Newbie AAR: Guadalcanal

Newbie AAR: Guadalcanal (Full Version)

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

Message

postfux -> Newbie AAR: Guadalcanal (8/19/2015 9:57:41 AM)
First of all, hallo to everyone. I was a fan of Gary Grigsbys Pacific War and fought for years with myself to buy this game. The reduced price decided the fight and I am addicted from minute one. Next step is to master the learning curve without loosing the spirit. There are lots of useful hints out there and I started reading a lot of them but learning through personal experience is still king. My idea is to start this newbie AAR with a focus on the "little" things like TF organisation and airgroup settings hoping for some experienced players to point out mistakes and recommend improvements. It is quite easy to understand that a mistake was made on most occassions but rather difficult to find out WHAT has been done wrong in such a complex environment so this would be a tremendous help for me and perhaps other people new to the game. Please let me know when this is a bad idea or the wrong place, otherwise I will stumble along.

Alfred -> RE: Newbie AAR: Guadalcanal (8/19/2015 10:54:36 AM)
There are a few things to bear in mind in order to minimise personal angst. 1. This is a game, not a simulation. Precisely because it attempts to make the game adhere as closely as possible to WWII capabilities and realities, whilst still providing maximum flexibility within those constraints, some aspects of the game seem to be consistent with it being a simulator but the overall design, which relies so much on abstraction, is very much that of game. A huge amount of criticism of the game from new (and not so new) players is when they expect something to operate exactly like a simulation and it did not. 2. Do not bring your preconceptions as to how something should work. By far the two most common criticisms are the "simulator" issue and this one where new players (and again not so new) don't bother to find out how the game developers incorporated "something" into the code and instead insist that their preconception of how something worked elsewhere should equally apply here. 3. AE was a multi year project built on legacy code. People who played PacWar in the early 1990s can still see DNA vestiges, although the main legacy belongs to classical WITP (which in turn was built on Uncommon Valour). Before criticising the devs for how something was/was not implemented new players (and not so new players) need to walk in their shoes and realise there were very good reasons why things were done the way they were. The AE development team was very talented and much more knowledgeable than many of their critics. 4. There is no escaping reading the manual. Some people familiarise themselves fully with the manual before commencing play, others refer to it on every occasion they come across an "issue" in their play. Those who believe that men with big cojones don't need to read the manual, or for that matter do research on the forum first before posting, invariably fail to understand how the game plays, let alone become strong players. These macho players get inundated with "facts" but never grasp the context or principles involved, consequently they continue repeating the same kind of mistakes. For them it isn't a steep learning curve they face but a solid wall in front. 5. This forum is populated by many well meaning individuals who will quickly come to your assistance. Just bear in mind that good intentions does not equal sound or correct comments. Consider the provenance of the source. This is why prior personal research is so important as otherwise you will not be in a position to make a good assessment. 6. New players (and again not so new) often raise a problem but fail to provide enough details for any meaningful response to be made. Often the new player does not realise exactly what sort of information to be provided is necessary. The provision of relevant screenshots is usually the most efficacious method of providing the necessary information for a proper diagnosis to be made by experienced players. Alfred

postfux -> RE: Newbie AAR: Guadalcanal (8/19/2015 11:32:13 AM)
Alfred, I did read the whole manual before starting the game the first time and have reread it perhaps three times over till then. In addition I spend more time on this forum any working man should. [:)] I am well aware that an understanding for the mechanics is necessary to play the game. My intention is exactly to learn how to use the engine to achieve the things I want done. Many of these things are not in the manual. For example do I set reaction range to 0 or 1 for a surface fleet to guard a convoy following with distance 0 and to ignore targets of opportunity? I guess 0, but I dont know, i could switch off reaction entirely. Do minesweeper do their job in an invasion task force or do they at least reduce the chance of running into a mine? etc. I am well aware personal research is necessary but searching the forum is even more unreliable than getting direct Response for exactly the reasons you pointed out. Especially as a beginner I have to rely heavily upon other opinions. Thats why I hope to get some positve reaction to my little project.

jmalter -> RE: Newbie AAR: Guadalcanal (8/19/2015 11:53:19 AM)
hi postfux & welcome! IMO you're wise to start out w/ a short scenario, that'll help you focus. Guadalcanal - early-war 'phib ops, a true 'Operation Shoestring' Coral Sea - carrier ops Thousand-Mile War - naval surface ops Burma - land-combat ops. These short scenarios each provide an experience-gain factor, that allows one to absorb the game while focusing on a specific aspect. Of course each one has the complete tool-kit going on, so land-based aircraft (LBA) & supply considerations are always present. Later, you can try the longer scenarios: Marianas - late-war 'phibs, w/ all the toys, & Downfall - aka Death from Above (& from the side, & from below). These are longer, more complicated games. But after you've soaked into a few of these smaller scenarios, you'll gain a handle on the interface & unit capabilities. Then you might even want to try a Grand Campaign - either a stock GC game, or one of the many 'modded' ones such as DaBabes or Reluctant Admiral. Enjoy, & don't fail to ask questions or publish a moan, as many folks here are avid to read your AAR & try to help you gain skill.

postfux -> RE: Newbie AAR: Guadalcanal (8/19/2015 10:29:52 PM)
So the kids are sleeping, the wife is away and I hope I got my homework done. Overall situation: My job as I understand it is to occupy a base well out of range of nearly all my land based aircraft, secure it, expand it and use it to further disrupt Japanese operations and keep up the offensive. Port Moresby is to be defended against an expected attack. My plan: I will do what is necessary to keep Port Moresby and expand it so it can serve as a base to reach just about any target in my area of operations. As a backup I will develop Cooktown. My main effort is towards Guadalcanal. I will take the base, build a decent airfield, get a perimeter defense running and see where I can go from there. I will supply my forward bases from Brisbane and Sydney with Noumea serving as my central naval base and supply base for the offensive.

postfux -> RE: Newbie AAR: Guadalcanal (8/19/2015 10:32:20 PM)
My disposition: Port Moresby gets to build its airfield and fortifacations. The ground forces stay where they are. Catalina: Naval Search 50, max range is normal range, height 6.000 Fighter: Escort, CAP 50, maxr normal, height 15.000 LB: Ground attack, target units attacking Port Moresby, maxr normal, 9.000 FB: as LB but with CAP 30 I hope these settings are all right for sustained operations and keep my base safe. I want to use it as B17 base in the future. Milne Bay: fortifications Fighter: CAP (as in Port Moresby) Lightning from Townsville: Recon Tula, 9.000 I have no plans with Milne Bay but hope that the recon helps my invasion.

postfux -> RE: Newbie AAR: Guadalcanal (8/19/2015 10:36:44 PM)
Cooktown: Airfield, will be my backup B17 base if things go wrong in Port Moresby Townsville (Charters Towers): B17s and 2 Aircobras go to Charters Towers FB: Escort Cap 30, Train 20, maxr normal, 15t 1 Marauder: Naval Search 50, maxr normal, 6t 1 Marauder: ASW Patrol 50, maxr normal, 1t LB: train 70, airfield attack, maxr normal, 9t B17: ground attack enemy forces attacking Port Moresby, maxr normal 9t I hope the FB provide security even with the training settings and train 70 is sustainable because I guess it will take some time till these bombers get deployed offensivly and that the Marauders can provides some sort of security for my supply lanes. B17s should help to keep the japanese heads down.

postfux -> RE: Newbie AAR: Guadalcanal (8/19/2015 10:39:16 PM)
Brisbane: port Catalina: ASW Hudson: naval search Wirraway: CAP 30, train 20 I Australian Corps gets Port Moresby as planning target and is loaded on transport. Rest of docking space is used for loading supply. I found it useful to form a one ship TF, dock it and order it to load supply and to then add other ships until docking space was full. Sydney: port Wirrawy: CAP 30, train 20 Achilles goes to drydock, all transports get loaded with supply. Noumea: Fighter: CAP 30, train 20 1 Cat: ASW with bombs 1 Cat: naval search with torpedoes Hudson: naval search B17: ground attack Lunga, 9t at extended range I guess that bombs are effective against subs since it was historically done this way as far as I know. The B17 will only be used until the troops are off the ship but until then I will use everything I can to suppress the defenders. Luganville: airfield, gets planes from Efate Wildcat: CAP 50 1 Cat: ASW 1 Cat: Naval Search 31st Base Force gets planning target Lunga I want to develop this basis as my main forward base besides Port Moresby until I can develop Lunga. B17s should find a place here soon to take up sustained operations against Japanese bases. Carrier TFs: Preset targets, reaction O, remain on station I want them to cover the invasion fleet without exposing them or their airgroups unnecessary. They shall sneak in from the east and than provide security against surface TFs trying to interfere. They will not attack ground forces or bases. Fighters: Escort Cap 50, maxr ext, 15t DB, TB: Naval attack/ Recon, maxr normal, 13t search 20 I hope that this gives my carriers air cover and enough awareness to find threats and targets. The offensive groups should attack targets out of the range of their fighter cover. I read on the forum that the fighter cover should be higher by 2t. I will need these planes and carriers in the future, so I try to be careful. Surface Combat: I want two separate naval groups comprised out of 3 TFs each. One SC to provide security, one bombardment and the invasion TF. I decide to disband the existing TFs and form new ones. Con: they get higher numbers than the Carrier TF and will fight before them, I loose the leaders Pro: I want two bombardment TFs since I guess suppression is paramount for an invasion, the leaders arent worth much compared to the captains. The SCTF get their targets set with reaction 0, bombardment and invasion follow with distance 0, all remain on station, bombardment range is set to max I hope this provides max security until the targets are reached, I plan to reconfigure once the invasion is started. SCTF: 2 CA, 1 CL(AA) 4 DD Bombardment: 1 CA, 1 (2) DD Invasion escort: 2 DD, 2 DMS The plan is to expose the ships as little as possible and still get some ordonance on the beaches. I am a little nervous because the bombardment TFs seem vulnerable to subs. Thats why they will remain on station and return with the rest. I am not sure if the minesweeper are any help but I give them to the invasion TFs because I guess they will have the highest risk to run into mines. The invasion TFs get leader with high land ratings. I found it useful to attach a CA to the invasion TFs to get more leaders to choose from. Gamey? Overall I try to set up sustained air operations that provide security and do some damage to the enemy withou getting fatigue to climb to high. I want to suppress the troops attacking Port Moresby and the ones defending the beaches. My troops out of Port Moresby base will buy time too fortify the base and ship in reenforcements. The defenders in Luga and Tulagi shall keep their heads down until my forces are landed. I guess it will be time to retreat the ships and stop B17s operations at this point. I will get it started tomorrow. Any input is highly welcome. I had to split this up due to posting restrictions until I found the reason.

sogcomando -> RE: Newbie AAR: Guadalcanal (5/9/2016 7:12:51 PM)
Postfux, How is this one going? I am a brand new player just returned from a couple of years in Kabul (with limited internet sources). I'm still reading the manual, but thought I would check out some other newbie posts to pick a few pointers/lessons learned. You had a lot thoughtful plans in place, and I was hoping to see what was the outcome. Hope you are still playing and can find the time to do an update (unless you are so far ahead it makes no sense to post anything)? Best wishes!

Bif1961 -> RE: Newbie AAR: Guadalcanal (5/11/2016 3:49:01 PM)
Good luck and welcome aboard the WitPAE.

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.765625