Was Tanaka that good? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific



Message

rich91a -> Was Tanaka that good? (4/25/2003 1:52:40 PM)

I've been playing Scen 16 as the Japs for some time against the AI, game setting hard.

The AI routinely sends bombardment TFs against Lunga.

Keeping a SC TF on station at Lunga with the BBs, strong CAs and a good quantity of destoyers with Tanaka commanding is a very effective counter.

Several times Tanaka has surprised the incoming bombardment TF despite this TF tracking him with radar.

The results are pretty spectacular - low survival rate for the Allied CAs.

Was Tanaka that good?

P.S. it's good to see the AI ties to deal with the protecting SC at Lunga with CVs. <----- Whoa! Praise for the AI! :D



Chiteng -> Re: Was Tanaka that good? (4/25/2003 1:59:02 PM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by rich91a
[B]I've been playing Scen 16 as the Japs for some time against the AI, game setting hard.

The AI routinely sends bombardment TFs against Lunga.

Keeping a SC TF on station at Lunga with the BBs, strong CAs and a good quantity of destoyers with Tanaka commanding is a very effective counter.

Several times Tanaka has surprised the incoming bombardment TF despite this TF tracking him with radar.

The results are pretty spectacular - low survival rate for the Allied CAs.

Was Tanaka that good?

P.S. it's good to see the AI ties to deal with the protecting SC at Lunga with CVs. <----- Whoa! Praise for the AI! :D [/B][/QUOTE]


Whatever 'that good' means. he was VERY VERY good.
He was caught by surprise with his ships loaded with
the wrong ammo, decks littered with supplies for Guadalcanal,
outnumbered and outgunned, and he turned it around
losing only one ship, sinking the Northampton



Mike_B20 -> (4/25/2003 4:11:04 PM)

Maybe he was good, maybe he was just lucky.
I've heard him described as a genius.

Here's a link to a description of Tassafronga.
http://www.combinedfleet.com/btl_tas.htm

Given the quality of the IJN Longlance torpedo his strategy seems pretty obvious, although other commanders didn't seem to have the same 'luck' with them.
Certainly, being able to time a Longlance attack to perfection could qualify as genius I guess.



Sonny -> (4/25/2003 8:23:18 PM)

Certianly isn't perfect. Tanaka with the Yamato and a few DDs got the "T" crossed by Lee in several CAs and a DDs in my game and was devastated. Only the Yamato survived. Lee took a few hits but only one of his ships went down (unless some sank later which were not reported).

So he is not totally invincible in the game.:)



crsutton -> (4/25/2003 8:32:42 PM)

He was very outspoken and not popular within the ranks of the Navy. However, he appeared to have a very firm grasp of the strategic situation, more so than the higher command and he was an excellent tactical officer. However, as a rule all Japanese surface commanders were highly trained and experienced-if a bit unflexible.



CapAndGown -> (4/25/2003 10:49:50 PM)

Tanaka had two things going for him at the battle of Tassafaronga:
-skill
-tenacity
-and the possession of excellent torpedos.

Wait, Tanaka had [B]three[/B] things going for him at the battle of Tassafaronga:
-skill
-tenacity
-the possession of excellent torpedos
-and a well rehearsed plan.

Wait, Tanaka had [B]four[/B] things going for him at the battle of Tassafaronga

Oh, never mind.



Von_Frag -> (4/26/2003 1:42:41 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by cap_and_gown
[B]Tanaka had two things going for him at the battle of Tassafaronga:
-skill
-tenacity
-and the possession of excellent torpedos.

Wait, Tanaka had [B]three[/B] things going for him at the battle of Tassafaronga:
-skill
-tenacity
-the possession of excellent torpedos
-and a well rehearsed plan.

Wait, Tanaka had [B]four[/B] things going for him at the battle of Tassafaronga

Oh, never mind. [/B][/QUOTE]

LOL, it is amazing that wargames and Python go so well together.

Von Frag



denisonh -> (4/26/2003 3:37:02 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Sonny
[B]Certianly isn't perfect. Tanaka with the Yamato and a few DDs got the "T" crossed by Lee in several CAs and a DDs in my game and was devastated. Only the Yamato survived. Lee took a few hits but only one of his ships went down (unless some sank later which were not reported).

So he is not totally invincible in the game.:) [/B][/QUOTE]

Was that Tanaka that demolished Scott's CA TF in our SC#19?



Nimits -> (4/26/2003 9:41:37 AM)

Tanaka was arguably the best surface commander of in the IJN if not of all the combatants. As for his tactics at Tassafaronga being obvious, well, a careful reading of military history will reveal the difference between great and poor commanders is the former's ability to discover and effectively apply the "obvious" solutions to tactcal or strategic problems. If Hooker had been able to recognize and apply the obvious tactic in the Wilderness in 1863, Chancellorsville, and not Gettysburg, would have been remembered as Lee's greatest defeat



Drex -> (4/26/2003 10:04:05 AM)

It would have been interesting to see how great Tanaka would have become had he remained in this theater. Unfortunately for Japan, his mouth earned him a desk job in Burma and Singapore. His evacuation of over 10000 troops from Guadalcanal without the US knowledge is truly amazing.



Chiteng -> (4/26/2003 10:12:58 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Drex
[B]It would have been interesting to see how great Tanaka would have become had he remained in this theater. Unfortunately for Japan, his mouth earned him a desk job in Burma and Singapore. His evacuation of over 10000 troops from Guadalcanal without the US knowledge is truly amazing. [/B][/QUOTE]

A man like Tanaka would have died at the helm of his ship.
Just like Rommel would have if he had been sent to Russia.



Mike_B20 -> (4/26/2003 10:22:54 AM)

This worshipping of Tanaka reminds me of Grant's comment at the Second Wilderness when he saw how nervous his subordinates were about facing Lee.
"Anyone would think he was gonna do a double somersault and land in our rear...get some guns up here" or words to that effect.

Sure he had a great result at Tassafronga but to ascribe genius to the results of such a roll of the dice as a torpedo attack seems a bit over the top.

Also, at that time the US was just becoming aware of the Longlance danger and would later develop tactics to counter it.
Wright steered his cruisers in the traditional line ahead manner, without manouvering and got hammered.



Chiteng -> (4/26/2003 10:25:43 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mike_B20
[B]This worshipping of Tanaka reminds me of Grant's comment at the Second Wilderness when he saw how nervous his subordinates were about facing Lee.
"Anyone would think he was gonna do a double somersault and land in our rear...get some guns up here" or words to that effect.

Sure he had a great result at Tassafronga but to ascribe genius to the results of such a roll of the dice as a torpedo attack seems a bit over the top.

Also, at that time the US was just becoming aware of the Longlance danger and would later develop tactics to counter it.
Wright steered his cruisers in the traditional line ahead manner, without manouvering and got hammered. [/B][/QUOTE]

But he had radar and he had total surprise. That goes a LONG way to counter poor deployment.



Drex -> (4/26/2003 10:39:26 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mike_B20
[B]This worshipping of Tanaka reminds me of Grant's comment at the Second Wilderness when he saw how nervous his subordinates were about facing Lee.
"Anyone would think he was gonna do a double somersault and land in our rear...get some guns up here" or words to that effect.

Sure he had a great result at Tassafronga but to ascribe genius to the results of such a roll of the dice as a torpedo attack seems a bit over the top.

Also, at that time the US was just becoming aware of the Longlance danger and would later develop tactics to counter it.
Wright steered his cruisers in the traditional line ahead manner, without manouvering and got hammered. [/B][/QUOTE] Tassafaaronga was just one of his exploits. In my post above, I mention his successful evacuation of the Guadalcanal force with only the loss of one DD and that was by a mine. I believe that was his greatest feat. Surely Tanaka's fame was well earned whereas some others have been worshipped for far less.



Chiteng -> (4/26/2003 10:40:50 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Drex
[B]Tassafaaronga was just one of his exploits. In my post above, I mention his successful evacuation of the Guadalcanal force with only the loss of one DD and that was by a mine. I believe that was his greatest feat. Surely Tanaka's fame was well earned whereas some others have been worshipped for far less. [/B][/QUOTE]

Ahh now...Halsey was the bull in the China shop.

At least he was not timid.



Drex -> (4/26/2003 11:01:39 AM)

TF58 where are you? the world wonders.



Tanaka -> (4/27/2003 1:34:02 PM)

With Tanaka commanding the surface fleets (without being fired) and Yamamoto and Yamaguchi commanding the air fleets (without being killed)
the war would have been very interesting indeed. :)

I plan on putting this into effect immediately in WITP. :)



Nimits -> (4/27/2003 4:22:43 PM)

The US and Commonwealth would still have won, but it could have provided some intersting what if scenarios.



RevRick -> A Bad Old Television show might ask.. (4/28/2003 8:43:55 AM)

Task Force 58, Where Are You... as in the old TV show, Car 54, where are you... Anyone old enough to remember that...

The point has been made that Halsey should have commanded the Battle of the PHillipine Sea, and Spruance the Battle of Leyte Gulf...Ah well, history plays its own games with us...



Drex -> (4/28/2003 9:14:32 AM)

Unfortunately I remember the show well. It was really bad. Fred Gwin did much better stuff later. Halsey did too.



pasternakski -> (4/28/2003 10:45:35 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Drex
[B]Unfortunately I remember the show well. It was really bad. Fred Gwin did much better stuff later. Halsey did too. [/B][/QUOTE]

Yeah, like Herman Munster, a characterization right up there with Sir Larry Olivier's Darcy in "Pride and Prejudice."

Oops. Sorry, I guess Halsey never played Herman Munster ...



pasternakski -> (4/28/2003 10:51:21 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Tanaka
[B]With Tanaka commanding the surface fleets (without being fired) and Yamamoto and Yamaguchi commanding the air fleets (without being killed)
the war would have been very interesting indeed. :)

I plan on putting this into effect immediately in WITP. :) [/B][/QUOTE]

Interesting command structure. You plan to divide the IJN into "surface fleets" and "air fleets" with independent commanders not under Yamamoto's centralized control? Hmm. Also, how good is Tanaka going to be at strategy? I always see him on the admiral's bridge of a task force flagship.

I see a lot of Midways and worse in the future of the Yamato people.



Chiteng -> (4/28/2003 10:55:53 AM)

The tragic flaw in all Japanese planning was the idea that the plan needed surprise to work, and they always thought they could get it.



Drex -> (4/28/2003 7:43:16 PM)

Surprise and and an overly complicated plan. Midway was definitely convoluted, so was Leyte Gulf.



Nimits -> (4/28/2003 9:45:58 PM)

The IJN's plan at Midway was worse than complicated or convoluted; it was in fact possessed of the most dangerous atribute a operation plan can have, that of being contradictory to its own goals.

First, the IJN plan depended on surprise, yet they neglected to take the steps to insure surprise was secured, such as changing the naval code or suspending unnecessary operations that might point to a Central Pacific Target (such as Operation K, the aborted seaplane recon of Pearl Harbor).

Second, the plan depended on the combiend might of the IJN fleet crushing the remnents of the USN fleet, yet Yammamoto dividided his force into three fleets separated beyond supporting distance, allowing the USN task force to strike at one or the other without interference from the other groups.

Third, even though the stated purpose was to draw the entire US fleet into battle where it could be destroyed, a strong diversionary force was sent to Aleutians, with the likely result that some or all of the US fleet would be drawn to fight against it, sparing it from immediate destruction by the Mobile Fleet to the South and giving it an opportunity to disengage.

Fourth, while it was assumed that Midway was vital enough to cause the entire US fleet to rush out into the jaws of certain desrtuction in a last ditch effort to save the island base, little thought was given to the idea that perhaps the Americans would already have their fleet deployed to guard such a base prior to the IJN attack,

Fifth, despite the plans dependence on surprise, no one of consequence in the IJN consider that attacking a base of such obvious importance would not necessarily prove a great surprise to the Americans.

Sixth, despite the fact that the plan for Operation MI had one of the strictest timeframes imaginible and its odds for success were based on a combination of strict adherence to the timeframe and a ship-by-ship estimate of available US carrier strength, no thought, outside of the abortive and easily dismissed Operation K, was ever given to actually reconning Midway Island or the US fleet.



Drex -> (4/29/2003 6:07:32 AM)

I think you said it all Nimits. Hard to believe that the Japanese were so sloppy but basically they threw the dice and got craps. Interesting to see how you tally Leyte Gulf. The Japanese still hadn't learned a lesson.



Chiteng -> (4/29/2003 6:19:13 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Drex
[B]I think you said it all Nimits. Hard to believe that the Japanese were so sloppy but basically they threw the dice and got craps. Interesting to see how you tally Leyte Gulf. The Japanese still hadn't learned a lesson. [/B][/QUOTE]

Considering the limitations on the IJN, especially with respect to fueling the fleet....

I think they did quite well at Leyte. In fact comming within reach of
a operational victory. It didnt happen, no. But it could have.



SoulBlazer -> (4/29/2003 6:50:55 AM)

Which part of Leyte are we talking about? Surigao Strait was one of the last old fashioned surface clashes and a great victory. The battle off Samar SHOULD have been a crushing Japanese victory except, in the words of the Combined Fleet website, "combination of exhaustion, crummy visibility, relentless air attacks, and an American destroyer screen that fought like wolves over their cubs" spoiled their chance.



Drex -> (4/29/2003 6:58:29 AM)

I'm not a naval strategist but the Japanese plan did draw Halsey out of the way( but he sank Ozawa's four out of six carriers) and left the San Bernadino Strait open. Kurita had lost some Capital ships on the way but still had an overwhelming naval force. But it was the courage of Taffy 3 destroyers and pilots that kept Kurita on the defensive. The Surigao Strait force was a suicide run that never should have happened. I think they could have used Nishimura's force elsewhere since Ozawa's bait worked against Halsey. The Japanese still had this penchant for multiple force plans: they made it too complicated to coordinate.



Snigbert -> (4/29/2003 8:10:11 AM)

[B]Interesting command structure. You plan to divide the IJN into "surface fleets" and "air fleets" with independent commanders not under Yamamoto's centralized control? Hmm. Also, how good is Tanaka going to be at strategy? I always see him on the admiral's bridge of a task force flagship.[/B]

I'm not sure if this is what he meant, but the Japanese Navy did have 'Air Fleets' during the war, which were comprised of wings of aircraft but no ships. Although I dont know why he would put Yamamoto or Yamaguchi in charge of them.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.812012