RE: Insanity. Obscenity. Indecency. ITAKLinus (A) vs DesertWolf101 (J)

RE: Insanity. Obscenity. Indecency. ITAKLinus (A) vs DesertWolf101 (J) (Full Version)

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

Message

ITAKLinus -> RE: Insanity. Obscenity. Indecency. ITAKLinus (A) vs DesertWolf101 (J) (8/5/2021 7:16:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BBfanboy The rapid fire guns might only fire in defence (I haven't heard either way), but I presume that if your tanks were operating on the atoll to try and throw the Japanese units back into the sea, they would be attacking the Japanese units. Check your LCU reinforcement queue - IIRC those tanks should start showing up in early 1942. Japan could try to leapfrog and attack the Line Islands before then, but would leave a lot of islands unconquered in their rear. As for Suva - the position is indeed good, but most IJ players go for Noumea first because of the high VP multiplier. Also, Suva can be suppressed from Pago-Pago and other islands so it is not a long-term conquest for Japan. The B-17 advantage is a great one, if you can get some airfields built to level 5. I meant Suva as a staging base, Pago Pago and Noumea are fairly easy to neutralize once you establish a forward base in the Fiji. The long-term perspective is not really relevant, since my fear is not the conquest of Suva (or whatver) per-se, rather its conquest in order to create a staging base for further assaults in the area. Tank units are scarce so far. I don't have the game open so I cannot check the reinforcement queue, but I remember I don't get much until beginning '42 indeed. Currently, I'm trying to move the 2 Marine Defense Battalions in Johnston Island and Canton Island, which have 6.000SL. Other units are going soon to be moved in Christmas Island, Pago Pago and Palmyra. My vision is to use the 3x40AV units which start in the Hawaii islands to protect Johnston Island, Canton Island and Palmyra together with a Marine Defense Battalion each. Their low SL of 6.000 makes the use of these units reasonable. A couple of regiments (120AV) will be sent to Christmas Island and Pago Pago, where the high SL allow a larger employment of IJ troops and deeper defenses. Is it enough to block a convinced IJ assault? As we all know, nope. But we do with what we have... Tanks are nowhere to be found other than those improved AFV in Australia and they're not even in consistent numbers. "real" tanks are yet to arrive as reinforcements in the West Coast. In the meanwhile, I also have to find a way to send ENG to Taithi, where I'll set up a logistical base. Not that it's on my priority list, but still... In PH there are also a couple of combat ENG units. IIRC they have very good a-soft and a-arm ratings (need to check) and they can be used to beef up bases such as Pago Pago or Christmas Island where I have the double need of defense and base development. The USN convoy with ART and AA which starts in the SoPac has unloaded its cargo in Suva, the closest possible base where those units can be useful. I wanted to ship them to Australia proper but I deemed reasonable to try the gamble of reinforcing Suva; in theory, he can get a nasty surprise there. Noumea is concerning. I have nothing there and the only troops which can reasonably arrive in the place are australian. Time is running short. KB has disappeared from radars but I suspect has gone further WEST (it was between Johnston Island and Palmyra yesterday). Heavy radio traffic at Truk and many SigInt reports every turn about troops being shipped there. The storm is coming. I had the temptation of doing a preventive strike on Truk with 2 US CVs, but it's quite too complex, givien the likely position of the Kido Butai. Also, fuel is an issue. My belief is that he will wait for everyone (KB and all the convoys) to be at Truk and then he will strike SOUTH. My CVs might very well try to ambush some convoy left behind. I don't know his doctrine in terms of aeronaval and amphibious offensives, so I have no idea on how he will organize his forces. There is also the possibility he will assault PM, though. If he goes SOUTH with a large bunch of convoys/support ships and all that jazz, I can try to strike with my CVs coming from WEST while his offensive power (KB and SCTF) are too SOUTH to protect his cargoes.

mind_messing -> RE: Insanity. Obscenity. Indecency. ITAKLinus (A) vs DesertWolf101 (J) (8/5/2021 8:40:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ITAKLinus My understanding is that units with AT guns don't have increased anti-armor capabilities, though. As far as I know, AT guns shot only in defense. Have I lived for years under the wrong assumption? It wouldn't be the first time Worth following the links suggested in this thread, particular emphasis on posts by Alfred and Symon. quote: As mentioned above, SNLF/NavGuards are not my concern. Those damn 252AV brigades are. They're very tough to block and their TOEs are farily good even late in the game. Those small allied units work well against the usual SNLF/NavGuards, but against those IJA brigades it's like stopping a train with a paper sheet... In a Scenario 1 game, there's a limited number of those brigades to go around in December '41. If there are lots running around, then they've either been pulled from China (great) or Japan (even better). The correct response is a submarine landed raider unit at a unlikely hex that has minimal or no garrison and aircraft factories. I suggest you review the north coast of Honshu. The scale of effort required to land a IJA division vs a large IJA brigade is more or less the same, so my earlier points still hold true. quote: Indeed, my posture is to make a series of decent strong points so that he has to mobilize his assets in force to capture them. Then what you are proposing with the US Army regiments makes sense. In 1941 you do not have the surplus of divisions and assets to make every island an unassailable fortress. You can make it not worth the risk and effort. quote: If you ask me, if I were him I'd do my usual moves that are: landing in Suva and getting the place, setting some kind of forward base there while in various dots around Luganville I disband the train of support ships. Then, with the logistical base in Suva, I can easily dominate the whole sector. In my current Japanese match, I've fought for an entire month in the area in Feb-42 using just AKEs, AOs, TKs and the like to resupply my ships. And I have a very heavy presence (10xBBs + KB + etcetc), fighting what looks like the entire damn USN. What I mean is that the support ships can do the trick with relative ease for short campaigns and I suspect Omar is such a good player not to neglect these logistical aspects. Then your opponent in your current Japanese match is playing to your strength. The first thought from me on this is that Suva is uncomfortably far east for Japan. There is a great deal of ocean between Rabual and even the forward base at Luganville. The second thought is that the IJN east of the Coral Sea is the IJN not defending other targets. Let's see what IJN dispositions look like once USN CV's appear off Honshu and strike industry and shipping. quote: Fundamentally, I'm frightened at the idea of him doing what I would do: arriving in forces with those nasty 252AV brigades on fast cargoes and with an insane train of support ships to mantain operational strength without many issues. You'll be less frightened once you realise what the appropriate response to those moves are. There are some suggestions in my post above, but there is more out there. Every action has a cost, and Japan only has so much to spend.

ITAKLinus -> RE: Insanity. Obscenity. Indecency. ITAKLinus (A) vs DesertWolf101 (J) (8/5/2021 8:44:35 AM)
17 DECEMBER 1941 TURN 11 I. NOPAC Nothing new. II. CENPAC Surprisingly, I am able to move almost freely around PH even if the IJN sub presence is still very intense. Small convoys are sent around bringing much needed supplies and reinforcements. A group of 10 DMS is moving in Fast Transport TF to Canton Island, where I have a desperate need of supplies. III. SOPAC Nothing new under the sun. USN CVs will reach Townsville tomorrow. I think the whole day of tomorrow and the day after will be needed to fully refuel the TFs. IJN carriers nowhere to be found. A couple of RAN CLs have done few damages over the coasts of PNG and New Ireland in the last turns. Various small IJN ships (xAKLs) have been sunk. Today, one of the two bombards Rabaul with little success and the other one rushes SOUTH. They should be able to escape Nell/Betty wrath. IV. DEI To my surprise, Omar captures Brunei. He landed there and in Miri on 7th DEC but didn't bother to capture the places. I wonder why he got the base now, though. A IJN SCTF sinks a Dutch CL and three Dutch DDs which were in Babo in the aftermath of the Battle of Ambon. They had no fuel left so there wasn't much to do for them (a heavily damaged xAP was moving in their direction but it was too slow to catch them up today). My B17s are redeployed in Rangoon and strike Bangkok harbour to no effect. No losses either. Situation in Malaya is quite bad but still under control. Almost 700AV in Singapore and forts approaching lvl3. They won't stop the japanese hordes, but I might survive for a couple of turns. To my surprise, I discover he went heavy in Luzon. I have reports of over 25 LCUs in the area. A strong commitment here from IJA side is more than welcomed. Today he bombs Clark Field from the sea with various BBs but no major damages are inflicted. CA Huston has to be scuttled (see image below) after it sustained heavy damage in a very interesting bombing run some days ago (it got caught in Polillo where it was disbanded together with Boise and a DD). V. CBI I somehow manage to bring roughly 600AV SOUTH of Ankang and I believe I can retake the base soon. In the meanwhile, I'm losing all the positions in the plains between Hankow and Peking. Not a surprise, obviously. I launched a small attack on the coastline near Canton but Chukow (sp?!) resisted my initial shock. Fair enough. Omar launched a deliberate in Ichang yesterday but failed (he intentionally didn't bomb my troops thinking they were on move but I had placed them back to combat after one turn of move mode). Tomorrow I should be able to save the bulk of Chinese troops there. Admittedly, I made various mistakes here. I moved the good Chinese Corps starting N-W of Ichang inside Ichang with the idea of crossing the river W of it and opening a quicker route to Chengteh. The trick has been successful and IJA has been even drawn in the area with consistent forces. However, I have sustained preventable losses and that's not really good. Moreover, I launched two deliberate in Ichang which were totally unnecessary given my target. After Omar sank 6 empty cargoes in Rangoon the last turn, I decided to have the last two unload and stop the supply runs to the place. These last two have indeed unloaded, but they have then been smashed by Betty/Nell from Rangoon. I consider it an investment worth the price. OTHER I'm rushing troops and ships everywhere. No assets available and very few combat ready units. No fighters in Australia. No fighters in India. It's gonna be a very long January I think... My current aim is to slow him down in the DEI in the month of January with the target of reinforcing several key areas in the meanwhile. There are still many days of amphibious bonus and each turn is a pain, but we fight back as much as we can. DEATH OF A CA (AND LUZON SITUATION): [image]local://upfiles/59041/EE60B740E33B4D70A80062EF6FE94241.jpg[/image]

jdsrae -> RE: Insanity. Obscenity. Indecency. ITAKLinus (A) vs DesertWolf101 (J) (8/5/2021 8:47:11 AM)
For Tahiti, check the port size. I think you need to send troops in an amphib task force or you might not be able to unload the bulldozers when they get there. https://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/Admin-Hist/021-AdvanceBases/AdvanceBases-4.html From memory the real life OP BOBCAT learnt the hard way that the order you pack a ship is important as it dictates the order in which it is unpacked at the other end!

ITAKLinus -> RE: Insanity. Obscenity. Indecency. ITAKLinus (A) vs DesertWolf101 (J) (8/5/2021 9:13:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing Worth following the links suggested in this thread, particular emphasis on posts by Alfred and Symon. It is my understanding that AT guns are: 1) ART 2) with insufficient range to bombard Therefore, they don't benefit from the bombardment capability and, at the same time, being ART, they cannot deliberate/shock. My conclusion has always been that they are excluded from bombardment (due to range) and, since they cannot deliberate/shock, the participate only in defense firing phase and nothing else. Am I misunderstanding everything including what's written in the link you provided (btw, thanks!) ? quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing In a Scenario 1 game, there's a limited number of those brigades to go around in December '41. If there are lots running around, then they've either been pulled from China (great) or Japan (even better). The correct response is a submarine landed raider unit at a unlikely hex that has minimal or no garrison and aircraft factories. I suggest you review the north coast of Honshu. The scale of effort required to land a IJA division vs a large IJA brigade is more or less the same, so my earlier points still hold true. There are many which can be cheaply purchased in Onshu for a token price. Our HRs have forbidden sub landings, also, so this path is not going to happen. In China it's unlikely he has bought out units yet, since A) many reinforcements have yet to come; B) he's currently heavily committed in the Theater. quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing Then what you are proposing with the US Army regiments makes sense. In 1941 you do not have the surplus of divisions and assets to make every island an unassailable fortress. You can make it not worth the risk and effort. That's precisely my intent. I don't expect anything to hold out in case of a convinced Japanese offensive. I am instead pretty much convinced the best way to go is to create the lowest possible ROI for his assets. Moreover, he cannot credibly land everywhere in forces and obliging him to commit large amounts of assets is somehow a practical way to slow him down OR create openings for strikes around his main thrust. I am a firm believer that "fortresses" are an overstated concept. quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing Then your opponent in your current Japanese match is playing to your strength. The first thought from me on this is that Suva is uncomfortably far east for Japan. There is a great deal of ocean between Rabual and even the forward base at Luganville. The second thought is that the IJN east of the Coral Sea is the IJN not defending other targets. Let's see what IJN dispositions look like once USN CV's appear off Honshu and strike industry and shipping. I agree, but what can I do? I'm the Japanese there! [:D][:D][:D][:D] My perspective is that a heavy commitment in Suva&co creates openings somewhere else. Now, in this match the question is whether to bet on striking AROUND the thrust in the SoPac (f.ex. he goes on Suva and my CVs engage what he has in Luganville, hopefully various support ships) or if it is reasonable to strike in a strategically different location (DEI in my case). This is the real dilemma I am facing. To put it in other words, I have to decide whether I want to contrast his move locally or strategically. I am very much inclined to think that the strategic approach is the way to go, but I am probably biased due to my strong preference for the strategic, rather than the operational or tactical, level. Just like everywhere else, I welcome very much advice on this subject.

mind_messing -> RE: Insanity. Obscenity. Indecency. ITAKLinus (A) vs DesertWolf101 (J) (8/5/2021 10:31:31 AM)
quote: It is my understanding that AT guns are: 1) ART 2) with insufficient range to bombard Therefore, they don't benefit from the bombardment capability and, at the same time, being ART, they cannot deliberate/shock. My conclusion has always been that they are excluded from bombardment (due to range) and, since they cannot deliberate/shock, the participate only in defense firing phase and nothing else. Am I misunderstanding everything including what's written in the link you provided (btw, thanks!) ? In the context of an amphibious landing, remember that there is more than just the ground combat phase where devices within an LCU may fire. Your US Army regiment may only get 120 AV, but in such a situation it may get more than one "bite at the apple" in terms of engaging the bigger IJ brigade sized formation. quote: There are many which can be cheaply purchased in Onshu for a token price. Our HRs have forbidden sub landings, also, so this path is not going to happen. In China it's unlikely he has bought out units yet, since A) many reinforcements have yet to come; B) he's currently heavily committed in the Theater. One reason I mislike house rules. Then discount subs, there are APD's to hand for the Allies, and options for conversions. Even a lone, slow xAP can get surprisingly close to the IJ mainland given appropriate routes. Especially so early in the war, where the IJ don't have the assets and infrastructure to properly cover the North and Central Pacific approaches. quote: I agree, but what can I do? I'm the Japanese there! Hope your opponent isn't reading your other AAR? quote: My perspective is that a heavy commitment in Suva&co creates openings somewhere else. Now, in this match the question is whether to bet on striking AROUND the thrust in the SoPac (f.ex. he goes on Suva and my CVs engage what he has in Luganville, hopefully various support ships) or if it is reasonable to strike in a strategically different location (DEI in my case). This is the real dilemma I am facing. To put it in other words, I have to decide whether I want to contrast his move locally or strategically. I am very much inclined to think that the strategic approach is the way to go, but I am probably biased due to my strong preference for the strategic, rather than the operational or tactical, level. Just like everywhere else, I welcome very much advice on this subject. Japan has finite fuel, the Allies do not. The Pacific is big, use it. Every day's worth of sailing that the KB is making to respond to an Allied raid is a day where it's not contributing to a larger plan. To look at it another way, you trade the bases in the South Pacific for permanent VP's in the form of ships, industry, aircraft or whatever. Come 1943 and 1944 you can take the bases back.

ITAKLinus -> RE: Insanity. Obscenity. Indecency. ITAKLinus (A) vs DesertWolf101 (J) (8/5/2021 10:52:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing Hope your opponent isn't reading your other AAR? Sadly, he is for sure [:D][:D][:D] And google translate helps him. Funnily enough, even the opponent in that specific match, Kaiser85, reads the AAR about the match with him. Completely allowed and intended since the beginning. quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing Then discount subs, there are APD's to hand for the Allies, and options for conversions. Even a lone, slow xAP can get surprisingly close to the IJ mainland given appropriate routes. Especially so early in the war, where the IJ don't have the assets and infrastructure to properly cover the North and Central Pacific approaches. I don't diskile basic HRs but I suppose this goes down to the individual preferences. His NavS is good. I'd need to get Midway back in order to create a gap there. APDs are nowehere to be found until I finish the conversion of Clemson-Class destroyers on the West Coast (still 18 days to go). CenPac is covered as well. I have shown my CVs intentionally and they got picked up the first turn they were supposed to be in range and remained so. I think he has taken out a Mavis group from the Marshalls and put it in Wake or Midway, while another has gone south. Given that I cannot credibly cross the damn Marshalls, I think the only feasible way to threated Onshu proper is through the Midway-gap. Not that I have any intention of doing anything now. quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing Japan has finite fuel, the Allies do not. The Pacific is big, use it. Every day's worth of sailing that the KB is making to respond to an Allied raid is a day where it's not contributing to a larger plan. To look at it another way, you trade the bases in the South Pacific for permanent VP's in the form of ships, industry, aircraft or whatever. Come 1943 and 1944 you can take the bases back. The main point, rather than fuel, is the opportunity cost. That's why I did welcome the KB remaining one week around PH for ZERO results additional to the 7th Dec ones (just some minor damage to already damaged BBs). This delay from his side has given me the lead in terms of redeployment. My CVs are closer to DEI than his ones and I should be able to set something up over there before he can arrive, should he decide to do so. The problem I do see is how to create such a crisis as to require the redeployment of his CVs from the Pacific to the DEI. In other words, I would like to create a crisis in the DEI with my USN CVs so that he has to send KB over there and cannot heavily cover his SoPac operation. Basically: I need to find such a vital interest for him there so that he's compelled to react and not passively accept the situation. (currently) I don't see how to do so, but it would be a major strategic victory from my side. Especially if we consider that I am somewhat plenty of surface assets in the SoPac and they have a good amount of fuel: they can put up a real fight in the area should he come "light" while his carriers are away responding in the DEI. You mentioned CV strikes on Onshu. I disagree. My opponent in the AAR mentioned above has struck Tokio and he has been lucky not to lose any CV there. KB hasn't changed its route of a single hex due to the "crisis" over there. He couldn't do much damage and I had hundreds of IJNAF 2Es in range with good pilots (and bad weather.....[&:]). Even a torpedo or two to a USN CV near Onshu has the likelihood of transforming a raid into a tragedy and CAPs in 1941 aren't that great for either side. If he would have had the CVs slowed down, I could have hunted and sunk them with mine for example. He did accomplish a heavy movement of IJNAF 2Es and subs, though.

ny59giants -> RE: Insanity. Obscenity. Indecency. ITAKLinus (A) vs DesertWolf101 (J) (8/5/2021 11:07:46 AM)
Small xAKL - you have many with capacity of 1750 that take 14 days to convert to small xAPs in India, Dutch, and Australia. They are very useful for moving troops and are part of what I call my "coastal navy." Java - you have two large BFs here that I spent PPs to buy out as each is 100 Aviation Support. Much needed now and in the future. Malaysian Air Force - Those short legged Buffaloes need to get to India via Sabang on northern tip of Sumatra to Port Blair to Burma and beyond. If not, then fly down to Batavia to load unto xAKs. SoPac - It you still hold Suva/Pago Pago area in a few months, I develop Vava'u as my hub down here as it has the largest port size 6 outside of Aukland. You have couple of USN BFs on the 'tail' of Alaska that can be moved to Prince Rupert and then RR to Cali to rebuild and head out. Each has 100 naval support which is helpful at your hubs in CenPac/SoPac. A big decision right now is where to send the few construction engineer LCUs. Choose wisely my young Jedi. [;)] Get those PBY-5s out of USA to Pearl and beyond, sir!!

mind_messing -> RE: Insanity. Obscenity. Indecency. ITAKLinus (A) vs DesertWolf101 (J) (8/5/2021 11:44:39 AM)
quote: His NavS is good. I'd need to get Midway back in order to create a gap there. No, you should be able to infiltrate single ship task forces between Midway and Adak, even if one (or both) are in IJ hands. This early in the war, there just aren't the long-range aircraft needed to properly cover all the approaches. It probably takes until late '42 to fill out properly with the Dinah and other long-range planes. quote: APDs are nowehere to be found until I finish the conversion of Clemson-Class destroyers on the West Coast (still 18 days to go). Wise to get going on the conversions. You get a handful more by March, which incidentally is about the same time that you'll get a unit roughly 100% prepped for a base. quote: CenPac is covered as well. I have shown my CVs intentionally and they got picked up the first turn they were supposed to be in range and remained so. I think he has taken out a Mavis group from the Marshalls and put it in Wake or Midway, while another has gone south. Given that I cannot credibly cross the damn Marshalls, I think the only feasible way to threated Onshu proper is through the Midway-gap. Not that I have any intention of doing anything now. To reiterate as it bears repeating, single ship task forces are considerably harder to raise DL on compared to large task forces (especially carrier task forces). quote: The main point, rather than fuel, is the opportunity cost. That's why I did welcome the KB remaining one week around PH for ZERO results additional to the 7th Dec ones (just some minor damage to already damaged BBs). This delay from his side has given me the lead in terms of redeployment. My CVs are closer to DEI than his ones and I should be able to set something up over there before he can arrive, should he decide to do so. The problem I do see is how to create such a crisis as to require the redeployment of his CVs from the Pacific to the DEI. In other words, I would like to create a crisis in the DEI with my USN CVs so that he has to send KB over there and cannot heavily cover his SoPac operation. Basically: I need to find such a vital interest for him there so that he's compelled to react and not passively accept the situation. (currently) I don't see how to do so, but it would be a major strategic victory from my side. Especially if we consider that I am somewhat plenty of surface assets in the SoPac and they have a good amount of fuel: they can put up a real fight in the area should he come "light" while his carriers are away responding in the DEI. Based on the current situation, carrier strikes on the oil at Miri and Brunei should manufacture a sufficient crisis - provided DW actually takes the hex and doesn't sit and wait till the DEI has been cleared (which is what I would do in his position). quote: You mentioned CV strikes on Onshu. I disagree. My opponent in the AAR mentioned above has struck Tokio and he has been lucky not to lose any CV there. KB hasn't changed its route of a single hex due to the "crisis" over there. He couldn't do much damage and I had hundreds of IJNAF 2Es in range with good pilots (and bad weather.....). Even a torpedo or two to a USN CV near Onshu has the likelihood of transforming a raid into a tragedy and CAPs in 1941 aren't that great for either side. If he would have had the CVs slowed down, I could have hunted and sunk them with mine for example. He did accomplish a heavy movement of IJNAF 2Es and subs, though. Striking Tokyo is a fool's errand. The static AA alone makes it an unattractive prospect. Better to focus on the smaller bases of northern Honshu where defences are considerably weaker and allow an easier approach. Sendai, Yamagata, Akita and the bases surrounding Ominato all are solid candidates. 2E's are unlikely to be as large a problem for you as they were for your opponents - they cannot both be flying extensive naval search and be ready to sortie from the Home Islands, and there is only a single airbase suitable for torpedo equipped bombers east of Tokyo (Bihoro) on December 7th. If DW has stripped units from Japan proper, there will be fewer engineers to develop airbases needed to facilitate these strikes.

ITAKLinus -> RE: Insanity. Obscenity. Indecency. ITAKLinus (A) vs DesertWolf101 (J) (8/5/2021 11:50:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing Based on the current situation, carrier strikes on the oil at Miri and Brunei should manufacture a sufficient crisis - provided DW actually takes the hex and doesn't sit and wait till the DEI has been cleared (which is what I would do in his position). I reply super quickly just to this point. Contrary to my belief of not taking the oilfields until you have air supremacy in the area, he mysteriously landed on both Miri and Brunei on 7th DEC, but he hasn't conquered either until yesterday, when he finally took Brunei. If I were him, this wouldn't create enough of a crisis to shuttle CVs there from SoPac, but maybe I'm missing something?

mind_messing -> RE: Insanity. Obscenity. Indecency. ITAKLinus (A) vs DesertWolf101 (J) (8/5/2021 12:17:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ITAKLinus quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing Based on the current situation, carrier strikes on the oil at Miri and Brunei should manufacture a sufficient crisis - provided DW actually takes the hex and doesn't sit and wait till the DEI has been cleared (which is what I would do in his position). I reply super quickly just to this point. Contrary to my belief of not taking the oilfields until you have air supremacy in the area, he mysteriously landed on both Miri and Brunei on 7th DEC, but he hasn't conquered either until yesterday, when he finally took Brunei. If I were him, this wouldn't create enough of a crisis to shuttle CVs there from SoPac, but maybe I'm missing something? Challenging (but not impossible) to progress landings on Sumatra and Java in the face of Allied CVs without IJN CV's also in attendance. At the very least it puts a spanner in the timetable of any second phase offensive.

ITAKLinus -> RE: Insanity. Obscenity. Indecency. ITAKLinus (A) vs DesertWolf101 (J) (8/5/2021 1:29:02 PM)
Regarding Midway. I would like to land 2 US Army InfRegiments (240AV), USMC Raiders, 1 USMC ARM, 1 CombatENG. CommandHQ in range and CorpsHQ as well. Will it be sufficient supposing the worst case scenario (heavy forts and good troop mix) ? I have ZERO info about the defenses there, other than the presence of a tank unit (still need to check on the Japanese side its TOE). But, especially, so early in the war how should I frame the landing force? I live under the assumption that I can gather AKs for the equipment and use APs for the infantry (APDs are good as well, but I might use them for supplies): is this reasonable?

mind_messing -> RE: Insanity. Obscenity. Indecency. ITAKLinus (A) vs DesertWolf101 (J) (8/5/2021 2:57:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ITAKLinus Regarding Midway. I would like to land 2 US Army InfRegiments (240AV), USMC Raiders, 1 USMC ARM, 1 CombatENG. CommandHQ in range and CorpsHQ as well. Will it be sufficient supposing the worst case scenario (heavy forts and good troop mix) ? I have ZERO info about the defenses there, other than the presence of a tank unit (still need to check on the Japanese side its TOE). But, especially, so early in the war how should I frame the landing force? I live under the assumption that I can gather AKs for the equipment and use APs for the infantry (APDs are good as well, but I might use them for supplies): is this reasonable? Massive overkill. A US Army regiment is about 5k worth of stacking limits alone. What you propose would likely double the 6k stacking limit on Midway. One regiment plus one or two tank battalions will be sufficient to get the job done, provided you are able to sufficiently disrupt the defending troops via air bombardment or gunfire. AP/AK's are ideal, and you should have sufficient numbers to fully off-load the troops and tanks in one turn. APD's I would leave for dedicated fast transport raids or base flipping.

BBfanboy -> RE: Insanity. Obscenity. Indecency. ITAKLinus (A) vs DesertWolf101 (J) (8/5/2021 5:15:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing quote: ORIGINAL: ITAKLinus Regarding Midway. I would like to land 2 US Army InfRegiments (240AV), USMC Raiders, 1 USMC ARM, 1 CombatENG. CommandHQ in range and CorpsHQ as well. Will it be sufficient supposing the worst case scenario (heavy forts and good troop mix) ? I have ZERO info about the defenses there, other than the presence of a tank unit (still need to check on the Japanese side its TOE). But, especially, so early in the war how should I frame the landing force? I live under the assumption that I can gather AKs for the equipment and use APs for the infantry (APDs are good as well, but I might use them for supplies): is this reasonable? Massive overkill. A US Army regiment is about 5k worth of stacking limits alone. What you propose would likely double the 6k stacking limit on Midway. One regiment plus one or two tank battalions will be sufficient to get the job done, provided you are able to sufficiently disrupt the defending troops via air bombardment or gunfire. AP/AK's are ideal, and you should have sufficient numbers to fully off-load the troops and tanks in one turn. APD's I would leave for dedicated fast transport raids or base flipping. I would add an arty unit with 105 or 155 howitzers. Overstacking can be dealt with by landing lots of supply from supply-only ships (loaded amphibiously). A Corps HQ can be landed at the dot island (Kure?) next to Midway so it does not add to the stacking issues. There is no point bringing a Command HQ without also having a Corps or Army HQ in range. The Japanese do not have much in the way of engineers. Midway forts will take them at least three months to build to Level 5 or 6. Damaging the port and airfield will halt fort building until the former are repaired.

ITAKLinus -> RE: Insanity. Obscenity. Indecency. ITAKLinus (A) vs DesertWolf101 (J) (8/5/2021 6:24:04 PM)
I come back to the wonderful suggestions later Now a couple of quick questions. A) How do I resize DBs on Allied CVs? I have a VMBS group on the Enterprise but it doesn't want to resize, neither to "fit the ship" nor to 90 planes. I tried to create AirTF various times and disband but it doesn't work. B) What do you think of putting Swordfish groups on USN CVs and unloading the devastators? Cruise speed is awful at 104mph vs the almost 150mph of the Dauntless-2 but can it somehow work? Never thought at that but I have a couple of swordfish groups which can go on USN CVs (one is a random group around and the other is the Hermes' one, Hermes which is going to be transformed in a fighter-only CVL). C) I am pondering on how to employ the famous embarked british reinforcements.The initial idea was to send them to Australia and they are going there but I am currently thinking whether it can be wise to send them somewhere else. Do you have any idea on how to employ them? The 18th British Division should survive, but the various brigades (one of the 17th Division and two spare ones) are deemed "VERY expendable".

mind_messing -> RE: Insanity. Obscenity. Indecency. ITAKLinus (A) vs DesertWolf101 (J) (8/5/2021 7:48:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BBfanboy quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing quote: ORIGINAL: ITAKLinus Regarding Midway. I would like to land 2 US Army InfRegiments (240AV), USMC Raiders, 1 USMC ARM, 1 CombatENG. CommandHQ in range and CorpsHQ as well. Will it be sufficient supposing the worst case scenario (heavy forts and good troop mix) ? I have ZERO info about the defenses there, other than the presence of a tank unit (still need to check on the Japanese side its TOE). But, especially, so early in the war how should I frame the landing force? I live under the assumption that I can gather AKs for the equipment and use APs for the infantry (APDs are good as well, but I might use them for supplies): is this reasonable? Massive overkill. A US Army regiment is about 5k worth of stacking limits alone. What you propose would likely double the 6k stacking limit on Midway. One regiment plus one or two tank battalions will be sufficient to get the job done, provided you are able to sufficiently disrupt the defending troops via air bombardment or gunfire. AP/AK's are ideal, and you should have sufficient numbers to fully off-load the troops and tanks in one turn. APD's I would leave for dedicated fast transport raids or base flipping. I would add an arty unit with 105 or 155 howitzers. Overstacking can be dealt with by landing lots of supply from supply-only ships (loaded amphibiously). A Corps HQ can be landed at the dot island (Kure?) next to Midway so it does not add to the stacking issues. There is no point bringing a Command HQ without also having a Corps or Army HQ in range. The Japanese do not have much in the way of engineers. Midway forts will take them at least three months to build to Level 5 or 6. Damaging the port and airfield will halt fort building until the former are repaired. Disagree on the 105s/155s. Artillery is for protracted combat. Ideally, you want atoll invasions to be quick, one day affairs. The disruption and losses that your artillery LCU's would traditionally inflict will instead be delivered by BB/CA/CL bombardment (and be substantially more effective as a result). Artillery is also quite squishy and will likely suffer on the unloading phase. Much better to substitute for armoured units, which are more likely to fare better in the unloading fire phase and harder for your typical IJ garrison force to deal with. Also disagree on the overstacking - it complicates the extraction of units and causes issues with fatigue and disruption that can easily be avoided. The dance to get combat troops off the island and a garrison and support units on it is already a challenge. There are circumstances where overstacking makes sense, but I don't see this as being one of them. Corps/Command HQ's are not worth the effort in this situation either. Much like the artillery, they're for protracted land campaigns where they can give full benefit to a number of units rather than a handful. If this was an invasion in late '43 of Guam, for example, I'd agree with you. Not appropriate for a early '42 atoll landing. What is needed is a simple, well formed landing force with adequate naval and air support. This is followed up by an appropriate collection of garrison and support troops to enable naval and air operations from the island once the invasion force has withdrawn. quote: ORIGINAL: ITAKLinus I come back to the wonderful suggestions later Now a couple of quick questions. A) How do I resize DBs on Allied CVs? I have a VMBS group on the Enterprise but it doesn't want to resize, neither to "fit the ship" nor to 90 planes. I tried to create AirTF various times and disband but it doesn't work. B) What do you think of putting Swordfish groups on USN CVs and unloading the devastators? Cruise speed is awful at 104mph vs the almost 150mph of the Dauntless-2 but can it somehow work? Never thought at that but I have a couple of swordfish groups which can go on USN CVs (one is a random group around and the other is the Hermes' one, Hermes which is going to be transformed in a fighter-only CVL). C) I am pondering on how to employ the famous embarked british reinforcements.The initial idea was to send them to Australia and they are going there but I am currently thinking whether it can be wise to send them somewhere else. Do you have any idea on how to employ them? The 18th British Division should survive, but the various brigades (one of the 17th Division and two spare ones) are deemed "VERY expendable". A) Not all DB squadrons can resize freely. Some have timed resizes that superceed player defined resize. IIRC there are USN squadrons on the West Coast than can be freely resized. B) Bad idea. Swordfish are worse than the Devastators, but at least they have respectable torpedoes. I will remove torpedo bombers completely from Allied CV's until the Avengers are to hand in sufficient numbers. Dauntless dive bombers can handle everything bar the battleships, and even then non-penetrating hits will ruin the IJN's day. C) Where do you feel weakest?

Alfred -> RE: Insanity. Obscenity. Indecency. ITAKLinus (A) vs DesertWolf101 (J) (8/5/2021 8:02:26 PM)
Against a properly structured enemy invasion force, atolls can only be successfully defended if the defender has sea and air control of the approaches. Attempting to make them terrestrially impregnable just consigns the garrison to POW duties. Alfred

ITAKLinus -> RE: Insanity. Obscenity. Indecency. ITAKLinus (A) vs DesertWolf101 (J) (8/5/2021 8:46:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing Disagree on the 105s/155s. Artillery is for protracted combat. Ideally, you want atoll invasions to be quick, one day affairs. The disruption and losses that your artillery LCU's would traditionally inflict will instead be delivered by BB/CA/CL bombardment (and be substantially more effective as a result). Artillery is also quite squishy and will likely suffer on the unloading phase. Much better to substitute for armoured units, which are more likely to fare better in the unloading fire phase and harder for your typical IJ garrison force to deal with. Also disagree on the overstacking - it complicates the extraction of units and causes issues with fatigue and disruption that can easily be avoided. The dance to get combat troops off the island and a garrison and support units on it is already a challenge. There are circumstances where overstacking makes sense, but I don't see this as being one of them. Corps/Command HQ's are not worth the effort in this situation either. Much like the artillery, they're for protracted land campaigns where they can give full benefit to a number of units rather than a handful. If this was an invasion in late '43 of Guam, for example, I'd agree with you. Not appropriate for a early '42 atoll landing. What is needed is a simple, well formed landing force with adequate naval and air support. This is followed up by an appropriate collection of garrison and support troops to enable naval and air operations from the island once the invasion force has withdrawn. A) Not all DB squadrons can resize freely. Some have timed resizes that superceed player defined resize. IIRC there are USN squadrons on the West Coast than can be freely resized. B) Bad idea. Swordfish are worse than the Devastators, but at least they have respectable torpedoes. I will remove torpedo bombers completely from Allied CV's until the Avengers are to hand in sufficient numbers. Dauntless dive bombers can handle everything bar the battleships, and even then non-penetrating hits will ruin the IJN's day. C) Where do you feel weakest? I disagree with artillery as well. My artillery support has to be provided by ships and planes. My current idea is to use the 5th Marine Regiment once beefed up. It has exp=70 and it's a good unit. USMC InfSquad have a/soft lower than the corresponding USArmy ones, but I can live with the difference. Overstacking = I won't then. Personally, I have experience of '44 landings and for atolls I've never cared about overstacking them since my assaults are meant to be completed on the first day of the battle (or inflict such crippling losses not to have a problem on the second and final day). HQs = I'll bring them anyway. They don't create SL issues since they'd be in other bases. CommandHQ can be in range from a dot somewhere S-E and the CorpsHQ, as BBFanboy suggested, from Kure, dot WEST of Midway. B) See my picture below. The group has NO date scheduled for any resize and should be 'resizeble'. I don't grasp. Maybe the fact Enterprise has 1000ops spent is a problem? [&:][&:][&:][&:] C) I feel weak everywhere! Honestly, my weakest spots are the SoPac area but I cannot credibly reinforce them with those troops given the distances involved. In the DEI-CBI sector, the situation is the one we all know. India is fairly undefended currently, Burma has a token force in Rangoon (500AV) and that's it. Sumatra is basically empty. Java is not worth the attempt. I'm toying with the idea of bringing those brigades to Singapore (I can credibly manage a reinforcement dash there with USN CVs support) in roder to bring the defences to around 1.400AV. Not that many, but the reinforcements troops should be good units with good TOE, decent morale/exp and resiliant enough. I'm quite lost regarding their placement. quote: ORIGINAL: Alfred Against a properly structured enemy invasion force, atolls can only be successfully defended if the defender has sea and air control of the approaches. Attempting to make them terrestrially impregnable just consigns the garrison to POW duties. Alfred You're completely wrong. We don't take prisoners. [image]local://upfiles/59041/20335EFA19E74CEFAA8A16D7D2B8982F.jpg[/image]

RangerJoe -> RE: Insanity. Obscenity. Indecency. ITAKLinus (A) vs DesertWolf101 (J) (8/5/2021 9:18:20 PM)
I think that Alfred meant self supporting or starving POW enclosures. POW are good both for their intelligence value as well as propaganda purposes.

BBfanboy -> RE: Insanity. Obscenity. Indecency. ITAKLinus (A) vs DesertWolf101 (J) (8/5/2021 9:19:48 PM)
I haven't done a lot of naval air unit resizes, but every time I did the carrier had to be either disbanded in port or docked. It also took a turn, sometimes two, before the resize happened and another turn after that before aircraft started arriving. Availability of aircraft in the pools might also be part of the criteria - I was not able to resize units early on when there were few aircraft in the pools but by mid 1942 I could. Your SBD-1s are out of production. You will have to upgrade to SBD-3 to get enough aircraft for a unit of 36. Resizing to 60 DBs would likely be a mistake - if there are multiple threats to the CVTF, you want to be able to throw a squadron at each. Swordfish are in short supply and then no supply. Putting them on US CVs where they would face the strongest enemy CAP would not be useful. USN CVs need more fighters on board and there are eligible Marine fighter units available to take the place of the Devastators. Some player have found the Devastators useful ashore at forward bases at risk of bombardment because they can be a threat to enemy BBs. They can also do ASW patrols for the port.

mind_messing -> RE: Insanity. Obscenity. Indecency. ITAKLinus (A) vs DesertWolf101 (J) (8/5/2021 9:23:19 PM)
quote: My current idea is to use the 5th Marine Regiment once beefed up. It has exp=70 and it's a good unit. USMC InfSquad have a/soft lower than the corresponding USArmy ones, but I can live with the difference. Don't get too fixated on this. Yes, the USMC units are better squad for squad than their Army counterparts, but both are miles ahead of IJ squads. Plus, most of the firepower of the US divisions as a whole is concentrated in the MMG and LMG squads which are shared between the two. quote: HQs = I'll bring them anyway. They don't create SL issues since they'd be in other bases. CommandHQ can be in range from a dot somewhere S-E and the CorpsHQ, as BBFanboy suggested, from Kure, dot WEST of Midway. Strong discouragement on this from me. You may be fine with regular support squads and naval support squads, but motorized support will be a nightmare. quote: B) See my picture below. The group has NO date scheduled for any resize and should be 'resizeble'. I don't grasp. Maybe the fact Enterprise has 1000ops spent is a problem? Click the yellow text in top left "No resize allowed" a few times. It should prompt a text box offering resize options. quote: I'm quite lost regarding their placement. Can't go wrong with mainland India in my view, as it probably needs the most help in the early stages of the war. Effectively all the combat formations there are combat ineffective at start, and need some weeks of training reach reasonable EXP/morale levels. Australian forces at start are in a slightly better state, but they can ramp up their effectiveness much more quickly thanks to how the Allied pools work. With careful management you can get most of the CMF militia units using the much more effective AIF infantry squads by mid-42.

ITAKLinus -> RE: Insanity. Obscenity. Indecency. ITAKLinus (A) vs DesertWolf101 (J) (8/6/2021 6:21:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing Click the yellow text in top left "No resize allowed" a few times. It should prompt a text box offering resize options. It doesn't work! quote: ORIGINAL: BBfanboy I haven't done a lot of naval air unit resizes, but every time I did the carrier had to be either disbanded in port or docked. It also took a turn, sometimes two, before the resize happened and another turn after that before aircraft started arriving. Availability of aircraft in the pools might also be part of the criteria - I was not able to resize units early on when there were few aircraft in the pools but by mid 1942 I could. Your SBD-1s are out of production. You will have to upgrade to SBD-3 to get enough aircraft for a unit of 36. Resizing to 60 DBs would likely be a mistake - if there are multiple threats to the CVTF, you want to be able to throw a squadron at each. Swordfish are in short supply and then no supply. Putting them on US CVs where they would face the strongest enemy CAP would not be useful. USN CVs need more fighters on board and there are eligible Marine fighter units available to take the place of the Devastators. Some player have found the Devastators useful ashore at forward bases at risk of bombardment because they can be a threat to enemy BBs. They can also do ASW patrols for the port. Roger. I think you're right about the production/pool. I suppose the only feasible way to fix the issue is to send the 7 a/c group to Sydney, have it upgraded and then sent back to Townsville area. Hopefully, all the planes will be repaired in short order and be transferred to the CV when they sail in the DEI area. I'll fix the resize then in DEI proper. Next turn, however, I leave the group with the standing order of resizing, hopefully the next turn it will be done. My process as Japanese has always been very straightforward: load the group on an empty CV, set the resize to a certain amount, disband the AirTF, done. I think I've never had the need of waiting a day to have the resize performed. Sometimes, for unknown reasons, I had to create the AirTF and disband it multiple times before the group resized.

ITAKLinus -> RE: Insanity. Obscenity. Indecency. ITAKLinus (A) vs DesertWolf101 (J) (8/6/2021 7:35:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ny59giants Small xAKL - you have many with capacity of 1750 that take 14 days to convert to small xAPs in India, Dutch, and Australia. They are very useful for moving troops and are part of what I call my "coastal navy." Java - you have two large BFs here that I spent PPs to buy out as each is 100 Aviation Support. Much needed now and in the future. Malaysian Air Force - Those short legged Buffaloes need to get to India via Sabang on northern tip of Sumatra to Port Blair to Burma and beyond. If not, then fly down to Batavia to load unto xAKs. SoPac - It you still hold Suva/Pago Pago area in a few months, I develop Vava'u as my hub down here as it has the largest port size 6 outside of Aukland. You have couple of USN BFs on the 'tail' of Alaska that can be moved to Prince Rupert and then RR to Cali to rebuild and head out. Each has 100 naval support which is helpful at your hubs in CenPac/SoPac. A big decision right now is where to send the few construction engineer LCUs. Choose wisely my young Jedi. [;)] Get those PBY-5s out of USA to Pearl and beyond, sir!! ny59giants, thanks for your suggestions: gold as usual! I will try to get those Dutch BFs out as soon as Java is threatened. Buffaloes in Malaya are still functional to the defense of the sector and I think their ROI is higher employing them there for the time being. SoPac: Vava'u is meant to be my refuelling station in case I can "straighten" the West Coast - Australia sea route. For the time being, I work in Taithi area due to its relative safety. ENG = that's indeed a huge decision to be made. I think I will ship them in SoPac for now and then redistribute them as soon as they set up a bunch of decent bases in the SoPac area. Currently, my priorities are: 1) securing key bases to allow faster shipments from US; 2) creating sufficient infrastructures to have bunches of mutually supportive bases; 3) fortify key bases in Australia, should things go really bad. Catalinas are on their way to SoPac indeed! B17s as well (actually, they've reached Calcutta today for a period of rest and refit).

ITAKLinus -> RE: Insanity. Obscenity. Indecency. ITAKLinus (A) vs DesertWolf101 (J) (8/6/2021 8:00:41 AM)
ALLIED STRATEGY The entire discussion about "where to send British reinforcements" has led me to the very simple and obvious conclusion that I cannot do the trick without having a strategy. Delaying that to the end of amphibious bonus is probably a wrong idea under many possible points of view. I am now in the process of analyzing the general picture and drawing some conclusions. Broadly speaking, I think my main target is to "dilute" Japanese forces as much as possible, so that I can locally overwhelm them in offensive movements. Having said that, I decided to go for a very CBI-centric strategy. It's something I'm naturally inclined to follow and I do believe in it. The very basic idea is that in CBI I can discard (partially) Japanese naval supremacy and I can force a major strategic accomplishment, which is the opening of a land route to China, where the flow of supplies would create the interesting consequences of blocking there large IJA formations. This has to be coupled with minor operations along the Pacific perimeter, where I can fight a logistical war against Japan and where a minor position can threaten multiple axis and thus make Japan commit relatively heavy amounts of materiel. An added benefit is the amount of ENG Japan would need to fulfill its commitments in the area, ENG which are taken away from other duties. The very basic concept can be summarized in creating the need for Japanese commitment in as many areas as possible, through the means of direct or indirect threats. In this very framework, I do believe I need to create the conditions for an effective fight in Burma early on. Ideally, I should be able to retake the upper half of it before fall '42. The key element is thus the creation of a sufficiently strong presence in India such as to discourage any fool Japanese move in the area while I'm heavily committed on the border with Burma. This, implies the ability to keep key bases along the coastline and to create a very heavy aerial deterrent. Operationally speaking, I am still not sure on the path to follow to accomplish this. I suspect I will spend much of the initial months refitting my LCUs and creating proper infrastructures. Strategically, I have needs that are to be met in order to accomplish my CBI-strategy and my "diluting" approach. My forces operate on the arc of the circle that is the Co-Prosperity Sphere, while Japanese ones operate along the chord. This, implies a very basic consequence: I cannot credibly have a strategic mobility of my forces as strong as the Japanese. Instead of trying to minimize the problem or solve it altogether, I have the conviction that the best approach is "holistic", meaning that each theater of operations will need to perform its tasks with minimal external support from other theaters. On top of that, operations will have to be multiple on multiple axis. In better words: NoPac will need to perform a slow but constant advance on, fundamentally, its own. Same goes with CenPac and SoPac. Small scale actions are paramount, so to minimize the exposure of materiel. Especially, I will need to operate along the lines of "passive aggressive advance", as I define it: basically, it's Guadalcanal logic, where the allies land in a lightly defended position and entail a Japanese answer, which, as successful it can be in the short term, is doomed to fail in the long one. He can shut down a base. He can shut down five bases. He cannot keep shut down a dozen bases thousands of KMs distant. I see the Japanese as a dam and the Allies as a mass of water, which infiltrates through small cracks. The Japanese will try to close all these cracks but they cannot cope with many of them. To recap these, very brief, strategic thoughts: contrarily to my initial assessment regarding the defensive needs, I need to actually send reinforcements to CBI theater. On top of that, I have to start creating the logistical infrastructures which will favor minor operations in the Pacific Ocean (NOPAC/CENPAC/SOPAC). Hope what I wrote makes sense and I, at least partially, expressed my thoughts. EDIT: As far as I do remember, keeping the N-E area of Burma (Katha-Lashio) doesn't allow supplies to flow into China and instead the fellas there themselves have large supplies issue. Other than developing all the bases on the Indian side, is there any trick to make the flow to China work or am I obliged to get Ramree Island and fix in the normal way? My idea is to brutally exploit the fact that THAI cannot go into Burma and try to keep a hold in the area there with proper reinforcements coming from all around the world (but, mostly Chinese and US Army). This, obviously, provided India proper is sufficiently defended so to discourage the action I'd do as Japanese in such a situation: landing between Chittagong and Diamond Harbor and cutting everyone out.

ITAKLinus -> RE: Insanity. Obscenity. Indecency. ITAKLinus (A) vs DesertWolf101 (J) (8/6/2021 10:38:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing quote: My current idea is to use the 5th Marine Regiment once beefed up. It has exp=70 and it's a good unit. USMC InfSquad have a/soft lower than the corresponding USArmy ones, but I can live with the difference. Don't get too fixated on this. Yes, the USMC units are better squad for squad than their Army counterparts, but both are miles ahead of IJ squads. Plus, most of the firepower of the US divisions as a whole is concentrated in the MMG and LMG squads which are shared between the two. Squad for squad, they are roughly the same as initial IJ units. Both SNLF and IJA Inf Squads have 20 of a/soft OR 22. USArmy squads have initially 23 a/soft USMC squads have 21 a/soft Until they do get upgraded, USArmy and USMC infantry squads are basically identical to SNLF IJA ones. 23 vs 20 of a/soft is little bit more than +10% in firepower: a lot, but not overwhelming as in late game. This, talking about InfSquads. The rest is along the same lines in terms of infantry. Let's take machinegunners: IJA HMG squad has 33 a/soft SNLF HMG squad has 24 a/sof US MMG squad has 30 a/soft US HMG squad has 40 a/soft The 2nd Marine Regiment (not the 5th as I wrongly stated in another post) has 102 USMC Rifle Squads (21 a/soft each); 27 US MMG sections (30 a/soft) and 4 HMG section (40 a/soft). 32 mid to small calibre artillery pieces. 180xSupport+45xMotSupport. A US Army Inf Regiment, taking randomly the 160th as an example, has: 91 USA Rifle squads (23 a/soft each); 12 US MMG sections (30 a/soft) and 12 US HMG sections (40 a/soft). 18 mortars and 28 heavy caliber artillery pieces. 89xSupport+89xSupport. A typical 1xSNLF+1xNavGuards defensive scheme has: 96 SNLF squad (a/soft 20), 24 SNLF HMG squad (24 a/soft) 8 70/75mm artillery pieces and 4 mortars. 2 armored cars. In Midway there is also, accordingly to SigInt, the 4th Tank Regiment with 52 Type 95 Light Tank.

mind_messing -> RE: Insanity. Obscenity. Indecency. ITAKLinus (A) vs DesertWolf101 (J) (8/6/2021 12:21:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ITAKLinus quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing quote: My current idea is to use the 5th Marine Regiment once beefed up. It has exp=70 and it's a good unit. USMC InfSquad have a/soft lower than the corresponding USArmy ones, but I can live with the difference. Don't get too fixated on this. Yes, the USMC units are better squad for squad than their Army counterparts, but both are miles ahead of IJ squads. Plus, most of the firepower of the US divisions as a whole is concentrated in the MMG and LMG squads which are shared between the two. Squad for squad, they are roughly the same as initial IJ units. Both SNLF and IJA Inf Squads have 20 of a/soft OR 22. USArmy squads have initially 23 a/soft USMC squads have 21 a/soft Until they do get upgraded, USArmy and USMC infantry squads are basically identical to SNLF IJA ones. 23 vs 20 of a/soft is little bit more than +10% in firepower: a lot, but not overwhelming as in late game. And yet, soft attack is only half the picture. The IJA doesn't get anything with a anti-armour value higher than a 5 until the '43 IJA infantry squad, and that's only rolled out across a few units. The US squads start at 15 or thereabouts and just get better. quote: This, talking about InfSquads. The rest is along the same lines in terms of infantry. Let's take machinegunners: IJA HMG squad has 33 a/soft SNLF HMG squad has 24 a/sof US MMG squad has 30 a/soft US HMG squad has 40 a/soft The important thing to note is that there's no IJ MMG squad in the game whatsoever, so that's a net advantage for US formations over Japanese ones pretty much across the board. quote: The 2nd Marine Regiment (not the 5th as I wrongly stated in another post) has 102 USMC Rifle Squads (21 a/soft each); 27 US MMG sections (30 a/soft) and 4 HMG section (40 a/soft). 32 mid to small calibre artillery pieces. 180xSupport+45xMotSupport. A US Army Inf Regiment, taking randomly the 160th as an example, has: 91 USA Rifle squads (23 a/soft each); 12 US MMG sections (30 a/soft) and 12 US HMG sections (40 a/soft). 18 mortars and 28 heavy caliber artillery pieces. 89xSupport+89xSupport. A typical 1xSNLF+1xNavGuards defensive scheme has: 96 SNLF squad (a/soft 20), 24 SNLF HMG squad (24 a/soft) 8 70/75mm artillery pieces and 4 mortars. 2 armored cars. Without getting too much into the weeds on comparative firepower between TOE's, the important thing to note is that: 1) The Allied squads have overall better stats. 2) The Allied TOE's have a more favourable distribution HMG squads and MMG squads that Japan doesn't have. 3) The Allied TOE has a substantial organic artillery advantage before adding specific artillery LCU's. The fact that the IJ have 8 popguns and four mortars is the reason why you want to put tanks ashore on D-Day

ITAKLinus -> RE: Insanity. Obscenity. Indecency. ITAKLinus (A) vs DesertWolf101 (J) (8/6/2021 12:34:05 PM)
I was mostly replying to this intervention you made: "Don't get too fixated on this. Yes, the USMC units are better squad for squad than their Army counterparts, but both are miles ahead of IJ squads.". It's not true until the first upgrades kick in. The bottom line is, as you mentioned, the need to smash Japanese defenders by other means (especially tanks). My plan is to use a very simple setup with the Marines, a unit or two of tanks, combatENG and the USMC Raiders. They should do the trick even if Japanese are heavily entrenched. Hopefully.

mind_messing -> RE: Insanity. Obscenity. Indecency. ITAKLinus (A) vs DesertWolf101 (J) (8/6/2021 1:01:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ITAKLinus I was mostly replying to this intervention you made: "Don't get too fixated on this. Yes, the USMC units are better squad for squad than their Army counterparts, but both are miles ahead of IJ squads.". It's not true until the first upgrades kick in. You are not be using the latest device database files. USA 41 Rifle squads have 15/20 (a/arm - a/soft) USMC Rifle squads have 15/21 One point of difference is one point of difference, but there's more to in considering things like the MMG/HMG distribution and (likely more importantly) more combat engineers in the Marine units at the regimental level.

ITAKLinus -> RE: Insanity. Obscenity. Indecency. ITAKLinus (A) vs DesertWolf101 (J) (8/6/2021 1:13:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing quote: ORIGINAL: ITAKLinus I was mostly replying to this intervention you made: "Don't get too fixated on this. Yes, the USMC units are better squad for squad than their Army counterparts, but both are miles ahead of IJ squads.". It's not true until the first upgrades kick in. You are not be using the latest device database files. USA 41 Rifle squads have 15/20 (a/arm - a/soft) USMC Rifle squads have 15/21 One point of difference is one point of difference, but there's more to in considering things like the MMG/HMG distribution and (likely more importantly) more combat engineers in the Marine units at the regimental level. Ohhh, now I see what's the issue. Yes, I think we are not using the latest database and in the one we use the USMC have a lower a/soft than USArmy and both are approximately similar to IJA/SNLF ones. At least in '41 and a good part of '42. I know there are more things to consider: I was just considering the raw a/soft of the main infantry troops (rifle squads, MMGs and HMGs) since I'm not very familiar with early-war Allied infantry capabilities on the offensive.

rustysi -> RE: Insanity. Obscenity. Indecency. ITAKLinus (A) vs DesertWolf101 (J) (8/6/2021 8:21:50 PM)
quote: My forces operate on the arc of the circle that is the Co-Prosperity Sphere, while Japanese ones operate along the chord. IOW Japan operates on interior lines and you do not.[:)]

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.203125