dynamics, does it make the Japanese too strong?



Ossian -> RE: One Weird Battle (1/3/2011 5:18:45 PM)

Do you think you might like to play Scen 2 from the other side next time? Could be an interesting experience. I think most of us tend to stick to one side or the other though, don't we? Personally, I've grown attached to all the toys the Allies get later on. [:)]



Canoerebel -> RE: One Weird Battle (1/3/2011 5:24:37 PM)

Scenario Two in the hands of a very good IJ player is going to be a real bear now that we're a year-plus into AE and players better know how far they can go and what Allied capabilities are. My "uber-soft" defense worked in this game, but only just barely and only because I think it caught Brad by surprise (had he known how soft I was going to play he would have come harder, faster).

Uber-soft probably won't work again, which probably means the Allied player will have to be very aggressive. This can work, of course, but it also carries an elevated risk of a big carrier battle defeat. PLaying Scenario Two at a decided carrier disadvantage in 1942 and 1943 will be a marathon of "I'm not having very much fun, guys." That is, if you manage to avoid auto victory.

I may be over estimating Japan's capabilities, but I definately think auto-victory is in play. I don't think it is in Scenario One, at least for an experienced Allied player.

As for switching sides, I'm intimidated by production. That kind of minutae reminds me of pilot training, which I detest.




Nemo121 -> RE: One Weird Battle (1/3/2011 6:00:46 PM)

quote:

In fact, if we played again and if I employed the same strategy, I have no doubt that he would succeed and achieve auto victory.


I'll file that under "things that make me go HMMMM!!!" I don't think that he was ever going to achieve autovictory since he never committed properly. Once you read his AAR you'll see what I mean. It just so happened that your strategy of withdrawing coincidentally gave him the thin air which exposed his lack of focus and committment. Strangely enough if you had resisted more earlier he would have "known" to hit your forces and would have been led into a more effective disposition of forces. As it was your lack of resistance and his lack of strategic focus combined to reinforce his dithering and really showed up his lack of an overarching strategic plan fit for purpose.

It was pointed out to him that he didn't seem to be able to identify a concrete strategic end-state in India and elsewhere beyond a somewhat nebulous "kill enough to get autovictory" but he didn't take the hints and re-evaluate his goals.


Really this game was a very interesting examination of how a refusal to engage can expose those who don't have a clear strategic plan. When he hit empty air he simply didn't know what to do next and he never took the mental space necessary to reformulate his plans. The fact that only your resistance served to give him focus was an interesting interplay to follow. As to him winning though - only if he had a proper plan. In this game he never really did and so when you didn't "lead him on" through resisting he never proved able to fully decide what to do in order to achieve the end-state he wanted ( since he never really, truly knew what that end state was except in nebulous terms).

As I said, that interplay was interesting to see but it was a pity he never truly took stock and formulated a proper strategic end-point he wished to achieve. Because he didn't he didn't know what he sought to do when he had the freedom to impose his will and therefore he never fully committed. This was a classic example of a campaign undertaken with ill-defined strategic goals. As with all such campaigns the lack of focus doomed it. On many occasions it reminded me of the Barcan campaign against Rome. Hannibal won victories but never knew how to translate them into a strategic end-state commensurate with victory. As such he was stuck in Italy winning battles but never translating that into a meaningful change in the strategic state of things. IN the end this failure led to his failure and the destruction of his state.



Bullwinkle58 -> RE: One Weird Battle (1/3/2011 6:34:29 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Scenario Two in the hands of a very good IJ player is going to be a real bear now that we're a year-plus into AE and players better know how far they can go and what Allied capabilities are. My "uber-soft" defense worked in this game, but only just barely and only because I think it caught Brad by surprise (had he known how soft I was going to play he would have come harder, faster).

Uber-soft probably won't work again, which probably means the Allied player will have to be very aggressive. This can work, of course, but it also carries an elevated risk of a big carrier battle defeat. PLaying Scenario Two at a decided carrier disadvantage in 1942 and 1943 will be a marathon of "I'm not having very much fun, guys." That is, if you manage to avoid auto victory.



You very warm, now many months in the past in your game. Nothing below will give you any aid or comfort should this game continue.

Scenario 2 IS auto-vic-able for the Japanese player IF he hangs it out and goes for a "sealed India." At minimum this forbids the Allied player from Sir Robining his carriers as you did. Brad let you get away with it. At best a sealed India wins the auto-vic.

As others have said and analyzed, Oz may be even easier to auto-vic unless the Allied player commits 100%, all in, in the first half of 1942. ****-footing around with the USN won't cut it. But India is also auto-vic-able, especially now that the mechanics of emergency reinforcements are better known by both sides' players.

You two's AARs will be an excellent archive for future India auto-vic strategists. As Nemo says/alludes, Brad had you, and he let you get away.



Chickenboy -> RE: One Weird Battle (1/3/2011 6:50:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121
Really this game was a very interesting examination of how a refusal to engage can expose those who don't have a clear strategic plan.


Nemo, I couldn't disagree more.

I think Brad's strategic plan (which I won't discuss further here due to OPSEC) was as clear as it needed to be / could be and his strategic accomplishments significant in this game. If he was on the defensive in India, that's OK at this stage of the game.

There's a big difference between a clear strategic plan and realistic implementation of said plan. India, like the West Coast CONUS, may just be a land mass too far for Japan's comparatively meager forces. No Japanese 'clear strategic plan' can waive off the reality imposed by the map, the forces available, movement limitations, game modeling of events, etc. The old saw about 'no intact plan survives contact with the enemy' is still certainly true. Again, I'm not going to discuss deviations from Brad's planning in his implementation of said plans (if any) here due to OPSEC, but I think that may (or may not be) the place to look at Brad's experience.

PM me if you want to talk specifics.



Nemo121 -> RE: One Weird Battle (1/3/2011 8:16:13 PM)

Well, opinions can differ. I would suggest you read Canoerebel's opponent's AAR. IIRC Alfred and I both posted with concerns re: his lack of committment many many months of gametime ago. Others may have posted the same concerns too but I don't remember their names.

Bottom line - If you read those posts from many months ago it is clear some people identified his plan wasn't clear enough to serve as a focus for his thinking... I think events have proved that to be right. I think that our difference may lie in us meaining two different things when we talk about "the plan". I think you're talking about his plan as outlined. I'm talking about his end-point, which I don't think he ever crystallised and thus since he didn't know his end-point he could never have a proper yardstick against which to measure his committment of forces.

Happy to discuss this by PM if you wish... but I think clarifying that we seem to mean slightly different things when we use the same word probably clarifies it sufficiently.



Page: <<   < prev  36 37 [38] 39 40   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.78125