RE: Wild Sheep Chase (Full Version)

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



Message

obvert -> RE: Wild Sheep Chase (3/11/2014 4:46:56 PM)

DDs STILL FLOATING
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

By the end there were still enough DDs to cycle some out for repairs and continue operations with bombardments and keeping the KB escorted. The Akizukis stayed with the KB throughout, from when they were commissioned until the end, so unless sunk during a CV exchange, they are still there. (There might be a few in the yard repairing, so maybe a few more than listed here actually).

It's kind of funny thinking the Allies have literally 10x this amount sailing around! [:D]

Remaining DDs: 52

[image]local://upfiles/37283/87155FAC8FBF4E319733D90872E959BE.jpg[/image]



DOCUP -> RE: Wild Sheep Chase (3/11/2014 10:02:53 PM)

I'm late but congrats on an epic game.



obvert -> RE: Wild Sheep Chase (3/11/2014 10:06:18 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DOCUP

I'm late but congrats on an epic game.


Thanks!



DOCUP -> RE: Wild Sheep Chase (3/11/2014 10:09:39 PM)

Your welcome.  I'll read your next AAR. 



Insano -> RE: Wild Sheep Chase (3/11/2014 10:11:20 PM)

obvert great job. I've already applied some of the lessons from your war to the planning for my own game.

For fun - from tracker what are some of your ships with the highest crew experience?



obvert -> RE: Wild Sheep Chase (3/11/2014 11:34:39 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Insano

obvert great job. I've already applied some of the lessons from your war to the planning for my own game.

For fun - from tracker what are some of your ships with the highest crew experience?


Something I haven't looked at. I'll check into it. Probably by sometime tomorrow.

Let me know if there are other questions. I am mostly dealing with units, pilots, ships, and things of a measurable sort now. I'd like to get into strategic concerns as related to the economy more later as well.



obvert -> RE: Wild Sheep Chase (3/11/2014 11:35:04 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DOCUP

Your welcome.  I'll read your next AAR. 


The next will be Allies, so I'll need your help!



koniu -> RE: Wild Sheep Chase (3/12/2014 5:44:11 AM)

Congratulations.

Great game and great AAR. I must say that one of most interesting thing in AAR was for me photo part. Together with reports and You comment they give me that strange feeleng that this is happening real.

Now i plan to re read some parts of it. Especially entire 1944



obvert -> RE: Wild Sheep Chase (3/12/2014 7:11:06 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: koniu

Congratulations.

Great game and great AAR. I must say that one of most interesting thing in AAR was for me photo part. Together with reports and You comment they give me that strange feeleng that this is happening real.

Now i plan to re read some parts of it. Especially entire 1944


Thanks koniu! And thanks for the help all of the way through.

I do love the images, and I've learned so much by just searching them out, finding the ones I'd never seen, reading those stories. I included more of the stories early on, and I'd like to do more of that in the future.

As for 44, it was all hinging n the Allied move to Sarmi. The KB had them in the sights and couldn't stop it. That turned everything in the Allied favor.



setloz -> RE: Wild Sheep Chase (3/12/2014 9:24:46 AM)

Great AAR! I love the fact that you post so many post-game information. I look forward to the economy overview.



obvert -> RE: Wild Sheep Chase (3/12/2014 9:38:54 AM)

CRUISER LOSSES
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Early on the losses were mostly CL, and the CA were tough up through 43, but in 44 they started to lose their shine a bit. Most losses were in the So Pac area early, the DEI late. The CAs were still useful and fought hard to the end, with three surviving the war, but could no longer take on Allied CL/DD TFs with an advantage. many losses to air strikes were after a major surface engagement as the wounded struggled to get out of range.

I was pretty careful with the CAs through most of the war, but as the Allies moved forward they were asked to hold the line as a deterrent in the DEI while other forces battled in the PI and in the Pacific, and they eventually suffered, being in range of air strikes most of the time there.

The Modern IJN CL are decent ships, and they held their own in many surface battles throughout the late war.

Total Lost: 35

15 --- 1000lb SAP bomb
1 --- 1000lb GP bomb
2 --- 500lb SAP bomb
1 --- 250lb SAP bomb

1 --- 16in/45 Mk 6 Gun
4 --- 8in/50 BL Mk VIII
3 --- 6inch/47 Mk16 Gun
1 --- 8in/55 Mk 12 Gun

2 --- 21in Mk VIIc Torpedo
3 --- 21in Mk 15 Torpedo
2 --- 21in Mk 14 Torpedo
1 --- 22.4in Mk 13 Torp.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
[image]local://upfiles/37283/DB658187F7CB4632847FA2164DEBABC3.jpg[/image]



GreyJoy -> RE: Wild Sheep Chase (3/12/2014 4:34:49 PM)

Hi Erik,

I'm pretty curious to hear from you about what you, now with the insight of this brilliant game, would do to stop the allied advance in late-stages of the game as Japan.
I mean, how would you change your overall strategy based on what you know now?
I'm pretty sure you won't play another game without SLs, right?[:D]

Would you invest more in forts?
Would you invest less in the pacific theatre?
Would you change your lines of defence?
What about the R&D?



obvert -> RE: Wild Sheep Chase (3/12/2014 6:39:58 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

Hi Erik,

I'm pretty curious to hear from you about what you, now with the insight of this brilliant game, would do to stop the allied advance in late-stages of the game as Japan.
I mean, how would you change your overall strategy based on what you know now?
I'm pretty sure you won't play another game without SLs, right?[:D]

Would you invest more in forts?
Would you invest less in the pacific theatre?
Would you change your lines of defence?
What about the R&D?


[:)]

These are exactly the things I'd like to get to, but not just for the endgame. I think many of the faults in my game happened much earlier, and extended into the mid-to-late game.

Strategically, as a simple version for now, I would play for the economy first. Get oil fast. Protect it. Get it back home, make sure I keep it as long as possible. Conserve it and what it can produce. Only make what is necessary, what will really change outcomes, and try to ensure my opponent does not know what I'm short changing!

Overall early I smashed and grabbed a bit too much. Tactics were not chosen for a defined reason, and too many deep advances led to resource drains (I think, at least. I still have to look at numbers later).

SL: YES!!! Big stacks determined strategic choices, and I don't like that. I'd rather play with lots of maneuver, deception, intrigue and smaller concentrations over more space on the map. Also, some spots just are not defendable without stacking limits, like anything on a coastal hex! [:D]

Forts: Less on the extended Empire front lines, more at critical rear positions in strategic bombing range of the HI. Kind of a modified 'Hive.'

Pacific: Much less emphasis on extend positions in the central pacific. Still some basic defenses, but no level six forts, no maxed airfields, nothing larger than a naval guard in garrison. Certain bases with CD guns static and of course Truk, Marcus and Wake would be well defended. Maybe Kusaie and Ponape as well, depending on the game. Nothing like this game though where the lower Solomons, the Gilberts and the Marshalls were all built up.

Defensive lines: On the continent the Burma adventure worked wuite well, but probably used a lot of supply as well. I'd build fewer high level forts/airfields and rely on secondary defensive lines in good territory, sort of where I ended up when I thought it was all collapsing in late 43 and basically stayed for half a year. The retreat was well planned, and working, but hubris reared it's ugly head after Jocke's very nice landing at Tavoy, and instead of the easy route, losing face a bit, I contested the dangerous route and lost 250k troops!! [:-][X(]

Elsewhere I think the inner defenses, as mentioned, would be stronger. The PI, Formosa, ALL of the Ryukus and anything in 4E/sweep range of the HI.

R n D: I'll get more to this with data as well, but quickly, this was an experiment for me in the Japanese side. I wanted to try everything, and got to try most of the airframes. I'd not set it up this way again, but I'd still use more than I would have knowing now the qualities of different planes.

So some streamlining, but really more of a realistic view of the situation based on economic priorities. So less push to get mid-war planes sooner, more for late war planes, and more sensible increases in airframe production numbers.

Less R n D on A6M and Tojo, any 2E bombers, any other plane types.

More R n D on the Grace, the Sam, the Frank 'r' and the Ki-100 (skipping all Ki-61 versions), and plan NF development better.

Late: Surviving in the late game seems about restricting access to locations that change the strategic game. What bases are in B-29 range? Fight for those, suppress them if you lose them, hit back. What bases are in fighter range? Make sure they are bastions.

Plan early to reduce fuel in transport bunkers, choosing 'do not refuel' and loading other ships from full ones. Get ALL fuel back to the HI, including that in small ports. Have a larger Vehicles pool, make sure there is supply to fill out late arriving units, as there are a LOT of them. Plan for training groups to fly some 1E LB for IJAAF and for IJNAF, not bi-planes.

I'll get more into this once I can get to the timeline and economy.



obvert -> RE: Wild Sheep Chase (3/12/2014 7:05:22 PM)

TANKER LOSSES
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Looking through these I feel pretty good about shepherding so many of the big, high capacity, quick TK into the late game. Below is a map showing the basic transport routes for fuel/oil and the tanker losses along those. Before 1/45 only 29 TK and three AO were lost to subs, while a few decent hits on ports in 44 took out a good portion as well. This didn't really impact the results much though as the last shipments to the HI from the DEI were in mid-1/45.

Sizes with date sunk are on the map, although the text is small, sorry. These correspond to the following guidelines.

Fuel capacity:

10 - very small ---<1k
6 - small -------- 1-4k
11 - medium ------5-8k (between 12-14 knots)
2 - BIG ---------- 9-12k (also the fast ones, 18-19 knots)
2 - VERY BIG -------15k (Tonan Whalers - 15 knots)
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
[image]local://upfiles/37283/9AE8A1635E1847D095CA8CAC9419BDE6.jpg[/image]



obvert -> RE: Wild Sheep Chase (3/12/2014 7:10:29 PM)

TANKER LOSSES - MAP
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Very few of the big TKs were lost on the win route along the Chinese coast.

A lot of smaller TK were used in the lower DEI.

Some of the 12 knot TK, 8k capacity, were used around Balikpapan, Tarakan, and on to Babeldaob.

I eventually changed this route to go back toward Singers, then along the safer Chinese coast with the big tankers.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
[image]local://upfiles/37283/009F4FCEC97743D9A3DF44CD66781097.jpg[/image]



mind_messing -> RE: Wild Sheep Chase (3/13/2014 12:19:36 AM)

Sad to see it finish, but congrats!

Now to mine this AAR for information. Here's hoping my IJ Empire looks half-as-healthy as this one by 1945!



Lokasenna -> RE: Wild Sheep Chase (3/13/2014 1:52:46 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Sad to see it finish, but congrats!

Now to mine this AAR for information. Here's hoping my IJ Empire looks half-as-healthy as this one by 1945!


It won't if I have anything to say about it!



obvert -> RE: Wild Sheep Chase (3/13/2014 8:18:36 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Sad to see it finish, but congrats!

Now to mine this AAR for information. Here's hoping my IJ Empire looks half-as-healthy as this one by 1945!


When we get to that later stuff, the real meat of it, I'm sure you'll see even more areas you can improve on. This was all a test for me, a big experiment that took several years to run. That's why I'm now really interested in digging into it to see how it actually went along the way with a more objective perspective.



obvert -> RE: Wild Sheep Chase (3/13/2014 12:57:42 PM)

ALLIED CV LOSSES
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

After Jocke posted his list I was curious to see FOW at work. I certainly found it, but it does look like over time, it will I've the correct results, even with the right names of ships.

I think it looks like 12 CVs sunk and 34 confirmed CVE sunk, plus 3 CVL. Added quickly, and my eyes are starting to blur from looking at all of these screenshots. [:D]
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
[image]local://upfiles/37283/555B59C50D524CE885DE014EF81D96BF.jpg[/image]



obvert -> RE: Wild Sheep Chase (3/13/2014 3:03:48 PM)

AUXILIARY LOSSES and REMAINING
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I included both in this list mainly for the players on the Japanese side thinking about how many ships to convert for these various types. I didn't really need all that I have, and didn't use them much after early 44 anyway. By then the fleet was near our own bg bases, used sporadically and if some were damaged they'd head right for a big yard, not a repair ship.

The only auxiliary ship type I could always have used more of were the AVs. Even a few more moving around the lower DEI, the PI and through the middle of the South China Sea could have been useful.

Although there is no real cost for conversions, I probably didn't need to make as many AV, AKE, AD and AG especially. Where this hurt is if I used an 18 knot AK and converted it to something that just sat in port waiting to be bombed by 4Es, unneeded.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
[image]local://upfiles/37283/CAB7BA0559F946A18CD300D2E7B7ABA1.jpg[/image]



MrBlizzard -> RE: Wild Sheep Chase (3/13/2014 5:32:50 PM)

Congrats for reaching the port, commander [8D]
It was a very long travel, you descovered new lands never touched before and you manage,to complete the travel , a very difficult task!
I thank you for giving me all this nice enterteinment, sharing valuable opinions and been always kind and friendly with your readers
This AAR is now a milestone for all players.
Thank you also for this wonderful summary.

Ciao
Blizz



mind_messing -> RE: Wild Sheep Chase (3/13/2014 8:38:59 PM)

quote:

The only auxiliary ship type I could always have used more of were the AVs. Even a few more moving around the lower DEI, the PI and through the middle of the South China Sea could have been useful.


I've developed a love for the AV's, and combined with this, I'm going to start converting some more. I'll need to look and see what class is best, and what hulls I can spare.



obvert -> RE: Wild Sheep Chase (3/13/2014 9:50:41 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

quote:

The only auxiliary ship type I could always have used more of were the AVs. Even a few more moving around the lower DEI, the PI and through the middle of the South China Sea could have been useful.


I've developed a love for the AV's, and combined with this, I'm going to start converting some more. I'll need to look and see what class is best, and what hulls I can spare.


The 18 knot Kyushu convert to a 9 plane AV and can move with all of your best TK/AO. The 14 knot Husimi can get 4 planes, and those are still useful.



obvert -> RE: Wild Sheep Chase (3/14/2014 9:17:10 AM)

Allied BB/CA/CL LOSSES
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

This report was a bit more confusing when I matched up Jocke's and mine. l looked into the AAR and I found confirmed sinkings for the ships on my version from the distant dates in 42/43. The more recent ones are FOW. So this makes it seem that the game reports will eventually show exact results, after a year or so, but in the short term they are highly subject to FOW.

October 14, 1942 report. Mauritius and Raleigh definitely sunk in a raid on Suva.
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=3114172

I remember Boise going down, as that was after our second CV clash, and it ran up to hit the KB in a seemingly never ending barrage, was hit by airstrikes the next day, and still needed a BB hit to take her down on the day following! [:D]

Anyway, interesting to see how the FOW works.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

[image]local://upfiles/37283/A98818D4F22E41939F0D24EA57D91723.jpg[/image]



crsutton -> RE: Wild Sheep Chase (3/14/2014 2:28:09 PM)

A good game, I think that vs equal opponents for a Japanese player to go to mid 45 is about the best you can expect. If the Allied player is patient and not rash, there is no way he can lose with the resources he gets. Good job. I don't thing the VP scores are right so I think this would be a draw in my book. Pretty much if the Allies are not on the HI in strength before the end of 45 then it is a decisive Japanese victory.



Lowpe -> RE: Wild Sheep Chase (3/14/2014 3:12:33 PM)

Can you share some of your night fighter thoughts?



obvert -> RE: Wild Sheep Chase (3/14/2014 4:46:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

A good game, I think that vs equal opponents for a Japanese player to go to mid 45 is about the best you can expect. If the Allied player is patient and not rash, there is no way he can lose with the resources he gets. Good job. I don't thing the VP scores are right so I think this would be a draw in my book. Pretty much if the Allies are not on the HI in strength before the end of 45 then it is a decisive Japanese victory.


Thanks! It's been a fun, hard fought several years!

Because we started with an idea that we could play happily without PPs and that system of deciding victory, I think the process of the game was a bit different than many. From early on when Jocke really didn't see a way through having all of China lost, and the compromises we worked out to keep the game moving forward, I definitely did not consider PPs, victory conditions or winning/losing in my framework of strategic or tactical choices. I took risks, didn't take others, and generally tried things based on interest rather than ultimate outcomes.

Jocke also made choices that seemingly were not about PP concerns, but getting to strategic goals in game. I know now that at the end he was shooting for 2:1 by VJ day, and that is fine as a goal. He might have gotten there or very close if we'd kept going. My supply was dwindling fast and even replenishing air groups was going to be a problem in a few more weeks, let alone any kind of strikes.

After all of the things we had to work out, the occasional flare-ups of discord and resolution (and we really did work through a lot and come to good decisions) the real victory is getting to the summer of 45, still enjoying the game and fighting hard from each side.

Playing again I would definitely play for PPs. It just puts a different pressure, a positive one, on all decisions. It's just not something that is easy to figure out until you see how it works throughout a game. When I was at over 3:1 in 6/42 there is a small chance I could have even pushed in China and gotten Chungking, which might have swung the points to 4:1, but that was not the goal then as I wanted to see the whole game. I wasn't interested in AV, and Jocke and I worked to make the game playable for the both of us. Even in another go around I'd have to really think hard if I was at over 3:1 in 42 with a chance for AV, because if you don't get it you might screw yourself for the rest of the game, but at least it's something the Allies have to defend, which changes what they do as well.



Mike McCreery -> RE: Wild Sheep Chase (3/14/2014 5:08:16 PM)

PP is kind of deceptive. It is easy for the Japanese to achieve 2-1 and even 3-1. There are not enough points on the map in the regular expansion zone to get to 4-1.

So it requires special circumstances to be able to achieve.

Also, against an aggressive allied player the Japanese should not be able to hold all the territory they take in 1942.

You have to win big points in naval, LCU or airpower to get over the hump.




obvert -> RE: Wild Sheep Chase (3/14/2014 5:09:00 PM)

NIGHT FIGHTERS
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Before I needed them I didn't think too much about night fighters, or at least not enough. [;)] I planned for a few, but hadn't bothered to look through groups and see which ones they would fly, which could convert to NF from other types, and I just didn't have a plan.

That all changed quickly once the B-29 came around. I opened up strategic bombing at night to Jocke in early 44 after our previous HR restricted it. We still kept the HR against port and airfield bombing. Or maybe added it in again later after noticing the extreme outcomes of those raids, I think.

The first NF I tried was the J1N1-S Irving, which disrupted the beasts but didn't do much else but die in large numbers. Soon after I began looking around and realized a bunch of recon groups could upgrade to the Dinah III KAI NF, which I'd not planned for. The IJAAF groups seemed sparse until I really dug around, and then I found quite a few. Some from recon planes, some that could upgrade from FB, some arriving as another type then converting. Every imaginable odd upgrade path. Except I didn't have a good NF for those groups. Some would only upgrade to a certain plane, like the FB groups that can upgrade only to the Ki-46 Id Nick NF. I finally made some of those, which are marginal anyway, but it's not necessarily about quality, it's about numbers.

The trouble is getting coverage, especially early when you have few groups and lots of big valuable targets in the DEI, China and Thailand, all reachable from Rangoon, plus others reachable from Darwin. So I put most groups into Palembang and then flew a few others around trying to get lucky.

Once the J1N1-Sa version with radar arrived the results got better. I had more planes, better target acquisition and fewer bases to defend.

After the Marianas second tier invasions, the incursions of the Allied fleet into areas very close to the South China Sea and the continual targeting and destruction of any HI/LI and oil the DEI, I began to plan for Home Island Defense. I got a bunch of NF back, prepared for the last oil/fuel shipments to go through the gauntlet, and got all of the AA I could into Osaka and Tokyo.

The strikes from the Marianas took out about half of Tokyo and Osakas industry within 3 months in spite of the NF there. They stopped some raids when weather helped, but when they hit they hit hard. Now, if I'd had another 120-50 NF, which I would have if I'd planned my upgrades and production better, the results may have been less extreme.

As Jocke got other 4Es in range from Okinawa the NF did well to thwart most B-24 and other strikes, but with the addition of the B-29B with the double bomb load the slope got steeper and more slippery. The NF could shoot down and disrupt a bunch but if only a few planes hit it was a LOT of hits.

Eventually the Allies will simply have enough and better equipment, and if used well (as Jocke proved) they will squeeze the Japanese economy dry.

Here is the list of NF groups in the end. One or two actually withdraw in May, which sucks, as well.

The J1S1-Sa is probably the best all around until the Randy Ic comes online. I didn't get to use the Randy though. Too late arriving.
The Frances was surprisingly effective and durable, with very few lost.
The A6M NF is very useful with it's low service rating and the ability to make a lot cheaply.
The Dinah II KAI in spite of it's good speed is very fragile and it was hard to keep groups full I lost so many.
The Nick Id is not so good, about like the early J1N1-S.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

[image]local://upfiles/37283/6259BEC046124D829EBBCAC4DAD6F6B8.jpg[/image]



obvert -> RE: Wild Sheep Chase (3/14/2014 5:25:36 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Wargmr

PP is kind of deceptive. It is easy for the Japanese to achieve 2-1 and even 3-1. There are not enough points on the map in the regular expansion zone to get to 4-1.

So it requires special circumstances to be able to achieve.

Also, against an aggressive allied player the Japanese should not be able to hold all the territory they take in 1942.

You have to win big points in naval, LCU or airpower to get over the hump.


Here is a screen from 6-42. Chungking was worth 1600 VP for IJ and -800 for Allies at this stage. Perth was worth I believe another 600 for the IJ. Add in lost armies from China and that is well over 4:1. 22242 + 2200 = 24442. 6731 - 800 = 5931.

4.12:1

Now, I would have had to really push in both places, assigning a lot of other troops that were in Burma, So Pac and other areas to OZ and buying out more from Manchuria for China. There would have been opportunities for the Allies to come back, take some valuable stuff like Noumea back, and CV clashes would have to go very well not to disrupt the balance sheet to keep a 4:1 if it was achievable.

Plus, I didn't want that kind of a game. [:)]

[image]local://upfiles/37283/F5057187268D422C9CAF08F25F9E9045.jpg[/image]



Page: <<   < prev  113 114 115 [116] 117   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.078125