Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J)

Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) (Full Version)

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

Message

Mike Solli -> Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) (7/28/2021 9:37:28 PM)
Hi guys. Mike and I are starting a new game. This one will be a 1 day per turn game, unlike the last feeble attempt (by me) at a 2 day per turn game. That was awful and I couldn't manage it. Anyway, here are the house rules: Blackhorse’s house rules to enforce "Original Intent" for PP’s to transfer LCU’s: Restricted LCUs may transfer to any on-map Corps, Army or Command HQs (only). HQs may not be reassigned from an unrestricted Command HQ chain-of-command to a restricted Command HQ chain-of-command. (This prevents reassigning the HQ and having all the units assigned to it be automatically unrestricted without paying the PPs. We wouldn't do that anyway.) Engineer-type units, including base forces, can be assigned to any on-map HQs. Thai forces can leave Thailand for any purpose to a max 4 hexes from the Thai border. Same for Indian troops within 4 hexes of Indian border. Basically, you need to use PPs to move a restricted unit to to an unrestricted HQ to allow it to move over a border. No paradrop or invade with small fragments. Can't invade non-base hexes. No bombing under 10k with 4EB's, but USSA promises he'll forget it a few times. LOL For non-historic first turns, no new Allied TF creation and no orders to air and ground units outside China - pretty standard for the Allies. Issuing orders to any TF's that are already formed at start is allowed. Realism Options: FoW On Advanced Weather On Allied Damage Control On PDU On Historical First Turn - Off Dec 7 Surprise On Reliable USN Torps Off Realistic R&D On No Unit Withdrawals Off Reinforcements - both Fixed Game Options: Combat Reports On Auto Sub Ops Off TF Move Radius On Plane Move Radius On Set All Facilities to Expand Off Auto Upgrade Off Accept Air and Ground Replacements Off Turn Cycle 1 Day Turns Preferences: Combat Animations On Combat Summaries On Let the games begin!

jdsrae -> RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) (7/28/2021 9:42:02 PM)
Welcome back and good luck. May your engineers never run out of cold beer (supply)!

rustysi -> RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) (7/28/2021 9:54:03 PM)
Oh well, I'm too late.[:(] Anyway, PVT Nut Job reporting, sir.[:D]

rustysi -> RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) (7/28/2021 10:23:07 PM)
I take it this is Scen1?

mind_messing -> RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) (7/28/2021 10:30:02 PM)
Excellent to hear that you're back. I imagine that you'll go in to this in more detail in due course, but any broad views on what you'll be doing differently this time around? Are you playing with Andy Mac's updated Scenario 1? There are some changes that I am quite keen about (extra dot China and Burma bases) and others I am not so keen on (extra LI) but on the whole it's an improvement.

RangerJoe -> RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) (7/28/2021 10:38:23 PM)
I learned a lot from your previous AAR and I have referred people to it for help in setting up Japan's situation.

USSAmerica -> RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) (7/28/2021 11:19:43 PM)
In before the lock! [:D] Well, before I'm locked out, anyway. I'm really looking forward to the next decade or so of conflict between us. With any luck, we both might be retired by the time we finish. [8D] Good luck to you, Mike. I hope you're gonna need it. [:'(] Ok, it's safe to break out the Japanese Secret Sauce and start talking factory expansion and hoarding Heavy Industry points. I'm out of here until sometime in 1945. [sm=character0085.gif]

DesertWolf101 -> RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) (7/29/2021 12:17:14 AM)
Looking forward to this one Mike, your AAR was the very first one I read when I started to play the game. Glad to see you are getting back into it. Since I just started my new game as Japan, it will also be nice to see how our games progress in the same approximate timeframe. Good luck!

Mike Solli -> RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) (7/29/2021 12:18:26 AM)
Yep, Scenario 1. quote: ORIGINAL: rustysi I take it this is Scen1?

Shilka -> RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) (7/29/2021 4:12:24 AM)
quote: Hi guys. Mike and I are starting a new game. This one will be a 1 day per turn game, unlike the last feeble attempt (by me) at a 2 day per turn game. That was awful and I couldn't manage it. Was the 2 day turn cycle really that bad? I'm currently playing the AI with it, it seems you can lose some reaction time for i.e. invasions. And in some cases bad decisions, or guesses can have multiplied effects, but then again so can good decisions so it might somewhat even out over time (of course AI is exception). But on the other hand, it might theoretically more or less halve the total time for a game, even if not practically that much but still it might be a big deal for most people. It doesn't affect too much on the strategic level but might in the tactical - well just good to know the trade offs. I guess the game is originally meant for 1 day turns but the devs have done what they can to help with longer cycles. Anyway thanks and good luck with the AAR, will be reading too.

jdsrae -> RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) (7/30/2021 2:11:17 AM)
I wouldn't like two day turns for air or land combat, or CV battles. For land combat, not being able to cancel the second day in a row of shock attacks would not be good. eg: Singapore assault or any amphibious landing on an atoll would cause back to back days of shock attacks. For air combat, not being able to cancel a sweep or bombing raid that ran into unexpected opposition would also be difficult to watch. CV battles which can change the strategic picture would also be even more of a lottery.

Mike Solli -> RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) (8/2/2021 4:08:48 PM)
Sorry for a lack of posts, but I've been scanning my old AAR to remind myself of all the stupid things I did and how to fix them. I plan on making different stupid mistakes this time around. [:D] Anyway, I'm starting at the end of the war and working my way to 1941 so I can plan with the end in mind. Air/engine R&D first. My end game fighters will be: IJA: Frank-r Ki-83 IJN: Sam George Simple and to the point. I plan on building the Ki-115 and Toka. I want to minimize engine and airframe factory wholesale changes. One thought is to Keep the Ha-34 engine going and build Helen bombers throughout the war to use as Kamikazes as well. Armor, high durability, good range. That way I don't have to change a 360 size factory for a huge cost in supply and I'll still have a nice supply of good IJAAF Kamikazes. I'll start with that. Let the litany begin. [:D] Edit: I estimate a pool of 4500-5000 Helens available as Kamikazes.

RangerJoe -> RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) (8/2/2021 5:32:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mike Solli Sorry for a lack of posts, but I've been scanning my old AAR to remind myself of all the stupid things I did and how to fix them. I plan on making different stupid mistakes this time around. [:D] Anyway, I'm starting at the end of the war and working my way to 1941 so I can plan with the end in mind. Air/engine R&D first. My end game fighters will be: IJA: Frank-r Ki-83 IJN: Sam George Simple and to the point. I plan on building the Ki-115 and Toka. I want to minimize engine and airframe factory wholesale changes. One thought is to Keep the Ha-34 engine going and build Helen bombers throughout the war to use as Kamikazes as well. Armor, high durability, good range. That way I don't have to change a 360 size factory for a huge cost in supply and I'll still have a nice supply of good IJAAF Kamikazes. I'll start with that. Let the litany begin. [:D] Edit: I estimate a pool of 4500-5000 Helens available as Kamikazes. As long as you don't keep repeating the same mistakes. A suggestion, especially if you remove a float plane unit from your cruisers that have two, resize the Jakes and train them on Low Naval. Even with trainees early on, they can get decent hits on Low naval. Then use them for ASW to get their experience up and you will have trained naval kamikaze pilots.

mind_messing -> RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) (8/2/2021 6:56:07 PM)
Well, happy to provide some input to start things off. quote: IJA: Frank-r Ki-83 Both good choices, the '83 is about as late-war a plane as you can get and keep it practical. quote: IJN: Sam George George is a mid-war fighter to my thinking. Would consider the Shinden as a late-game contender as it will do yeoman-like work on the defensive. quote: I want to minimize engine and airframe factory wholesale changes. One thought is to Keep the Ha-34 engine going and build Helen bombers throughout the war to use as Kamikazes as well. Armor, high durability, good range. That way I don't have to change a 360 size factory for a huge cost in supply and I'll still have a nice supply of good IJAAF Kamikazes. Some thoughts on this: - Helen does not strike me as a good contender for kamikaze. Far too slow. - If you plan on using the IJAAF for anti-shipping, then the Peggy-T should be your prime contender. Peggy-T will have a number of attack profiles, the Helen will effectively just be a Low-Nav platform. - IIRC you need to pay a PP cost to change most of the late-war kami squadrons to use 2E bombers. Not a massive consideration, but one nonetheless. - For all that effort into the Helen, I'd consider looking into the Ki-74 Patsy as an alternative. Fast, massive range, exceptional altitude. Much more potential that the old, slow Helen.

Lowpe -> RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) (8/3/2021 2:31:22 PM)
Good luck... Helens are horrible Kamikazes, been there and done that, they just can't hit. Peggy T would be much, much better. Grace might be the best non-kamikaze kamikaze if you get my meaning.[;)]

Mike Solli -> RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) (8/3/2021 3:36:22 PM)
Ok, 0 for 2 on the Helen as a Kamikaze. Was just thinking to save 360k supply on that Ha-34 factory. Guess that ain't happening. Now when do I change it and what do I change it to? Gotta figure that out...

mind_messing -> RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) (8/3/2021 4:55:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mike Solli Ok, 0 for 2 on the Helen as a Kamikaze. Was just thinking to save 360k supply on that Ha-34 factory. Guess that ain't happening. Now when do I change it and what do I change it to? Gotta figure that out... Ki-74 Patsy all the way. Range of a B-29, respectable speed. Armour. Good durability. It's the massive range that will really let this airframe shine and give you both some real defence in depth and long reach. With 29 hexes normal range, you can be staging out of bases in Manchuria and flying against beach-heads in Hokkaido or Kyushu. Alternatively, draw a 29 hex circle around Truk. All those are potential targets. Don't get me wrong, it's a bit hit or miss to get consistent attacks over those long ranges, but it's a real step change while the Helen is a comparatively minor incremental improvement.

RangerJoe -> RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) (8/3/2021 5:22:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing quote: ORIGINAL: Mike Solli Ok, 0 for 2 on the Helen as a Kamikaze. Was just thinking to save 360k supply on that Ha-34 factory. Guess that ain't happening. Now when do I change it and what do I change it to? Gotta figure that out... Ki-74 Patsy all the way. Range of a B-29, respectable speed. Armour. Good durability. It's the massive range that will really let this airframe shine and give you both some real defence in depth and long reach. With 29 hexes normal range, you can be staging out of bases in Manchuria and flying against beach-heads in Hokkaido or Kyushu. Alternatively, draw a 29 hex circle around Truk. All those are potential targets. Don't get me wrong, it's a bit hit or miss to get consistent attacks over those long ranges, but it's a real step change while the Helen is a comparatively minor incremental improvement. If the Allied are not careful, they could also be used against the Allied 4E bases which may really disturb the enemy.[X(]

Mike Solli -> RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) (8/3/2021 6:48:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing Well, happy to provide some input to start things off. quote: IJA: Frank-r Ki-83 Both good choices, the '83 is about as late-war a plane as you can get and keep it practical. quote: IJN: Sam George George is a mid-war fighter to my thinking. Would consider the Shinden as a late-game contender as it will do yeoman-like work on the defensive. quote: I want to minimize engine and airframe factory wholesale changes. One thought is to Keep the Ha-34 engine going and build Helen bombers throughout the war to use as Kamikazes as well. Armor, high durability, good range. That way I don't have to change a 360 size factory for a huge cost in supply and I'll still have a nice supply of good IJAAF Kamikazes. Some thoughts on this: - Helen does not strike me as a good contender for kamikaze. Far too slow. - If you plan on using the IJAAF for anti-shipping, then the Peggy-T should be your prime contender. Peggy-T will have a number of attack profiles, the Helen will effectively just be a Low-Nav platform. - IIRC you need to pay a PP cost to change most of the late-war kami squadrons to use 2E bombers. Not a massive consideration, but one nonetheless. - For all that effort into the Helen, I'd consider looking into the Ki-74 Patsy as an alternative. Fast, massive range, exceptional altitude. Much more potential that the old, slow Helen. I have planned my R&D factories but let me see what I can do to incorporate the Shinden.

Mike Solli -> RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) (8/3/2021 7:00:00 PM)
Ok, the Shinden and Patsy both use the Ha-43. I guess I can have 2-3 moderate sized Ha-34 factories so when the inevitable change occurs, it won't take forever to repair them. Let me work on this.

rustysi -> RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) (8/3/2021 10:08:59 PM)
OK, now you're thinking. I have three Ha-34 factories in my current game. I think that's too much. Two should do, and I only produce 300 Ha-34 engines per month, and that has worked fine for myself. Of course your ideas as to their use might necessitate more production. IIRC I think the engine production far outstripped its uses as the plane production was low early in my game. One reason for that is that I didn't produce the very first Helen, the Ia or whatever it is, as the Sally is essentially the same plane. This allow the engine pool to build up quite well. After plane production increased it obviously came down, but that didn't matter as by the time it dipped below 500 I didn't need the engine bonus any longer. I do recall lowering my Tojo production to redress the balance, but by that time I had enough of them to bridge to the first Frank. I got got the first Frank in 9/43, a bit late, and I've since modified my R&D plans to get it about two months sooner. For the most part my R&D plans are calculated to get the models I need 'in time', not for how early I can make it happen. BTW, I don't skip any models on the development line. Even the ones I don't build, like the Tojo Ib. I think that's the one, with the low accuracy cannon. Anyway just my .03 (because I said so much).[:D] And of course JMHO. Edit:Got my Frank's 8/43. And now that I think about it is the Tojo IIb I don't build.

btd64 -> RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) (8/6/2021 2:37:05 PM)
Good luck Mike....GP

ITAKLinus -> RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) (8/6/2021 2:47:50 PM)
Mike, good luck with your new match and thanks for all the very instructive posts you did over the course of the years. Albeit questionable for many, in an AAR I started on this forum you can find my vision regarding Japanese R&D: https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4966141 I am firmly against Tojo and Tony. I'm a great proponent of the duo Frank-R and Oscar

witpqs -> RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) (8/6/2021 4:31:34 PM)
The best, Mike.

GetAssista -> RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) (8/6/2021 5:39:07 PM)
Excellent! We all need an update edition of the logistics FAQ the previous AAR has become over the years :D Good luck with your new game!

Saskecha -> RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) (8/6/2021 6:15:48 PM)
I will follow this AAR as well! I hope to see the Japanese Sun shine upon San Francisco Bay!

rustysi -> RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) (8/6/2021 9:04:43 PM)
quote: I am firmly against Tojo IMHO, Tojo is a must to bridge to the Frank. Specifically the IIc. Oscar is a stablemate with its own functions, but is just too 'everything' to be your main front-line fighter. Too slow, too fragile, too under-gunned. Yeah, its maneuverable, but that wins acrobatic contests, not wars.

rustysi -> RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) (8/6/2021 9:29:47 PM)
quote: Production I changed few production factories and expanded few other ones. A6M2: 70/month Oscar-Ic: 100/month (inconstant production) Kate-II: 40/month Val: 40/month Jake: 50/month Nell: 40/month (inconstant production) Betty: 25/month (until the new Nell comes in May) Mavis: 10/month (until the Emily comes in July) Sally: 50/month (for a long time, until the Helen-IIa has taken over) Dinah: 30/month (production at 0, will be restored when the Dinah-III comes online. Few Dinahs will be produced anyway in the meantime) Lily: 35/month (don't remember if it upgrades to the lily dive bomber. Don't think so. In any case, I need as many 2E level bombers as I can produce currently) Thalia: 10/month (will be increased and will be the standard TR for the entire match) Then I have factories which produce planes of which I do not have any engine production, but I have a stock of engines: Glen: 9/month (stock will last 13.5 months) Dave: 20/month (stock will last 12 months and will be used for NavS anti-sub) Kate-I: 18/month (identical to the Kate-II except for the SR. A plane I like. Stock of engines will last 5,5 months) Alf: 20/month (same as Dave) Mary: 18/month (I love the Mary, don't know why. Being a 1E is quite a handy plane. Stock of engines will last until late April 1942 and the factory will switch to the first Nick, available from 01/05/1942) Ann: 15/month (just like the Mary, it's a good 1E plane. Will be used for ASW patrols in low-priority areas. Good range and SR=1. Engines stock will last until late June 1942 and the factory will switch to the Mavis-TR, available since April 1942). A6M2 I set to 60/month, but 70, OK. I build out the Kate for which you have the engines available, got the idea from you.[:D] Yeah, they're SR2, but as you know CV battles tend to be short and vicious. IIRC, held me over until I got the Jills. Of course some shore based TB's had to 'downgrade'. I don't build any single engine bombers, I have enough for the early war and their ranges are too short and loads too small for later. If you intend to resize your float plane units make Jake 90/month. As for twin engine bombers, numbers must match your expected uses, and losses. And an FYI, the Lilly's do upgrade to the dive bomber version. They're OK, but as the war progresses they die in droves against US ship AAA. Then again what aircraft won't.[:D] It does give you an army DB to go with the Peggy(T)'s.

Mike Solli -> RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) (8/7/2021 5:35:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing Excellent to hear that you're back. I imagine that you'll go in to this in more detail in due course, but any broad views on what you'll be doing differently this time around? Are you playing with Andy Mac's updated Scenario 1? There are some changes that I am quite keen about (extra dot China and Burma bases) and others I am not so keen on (extra LI) but on the whole it's an improvement. Thanks. I'm unaware of Andy Mac's updated Scenario 1. Yes, there are going to be quite a few things done differently this time around. I learned a lot from the long game with Ted. In no particular order: I'm going to change around which ship types gather from certain bases. Basically, fewer larger ships to save fuel, but based on the capabilities of the port. I'm reassessing my resource gathering this time around. Leaving the far-flung, small resource producing bases alone this time. I had a HUGE amount of resources in Japan by 1 Jan 44. I'm going to try and get oil, resources and fuel flowing to Fusan this time. We'll see if it works. I'm working on my R&D, which I'll start from day one. Debating whether or not to take Midway early on. Considering Ceylon in Phase II. Possibly an invasion around Diamond Harbor, to break the Burma deadlock. My subs killed a lot of cargo ships last game. It meant nothing, other than the occasional items that went down in the holds. Re-assessing my use of subs. Aircraft on map training program will be different. I'm focusing more on pilot defense skill, which I didn't even think about until 1943 in my last game. I need to think more about my DEI invasion order in Phase I. I expect Mike to be forward defending, especially with his existing fleet in the area. I'll have to protect the invasion TFs much better. In China, I'm going to attempt to surround as many Chinese as possible without killing them. Chungking is a much earlier goal, then the destruction of of the Chinese Army, not the other way around, which was an issue last game. Better strategic use of my airborne troops early. Lots more, but I'll make a list as I go. So far, I'm doing the easy stuff that doesn't require any real thought.

Mike Solli -> RE: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J) (8/7/2021 5:36:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesertWolf101 Looking forward to this one Mike, your AAR was the very first one I read when I started to play the game. Glad to see you are getting back into it. Since I just started my new game as Japan, it will also be nice to see how our games progress in the same approximate timeframe. Good luck! I've been reading your AAR. Very interesting. What troops did you use to invade Midway and Wake?

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

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.391602