quote:

ORIGINAL: Bif1961

I find by setting the fast carrier TF to follow the slower carrier TF and both set to zero reaction distance that they almost always stay together.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

I think this game might be on a knife's edge right now...

I seem to recall that the Allies really need to preserve this early AP shipping capability...
Very much so! The early cadre of USN AP's forms a large core of APA's in '43 (and probably early '44, but I've never counted). They really have to be protected.

In addition, with two American fleet carriers out of action for a while, that really spells doom for the 40,000 troops (including the 2nd Marine Division) at Tabby, and my recent invasion of Builder in the Aleutians most likely spells doom for the 20,000 troops there.

Combined with the loss of the 18th British Division, 5 Commonwealth Brigades or Regiments, 4 Australian Brigades, all that wonderful British AA at Ceylon.... and with Clark ready to fall any day, the Allies are worried about where Japan will go next.

The potential loss of shipping hiding in dot bases in the Aleutians... & of course I am unsure how much is trapped north of the Aleutians, low on fuel.

And, China is falling super fast..

Plus I don't think the Allies like the mod with the Aussies being restricted to brigade size.
I'm playing the new DBB 28-C with BDE organization for the Aussies and, although we haven't yet seen combat where any differences could matter, I am not worried about it. A while back MichaelM made changes to the casualty routines which very nicely (IMO) did away with the old problem of small units taking disproportionate damage all the time. Also, when smaller units are destroyed (by sheer weight of numbers in some battles) you can now buy them back and rebuild them. The only difference there is a few PP.

That the game comes down to this: the Allies will either surge everything they have at the KB, or seek negotiations. Personally I think he will surge his six battleships at me knowing the KB lacks torpedoes. But he might not be in position to do that.

What a strange game, prior to June of 1942 Japan was doing well in China and pulled off Ceylon...but the Allies had preserved every ship larger than a destroyer and I thought Japan would be in a world of hurt starting in early 1943.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bif1961

Is it a good idea to keep 8 Japanese carriers in one TF? Doesn't tat affect their chances at coordinated strikes since he has about 400 AC in one TF?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

I think this game might be on a knife's edge right now...

I seem to recall that the Allies really need to preserve this early AP shipping capability...

In addition, with two American fleet carriers out of action for a while, that really spells doom for the 40,000 troops (including the 2nd Marine Division) at Tabby, and my recent invasion of Builder in the Aleutians most likely spells doom for the 20,000 troops there.

Combined with the loss of the 18th British Division, 5 Commonwealth Brigades or Regiments, 4 Australian Brigades, all that wonderful British AA at Ceylon.... and with Clark ready to fall any day, the Allies are worried about where Japan will go next.

The potential loss of shipping hiding in dot bases in the Aleutians... & of course I am unsure how much is trapped north of the Aleutians, low on fuel.

And, China is falling super fast..

Plus I don't think the Allies like the mod with the Aussies being restricted to brigade size.

That the game comes down to this: the Allies will either surge everything they have at the KB, or seek negotiations. Personally I think he will surge his six battleships at me knowing the KB lacks torpedoes. But he might not be in position to do that.

What a strange game, prior to June of 1942 Japan was doing well in China and pulled off Ceylon...but the Allies had preserved every ship larger than a destroyer and I thought Japan would be in a world of hurt starting in early 1943.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Ceylon is almost fully evacuated, it is just too far away to hold.

Troops are 100% prepped for Darwin, Midway, but not Port Moresby. Of the three I really am only tempted to take Midway, but with the recent developments might revisit that.

Short term I want to wipe out American troops in Aleutians and Tabby, but then pull back to a shorter perimeter.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrKane


Ceylon is almost fully evacuated ? This open road to Sumatra invasion ;(. Anyway Mike is going hit you for real in DEI. He does not like islands-south-central pacific way.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrKane


Ceylon is almost fully evacuated ? This open road to Sumatra invasion ;(. Anyway Mike is going hit you for real in DEI. He does not like islands-south-central pacific way.

This is a scenario 1 game, and to my thinking, Japan simply isn't strong enough to hold Ceylon, without giving up too much elsewhere.

Thanks, I thought he might be coming SRA somewhere, or New Guinea.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


One of the justifications of stacking limits is to slow down the conquest of China, but what happens in practice is that it usually accelerates the fall.

Once the initial position is broken, the Chinese retreat back along the road seriously over stacking the next position draining the troops of supply and increasing the effectiveness of Japanese aerial bombing and land bombardment.

And when the fight gets to Chungking, it is so overstacked a successful defense is almost impossible to achieve.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

China

June has been a super tough month for the Chinese losing several thousand squads.

One of the justifications of stacking limits is to slow down the conquest of China, but what happens in practice is that it usually accelerates the fall.

Once the initial position is broken, the Chinese retreat back along the road seriously over stacking the next position draining the troops of supply and increasing the effectiveness of Japanese aerial bombing and land bombardment.

And when the fight gets to Chungking, it is so overstacked a successful defense is almost impossible to achieve.

This particular mod has given the Chinese Corp an enhanced anti-tank capability, but generally speaking the overstack penalty once activates simply snowballs and wipes out a defensive line very quickly.

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

China

June has been a super tough month for the Chinese losing several thousand squads.

One of the justifications of stacking limits is to slow down the conquest of China, but what happens in practice is that it usually accelerates the fall.

Once the initial position is broken, the Chinese retreat back along the road seriously over stacking the next position draining the troops of supply and increasing the effectiveness of Japanese aerial bombing and land bombardment.

And when the fight gets to Chungking, it is so overstacked a successful defense is almost impossible to achieve.

This particular mod has given the Chinese Corp an enhanced anti-tank capability, but generally speaking the overstack penalty once activates simply snowballs and wipes out a defensive line very quickly.

I find SL make defending in good territory much more effective for the Chinese. If they do have to retreat, ideally there would be dug in troops behind, and as the retreated troops move back, the hex would again be under SL and the dug in troops able to stand.

Unless the Allied player is caught out, and didn't prepare multiple lines behind the front, SL alone should not make China harder to defend.

Against Greyjoy my Chinese managed to push back and crush a shock into Sian, and that was successful mainly because he didn't want to overstock his troops shocking over. Without SL he might have used double the troops and gotten a decent result and pushed everything back in a few days. The offensive player can always add more than the defender in a chosen hex without SL, and that makes defending really tough. You just can't move troops onto the front or behind to cover the next hexes before the attacker has broken through and moved into the rear reserve.

I found there that when frontline troops were tired, I could fairly easily trade them out since they would have had their SL reduced and the new unit would only overstack for a day or so, thus not losing supply.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrKane



I do not like it anymore ;). SL is working always for stronger side in my opinion. It using men number as limitation and does not take in count real value(fire power value) of squad. Basically on beginning it allows bring more fire power in hex for Japanese side and later on it allows to do the same trick for allied player.

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert


I find SL make defending in good territory much more effective for the Chinese. If they do have to retreat, ideally there would be dug in troops behind, and as the retreated troops move back, the hex would again be under SL and the dug in troops able to stand.

Unless the Allied player is caught out, and didn't prepare multiple lines behind the front, SL alone should not make China harder to defend.

Against Greyjoy my Chinese managed to push back and crush a shock into Sian, and that was successful mainly because he didn't want to overstock his troops shocking over. Without SL he might have used double the troops and gotten a decent result and pushed everything back in a few days. The offensive player can always add more than the defender in a chosen hex without SL, and that makes defending really tough. You just can't move troops onto the front or behind to cover the next hexes before the attacker has broken through and moved into the rear reserve.

I found there that when frontline troops were tired, I could fairly easily trade them out since they would have had their SL reduced and the new unit would only overstack for a day or so, thus not losing supply.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo


+1

My assessment as well.

My question |(to myself) is: Is this accurate? Is the issue that a player does not fight to control 2 or 3 hexes around CK? I am still debating this …
I'm doing comparisons against historical encirclements of the era (necessarily on the Eastern Front). Slow process as my time is limited ...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe
Really, there are only two hexes around Chungking that are defensible, the two w-r hexes to the south. And I agree they are key to defending Chungking or at least prolonging the defense.
Except for a breakthrough from the east near Sian.

I think a lot of the problem, whether SL or not, is that simply the Allied players personal morale breaks in China and the quality of their play there deteriorates. I absolutely love Mr.Kanes tactic of a huge air re-supply of China and really would wish that more Allied players did this.
Definitely interesting. It requires trade-offs as everything does.

I think China could last much longer if Japan only used artillery 15cm and smaller there, and limited the number of tanks regiments sent. If the Manchuko Garrison required a set number of artillery and armor units there, in addition to raw AV that would do something...most likely free up PP to be spent on Manchuko bombers sooner (the law of unintended consequences at work).
I would not favor any HR's on this, but I agree it would be nice if the Manchukuo Garrison required certain weight of artillery and armour.

It is a devious circle of workarounds.
Yup!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrKane



I do not like it anymore ;). SL is working always for stronger side in my opinion. It using men number as limitation and does not take in count real value(fire power value) of squad. Basically on beginning it allows bring more fire power in hex for Japanese side and later on it allows to do the same trick for allied player.

Certainly it benefits the side that can stuff in non-manpower based firepower like art and arm.

But I am not sure super stacks and no stacking limits are better. They both require different approaches. I don't think there is a "right" answer in selecting one over the other.

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs


Really, there are only two hexes around Chungking that are defensible, the two w-r hexes to the south. And I agree they are key to defending Chungking or at least prolonging the defense.
Except for a breakthrough from the east near Sian.