RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) (Full Version)

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



Message

Canoerebel -> RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) (7/13/2012 5:13:17 AM)

I am open to the possibility that Steve might have flip-flopped his carriers, moving Mini-KB from the DEI to NoPac and the KB from NoPac to somewhere else, but my instinct (based on the feel for a game a player develops after seeing his opponent work and juding by the countless little details you pick up on) tells me the KB is in NoPac. I think that's the KB sitting off the West Coast. I also think it's a bit of a diversion time to get his LBA raids underway. Whether that second hunch is right shall be answered tomorrow.



castor troy -> RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) (7/13/2012 7:59:57 AM)

no chance to move inland from Prince Rupert, just too bad terrain for the enemy and only 2 of your divs railed up there would stop the whole IJA. While I don't think this whole IJ operation makes any sense at all, PH would not be smart if he lands anywhere where you could move in via rail or road. If he takes bases you can only amphib assault he is safe but those you can reach by marching in should be a no go.



JeffroK -> RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) (7/13/2012 8:04:29 AM)

I think he started it as being a fun move but has discovered it as a morass.

Anchorage holding out wouldnt help any plans he has.



Alfred -> RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) (7/13/2012 12:15:03 PM)

There is nothing wrong with Japan's strategy in this game. In a couple of areas, tactically Japan has not finessed perfectly but that doesn't invalidate the strategy.

I've said before that Canoerebel's opponent believes he belongs to the Nemo school. Do any of you really believe that if Nemo were the opponent, that Japan's moves to date would be only to commence a strategic air bombing campaign or a march inland from Port Rupert? Nemo's strategy with these operational moves in NorPac/West Coast (let alone the moves elsewhere) would be the implementation of a much more layered strategic plan.

To paraphrase the Barb, there is more in heaven and earth than is dreamt of in your philosophy. Whether PH is the equal of Nemo, that indeed is the question.

Alfred



JeffroK -> RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) (7/13/2012 1:27:57 PM)

He was a bard.



Canoerebel -> RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) (7/13/2012 1:50:40 PM)

I forgot to mention that one of the "small, nuanced clues I picked up that this is the KB - the kind of clues only a player carefully dialed in to the ebb and flow of the game and adept at reading his oppoent's subtleties," is the fact that the TF includes BB Kirishima and CA Suzuya.

[sm=00000030.gif]



Cap Mandrake -> RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) (7/13/2012 2:38:27 PM)

quote:

There is nothing wrong with Japan's strategy in this game. In a couple of areas, tactically Japan has not finessed perfectly but that doesn't invalidate the strategy.

I've said before that Canoerebel's opponent believes he belongs to the Nemo school. Do any of you really believe that if Nemo were the opponent, that Japan's moves to date would be only to commence a strategic air bombing campaign or a march inland from Port Rupert? Nemo's strategy with these operational moves in NorPac/West Coast (let alone the moves elsewhere) would be the implementation of a much more layered strategic plan.

To paraphrase the Barb, there is more in heaven and earth than is dreamt of in your philosophy. Whether PH is the equal of Nemo, that indeed is the question.

Alfred


Nemo, Shmemo. [:'(][:)]

To quote a lesser bard-like creature, Cervantes, and others before him, "the proof of the pudding is in the eating". If this is some massive jimmy-leg to induce CR to withold resources from Australia and the South Pacific or Hawaii, resulting in a catastrophe there, then I will be impressed, otherwise it will have been a very diverting strategic error, resulting in the capture of some frozen volcanoes and entertainment for the monkey cage visitors.

I agree with Ricin Troy.



Cap Mandrake -> RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) (7/13/2012 2:40:40 PM)

quote:

forgot to mention that one of the "small, nuanced clues I picked up that this is the KB - the kind of clues only a player carefully dialed in to the ebb and flow of the game and adept at reading his oppoent's subtleties," is the fact that the TF includes BB Kirishima and CA Suzuya.



Not to mention a mouseover showing 68 fighters and 125 bombers. [;)]



Canoerebel -> RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) (7/13/2012 2:58:44 PM)

Several weeks ago, I mentioned that I thought NoPac and West Coast were diversions. Although I cannot dismiss the possibilty of strategic bombing or even an invasion, I've long been convinced that Oz was the most likely strategic target. Proof in the pudding (as Cap says): 27th/B Div. just left LA for Melbourne, Sara and York have moved south to be in supporting range, and five or six USAAF fighter squadrons will be arriving at Adelaide after a very long journey from East Coast via Capetown. Oz also has 18th UK Div. and an Aussie division is aboard transports sitting south of Cocos, waiting for things to clear a bit so that I can decide between Oz and India.

Now, Hawaii is another matter entirely. I"m leaving her out to dry - I've even stripped most of her fighters to reinforce West Coast (all eight squadrons safely arrived some time ago). I don't think Hawaii is critical to Allied survival in a game. Oz and India have to get priority.



Canoerebel -> RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) (7/13/2012 3:09:48 PM)

2/12/42

North America: The KB slides closer to west coast, taking position just six hexes WSW of San Louis Obispo (and seven SW of San Fran). Mouseover shoes 66 fighters, 133 bombers, 36 aux. Steve has also flooded LA and SD with subs - I count at least six, one of which sank a small xAP fleeing to the south. One logical possibility is that Steve is isolating Hawaii in preparation for an invasion. There was no LBA attack against northwestern USA industrial targets and recon shows only a handful of IJ aircraft at Alliford Bay.

Pacific: CL Helena tangles with CAs Kako and Aoba at Shortlands. One USN DD may sink, but I think the Allies got the better of the confrontation, with both IJN cruisers probably needing a bit of time in the yeards. Ent and York are between Christmas Island and Tahiti. I'll probably hold them there until I get a better feel for what's happening around Hawaii and West Coast (and any potential threat to Oz).

Australia: A small IJN DD force sinks a few coastal vessels around Carnavon. A small USN DD force finds and sinks one of the enemy destroyers. CA Australia just missed out on intercepting.

Burma: Magwe falls, drat it.

China: Still not sure of the enemy's major vector of attack. It might be out of Ichang towards Chengte or it might be towards Ankang, the base in the forests south of Sian. The Chinese can react to either or any of a number of other possibilities.



Canoerebel -> RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) (7/13/2012 5:50:31 PM)

In light of current developments, some action was taken to complete Hawaii's preparation for a possible invasion:

1. Three small amphibious TFs will retrieve the three infantry garrisons from the nearby islands.

2. An air-transport TF departs carrying three bomber squadrons.

3. Most of the support, combat and merchant shipping departs.

4. Three minelayers to deposit their loads at Pearl and then make for Christmas Island.

5. A few of the West Coast subs will report to Pearl (those around Alliford Bay have been drilling dry wells, so I'll reduce their numbers. (If an invasion of Hawaii does take place, approximately 20 USN subs currently positioned off the West Coast and Alaska can respond quickly.

6. Two more damaged BBs depart, making ultimately for the Canal Zone (unless the threat to LA and SD recedes before they get off map).



Canoerebel -> RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) (7/16/2012 3:23:20 PM)

2/13/42 to 2/15/42

West Coast: The KB slides further west. The threat of a raid seems considerably diminished. To the south, a Japanese CS interdicts some of the shippnig fleeing out of LA and SD. 20 Jakes fly and manage two hits on an xAK, doing light damage. Ent and York will move to intervene, though it will take a couple of days and I won't chance it if I don't know the precise location of the KB.

NoPac: Anchorage again holds and inflicts significant damage on the Japanese besiegers.

Allied Disposition: Steve's done a good job of leaving alot of possibilities open so that I'm still not positive where the hammer is going to come down. Nevertheless, I'm pretty happy with the allocation of forces right now. I haven't put all my eggs into any of the three main baskets (India, Oz, or USA), but all three are pretty well protected. Of the three, Oz still worries me the most.



Bullwinkle58 -> RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) (7/16/2012 7:31:07 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Several weeks ago, I mentioned that I thought NoPac and West Coast were diversions.


Re-read this one today and for some reason this line jumped out at me. Speaking theoretically as someone who loves words as much as you do, CR, I wonder if there is assumed semantic content in this particular word which could, absent rigorous shaking of the downstream assumptions, lead a player to actions which might be sub-optimal? Does "diversion" imply degree, only direction, or both? Must it? Does the word implicitly imply secondary or tertiary status? Can a diversion be a primary entry on a strategic menu?

Words order thoughts, but they can also funnel them. Just sayin'.[:)]



Canoerebel -> RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) (7/16/2012 9:09:33 PM)

Have you been talking to Chickenboy about how to write things that will confuse me?



Bullwinkle58 -> RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) (7/16/2012 9:46:49 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Have you been talking to Chickenboy about how to write things that will confuse me?


No, I am not worthy to speak to CB. I play the AI.

Let me come at it this way: I say, "That guy sure is TALL." It's a word. It has a definition. But it carries baggage. To many, tall implies power. Or attractiveness. Or social status. Or athletic ability. If we say someone is tall, and the listener has no other facts, they probably have a positive impression more so than a negative. The word does more "work" than the word is in a sense. And our reaction to just this one known fact can be colored by it, but moreover also by the conotations we attach to the word.

Now consider "diversion." What are the boundaries? What is implied but not included in the raw definition? What connected assumptions follow from a declaration that something is a diversion and not a "They're a'comin' over the hill, boys!" situation?

Things can become what we label them in our own minds, and if we make plans based on what is in our minds we give the original label great power to influence future events.

You have a fact set in NoPac. You have said you think this may be a diversion. What does that mean, and what does it imply? Again, what are its boundaries?



Canoerebel -> RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) (7/16/2012 10:09:39 PM)

"Those are big words, missy. We're naught but humble pirates!" (From Captain Barbosa in Pirates of the Carribean)

Actually, you did a fine job of explaining your thought, Moose. I may be a fairly shallow thinker, though [my lack of ability in chess would support that], and sometimes arrive at conclusions about things that have registered only on my subconcious.

Anyhow, I think NoPac is a diversion (though also a platform to strat bomb the USA if possible to do so productively) while Steve unwraps his strategy elsewhere, which I think will target Oz and China (or, less likely, Hawaii or India).

If I've evaluated this correctly, I've done well to divert aircraft, infantry and armor to Oz. And India's defenses and current "remoteness" mean that Oz can come to India's support if Steve heads that way.

However, I'm still not positive NoPac is a diversion, so I am leary of stripping too much infantry from the USA. But I lack the political points to do so right now anyway I have two USA RCT at Capetown that first need to be bought out and transfered to either India or Oz.

As is the case with most Allied commanders facing an experienced opponent, I'm spread thin in February 1942 and subject to being overwhelmed at any single point. But I am spread in ways that seem optimal to me, what with my carriers dispersed and USA, Oz and India decently protected.



Bullwinkle58 -> RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) (7/16/2012 10:45:43 PM)

When does a diversion become part of the main effort? What are its boundaries?

My other favorite word in this class: "feint."[8|]



Cribtop -> RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) (7/16/2012 10:49:09 PM)

The Moose does have a way with big words, which I, as a lover of loquaciousness, fully support.

This is reminiscent of the conclusions chapter to Shattered Sword, in which the author argues (correctly, IMHO) that Yammamoto and Japan took actions based on their assessment of American intentions, rather than America's capabilities.

That said, I think you're in good shape in this match so far, Dan.



GreyJoy -> RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) (7/16/2012 10:51:52 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cribtop



That said, I think you're in good shape in this match so far, Dan.



+1.... the whole NOPAC adventure, being a feint, a diversion or the main effort, is a mistake imho



obvert -> RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) (7/16/2012 11:58:22 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

When does a diversion become part of the main effort? What are its boundaries?

My other favorite word in this class: "feint."[8|]


You could use a word like gambit and suddenly the implecation of intended loss for future gain becomes quite clear. I think that is what Dan might be getting at with his use of diversion.

In a gambit, you make moves that seem on the surface to be silly, or mistaken, to lure your opponent into tactical and strategic positions that give you at least adequate payback for your loss in material.

PH is 'losing' both material, (units, ships and ground losses in places like Anchorage) and time. Will it be worth it? That will be determined by how well he has veiled his next moves and how well Dan has prepared his position for them.



Canoerebel -> RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) (7/17/2012 3:22:07 PM)

2/16/42

West Coast: The CS raider or raiders is still moving south, trying in vain to pick off Allied TFs fleeing out of San Diego and LA. The chase has moved very far south now, and Sara and York could possibly intercept tomorrow if the raiders continue their present course. I've just lost track of the KB, though, so there's some uncertainty. KB was far to the north, but with two days steaming at top speed the carriers might be able to reach the vicinity of mine. Of course, at flank speed the KB would be way out in the middle of nowhere without fuel, so this is unlikely. I"m positioning a couple of DDs to act as pickets while my carriers move closer to the scene. I won't move far enough to strike tomorrow, but rather to fully evaluate the opportunity and risks when the pickets are in place and the relative positions of the IJN raiders and my carriers closer and thus more certain Other than that, West Coast continues quiet. Coal Harbor AV up to 210 with forts three.

DEI: No move on Singers yet. No move on Koepang yet. No move on Sabang yet. I'm sending aviation support to Cocos Island. Lex and Ent remain on station just to the south.

What If: So, what if the NoPac moves are a "main show" for Japan? If the KB remains in NoPac, the Allies will more aggressively defend forward in the Indian Ocean. I'd moving forward more troops to Cocos Island, Port Blair, and probably Sabang and the western end of Sumatra. I'd also start moving forward in SoPac (to garrison more strongly Noumea and Fiji and to station combat TFs further north, for instance), but that region is relatively unimportant, so others would have a higher priority. Wherever the KB isn't the Allies will fight on the margins and look for chances to push the envelope a bit.



Canoerebel -> RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) (7/17/2012 5:55:08 PM)

I need to double-check the last known position of the KB and thus where it might be tomorrow, but if that checks out "safely," here's my orders for tomorrow: York and Sara to steam eight hexes NE. If the Japanese TF continues S or SSE, we'll do battle.

Before committing carriers that have been hidden the entire game, I have to ask myself if it is worth it. Yes, a CS is worth it, in part because by revealing the location of my carriers I can then use Steve's knowledge to my own advantage (at the same time he is telling himself that he gained some valuable intel).

[image]local://upfiles/8143/BD11B4CB00CA4EE08883E8D5F6424E2B.jpg[/image]



Canoerebel -> RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) (7/17/2012 6:08:42 PM)

Someobdy out there might help me do some math if you know how far the KB can move in a day.

The position of Sara/York on the map above is 39 hexes SE of the known location of the KB yesterday. I want Sara/York to steam eight hexes NE, which would put them within 31 hexes of the KB's known location of what will then be two days earlier. If Steve is outthinking me and had the KB on a SE heading starting yesterday, how far could it steam over two days? Over three days?

Two important factors enter into this: (1) does the KB have fuel to allow a sprint to the SE? (2) is Steve outguessing me here? As Alfred notes, Steve is on good terms with Nemo, so would Nemo set me up this way? You bet. But it doesn't "feel" like that's what's going on here. There's a fair chance Steve thinks the Allied carriers are still covering Oz.



Miller -> RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) (7/17/2012 6:31:00 PM)

Depends on whether Kaga is part of the KB. If she is then 16 hexes max, otherwise 18 hexes max (both at full speed). At normal speed probably in the region of 11 or 12.



Encircled -> RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) (7/17/2012 6:32:03 PM)

I honestly have no idea.

If they can move that fast though, that far from home, surely they will take heavy systems damage, and thats a risk that probably isn't worth taking, unless of course he has spotted your carriers.

(Thats one post on here, and one post on Greyjoys, so thats ok, isn't it?)



Mundy -> RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) (7/17/2012 6:48:09 PM)

And probably engine damage on top of that.

I don't know how tolerant the readership is of ship damage. I like to keep them pristine. [:)]

Ed-



Andav -> RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) (7/17/2012 6:55:29 PM)

As a Japanese player, I do not think KB would be sprinting around at full speed in that part of the ocean unless there were very good reasons. Anything he has seen over the last couple of turns would not warrent a sprint. It is a long way from fuel and a safe harbor and running a full speed will empty the fuel bunkers very quickly and run up system damage. My guess is a normal move of around 11 hexes per turn.


Wa

(If I could figure out how to make that double post error work, I would do it to support your post count) [:D]

Edit: Fixed some spelling and such. [8|]



BBfanboy -> RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) (7/17/2012 7:54:51 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Andav

As a Japanese player, I do not think KB would be sprinting around at full speed in that part of the ocean unless there were very good reasons. Anything he has seen over the last couple of turns would not warrent a sprint. It is a long way from fuel and a safe harbor and running a full speed will empty the fuel bunkers very quickly and run up system damage. My guess is a normal move of around 11 hexes per turn.


Wa

(If I could figure out how to make that double post error work, I would do it to support your post count) [:D]

Edit: Fixed some spelling and such. [8|]

+1.
Since those CS's convert to CVLs later, killing them is worth the exposure and the risk.



Canoerebel -> RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) (7/17/2012 10:00:09 PM)

I've sent the turn. I moved the course of the two American CVs a bit further to the west, so that even if the Japanese ships remain on a SSW heading they should be within range.

There is a chance that Steve has set up an elaborate trap, using a Mini KB off the West Coast to lure me into a sense of safety, only to have a stout CV force ready to ambush my carriers. But I don't think so.



Cribtop -> RE: War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A) (7/17/2012 10:55:52 PM)

With Kaga present, KB can get 8 hexes normal move, 16 flank. Without, a little higher on both, I think 10/18.

One turn of sprint and you may be ok if your DDs don't refuel and kill your CV Ops points. Two turns of flank in a row? Unless you fully re-fueled the turn before the sprint began at sea from Oilers, you will be in deep kimche. I would rate the odds of a smart Japanese player going for a major strike at the end of a two day sprint as less than 10%. An inexperienced player might do it out of ignorance and be in a world of hurt. An experienced player would probably need two solid hours of planning to knowingly take the risk, and I feel almost all experienced players would judge the risk too great.

And that's not counting being way over in Indian Country like this situation.



Page: <<   < prev  20 21 [22] 23 24   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.609375