Heavily fortified Japanese bases with CD guns

Heavily fortified Japanese bases with CD guns (Full Version)

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

Message

Itdepends -> Heavily fortified Japanese bases with CD guns (12/27/2012 12:42:21 PM)
So guys- I'm finally on the offensive in my PBEM and I'd like some advice on which Japanese bases have significant CD defence levels- and possible counters. In particular I'm looking for indications on which bases would require BB's instead of CA's as escorts for amphibious TF's to prevent catastrophic losses during landing- aka Singapore or Bataan for the allies. I'm also keen to know if there are any bases that even with BB's in the amphib TF would result in potential significant damage. Any other suggestions for how to tackle these bases (assuming I don't just bypass the bases and bomb them back into the stone age). I've reviewed some of the Japanese OOB but I'm having trouble determining what level is a significant threat to CA or BB class ships. Cheers, Daniel

wfaherty -> RE: Heavily fortified Japanese bases with CD guns (12/27/2012 8:27:05 PM)
Bypassing the bases is the most economical use of force. Isolate them by land and sea then bomb them enough to reduce the airfield to scrap,after 3-4 months of starvation then you can try a land attack supported by air and naval bombardment. You do not need either base, you by now have the mobile base units,tenders and the big 55k AFD's (late 1943)so you can setup repair,rearm,refuel bases anywhere with a decent size airfield large enough to hold several fighter squadrons to protect it.

Bobthehatchit -> RE: Heavily fortified Japanese bases with CD guns (12/27/2012 9:20:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Itdepends So guys- I'm finally on the offensive in my PBEM and I'd like some advice on which Japanese bases have significant CD defence levels- and possible counters. In particular I'm looking for indications on which bases would require BB's instead of CA's as escorts for amphibious TF's to prevent catastrophic losses during landing- aka Singapore or Bataan for the allies. I'm also keen to know if there are any bases that even with BB's in the amphib TF would result in potential significant damage. Any other suggestions for how to tackle these bases (assuming I don't just bypass the bases and bomb them back into the stone age). I've reviewed some of the Japanese OOB but I'm having trouble determining what level is a significant threat to CA or BB class ships. Cheers, Daniel Bipass in the best bet, but if you absolutely have to take a base bomb the crap out of it, Bombard the hell out of it, provided you haven't lost to may 20 knot BB's along the way and be sure to fully prep you assult troops for the target and take as many Combat engineers unit and as much armour as you can and HQ's along as well. Forward plan your targets as much as possible so you can start to interdict suppies and re-enforments the hit the air fields and ports to take out AA and CD and kill engineers. Putting a few old BB CA and CL in amphib TS is a must they will supress and soak up a lot of fire meaning your APA AKA and LST LSD LCI ect will take less of a battering and take loads of supplies as well, CVE TF as usefull to protect you invasion fleets and allow you CV's to react to threats.

Bullwinkle58 -> RE: Heavily fortified Japanese bases with CD guns (12/27/2012 9:57:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Itdepends So guys- I'm finally on the offensive in my PBEM and I'd like some advice on which Japanese bases have significant CD defence levels- and possible counters. In particular I'm looking for indications on which bases would require BB's instead of CA's as escorts for amphibious TF's to prevent catastrophic losses during landing- aka Singapore or Bataan for the allies. I'm also keen to know if there are any bases that even with BB's in the amphib TF would result in potential significant damage. Any other suggestions for how to tackle these bases (assuming I don't just bypass the bases and bomb them back into the stone age). I've reviewed some of the Japanese OOB but I'm having trouble determining what level is a significant threat to CA or BB class ships. Cheers, Daniel Anything with "Fortress" in the name is worth a second look. Some bases you wouldn't think would be anything have cleaned my clock in the past. Wotje comes to mind.

BBfanboy -> RE: Heavily fortified Japanese bases with CD guns (12/29/2012 6:23:06 AM)
Just a note on naval bombardment distances: if you are grinding down the defences and not landing, do NOT leave the bombardment distance set to 0. I did that when I sent four of the old US BBs to bombard Saipan Naval Fortress. It was a disaster, even though the guns were too small to get armor penetrating hits, they did a ton of system and fire damage that put all 4 BBs in peril of sinking. I tried again later using four more BBs and set the stand-off distance to 10. At night, range 10, little moon and no Japanese radar meant my BBs did their stuff with very few hits and practically no damage. Eventually the fortress was worn down enough by weeks of bombing/bombardment that the landings could go on without huge casualties. BBs and CAs were embedded with the amphib groups too, and suppressed the few remaining guns.

Itdepends -> RE: Heavily fortified Japanese bases with CD guns (12/29/2012 6:52:59 AM)
Thanks guys- when I get a chance I'll take Bullwinkles advice and check the starting OOB for units with Fortress or larger calibre guns in them

Itdepends -> RE: Heavily fortified Japanese bases with CD guns (12/29/2012 12:37:52 PM)
So I had a look through the CD list tonight and here's what I got- note that I ignored the fortresses around mainland Japan, it'll be a while before I have to worry about those :P Wotje 20 x 12 and 15cm Truk 58 x 12 to 20cm guns Saipan 25 x 12 to 20cm guns Ponape 29 x 8 to 14cm guns Pescadores 14 x 7.5 to 20cm guns Peleliu 8 x 8 to 12cm guns Kwajalein 20 x 8 to 12cm guns Nago 6 x 15 to 25cm guns Mili 23 x 8 to 15cm guns Maloelap 20 x 12 to 15cm guns Paramashiro Jima 10 x 8 to 24cm guns Jaluit 6 x 12.7cm guns Chichi Jima 8 x 12 to 28cm guns Babeldaob 16 x 12.7cm guns Wake after Feb 42 24 x 12 to 20cm guns 3rd IJN Special coastal gun batallion (mobile) 12 x 12 to 20cm guns So nothing battleship sized- but I recall when I took Wake back the CD fort was a nasty surprise and based on the above I'd be very cautious about going after Wotje, Truk, Saipan, Ponape, Mili, Maloelap or Kwajalein without significant heavy support and/or sofetning of the bases beforehand.

Jorge_Stanbury -> RE: Heavily fortified Japanese bases with CD guns (12/29/2012 4:57:08 PM)
Remember to add the possibility of minefields to the equation; a heavily mined port will inflict significant damage to your TF

wfaherty -> RE: Heavily fortified Japanese bases with CD guns (12/29/2012 4:57:36 PM)
Wake island(which had 20cm cd guns range 34000 yds) remained in Japanese hands until the surrender in 1945 as it was not a needed base and expending assets to invade it was not considered. Only 2 bases on your list where considered as necessary,Saipan for a B29 base within range of the HI,and Peleiu was because McArthur wanted the airbase there taken to prevent the Japanese from bombing his Invasion forces in the PI. both of these bases were bombarded by air and sea (BB's at 34-36000 yds outside the range of 20cm cd guns)for several days in 1944 before a invasions were attempted(however the Japaneses had learned to bunker down before a invasion). Attacking any base with CD's other than those needed for a HV bomber base or to protect a invasion flank would be a waste of assets IMHO.

John Lansford -> RE: Heavily fortified Japanese bases with CD guns (12/29/2012 5:40:05 PM)
The bases in the Central Pacific with CD units are especially nasty. Since they are almost all atolls you are limited in invasion force size, and the forced shock attack on the first landing turn means if your amphibious TF takes a lot of damage from CD guns, they'll be so disrupted their success is almost certainly nil. Unfortunately, you need at least one or two of those Marshall Island bases, so do a lot of prep fire and bombing attacks at your target before starting the landing. I also go after Tarawa and Makin first off since both islands are larger than atolls and can support larger forces (and they don't have CD units).

Itdepends -> RE: Heavily fortified Japanese bases with CD guns (12/30/2012 2:54:05 AM)
Cheers. I've just taken Tarawa and have everything else in the Marshalls south other than Ocean island (where the LYB's are now providing targets for bombing range practice). I've also got Nauru and took an undefended Kusai, Taongi and Wake which helps to close an aerial blockade around the Marshalls. Glad I checked for the CD guns though- I didn't expect to see CD units on some of those Marshall islands. Mines are always a consideration for invasion/bombardment TF's for me. As for mines- I nearly always included DMS in my pre invasion bombardment forces.

John Lansford -> RE: Heavily fortified Japanese bases with CD guns (12/30/2012 11:40:03 PM)
Watch out; capturing Tarawa will sometimes trigger a counter-invasion attempt if the AI has forces available to try it. I've taken Tarawa and Apanama and am prepping for Makin when I spotted a TF headed for Tarawa. They landed a regiment, or at least tried to; I've got a reinforced division on Tarawa and their 155mm DP guns chewed the landing force up really badly (1300 casualties on the initial landing phase). What made it to the beach was barely a cohesive force after that.

Itdepends -> RE: Heavily fortified Japanese bases with CD guns (12/31/2012 10:17:08 AM)
I'm playing PBEM so I don't have to worry about the AI- and I'd love him to try a counter invasion [8D]

crsutton -> RE: Heavily fortified Japanese bases with CD guns (12/31/2012 5:28:03 PM)
Bypassing well armed bases is probably the best course. Sooner or later you are going to have to invade one but you had better prepare. Some things I think are useful. Best to bomb the hell out of them before. Low or no supply will limit enemy fire. Work to isolate the base long before the invasion. Old BBs go directly into your invasion TFs-not bombardment TFs. They will soak up most of the shore fire and sometimes take a lot of sys damage but that is what they are for. I find that the counter battery that they provide is much more effective than bombardment. Fully prepped units and have a fully prepped invasion force HQ along in an AGC (?). Don't do it until you have the proper landing assault ships. Have separate LST TFs that carry supply only. Have them unload supply at the same time your invasion troops go in. Take more strength than you think you will need. Hold some in reserve off shore. Use lots of tank units. You probably will lose some ships. Eh, this is war.

Crackaces -> RE: Heavily fortified Japanese bases with CD guns (12/31/2012 8:39:33 PM)
quote: You probably will lose some ships. Eh, this is war. No probably about it .. [;)] One thing that has changed in attacking fortress units is land based flak. With that recent change fortresses like Truk with 88mm L75 flak guns extract a toll on 4E attacks and make each attack less accurate. It is damn hard to hurt a fort unit these days .. I just attacked Babeldaob in my PBEM game and 2 APA's were struck badly despite 5 21 knt BB's and 3 CA's in the TF .. 2 others collide and 1 runs aground .. the problem? Damage slows disembarking exposing the TF to more shore battery fire until the units on the atoll can be neutralized. Also I am noting that shore battery fire seems to increase the P(x) of disruption with my attacks on fortress defended atolls expereining 100% disruption on landing despite 100% prep. [In fact, I beleive that prep correlates with how many die in the surf not disruption on landing per se]. In all I have lost the use of 8 APA's until they can be repeared. 6 LST's were sunk outright on the landing .. These attacks were against targets with zero supply that has been pounded by fast BB's 7 times [out of range of 4E's].. -- I cannot imagine the consequinces attacking a fully supplied well defended target. The bombardment of landing forces continues until the forces could be neutralized and that gets very expensive on the forces following the iintial invasion

Bullwinkle58 -> RE: Heavily fortified Japanese bases with CD guns (12/31/2012 9:04:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Crackaces These attacks were against targets with zero supply that has been pounded by fast BB's 7 times [out of range of 4E's].. -- I cannot imagine the consequinces attacking a fully supplied well defended target. In one AI game many patches ago I took Saipan at the cost of about 70 ships.

BBfanboy -> RE: Heavily fortified Japanese bases with CD guns (1/3/2013 7:44:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58 quote: ORIGINAL: Crackaces These attacks were against targets with zero supply that has been pounded by fast BB's 7 times [out of range of 4E's].. -- I cannot imagine the consequinces attacking a fully supplied well defended target. In one AI game many patches ago I took Saipan at the cost of about 70 ships. And Nimitz didn't tie you to an anchor and wish you 'Bon Voyage' ??!! [X(] He musta got lucky the night before ....

Bullwinkle58 -> RE: Heavily fortified Japanese bases with CD guns (1/3/2013 1:25:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BBfanboy quote: ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58 quote: ORIGINAL: Crackaces These attacks were against targets with zero supply that has been pounded by fast BB's 7 times [out of range of 4E's].. -- I cannot imagine the consequinces attacking a fully supplied well defended target. In one AI game many patches ago I took Saipan at the cost of about 70 ships. And Nimitz didn't tie you to an anchor and wish you 'Bon Voyage' ??!! [X(] He musta got lucky the night before .... Nah. I went on and won the war. [;)]

crsutton -> RE: Heavily fortified Japanese bases with CD guns (1/3/2013 6:35:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Crackaces quote: You probably will lose some ships. Eh, this is war. No probably about it .. [;)] One thing that has changed in attacking fortress units is land based flak. With that recent change fortresses like Truk with 88mm L75 flak guns extract a toll on 4E attacks and make each attack less accurate. It is damn hard to hurt a fort unit these days .. I just attacked Babeldaob in my PBEM game and 2 APA's were struck badly despite 5 21 knt BB's and 3 CA's in the TF .. 2 others collide and 1 runs aground .. the problem? Damage slows disembarking exposing the TF to more shore battery fire until the units on the atoll can be neutralized. Also I am noting that shore battery fire seems to increase the P(x) of disruption with my attacks on fortress defended atolls expereining 100% disruption on landing despite 100% prep. [In fact, I beleive that prep correlates with how many die in the surf not disruption on landing per se]. In all I have lost the use of 8 APA's until they can be repeared. 6 LST's were sunk outright on the landing .. These attacks were against targets with zero supply that has been pounded by fast BB's 7 times [out of range of 4E's].. -- I cannot imagine the consequinces attacking a fully supplied well defended target. The bombardment of landing forces continues until the forces could be neutralized and that gets very expensive on the forces following the iintial invasion Yeah I just took Babeldoab in my game with Viberpol. He had is well fortified and it proved to be a tough nut to crack. I would say it cost me about 30 ships out of the invasion force. (Not to mention the carriers and surface ships we traded off over two months) Mostly small ships but a few valuable APAs and AKAs. I will say one thing. Those rocket firing LCIs are wonderful.

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.9375