Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Combat Report: Sept 5-8, 1943

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> After Action Reports >> RE: Combat Report: Sept 5-8, 1943 Page: <<   < prev  19 20 [21] 22 23   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Combat Report: Sept 5-8, 1943 - 5/29/2008 2:02:25 AM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline 		Hmm, ok well I always defer to testing... Guess the absence of 4-engined planes really skewed my tests PLUS it was in an open economy during real games so there may have been other confounders

So, 1-engined plane = 36 HI
2-engined plane = 72 HI
4-engined plane = 144 HI
5-engined plane = 180 HI
6-engined plane = 216 HI

Well that's it. I've made the final additions to V1.3 and resent it... The Ki-264s are now 6-engined bombers to simulate the massive difficulty Japan would have in building them. Each player can build 6 fighters for the cost of a single Ki-264 or 3 x twin-engined army bombers. As the war goes on the number of engines required falls so as to simulate Japan's growing capability to produce such large, complicated, planes.

So, if you have 12,000 HI per day = 360,000 HI per month and you produce 100 Ki-264s per month you will have used up 21,600 = 5% of your entire HI for the month just on your bomber force --- or equivalent to enough build 4 entire submarines for the whole month. It shows you just how expensive a navy and a strategic bomber force are. For just 1/3rd of the outlay you can have the same number of tactical bombers ( twin-engined planes ). Makes the choices a lot more interesting.

Thanks for the good work here n01487477. Anything which improves the knowledge base is good.

(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 601
The Kaigun at Sea - 5/29/2008 2:13:03 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Here is the correct dispositions of the American and Japanese Fleets around the Bonins. I titled the posting to get Dan's attention and make him think I am attacking RIGHT NOW!






Attachment (1)

_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 602
RE: The Kaigun at Sea - 5/29/2008 3:34:11 AM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline 		Here is the latest economic reports.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 603
RE: The Kaigun at Sea - 5/29/2008 3:35:36 AM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline 		Here are the growing reserves.
Comments and feedback from other economic ministers, please.
Adjustments?!?




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by ny59giants -- 5/29/2008 3:36:44 AM >

_____________________________


(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 604
RE: The Kaigun at Sea - 5/29/2008 3:44:53 AM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline 		Shipbuilding status. Recommendations for change, if any.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 605
RE: The Kaigun at Sea - 5/29/2008 3:51:52 AM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline 		Just a useful screenshot from Tracker that some here may not have seen before.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 606
RE: The Kaigun at Sea - 5/29/2008 5:03:59 AM   
n01487477


Posts: 4779
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

Here are the growing reserves.
Comments and feedback from other economic ministers, please.
Adjustments?!?



From: A bean counter
To: A coffee brewer

Minister,
I'm impressed with the continued growth of HI and Vehicles. Might you consider halting Armament production for a few weeks?

Reinforcement armament need and delayed in the next 60 Days amount to just about 18K, you have sufficient to cover this. But as ever it is your decision to make...

A timely reminder that expanding any (not repairing existing) production facility will HI cost = num * 10 and associated supplies (cost show on screen) & then supplies to build. (Just if you're thinking about expanding anything - which I doubt you are!)

Lastly, how about halting Musashi, Kasagi and Aso for a few days, and accelerating Ise, surely John would like that in 11 Days to go with Hyunga in 17 ... or are you waiting to bring them in together ?...

Similarly, I recommend halting Kasagi and Aso, because when Ikoma catches up you can have 3 brought in at relatively the same time ... a nice little anvil of strength ... ! [edit]And soon (after Musashi) you'll be able to accelerate all 3 ...

Back to the counting ...
Make me a cuppa ?

---Damian---





< Message edited by n01487477 -- 5/29/2008 5:29:05 AM >

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 607
RE: The Kaigun at Sea - 5/29/2008 6:01:01 AM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

I'm impressed with the continued growth of HI and Vehicles. Might you consider halting Armament production for a few weeks?


I ended up expand one small Vehicles at Kanazawa a few days ago. Don't ask me why I felt the need to do so, but it seemed right at the time (I thing an armored division was over in Bangkok recovering). Hopefully, it will help as the Allies press in. I had just brough all but the 150 Armament back on line (Tokyo), but I'll turn off the other 4 x 75 Armament plants.

quote:

Lastly, how about halting Musashi, Kasagi and Aso for a few days, and accelerating Ise, surely John would like that in 11 Days to go with Hyunga in 17 ... or are you waiting to bring them in together ?...

Similarly, I recommend halting Kasagi and Aso, because when Ikoma catches up you can have 3 brought in at relatively the same time ... a nice little anvil of strength ... ! [edit]And soon (after Musashi) you'll be able to accelerate all 3 ...


I'm going to let John decide on this, as even though it is under the Economic's Minister area, he has a better idea of what he wants to do with his Navy.

_____________________________


(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 608
RE: The Kaigun at Sea - 5/29/2008 6:08:08 AM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline 		John,
Here is what it looks like following what Damian recommended (view the right most column to see what is given points).




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 609
Imperial Conference Called! - 5/29/2008 8:21:11 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Hi Guys.

I have been trying formulate a battle plan to deal with the American Fleet and I look down over my War Ministers desk to see a new mouond of economic paperwork!  The headache--which is always near--over the economy is lessoning and appears to be going away.

How you guys can work thru and process all this information is amazing and I lift my cap off to you.  The four of you have been magnificent and I hope other readers have enjoyed the banter, serious discussion, and powerful economic thought that has occurred here.  It is excellent.

On the reactions/thoughts to questions:
1.  I agree on the halting of the 2 CV so that they may coincide (Asagi, Aso, and Ikoma) in joining the Fleet at nearly the same time.
2.  Would LOVE to keep Musashi going but lets halt her for a bit so the 2 BB-Hybrids come in together.  Can certainly use them in the fight that is about to happen.
3.  Lets keep Vehicles and Armaments going until the end of the month.  I want to make sure that all my armor units get stocked up and the new infantry units about to come are set for the same.  Have to also keep in mind that there will be about 4-5 Inf Div needing to be rebuilt from the Rangoon evacuation.
4.  We NEED the new ASW escorts to get finished!  Michael--Can you turn some of the merchant shipyard back on so that can happen?  Dan's SS have been covering other things but we can bet on their arrival to our constricted sealanes much sooner then later.

Military Thinking:
1.  I am thinking of attacking FAR north China and try to grab that city NW of my current lines.  It has Heavy Industry, Resources, and Oil.  Might that be of help?  There are no good Chinese roads to it so I stand a decent chance of actually taking it before the Hordes arrive.
2.  Am moving fighters into the Okinawa--Formosa--Philippines Lines as fast as I can upgrade them.  REALLY wish the new Tonys were coming in NOW instead of October.
3.  Serious issues with Dan taking Rangoon.  If he drives me out of Moulmein then the DEI is in serious trouble.  Problem is the Chinese (within his army there) make it impossible to drive him back.  Any ideas here?
4.  I am about to pull an Infantry Division out of eastern Australia.  I intend to bring it back to either Formosa or Okinawa as these two places are basically naked at the moment.  Thoughts there?

Operation Typhoon:
Have started operational planning for the Japanese counterstroke.  Does it help that Combined Fleet HQ is at Saipan?

From the screenshot I posted earlier, Dan keeps his CVs about 2-3 hexes North of Iwo while most of his shipping is at Iwo Jima where they are waiting on his MSW to finish cleaning out my mines.  I want to flush those TF away from Iwo Jima's CAP (about 40 Hellkittens and a few Corsairs) so the KB (20 CVs total:  9 CV, 5 CVL, 6 CVE) can then attack them from five hexes away and (hopefully) crush his AP/AK TF and force his Fleet to withdraw.

To do this:
1.  A powerful STF will strike at Iwo.  They will not Bombard but they will attack whatever they can and return to Pagan.  I will cover them with about 150 Tony/Jacks.  This should force his shipping away from the island.

2.  Will position the KB (over 900 planes) four hexes SE of Iwo Jima so they can strike the Island area or any hex north of it.  In doing this, I should 'outrange' (what book is that from?) the enemy CVs and not risk colossal damage to my carriers. They will be set to '0' reaction.

3.  The Betty Fleet (200 Betty with 150 Fighters) sitting in the Marianas will be unleashed along with fighter escort. 

Goal:  Severely maul the American AP/AK/TK/AO and fix it so Dan cannot lift his troops out of Iwo Jima. 

The Fleet will then retire towards the Marianas and see what the American reaction is...


This is THE PLAN.  I am open to suggestions, recommendations, and insults from the readership.  My feelings will not be hurt.  I know Nemo has thrown out some sound advice.  Nemo?  Anyone else??



< Message edited by John 3rd -- 5/29/2008 8:25:56 AM >

_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 610
Indochina - 5/29/2008 8:42:14 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Combat Report
Sept 5-9, 1943
 
The other hot area is Indochina and Burma.  The last of my troops were wiped out at Rangoon on the 9th.  I am pleasantly happy to note that when I tried to attack the troops who had encircled my city (250,000 Japanese present that day) to the loss of the Port, my losses did not exceed 25,000 men.  Pretty good work with the evacuation if you ask me!

Dan will obviously move on Moulmein soon.  It is solid with an AS of 2,600, Fort 9, and supplies around 40,000.

The biggest problem I have is that my divisions from Rangoon are spread from Bangkok to Tavoy to Moulemin, to Victoria Point.  Must bring them together to reorganize, refit, and fill out my TOE.  This will take time.  Bangkok is the key to this and Dan is already hitting shipping there.  Until I can train up some army Sentai this will continue to happen. 

The Indians are trying to make life difficult by landing paratroopers (INDIAN Paras??!!) at Siem Reap and Battambang.  I had already begun moving two portions of Inf Divisions to this area due to recon flights.  The paras at Battambang were driven out and to Siem Reap.  Siem Reap has LRCAP over it shooting down Allied Transport planes and will have Japanese Infantry arriving within a few days.  Should EASILY deal with this threat.  Strange move but it does force me to react...


Side Note
I forgot to mention in the earlier email about my SS Offensive in the Bonins.  The 9th saw Ro-33 sink an LCI and put 2 TT into a TK.  I-123 was hit by ASW while laying a few mines but should get home without issue.  Two days of attacks and ASW have accounted for the following:

Japanese:  Sunk 1 AK, 1 LCI with damage done to 1 DD, 1 AO, 1 TK.

Allies:  Sunk Ro-60 and damage done to 4 Japanese SS with none in sinking condition.

There are still about a dozen SS Operating in the area and I move a pair to both Tori Shima and Chichi Jima to catch anything damaged.


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 611
Psych Warfare ? - 5/29/2008 9:24:26 AM   
n01487477


Posts: 4779
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline 		John,
overall I like the plan ... (there is a typhoon in the Pacific right now called Nakri)

This plan seems potentially flawed only if he moves Sth ... don't lose sight of those Allied CV's movements.

1. Taking a Chinese Base rich with HI/OIL/RES will only make your job easier. As long as it doesn't take a long siege and you end up repairing everything.
2. Yes, Michael and I should look at air groups, engines and airframes again shortly, especially close to the end of this month.
3. I defer to Generals of greater experience....
4. I agree with pulling the Division, but if I were him, I'd tighten the screws on you, especially if I still had enough supplies, 8-9 Divisions running rampant and been lulled in the last few days of relative safety. Although, maybe the delay in you striking back quickly would have me wondering ...

So by "tightening the screws", I'd be thinking why the hell not go for another target, something to wreak havoc on your economy. I don't need Saipan, I want somewhere to make your life miserable. Okinawa/Formosa/an Island I can use or maybe at a stretch Leyte... (I think he para'd into Siem Reap and Battambang as a spoiler/to annoy you, make you jump into something and make a mistake ... Same thing here ... psychological + economic noose)....you'd have to react, I'd try to out gun you. And on thinking further, isn't this whole bold strategy of his, to draw your hand, do a hammer blow from which you can't recover... & he knows he has more in the pipeline.

Therefore, if you have any troops available, get them loaded and reinforcing these area's ... And like Michael said a ring of fire, would help in combating that..

And if he does try to backtrack, give him a taste of Napoleon's march back from Moscow, harass him, use your subs along "normal" paths to make him feel pain. A guy did this to me, and it was a floating smorgasbord for the sharks... although maybe Dan is smarter than I.

---Damian---
[edit] re: Reinforcements - read somewhere about units outside bases in Malaria area's doing better & obviously near HQ's. Would like to know more about supply usage and reinforcements sometime. Maybe something for after this battle is concluded.

[edit] Having read Nemo's analysis below, I realise I'm still learning, and desperately need a game soon to sharpen my skills and analysis ... Could help with focusing on what WitpTracker needs too ... BB or CHS or Nemo ... hmm..

< Message edited by n01487477 -- 5/29/2008 1:08:09 PM >

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 612
RE: Psych Warfare ? - 5/29/2008 10:06:25 AM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline 		I think your plan is an excellent way to lose your SC TF component to virtually no gain. In naval combat the enemy SC TFs are now stronger than yours so, in effect, you are sending outnumbered, lower quality ships out to fight in the enemy's backyard with a view to engaging in synchronous battle with the enemy. It'll be grand spectacle but it won't be strategically viable.

Without enemy air cover his BBs etc are jut Betty-fodder. Why are you striking at components he doesn't need ( SC TFs ) with irreplaceable forces you do need ( for bombardment runs once the enemy airfield is closed ) when you could achieve everything you want with a plan aimed at crucifying his carrier air strength ( not his carriers but his carrier air strength ).

Just my opinion since you mooted you wished for feedback

(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 613
RE: Psych Warfare ? - 5/29/2008 1:54:37 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

On the reactions/thoughts to questions:
1. I agree on the halting of the 2 CV so that they may coincide (Asagi, Aso, and Ikoma) in joining the Fleet at nearly the same time.
2. Would LOVE to keep Musashi going but lets halt her for a bit so the 2 BB-Hybrids come in together. Can certainly use them in the fight that is about to happen.
3. Lets keep Vehicles and Armaments going until the end of the month. I want to make sure that all my armor units get stocked up and the new infantry units about to come are set for the same. Have to also keep in mind that there will be about 4-5 Inf Div needing to be rebuilt from the Rangoon evacuation.
4. We NEED the new ASW escorts to get finished! Michael--Can you turn some of the merchant shipyard back on so that can happen? Dan's SS have been covering other things but we can bet on their arrival to our constricted sealanes much sooner then later.


1 & 2 - You can make the changes if you remember for the next turn or I will the next time a turn comes across my desk. I will double check anyways.
3 - These two industries will continue unchanged. Besides there are 4 Bde coming in as reinforcements within 100 days. Tracker says there are 100% TO&E, but better safe then sorry.
4. Below is the Merchant Buildings. Except for a few MSWs, the ASW escorts are in the Naval Buildings. Once the BBs and this batch of DDs that are accelerated are finished, they should be able to get done.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 614
RE: The Kaigun at Sea - 5/29/2008 3:30:44 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

Here are the growing reserves.
Comments and feedback from other economic ministers, please.
Adjustments?!?





Things are looking good, especially the HI. The concern I see is the navy and merchant shipbuilding. Consumption is still greater than usage. I'd recommend halting some slow APs and AKs to solve the merchant concerns and maybe remove accelerate on the Hyuga, Fujinami and Suzunami to save 258 navy shipbuilding points per turn. If that's enough to start increasing the navy points in the pool, then see what you're saving each turn and accelerate accordingly.

Edit: I just saw that the shortage is 152 navy points. In that case, I'd downgrade just the Hyuga. That'll give a surplus of 58 per turn. That would be good to build up a bit of a surplus for awhile. I like having a surplus of about 4-500, just in case. You're short over 3k merchant points per day. If you want to regulate that, you'll have to turn on some merchant shipyards or you'll never get that aspect going again. You can try by shutting off all merchants and then turn on just what you want/need, but you'll need most of it eventually. Keeping your merchant shipyards off now solves your HI problem but means disaster later when you don't have replacement hulls to cover your losses.

< Message edited by Mike Solli -- 5/29/2008 3:38:21 PM >

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 615
RE: The Kaigun at Sea - 5/29/2008 4:21:19 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline 		I just thought I'd clarify my thinking here. I'm manoeuvrist and an adherent of Soviet doctrine ( which was undoubtedly the best doctrine at the strategic level during this time period... ) so the question I would ask myself in your situation is:

Question 1: "What is my CRITICAL objective here?"
Answer: To prevent Iwo Jima being turned into a fortress from which he can strike deeper and destroy my economic lifeline.

Q2: What are his means of striking deeper from Iwo Jima?
Answer: Land-based air and naval air +, possibly, further amphibious invasions.

Q3: How can I defeat his LBA?
Answer: By closing the field ( through either bombardments or aerial attack ). For either of these to be succesful enemy CVs need to be removed from the field as a going concern.

Q4: How can I defeat his CV-based air? ( which is crucial to answering Q3 )
Answer: Sinking his carriers or depleting his NAVY pilot and plane pools.

Q5: Which is easier for me to do, sink his CVs or just butcher all of their pilots  such that they have to sprint to safety to replenish and refill their pilot and plane ranks?
Answer: Well if you attack his shipping you have to carry a mixed load of fighters and torpedo and dive-bombers and will suffer much heavier losses as the attacker. In addition you will have fewer fighters on CAP and your own CVs etc will be vulnerable to counter-strike. OTOH if you just create a 90% CAP with almost nothing but fighters on your CVs you WILL be able to crucify his strike forces and once his airgroups are destroyed his CVs will really have to withdraw.

Q6: Without CV air cover can he invade deeper?
A: No.

Q7: Without CV air cover can his surface combat TFs survive in the face of Bettys and KB strike groups?
A: No.


So, it ALL comes down to removing the USN CVs from the area through either sinking them or killing so many of their pilots and planes that it is prudent for the USN player to remove them from the area. Once they are gone you can retake Tori Shima etc, bombard the airfield on Iwo to nothingness and begin a nice siege while waiting for a relief convoy to show up and get massacred.

Really though you need to identify his critical weakness, which as I hope I've shown, is his utter reliance on USN CV airpower to guard everything. Weaken that and you've completely defeated this move. Don't weaken it and he'll probably win through.

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 616
RE: The Kaigun at Sea - 5/29/2008 4:56:18 PM   
String


Posts: 2661
Joined: 10/7/2003
From: Estonia
Status: offline 		Excellent analysis of the situation Nemo121

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 617
RE: The Kaigun at Sea - 5/29/2008 5:45:58 PM   
pat.casey

 

Posts: 393
Joined: 9/10/2007
Status: offline 		I dunno, if he unboxed 200+ corsairs on Iwo and parks a good sized surface combat force there, then I'm thinking that Iwo is pretty much self suffcient.

I'm dubious that you could close a level 6 field with 200 corsairs on cap via airpower alone, which means you'd have to roll in with the big guns and go for a bombardment.

Him keeping a surface combat force on station though largely negates that move since, even if you win a surface engagement, you'll blow so many ops points as to have an anemic bombardment.

Likewise, he doesn't need to keep the surface fleet there for the rest of the war, it's just a stopgap while his carriers sprint back to midway to replenish.

Related note, as long as he has pilots and airframes in pool, can't he just replenish both at Iwo itself? I'm assuming he brought in several hundred k of supplies.

(in reply to String)
Post #: 618
RE: The Kaigun at Sea - 5/29/2008 6:08:41 PM   
Andav

 

Posts: 474
Joined: 5/8/2007
Status: offline
Just a chime in from a lurker who is really enjoying this (and the companion AAR). I really have enjoyed the economy discussions. I have learned so much.

Regarding the tool you are using, I saw one post from someone saying they were going to download it. I did some searches on the site but only found one discussion. The last post was back in April saying it was close to being ready. Google was not my friend either when looking for WiTP Tracker. Is there a place to download this?

Thanks in advance and keep up the GREAT work!

Walter

(in reply to pat.casey)
Post #: 619
RE: The Kaigun at Sea - 5/29/2008 6:13:06 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Nemo and Friends:

Your analysis makes a Hell of alot of sense.  Though it goes against my offensive motivations in the short run, I think this is a good idea. 

Actions:
1.  I just transfered 3 DB Daitai off of Unryu/Amagi/Taiho and replaced them with fighters.  I will take off another 3 Daitai of strike aircraft when I approach Saipan.  This will add 160 Fighters to my CAP.

2.  I will further boost this by moving 150 more fighters to Pagan and place them on LRCAP over my TF.  I consider this to be gamey but Dan did it a while back with P-38 so I will return the favor.

1 and 2 should give me about 600 Fighters (Jacks/A3/A3a/Tony) over my TF.

3.  I will form several decoy TF of BB/Surface ships in hopes of drawing his attack planes against them instead of my CVs. 

4.  On that thoughtline, I will split up my CV into 2 CV TF so that there will be around 10 of them.  I don't AA fire here, I simply need CAP and want to minimize damage done to anything that leaks through my CAP.

5.  I will bring the BB STF at Toyko Bay around North then East and then South to meet my forces at Saipan.

I want to dangle the Fleet close enough to prompt a response so I will move it about 3 hexes SSE of Iwo Jima.  That should be close enough for his CVs to react.  The good news is that any damage I take will have Saipan as a Port Sz-4, 3-4 AR, with Combined Fleet HQ for emergency repair.

Is there any way that Combined Fleet HQ can help with this?  Should I set the objective as Iwo Jima or leave it as Saipan?

More thoughts and/or comments?


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to pat.casey)
Post #: 620
RE: The Kaigun at Sea - 5/29/2008 6:31:44 PM   
n01487477


Posts: 4779
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline 		I know you can't think of everything, and certainly with that much CAP, you'd think you'll have plenty of protection.

Just one thought BB1.4 does seem to allow planes to slip through CAP & target ships, I've never tested with this much CAP though ...
From BB1.4 notes
The net result of these changes is to significantly lower air combat
losses to more realistic levels, without having a ripple affect on other
aspects of combat involving aircraft and land units or ships.

Which, in my shortened game resulted in CAP not being able to drive away the enemy, but you've played this longer and must have a better understanding of this than me ...

Don't want to confuse the issue, just making a simple observation.
[edit] I'll keep to economic observations from now on, there are better heads in this room than I.

< Message edited by n01487477 -- 5/29/2008 7:26:36 PM >

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 621
RE: The Kaigun at Sea - 5/29/2008 7:52:56 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline 		John 3rd,

Tips on designing a good CV TF:

1. Your limit isn't 2 CVs per TF but, rather, 200 planes per TF IIRC.

2. You want to put a CVL or two with every 2 CVs to act as a cheap bomb magnet ( e.g. 2 x 70 plane CVs + 2 CVL ( 30 planes each ) = 200 planes ). Remember to think of decoys within the TFs too.

3. To boost your fighter CAP even farther you can fly carrier-capable but land-based Zeroes onto CVLs and CVEs etc. This means that EVEN if your CVLs or CVEs get sunk the squadrons will respawn ( which won't be the case if the CVE/L-based fighter unit goes down with its own CVL/E ).

4. You will get better results in terms of decoying enemy planes away from your CVs by dispersing your BBs and CAs amongst the 6 or so CV TFs you will be creating rather than putting those BBs etc into a single TF.

5. Ships dodge torpedoes better than bombs while undamaged. IF you are going to send a small strike toward the enemy in order to sting them you are FAR better off sending a few DBs since they are more likely to get hits than TBs. Sure some of those hits are going to be onto the deck armour of BBs BUT overall you will hurt more of his CVs with 50% of your DBs than with 50% of your TBs. Once his ships are crippled then, by all means, fly the TBs in and punch big holes beneath the waterline to sink them. But in order to stop flight ops you just need to put a few 250Kg bombs through their flight decks and cause system and fire damage equal to 50%. This isn't all that hard.


Without enough planes etc to fly CAP he will HAVE to replenish which means heading for Iwo or Tori Shima OR Pearl Harbour.

Position yourself just west of Chichi Jima and then you can easily cover both bases... and fly a strike mission against Iwo airfield. With that closed by KB ( and kept closed by long-range Betty strikes ) you can just whittle down his CV fleet again in another defensive air battle and then fly in all those DBs and TBs and begin offensive missions in earnest.

That's how I'd do it anyways. Note: I wouldn't split ANY BBs off for bombardment runs at all given the strong state of the enemy SC fleet AND the fact that you have so many mines at Iwo which are now hostile to both sides.

(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 622
RE: Combat Report: Sept 5-8, 1943 - 5/29/2008 11:19:53 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline 		Engine production from last turn for viewing and comments.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 623
RE: Combat Report: Sept 5-8, 1943 - 5/30/2008 1:36:26 AM   
KTNJR


Posts: 102
Joined: 3/19/2007
From: Green Bay, WI
Status: offline 		WOW!! Everyday I come home and I have a ton of reading to do!!  I love this AAR
I already can see I don't want to fight against Nemo 121

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 624
RE: Combat Report: Sept 5-8, 1943 - 5/30/2008 4:29:31 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		I bumped up Aichi production some with the last turn.  I've slowly built (at 20 per month) enough engines to build 100 Judys/Month before I run out.  As our engine situation improves, I will bump the Aichi numbers some more...

Just got home from a long, tedious, and depressing day so I don't expect to get much done.  Dan is gone tomorrow so I plan to spend a good portion of it working on my battleplan.  Nemo--I will display my planned TF once I have figured out what I am firmly doing...

Andav and KTNJR I like hearing from you so thanks for chiming in!


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to KTNJR)
Post #: 625
RE: The Kaigun at Sea - 5/30/2008 4:40:41 AM   
Blackhorse


Posts: 1983
Joined: 8/20/2000
From: Eastern US
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
2.  I will further boost this by moving 150 more fighters to Pagan and place them on LRCAP over my TF.  I consider this to be gamey but Dan did it a while back with P-38 so I will return the favor.



Another lurker here, chiming in to say great AAR.

Re: Land-based LRCAP over CV TFs. Aren't they reduced to 1/4 their nominal strength? Or is that an urban legend?

_____________________________

WitP-AE -- US LCU & AI Stuff

Oddball: Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?
Moriarty: Crap!

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 626
RE: The Kaigun at Sea - 5/30/2008 9:24:03 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Blackhorse


quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
2.  I will further boost this by moving 150 more fighters to Pagan and place them on LRCAP over my TF.  I consider this to be gamey but Dan did it a while back with P-38 so I will return the favor.



Another lurker here, chiming in to say great AAR.

Re: Land-based LRCAP over CV TFs. Aren't they reduced to 1/4 their nominal strength? Or is that an urban legend?



yes, it´s greatly reduced. You can avoid this though, but that would be gamey then IMO.

_____________________________


(in reply to Blackhorse)
Post #: 627
RE: Combat Report: Sept 5-8, 1943 - 5/30/2008 10:47:31 AM   
n01487477


Posts: 4779
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline 		Engine Analysis:
Not to be too obvious, but for interest sake.

John expanded the Aichi Engines by 20
1. Initial expansion cost = 2000 Supply,200 Manpower and 200 HI points
2. To build it will cost an additional 20000 supply.

Onto the Tables and some thoughts ...

Mitsubishi Engines to this point are robust, however we went from dropping 11 to about 111 engines a month, this is due to 2 factors, 1. 70 factories were turned off and some Airframe factories using 30 engines came on-line. [edit]We will need to find a better equilibrium here ...

Nakajima Pool has risen by about 190, ultimately we are 90 short of what full production would use (1429-1339), but this is not a a potential problem me thinks...[edit] especially with 300+ engines being produced a month.

Not sure what is going on with TBO use, [edit]but I have some idea's that will make this whole table easier to follow ... It's good analysing your own work and realising, it wasn't as straight forward as first thought.

Kawasaki Engines, now here is a small problem in the making. Next month shiny new Ki-61 KAIc Tony's start rolling off the production lines at a rate of 328/mth . At present 66 Ki-61 KAIb Tony's/mth are being produced. Total next month = 388 and our total Kawasaki Engine capacity is 226+34=260.

So even if we halt the "b", this will still leave us with a shortfall of 68 engines/mth. Figuring into the equation our surplus, that will give us about 3 months at full production. If we don't halt the "b" then about 2 months...

Not sure of your surplus pool of "b" but do you have enough to cover losses ? Can we shut it down sometime, and use them(for losses) into units as we upgrade them to the "C" ... or are you upgrading more outmoded airframes first ?

Aichi looks good.

---Damian---




[edit] Lastly start thinking about prioritising the Merchant Shipyard / shortest Delay / Most needed etc
Also was wondering an update on the Oil situation and transportation of said liquid. When you get into the single digits, things start to go awry.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by n01487477 -- 5/30/2008 2:18:52 PM >

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 628
RE: Combat Report: Sept 5-8, 1943 - 5/30/2008 3:47:33 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline 		I just sent John a PM (did my occasional adjustments for AK/TK movement and small economic adjustments) about how both Kanazawa and Nagoya have fallen below 10k and thus engine repairs are not taking place.  Thus, no more loading of supplies unto AKs for a few days to allow the AI to move it around (hopefully). We have 3 converted airframe factories at Sasebo that don't repair as that base doesn't hold supplies (1488). The solution is moving a HQ there or what??

I just adjusted Merchant shipbuilding to 500/day. I will look at it after a few days. Trying to manage the economy to get between 2000 to 3000 HI put into reserve per day. Finally have enough Oil centers repaired to get over 13,000 in Oil per day.

On the whole engine and airframe production, I've allowed John to do most of that, but will ask him how much of that he wants me to control vs him.

Thanks for your input...now back to me getting my first turn of Empire's Ablaze to John.

_____________________________


(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 629
RE: Combat Report: Sept 5-8, 1943 - 5/30/2008 4:00:04 PM   
n01487477


Posts: 4779
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline
quote:

Thus, no more loading of supplies onto AKs for a few days to allow the AI to move it around (hopefully). We have 3 converted airframe factories at Sasebo that don't repair as that base doesn't hold supplies (1488). The solution is moving a HQ there or what??


In my game Vs you, I tried that, In fact from memory I tried two HQ's there for a while, had Engineers there too, it took months to achieve anything ... I never came up with a viable solution. Later I even tested it, and couldn't make it work well unless I had an abundance of Supplies everywhere. I never posted a bug report, but it certainly is annoying. Sasebo is one of those ports where IJN players often unload and hence, it must have a "super officious" logistics Officer.

I'll never change my production choices at Sasebo again.

I just wonder, how's that Oil/Oil Transportation? Answer when you get a chance ... back to programming for me & then a few beers at my local.

[edit]Also, often I find it better to transport surplus supply from Korea/Manchuko to Japan.

< Message edited by n01487477 -- 5/30/2008 4:05:01 PM >

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 630
Page:   <<   < prev  19 20 [21] 22 23   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> After Action Reports >> RE: Combat Report: Sept 5-8, 1943 Page: <<   < prev  19 20 [21] 22 23   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.281