IJN hordes

IJN hordes (Full Version)

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

Message

Mike_B20 -> IJN hordes (6/8/2003 8:11:54 AM)
I've never played IJN for longer than a few turns and was somewhat surprised to see how much they get after a few months in scenario 17 at 120%. My IJN opponent in a scenario 17 PBEM game ended the game at the beginning of November 42 and gave me his password to check out what he had. :eek: :eek: :eek: I had thought myself to be doing rather well, having trounced his first invasion attempt and sinking 4 carriers early on. Seeing the hordes of naval vessels as of November came as a shock. He had virtually every carrier left in the IJN fleet and a myriad of other vessels including something like 10 ML's. There was very little left at Tokyo. I will never again feel complacent about my chances in 42 as allies, no matter how many ships I've sunk or damaged.

pasternakski -> Re: IJN hordes (6/8/2003 8:29:11 AM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mike_B20 [B]I've never played IJN for longer than a few turns and was somewhat surprised to see how much they get after a few months in scenario 17 at 120%. My IJN opponent in a scenario 17 PBEM game ended the game at the beginning of November 42 and gave me his password to check out what he had. :eek: :eek: :eek: I had thought myself to be doing rather well, having trounced his first invasion attempt and sinking 4 carriers early on. Seeing the hordes of naval vessels as of November came as a shock. He had virtually every carrier left in the IJN fleet and a myriad of other vessels including something like 10 ML's. There was very little left at Tokyo. I will never again feel complacent about my chances in 42 as allies, no matter how many ships I've sunk or damaged. [/B][/QUOTE] You mean you think you were losing? If you have turned back a Japanese invasion attempt and sunk four carriers by November 42, you have a won game that in chess would be referred to as a "forced mate." The most difficult thing as the Allies is to break into the "ubergroup" of carriers. Once you have started to attrit them, the end is almost inevitable. If you hold onto bases in either New Guinea (preferably Port Moresby) or the Solomons (obviously by re-invading Lunga), the Japanese are dead meat in scenario 17. I had one PBEM opponent ask me if I wanted to quit after losing Yorktown and Lexington in exchange for Zuikaku and Shoho in early June 42 in a battle swirling around Gili-Gili. I told him, "Nuts," in my profound way of finding original ways of expressing myself.

Mike_B20 -> (6/8/2003 8:33:54 AM)
No, I didn't think I was losing, I thought I had a won game. Was just very surprised to see that even at 120% commitment for IJN, they had virtually the whole Jap fleet in theatre. Also, I only had 5 carriers ( I thought this was plenty) and there was no sign of any more carriers turning up in Noumea for a while. A showdown between his carriers and mine would have been very close run thing.

Snigbert -> (6/8/2003 9:36:28 AM)
[B]I had one PBEM opponent ask me if I wanted to quit after losing Yorktown and Lexington in exchange for Zuikaku and Shoho in early June 42 in a battle swirling around Gili-Gili. I told him, "Nuts," in my profound way of finding original ways of expressing myself.[/B] I lost 4 US CVs in exchange for damaging the Hiryu, badly damaging the Junyo and sinking the Zuiho...and I didn't bat an eyelash at that. It wont have any effect on my ability to completely overwhelm him with LBA.

Yamamoto -> (6/8/2003 10:51:20 AM)
Even if he had every single ship that he would ever get all that means is that, starting in 1943, any ship he sends back to Japan he will never see again. Yes, the Japanese get their stuff earlier but they get less of it. Most of it doesn't matter anyway. The carriers, subs, and minesweepers are all I consider important. OK, you need transports and some surface combat groups just to look menacing but the surface groups mostly sit in port except when doing an invasion. If land-based air was toned down then surface combat groups would be more interesting to use. As it is now, I don't even move my CV groups within range of land-based air unless I have 4 or more CVs in the group (and I prefer 6). In WitP I will have to spread the CVs out in different theaters, I'm sure, so I dread what the land-based air will do in that game. Yamamoto

CapAndGown -> (6/8/2003 11:40:52 AM)
Yamamoto, I have no idea what you are talking about. I have seriously been playing with the idea of using my surface ships to [B]lure[/B] out US LBA so I can shoot it down with AAA. Since 2.3 I have yet to see a combat ship (BB, CA, CL, DD) hit by level bombers. Maybe, maybe mind you, they might score some hits if they dropped down to 100 feet and skip bombed, but anything higher and it is so rare for them to hit that I don't worry about it that much. Sure I worry a little, but things are much more manageable now. So no, I don't view surface fleets as superfluous. In fact, I see them as my primary way to defeat an allied invasion--Carriers can be sunk, planes can be grounded or shot down by CAP, but the battleline will make it to the invasion sight. Forward to Leyte and operation A-GO!

Mike_B20 -> (6/8/2003 12:06:52 PM)
In another of my scenario 17 PBEM games I've just been ambushed by IJN CV's around Gili Gili on 1/7/42. It wasn't pretty :( Earlier I had sunk Shokaku, Zuikaku in first carrier battle with little damage taken. Later I sunk the Akagi and damaged Shoho . Then with 3 CV's I was happily patrolling south of Gili Gili (just outside of air transfer range for my carrier aircraft, stupid me) and I was waylaid by a brand spanking new CV fleet of 4 CV's and 2 CVL's. Man, was I surprised :eek: :eek: :eek: 10 IJN carriers available by mid June 42. Is it usual to get sooooo many carriers sooooo early for IJN at 120% IJN commitment?

Drongo -> (6/8/2003 1:16:08 PM)
Posted by Cappy [QUOTE]I have seriously been playing with the idea of using my surface ships to lure out US LBA so I can shoot it down with AAA. Since 2.3 I have yet to see a combat ship (BB, CA, CL, DD) hit by level bombers. Maybe, maybe mind you, they might score some hits if they dropped down to 100 feet and skip bombed, but anything higher and it is so rare for them to hit that I don't worry about it that much. Sure I worry a little, but things are much more manageable now.[/QUOTE] One of the best kept secrets of the war. I sucked in my opponent's 60+ allied mediums from Cooktown into hitting a BB/DD TF at PM after faking with a transport TF move the day before. 18 mediums never got home. No ships got hit (and the BBs are invulnerable anyway). It was a beautiful thing to watch. The next day, my transport TF sailed in and unloaded supplies for my garrison without any probs from his now stuffed squadrons. A squadron of A6Ms on LRCAP was enough to deter the remnants. I don't know why the Jap ships had any trouble with allied LBA historically. Bring 'em on. :p (Not sure if I'd risk the CAs too often though, they ain't bomb-proof and they're too valuable).

Raverdave -> (6/8/2003 2:36:49 PM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Drongo [B] I don't know why the Jap ships had any trouble with allied LBA historically. Bring 'em on. :p [/B][/QUOTE] Don't let you-know-who see this as it will send him of in a rant again!;)

kentaggie -> (6/10/2003 12:13:21 AM)
Until August '42 in Scenario 17 the IJN has asignificant advantage in numbers and quality. The IJN player should be as aggressive as possible in that time frame. By bid June IJN usually has 10 flattops to 4-5 US. Time to go hunting! I keep reading about the supposed "Super Cap" the US can put up. After some extensive testing, and some e-mails with Mr. Frag, The IJN just needs to put up 30-40% cap and will put a lickin' on the poor USN. You will lose a lot of Zero's on escort, but only at a 1:1 ratio and, more importantly, love relatively few Kates and Vals. And we all know what Kates do.... As far as LBA, the only LBA he really has to worry about is a ton of P-39's and P-400's set at 100o feet. Anyone that uses those aircraft in CAP mode is just flushing them down the toilet. Medium bombers WILL NOT hit a CV or surface TF. They will just get damaged. I agree with the AAA "bait tactic". Had that pulled on me by an opponent and he just creamed my Allied LBA with flak w'/out getting a hit. The only time Allied LBA is a threat is to invasion or resupply TF's w/out aircover.

Full Moon -> (6/10/2003 12:36:56 AM)
[QUOTE]The IJN player should be as aggressive as possible in that time frame. By bid June IJN usually has 10 flattops to 4-5 US. [/QUOTE] Which is true under 120% ship commitment. But, under 100% ship commitment, IJN usually has only around 6 carriers by June.

kentaggie -> (6/10/2003 12:51:04 AM)
[QUOTE]Which is true under 120% ship commitment. But, under 100% ship commitment, IJN usually has only around 6 carriers by June.[/QUOTE] My apologies. I meant by July.

panda124c -> (6/10/2003 2:12:13 AM)
I have noticed that people tend to play with 100% plus comitments. Has anyone tried playing with less than 100% comitment????

Elrod -> What is (6/10/2003 2:18:34 AM)
What is LBA? Any other abrev's I should know about? John

Mike_B20 -> (6/10/2003 2:28:24 AM)
Elrod, LBA is land based aircraft, SOB, is your opponent when he sinks your ships. I think my opponent was just lucky with CV availability in the PBEM game I mentioned. Doing some sums, he must have had 7 flattops available in the first month inTokyo, then these ships must have been released immediately to be sailing off Gili Gili by early July. I've started some test games as IJN to test availability and at 120% commitment it is remarkable how often 7 carriers are available at Tokyo in the first 30 days. Also, given that I did sink some carriers early and knowing just how much Yamamoto (the one in Tokyo, not on these boards) hates seeing his carriers sunk I'm not surprised that all 7 carriers available at Tokyo were released as they came in. I'm seriously considering trying hard in future NOT to sink IJN carriers early, just to really, really hurt them :D As a postscript on the above action, I lost all 3 CV's, one sunk immediately the other two by his sole remaining operational carrier as they made a dash for Noumea but my opponent lost a CV and CVL sunk as they limped to port and Lee managed a surface intercept in which he sank a CV and CVL. So, things turned out better than I thought.

mogami -> IJN CV (6/10/2003 3:34:39 AM)
Hi Akagi, Kaga, Hiryu, Soryu, Zuikaku, Shokaku first line CV Junyo, Hiyo second line CV (too slow) 8 IJN CV Lexington, Yorktown, Hornet, Enterprise, Saratoga, Wasp first line USN CV. (6 IJN first line CV versus 6 USN first line CV IJN has advantage in TF agumenting 2nd line CV/CVL USN has advantage of larger air groups) USN can trade 1 for 2 and be miles ahead. USN can trade 1 for 1 and cripple the IJN but then have to wait a year to have advantage. I don't include IJN CVL/CVE for same reason I don't include USN CVL/CVE. Too slow or too few aircraft. CVL (both sides) augment aircombat TF's they don't make them. (CVE do not fight carrier battles they protect slow TF's where threat is long range enemy bombers and subs) USN can afford the loss of their carriers if they also remove the IJN CV. (The allies can advance under cover of their long range heavy bombers-the bombers knock out the air threat) The IJN cannot afford to lose more then 2 for 6 and still retain enough for viable threat to Allied bases. (IJN prefers to lose the CVL for USN CV) Many IJN players insist on making same mistake the Japanese did during war. (Placing all CV in single TF) This does require fewer escorts but if enemy strike breaks through all the carriers are targets. Better to make 2-3 TF in same hex. (with more escort and fewer targets) These "uber" TF's cause allied players fits but expose all CV to attack if allied player waits for all 6 USN CV before engaging. (and can arrange a battle where LBA can also take part) I recommend all allied players avoid carrier battles early in long scenarios (send the CV back to PH for AA upgrade and allow time for airgroups to build to full size. Never fight IJN with less then 4 CV (in 2 TF's of 2 CV each) I tend to prefer the Car Div plus CVL Akagi, Kaga Hiryu Soryu Zuikaku Shokaku Junyo Hiyo (keeping in rear for 2nd day of battle/ pursuit of cripples) Oh my....sorry...but there really are hordes of Japanese CV in scenario 19 200 percent Japanese commitment.

Mike_B20 -> (6/10/2003 3:39:48 AM)
Mogami, yes we all know that you are a superhero and can take on whole Japanese fleet with Lee and single detroyer.:D Do IJN get extra carriers built specially at 200% commitment or just same ones sent earlier?

mogami -> What? (6/10/2003 3:44:11 AM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mike_B20 [B]Mogami, yes we all know that you are a superhero and can take on whole Japanese fleet with Lee and single detroyer.:D Do IJN get extra carriers built specially at 200% commitment or just same ones sent earlier? [/B][/QUOTE] Hi, That's not very nice. As the allies I have had to fight very hard. I've lost 2 of 10 Scenario 19 200 percent IJN 100 percent USN games. Commitment level is value of ships allowed on map. By doubling it (200 percent) you allow twice as many ships to be on map. No new "unhistorical" ships are created. Ships that arrive Tokyo/PH as they are built become available based on how many unused commitment points remain. The only super human abiltiy I have is the one that allows me to make 30 turns per day.

Drex -> (6/10/2003 5:37:21 AM)
With 200 % commitment, the Japanese can have 10 CVs/CVLs by June'42. I don't need to point out what the US has with 100%. Its a tough first year.

crsutton -> (6/10/2003 8:32:52 AM)
The big difference between #17 and #19 for the Japanese is the replacement rate for vals and kates. (nells and bettys too). You can have all of your carriers in #17 but high lossed of carrier craft will be slow to replace and have lousy crews. Still a problem with #19 but the replacement rate is better.. Best is to attrition the Japanese. They get a ton of ships but you damage one and it may never come back. Damaged Allied ships repair faster and most always come back. That is where the Allies have an advantage. Plus they really do get a heck of a lot of DDs. I find surface ships to be very deadly and for the Allies the best response early in the game. Thing is, most players are using them in TF that are too large and always get spotted. A spotted surface force is in trouble or easy to evade. The perfect TF has three or four DDs and perhaps one CA and CL. 90% of the time, a force that size can complete it mission without getting spotted. Three small TFs can easily beat one large in battle, or at least match it in kills and damage-meaning a victory for the Allied player. The game designers have done a good job of making BBs sort of dangerous to use a night. Sometimes they do not work too well at all and take a lot of damage from smaller ships. Best to save them for bombardment or AA support.

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.09375