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: Just Total Carnage

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Just Total Carnage Page: <<   < prev  23 24 [25] 26 27   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Just Total Carnage - 1/22/2010 6:33:40 PM   
veji1

 

Posts: 1019
Joined: 7/9/2005
Status: offline 		Agree with Crsutton : Attacking the DEI and Kuriles that early is bold, and while the game should make it possible, it should make it likely very costly. had the US had to crush the Japanese before 1945 or even 1944, they could have done it, by taking way bigger risks and risking big losses. They took there time and advance methodically. with a massive LBA and an unstoppable carrier force, it is normal not to have too big losses. that early in the game is a different matter. Your game has been aggressive, KO type of boxing in which the two boxers are already tired in the fourth round while in other types of bouts they are still cruising...

_____________________________

Adieu Ô Dieu odieux... signé Adam

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 721
RE: Micromanagement "Hell" - 1/22/2010 6:34:47 PM   
vettim89


Posts: 3615
Joined: 7/14/2007
From: Toledo, Ohio
Status: offline 		Dan,

Just caught up with your AAR. Good reading. Some observations:

1. Nice to see you push the envelope. Your point about making Miller use up valuable resources (esp. fuel) responding to your moves is valid. Even if you lose the battle up north, it will force him to burn precious resources he might wish he had later.

2. That said, one of the first things the Devs said when AE was released is you can't play AE like WiTP. I think some of the losses you have experienced have to do with you WiTP-think. Of course, for those of us watching, their is nothing like the ability to learn from some one else's mistakes. Thanks for the tutorial!

3. Very interesting point about the difference between RL and the game. The political ramifications of some of your losses in RL would have been serious to say the least. Consider how one bad day in November 1943 affected public mood (the Tarawa invasion foul ups are a point belabored by historians to this day). Yet, your game is far from unsalvagable. In fact the point could be made that you are in pretty good shape despite the losses.

4. Lastly you were worried that AE would be boring. WHat is your opinion now that you've played?

_____________________________

"We have met the enemy and they are ours" - Commodore O.H. Perry

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 722
RE: Micromanagement "Hell" - 1/22/2010 6:48:06 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		Vettim, good to see you in the AE forums.

AE is definately different than WitP and, you're right, many of the moves I've made have been predicated on an instinctual (but incorrect) application of strategy and tactics that worked in WitP.  I've pushed too hard and it's cost me.  By the same token, the Allies are in fairly decent shape.

I have mixed feelings about AE at this point:

1.  The game is massive and nuanced and wonderful and vexing.  It was worth every penny of whatever it was I paid for it (don't recall now - $59?).  Miller and I have spent hundreds of hours so the game is the cheapest form of entertainment around.
2.  The game has major flaws.  Some of these have been addressed and I think many other will be addressed in the future (I hope so!).  I didn't pick up WitP until years after its release.  I assume that WitP began with wrinkes, but that by the time I got involved (playing the Big B mod), many had been ironed out.  Is that true, and do all you plank owners think that AE is going through exactly the same process?
3.  The game has amazing detail that offers richness but also threatens to overwhelm a player with micromanagement headaches that detract from enjoyment.
4.  AE has definately reigned in the ability of Japan to expand to the edges of the map, but also seems to have given Japan a better ability to defend itself.  I'd say the game is just as exciting as WitP, but at this point more irritating and more tedious.

(in reply to vettim89)
Post #: 723
RE: Micromanagement "Hell" - 1/22/2010 7:19:26 PM   
anarchyintheuk

 

Posts: 3921
Joined: 5/5/2004
From: Dallas
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

2.  The game has major flaws.  Some of these have been addressed and I think many other will be addressed in the future (I hope so!).  I didn't pick up WitP until years after its release.  I assume that WitP began with wrinkes, but that by the time I got involved (playing the Big B mod), many had been ironed out.  Is that true, and do all you plank owners think that AE is going through exactly the same process?



Pretty much. Imo there were more database errors to fix in WitP than AE. My long term memory is somewhat suspect however.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 724
RE: Micromanagement "Hell" - 1/22/2010 7:29:27 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
2.  The game has major flaws.  Some of these have been addressed and I think many other will be addressed in the future (I hope so!).  I didn't pick up WitP until years after its release.  I assume that WitP began with wrinkes, but that by the time I got involved (playing the Big B mod), many had been ironed out.  Is that true, and do all you plank owners think that AE is going through exactly the same process?

I respectfully remind you of your own qualifications about YOUR game having major flaws versus THE game having major flaws. Many others playing PBEM have not experienced the same flaws as you have, for whatever reason.

Yes, that's true. Yes, AE is going through similar growing pains, albeit, IMO less substantial ones. Some of the early WiTP bugs were real game killers. Classic examples include the leader bug that 'disappeared' 2/3 of one's leaders overnight or swapped out your American Carrier COs at inauspicious times (right before a major battle) for Japanese 0/0 skill warrant officers. Oh man...

I think the AE 'bugs' are smaller in scale and scope and are more gameplay balance sorts of things. I'm pleased with the spit and polish, particularly compared to its predecessor. In WiTP, it took upwards of a year to really work out major kinks (although some iteration of the leader bug remained 'till the bitter end). AE has improved on that with a very serviceable game being out NOW-about 4.5 months after initial release.

_____________________________


(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 725
RE: Micromanagement "Hell" - 1/22/2010 7:31:21 PM   
anarchyintheuk

 

Posts: 3921
Joined: 5/5/2004
From: Dallas
Status: offline 		Leader bug . . . bad times, bad times.

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 726
RE: Micromanagement "Hell" - 1/22/2010 8:07:18 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		That helps, Chickenboy.  I never dealt with those massive bugs.  I can just imagine the irritation level dealing with things that major. 

So, AE is far more polished and it sounds like it should be easier to iron out the wrinkles.  That's good.

As for those wrinkles, though, I'm pretty sure that it isn't just my game.  We've played too far and they've been happening too regularly and for too long in the game  - especially the Artillery Death Star and Nuclear Sub matters.

(in reply to anarchyintheuk)
Post #: 727
Focus on what you can influence, forget the rest. - 1/22/2010 8:17:26 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline 		Bottom line... It's a game and it has some flaws. Some of those flaws benefit you, some the enemy. Unless those flaws are absolutely massive ( nuke arty bombardments ) it is your job as commander to figure out a way around them and carry on fighting. When they're massive you should HR them to avoid them. Right now the escort issues and submarine issues seem to me to be things which you COULD do something about through your gameplay. I suggest you adopt a HR for amphib TFs... No more than 8 escorts in the TF and they have to be DDs or better. That way you won't waste all your CD shells on PBs and other useless stuff.


As to the rest.... You've won some strategically important victories here. You have the strategic advantage in the north-east and south-west of the Japanese perimeter. Now is the time to gain it in the north-west and south-east. Once you have it in all 4 corners you should be able to phase a series of rolling offensives in series and never lose it. Your situation is strategically wonderful. It pains me to see you bi***ing about minor tactical issues and losing sight of the huge strategic advantages you are accruing.

Focus on what you can do to the enemy and then DO IT. Don't focus on what the game is doing to you in the small print, that way lies mediocrity and quitting.



As for AE:
The more I play the more impressed I am. It is behaving more and more as I would have expected given history. At present the only major issues remaining ( apart from tweaking of subs etc ) that I can see are:
1. Need to fix CD guns. It is a game of amphibious invasions. Currently one of the main safeguards to amphibious invasions simply does not work properly. That needs fixing.

2. They really should add in some way to tell fighters to head directly for enemy strike planes/bombers. Right now your twin-engined bomber destroyers will happily try to dogfight a P-51 instead of going for the bombers. This is utterly ahistorical and renders certain plane types absolutely useless when, in real life, they were rather useful indeed.

3. GUI regarding pilot selection for squadrons needs to be clarified. At present I find it almost impossible to tell how many veteran pilots I have going to a particular squadron. End result, sometimes I send too many, sometimes I send none. Which is which? I don't know because the UI struggles to tell me.


If those are the 3 biggest issues apart from tweaks then that's a staggering compliment to the developers... and I'm hardly known for giving out praise easily.

< Message edited by Nemo121 -- 1/22/2010 8:33:51 PM >

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 728
RE: Micromanagement "Hell" - 1/22/2010 8:23:59 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
2.  The game has major flaws.  Some of these have been addressed and I think many other will be addressed in the future (I hope so!).  I didn't pick up WitP until years after its release.  I assume that WitP began with wrinkes, but that by the time I got involved (playing the Big B mod), many had been ironed out.  Is that true, and do all you plank owners think that AE is going through exactly the same process?



Quite honestly, I think that AE right now is substantially better than WITP at its best.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 729
RE: Micromanagement "Hell" - 1/22/2010 9:51:51 PM   
JeffroK


Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline 		It had better be an improvement on WITP.

But dont forget the best WITP were the mods, CHS, RHS, BigB, Nikmod and others.

AE should have used the best of all of these mods plus improvements to the processes.

And its only through the comments of players like Dan that we have had the sub & arty problems looked at and resolved. In a way, we are doing to hard core playtesting that time didint allow the devs to run.

IMHO, we are at AE vanilla, there is a long, long way to go to get it to the improvement level that WITP got to.

Dan,

Ditto to Nemo's

As to the rest.... You've won some strategically important victories here. You have the strategic advantage in the north-east and south-west of the Japanese perimeter. Now is the time to gain it in the north-west and south-east. Once you have it in all 4 corners you should be able to phase a series of rolling offensives in series and never lose it. Your situation is strategically wonderful.

Focus on what you can do to the enemy and then DO IT. Don't focus on what the game is doing to you in the small print, that way lies mediocrity and quitting.

In Bill Slim's Unofficial History he has the same problem where he worries about the myriad problems of his force when attacking Syria. After the battle and conversation with his opponent he realisesthat his actions had created so much more doubt in the mind of his opponent.




_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 730
Back to the Real Game - 1/22/2010 11:09:04 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		4/1/43 to 4/7/43
 
NoPac:  It is confirmed that the Japanese have all remaining BBs - seven of them - operating in NoPac.  On the 6th, Gar put two TTs into BB Yamato, hopefully putting her in the shipyard for a month or more.  In addition to the BBs, two powerful CA TFs (with a total of at least 14 cruisers) are operating in these waters.  Given this power, and the lack of Allied power, I'm quietly conceding Paramushiro.  I'll try to evacuate by sub a cadre from each unit. 

Allied Carriers:  I've decided to send the Allied carriers from NoPac back to SWPac. I want them to remain a force in being - IE, to conceal their whereabouts so that Miller has to assume they can show up anywhere.  If, however, a Mini-KB were to show up in the DEI, I would want to have my carriers available.  I'm not sure where they are going - perhaps Port Headland?

SWPac:  The Allies took Babar Island and have re-supplied Saumlaki.  Thus far Miller has committed only subs and some LBA - no combat TFs and no Mini-KB.  The Allies have loaded transports at Darwin and will soon move on Kai-Elanden and Aru, two small islands north of Saumlaki.  If that goes well, the Allies will move expeditiously on Babo (western tip of New Guinea) and Boela (eastern tip of Ceram).  If Miller doesn't commit the Mini-KB soon, this will happen in short order because I don't think his LBA poses a significant threat (yet).  Boela and Babo pose big strategic threats to the Moluccas, so I intend to garrison these in force including 32nd Infantry Division, which is 100% prepped for Lautem.  I'm not going to Lautem, however, as I'm pursuing a path of lesser resistance that in the long run is just as valuable. [Note - I had BB Washington in a bombardment TF to hit Babar from Darwin.  The BB didn't retire, however.  She sat there for an entire day and took a TT from a Betty.  I've lost many ships this way - especially those in fast transport TFs an annoying glitch.]

Burma:  In his email last night Miller disclosed that he's been air-evacuating Akyab, so the Allies will advance and try to take the base.  From there I'll just rattle my drums and march troops around making noise and trying to look threatening (I'm foregoing Burma to concentrate on the DEI).

China: A Chinese army marched cross-country, arrived at Nanning and found it lightly garrisoned, but Japanese reinforcements arrived before I could attack.  I'm just nosing around here, too, trying to rattle Miller.  Things are quiet at Changsha and Changeh at the moment.

Strategic Situation:  The Allies are in pretty good shape if they can make some progress in DEI.  However, if the Japanese are able to put up a nasty defense here, I'm in trouble.  China is toast, I'm foregoing Burma, NoPac is a no-go, and I've lost so many ships that I doubt I can mount a two-prong advance at this point.  So I need to make some progress in the DEI and I think I have a good start.



< Message edited by Canoerebel -- 1/22/2010 11:10:53 PM >

(in reply to JeffroK)
Post #: 731
RE: Micromanagement "Hell" - 1/22/2010 11:34:28 PM   
vettim89


Posts: 3615
Joined: 7/14/2007
From: Toledo, Ohio
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Vettim, good to see you in the AE forums. [/quote}

I have abstained for the obvious reason. I resolved myself to not start a PBEM until patch 3. Mind you I made that commitment at release. I am glad I made that promise to myself. That said, reading yours and Q-Ball's AAR's is getting my AE juices flowing. You of all people should understand the challenges of keeping a commitment like this one

quote:


AE is definately different than WitP and, you're right, many of the moves I've made have been predicated on an instinctual (but incorrect) application of strategy and tactics that worked in WitP.  I've pushed too hard and it's cost me.  By the same token, the Allies are in fairly decent shape.

I have mixed feelings about AE at this point:

1.  The game is massive and nuanced and wonderful and vexing.  It was worth every penny of whatever it was I paid for it (don't recall now - $59?).  Miller and I have spent hundreds of hours so the game is the cheapest form of entertainment around.


As was WiTP
quote:


2.  The game has major flaws.  Some of these have been addressed and I think many other will be addressed in the future (I hope so!).  I didn't pick up WitP until years after its release.  I assume that WitP began with wrinkes, but that by the time I got involved (playing the Big B mod), many had been ironed out.  Is that true, and do all you plank owners think that AE is going through exactly the same process?


Ding - you found my reason for waiting for Patch 3. That said, as WiTP found its legs, a pretty standard set of HR's evolved to address those issues that the game could/would never address. I think we will see this in AE also

I have a greater appreciation of how vital the cocurrent campaigns for PNG and the Solomons were to the RL Allies. It seems that the Allied player in AE really needs that kind of long drawn out battle of attrition to truly grind the Japanese down to win

_____________________________

"We have met the enemy and they are ours" - Commodore O.H. Perry

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 732
RE: Just Total Carnage - 1/23/2010 3:28:28 AM   
erstad

 

Posts: 1944
Joined: 8/3/2004
From: Midwest USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: aztez

Good move seizing Kuriles. I wohn't go into details where I might/will hit for obvious reasons. I will let my beloved opponent find this out from the actual game!



I can't wait!

(in reply to aztez)
Post #: 733
RE: Micromanagement "Hell" - 1/23/2010 5:38:25 AM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline 		[/quote]
Quite honestly, I think that AE right now is substantially better than WITP at its best.
[/quote]
+1. And it keeps getting better for me...

_____________________________


(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 734
Developments - 1/23/2010 9:27:35 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		4/9/43 and 4/10/43
 
NoPac:  Japanese air raids and small combat TFs visit Paramushiro regularly.  I have a sub shuttling cadres of units from there to Attu.  I hate to give up on Paramushiro.  I really thought that Onnekotan's CD guns would so devastate the Japanese invasion fleet that he would either never take a shot at Paramushiro or that if he did it would take so long to assemble that American carrier reinforcements would arrive. I was wrong about Onnekotan, so I'm not going to expend too much more to help Paramushiro.  The Allied fleet carriers departed Kodiak for Pearl.  Three CVEs departed Prince Rupert for Christmas Island.

SWPac:  Miller pretty much pulled his aircraft and ships out of the DEI.  Sallys, Bettys, Oscars and Zeros are back, but are flying at long range out of Kendari.  He doesn't have enough in theater, yet, to stop the Allies from advancing.  An Aussie Brigade just finished off the Japanese raiding regiment at Babar Island and amphibious landings have begun at Taberfane.  The Japanese concentrated on suppressing Saumlaki's airfield, but perhaps will switch targets to naval attack now.  Another amphibious group is heading for Aru.  If I can take Taberfane quickly, the Allies will move at once to Babo and Boela.  If they are able to take those bases, then the Allied position in the eastern DEI becomese very strong and threatening.  How will Miller allocate between the DEI and Paramushiro?

Burma:  Bombardment at Akyab showed that the Japanese have 200 AV; I suspect they are low on supply, so tomorrow I'll try a deliberate attack; the Allies have about 1000 AV with another 250 on the way.

China:  The arrival of a Chinese "army" at Nanning forced Miller to pull back the units that have been sitting outside Liuchow the entire game.  The Chinese at Liuchow will advance to Nanning and I'll see if I can take the city.

Strategic Situation:  Miller has about ten days to get his defenses back up to snuff in the eastern DEI.  If he doesn't, the Allies will have made some hay while the sun was shining.

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 735
RE: Developments - 1/23/2010 10:12:05 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		Here's a map of the situation in the DEI as of 4/10/43:




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 736
RE: Developments - 1/23/2010 10:17:12 PM   
pat.casey

 

Posts: 393
Joined: 9/10/2007
Status: offline 		I don't have the full strategic picture like you do, but I think you're being a bit too pessemistic about Paramushiro Jima. Seems like if it was worth the cost to take it, its likewise worth the cost to defend it. Giving up on it now only makes sense if you're SURE its a lost cause, and it doesn't look that way to me. You've got a solid LCU garrison in place, its mountainous, and you still have a fleet, albeit reduced.

It looks like you're fixating on the difficulties you are facing (poor efficiency of coast defense units, weak carrier wing, shortage of surface combatants), rather than thinking about your opponent's challenges as well. He's doubtless got his own set of problems, so assuming he's just going to roll over PJ with 20 divisions any day now doesn't strike me as likely. Sure, he might have that kind of LCU reserve and shipping handy, but I doubt it.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 737
RE: Developments - 1/23/2010 10:19:47 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		Thanks, Pat.  It's a tough call on Paramushiro.  I have 1000 AV ashore, but supplies are low and will be zilch in a week or so.  I no longer control the air or sea, nor can I hope to do so in the next several months.  Miller can park the KB between Attu and Para, as he's already done several times, and chew alive anything that ventures that way.

So I can hang around and try to do things to aid Para, but in all likelihood I'll end up just reinforcing defeat.

Or I can hide my carriers so Miller has to assume they could intervene, thus he has to remain fully focused on Para and shift my efforts to the DEI, which appears to be an open gate momentarily. I expect it to slam shut sooner or later with the appearance of the Mini-KB, but until that happens the Allies are making important progress there.

In the unlikely event I still hold Para as we draw well into summer, I can send my carriers there and that will permit me to hold the base. I don't expect that to happen.

The quick and relatively easy demise of Onnekotan taught me that alot of things some of us thought were true aren't: (1) CD guns won't tear up an invasion force as they did in WitP and (2) unprepped Jap troops can land in decent shape.

< Message edited by Canoerebel -- 1/23/2010 10:22:38 PM >

(in reply to pat.casey)
Post #: 738
RE: Developments - 1/23/2010 10:28:29 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline 		Pat is right Canoerebel.

Wars are very rarely won by doing the right thing so brilliantly and so often that the enemy feels compelled to surrender in awe. Battles and wars are won by making fewer egregious mistakes than "the other guy" and hanging in there whilst giving him the opportunity to make more and worse mistakes then you are making... Liddell Hart very much hewed to this line as did Clausewitz to an extent.

Looking at this AAR psychologically you have vacillated wildly from hubris to despair, from coming up with a risky operation to hinting at throwing in the towel if bug x or y means your opponent gets an easier time of it in China or whatever. It seems clear to me that you are making decisions whilst under rather a fair bit of emotional pressure/influence.

Take a step back, realise that following the middle path of engaging in neither hubris nor despair is the best path and, almost most of all, realise that right now you are looking at your problems ( and most assuredly engaging in cognitive distortions which magnify the negatives and minimise the possibilities ) and not appropriately assessing your opponent's problem.

You have paid in blood for Paramushiro. Right now you need to stay the course and gain the benefit of that investment. If you are smart about it and choose to seek out manageable goals then you can reap a significant return from Paramushiro ( holding it isn't necessary for the investment to have been worth it ) in terms of enemy forces committed, enemy forces lost to the weather rules etc.

If, on the other hand, you flit from pillar to post, invading one week and then abandoning the next you will achieve operational success at great cost and then, a la Barca, throw away any possible strategic gain accruing from that operational success. That's incredibly wasteful.


Take a step back, detach your emotions, stop flitting from one extreme to another and realise that putting in a daring attack operationally is an utter waste if you don't commit to it and gain the strategic benefit from its success. Right now you are like Barca or Rommel, doing flashy things which look good on newsreels or history books but throwing away the strategic benefits which would accrue if you properly committed to supporting the operation to its limited, achievable goals --- not the hubristic goals you initially set which were never going to be achieved but goals which can be achieved and are assessed as being achievable without the intrusion of hope as an instrument of operational and strategic planning.

You've put in an attack which, arguably, you should have structured differently in order to gain greater strategic benefit but that's in the past. Now you've got the opportunity to throw it all away with another precipitous decision or the possibility of gaining strategic advantage from a metered committment.

(in reply to pat.casey)
Post #: 739
RE: Developments - 1/23/2010 11:07:46 PM   
pat.casey

 

Posts: 393
Joined: 9/10/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Thanks, Pat.  It's a tough call on Paramushiro.  I have 1000 AV ashore, but supplies are low and will be zilch in a week or so.  I no longer control the air or sea, nor can I hope to do so in the next several months.  Miller can park the KB between Attu and Para, as he's already done several times, and chew alive anything that ventures that way.

So I can hang around and try to do things to aid Para, but in all likelihood I'll end up just reinforcing defeat.

Or I can hide my carriers so Miller has to assume they could intervene, thus he has to remain fully focused on Para and shift my efforts to the DEI, which appears to be an open gate momentarily. I expect it to slam shut sooner or later with the appearance of the Mini-KB, but until that happens the Allies are making important progress there.

In the unlikely event I still hold Para as we draw well into summer, I can send my carriers there and that will permit me to hold the base. I don't expect that to happen.

The quick and relatively easy demise of Onnekotan taught me that alot of things some of us thought were true aren't: (1) CD guns won't tear up an invasion force as they did in WitP and (2) unprepped Jap troops can land in decent shape.


It doesn't sound easy, and its clearly not an ideal situation to defend from, but you have to consider a couple of things, or at least I'd hope you would:

1) You're defending, so you don't need to control the sea; all you need to ensure is that he can't totally control it. Even with KB there, he'll eventually have to move back to JPN to rearm, which would be your chance to slide in a convoy and drop off some supplies. You're in an "every bit counts" sort of situation now, so even a few thousand here and there is going to help.

2) If he decides to invade, he'll probably bring the kitchen sink, but it can't stay there, especially if it has to fight e.g. he'll run out of ammo/fuel, especially if he decides to bombard with his heavies. You might plausibly send in a number of medium sized DD forces to disrupt him; by '43 the US destroyer are, if I recall, pretty solid and can put a hurting on the Japanese without you having to risk capital units you're short on. Same thing goes double for PT boats if you have any left.

3) By this time in the war you should have a goodly number of air transports, I'll admit I haven't looked at the map recently, but can you air transport supplies in from anywhere else in the alutians? Again, every bit counts.

Like I said earlier, I'm basing my advice here on speculation rather than perfect intelligence, but I'd suggest that at some level so are you. I suspect you're overestimating your opponents capabilities at this point and reacting to him as though he's as strong as you fear.

Consider:

If he's as strong as you fear, what does running away accomplish? You save, probably a few dozen ships that would be lost in a defense effort.

If he's not as strong as you fear, what does running away accomplish? You give him PJ on the cheap, negating any strategic advantage its initial capture gave you.

On the other hand, if you stand and fight it out:

If he is as strong as you fear, you lose, but you'll lose more slowly and keep his strength there. Your carriers are 3 months away, and if he's tied up "fixing" his border at PJ for the next 3 months while you are advancing in the DEI, you'll be in an excellent position in 3 months.

If he is not as strong as you fear, you'll hold the line in PJ. You'll pay for it, but in 3 months you'll have your new carriers AND PJ == win.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 740
RE: Developments - 1/24/2010 3:09:33 AM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		4/11/43 to 4/16/43

Gents, thanks for the thoughts and suggestions. I read them carefully. Unfortunately, the Allied situation in NoPac is so weak now that I truly don't have the option of duking it out. Miller's carriers, ccmbat TFs and LBA control the sea around Parmushiro. Nothing gets in unless Miller makes a mistake. I'm also down to fumes as far as combat ships go. If I'm not very careful I won't have enough to allow me to create carrier TFs when my fleet carriers begin arriving next month. Para is not within air transport distance of Attu, so that is also a no go. You guys aren't privy to many, many details that factored into my decision or I think you might nod your heads in agreement.

NoPac: Supply at Parmushiro is down to 4,000. I tried to sneak in two LSTs while the KB was away, but subs claimed one LST and the escort SC and the other turned back. I'm going to try to give the appearance of activity and defense so that Miller remains convinced he has to act decisvely and give his full effort up here. An important part of the equation is keeping my carriers hidden so that he has to allow for them here and elsewhere.

Carriers: I think I may post them someplace like Pearl or Christmas Island - a central location while I await arrival of the fleet carriers and CVLs. I'm convinced now that I won't be able to advance any further anywhere until I have a stout carrier force. So no risk-taking until then.

SWPac: A bit of carnage in the eastern DEI. I think I came out on the short end; Miller thinks he did. He sent in a reinforcement convoy for Taberfane, covered by a Mini-KB and combat TF. At the same time I had a TF unloading at Taberfane and other, smaller TFs unloading at nearby Aru and Kai. I had also detailed a combat TF to visit Taberfane to protect my transports. The resulting convergence of forces was weird: (a) Miller's combat ships arrived first and tangled with my transports, sinking most of them; then his combat ships withdrew and mine came in an tangled with his transports, ravaging them. Them Miller's CVE Kates (armed with torpedoes) finished off a goodly number of ships at Aru and Kai. I really need Taberfane, so I'm going to wait for the coast to clear and then send in another big amphibious force; but that's as far as I go until the carriers arrive in August. I'll have to be satisfied with building Saumlaki, Taberfane, Aru, and Babar. Darwin just went to level six port and will reach level nine airfield in two days. This should really bolster Allied ability to coontrol the skies out as far as Saumlaki (except when Japanese carriers are present in numbers). I'll continue gathering all troops possible at Darwin - there's already a huge Army there. I'll also try to think ahead to have troops properly prepped for future targets in the DEI.

Akyab: Back-to-back deliberate attacks couldn't quite reach 2:1 odds, but the Allies should prevail here in a week or so. I may then use political points to change the restricted Indian units to Burma HQ so that I can penetrate deeper into Burma, rattle my saber and bang my drums, and see if I flush Miller through smoke and mirrors.

China: The Chinese will try a deliberate attack at Nanning tomorrow. They greatly outnumber the Japanese garrison, but I'm not counting my chickes. 2000 AV at 45 experience will probably lose to 350 Japanese AV.

Hidden Consequences of the Recent Carnage in NoPac and SWPac: The Allies have paid greatly, greatly, greatly in ships during these campaigns. They've also inflicted some damage on the Japanese, but here are a few harder to pinpoint or quanitfy benefits:

Air: Over the course of these battles, I believe the Japanese have lost perhaps 500 more aircraft than have the Allies - this in all theaters. This hasn't had a noticeable effect on pilot quality, but perhaps Miller's noticing it from his end.

Subs: Miller has pulled his subs back to the hot points - mainly eastern DEI and NoPac. However, most of the big ports and key lanes of transport have been clear for many weeks: West Coast, sea lanes to Tahiti and on to NZ, Sydney, Brisbane, Townsville, Melbourne, Noumea, and Pago Pago have all remained blessedly clear. The Allies should take Baker Island within the week and that will permit the Allies to shift the main transport lane from West Coast - Tahiti - Auckland to West Coast - Pago Pago - Noumea.

Japanese Logistics/Fuel: I have to believe Miller's been taxed in this regard. He's had ships flying from DEI to NoPac and moving back and forth to meet different emergencies. Hopefully his fuel stocks have been sucked dry here or there putting pressure on him.

(in reply to pat.casey)
Post #: 741
RE: Developments - 1/24/2010 4:50:28 AM   
JeffroK


Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline 		I cant remember which Johnson it was who defended the South so succesfully, all the way to Atlanta.

As soon as you are out of Paramushiro, Miller moves elsewhere and your same arguments to evac Paramushiro will be seen at Taberfane, Babar, Saumlaki etc



_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 742
RE: Developments - 1/24/2010 6:13:47 AM   
dekwik


Posts: 90
Joined: 9/22/2007
From: Atlanta
Status: offline 		mmmmmm... not really. Para is on the end of a pretty long string. NOt so at Saumlaki

(in reply to JeffroK)
Post #: 743
RE: Developments - 1/24/2010 7:03:51 AM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		For just three more months Miller has the ability to achieve supremacy wherever he chooses to commit his carriers. For now, he's selected NoPac.

It would be tough for Miller to seize Saumlaki even if he committed the KB now for the reason dekwik alludes to - Saumlaki is supported by other bases, the most secure of which are Darwin and Bathhurst Island. The Allies are continuing to build each of these and Darwin, a level nine airfield, is just seven hexes away. The Allies will have 200 4EB and 250 fighters based there.

By the time Miller is finished at Paramushiro the American carrier reinforcements will be coming in. At that point Miller will no longer have the unilateral ability to achieve supremacy wherever he chooses.

The Allies had achieved strategic surprise in NoPac and were able to put ashore the forces I wanted (though not the supplies) at Onnekotan and Paramushiro. Had Onnekotan and it's CDs torn up Miller's counter-invasion force as I had anticipated, Parmushiro wouldn't even be vulnerable. Unfortunately, that wasn't the case.

I committed everything I could to the defense of Paramushiro, committing the remaining West Coast BBs and combat vessels, and as a result lost Tennessee and West Virginia. I can't afford to lose any more unless there appears a reasonable chance that the cost would be worth it.

(in reply to dekwik)
Post #: 744
RE: Developments - 1/24/2010 7:10:59 PM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline
I know I won't be able to change your mind, but I'd join other, more experienced strategists, in opining that you not give up on Para, purchased at such a price.

Why? Leverage. Simple financial concept, works with navies as well. You lost an SC and an LST? So what? You made him keep much, much larger combat forces there looking for that SC and LST, at the cost of fuel, system damage, and time. For a tiny investment of two ships you have already (and will get more of in droves), you kept a large portion of his fleet in waters that do him no good except to prevent you doing no good to him.

He must keep supplies out of Para. for months to come if you commit to staying. You only have to get lucky once or twice a month. You have hundreds of xAKLs all over the map, and scores of SCs. Run an xAKL/SC combo in there every other day. Force him to patrol for them, to keep STFs there to stop them. Mix it up and send three one week, etc. Use your leverage. He has to be lucky all the time. You only have to be lucky once or twice.

Meanwhile, do what you're going to do in the DEI. But don't throw away the foothold you purchased at such a high price over twenty or thirty more merchants.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 745
RE: Developments - 1/24/2010 9:18:42 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		I have to keep up the appearance that Paramushiro is "the real thing," so I'll continue to send supply transports and perhaps I'll try to slip in a combat TF just to make some noise.  But I don't have many AKLs left - go back and look at the number of ships I've lost (post made on previous page) and you'll see that I've stripped the cupboard nearly bare.

The Allies gave it their best shot.  We got the men ashore.  I thought that decided the battle because I thought the CD units at Para and Onne would decimate any Japanese counterinvasion.  So I thought I could win the battle and committed everything I had - losing six BBs and something like 150 transports in the process.  Now I'm nearly out of ships - so low that there's no way I can do anything meaningful.  More importantly, based upon what happened at Onnekotan Jima, I know that Para can't hold against a committed Japanese counterattack.

If I thought there was any realistic way to hold Paramushiro I would commit to a suicide struggle.  I would do whatever it took to hold the base until the Allied carrier reinforcements arrive in July.  Allied CD forces seem to be much, much less effective than they were in WitP, however. That, the fact Miller got many garrison reinforcements when I stepped foot in Japan (allowing him to mount a big counter-invasion much sooner than othersie), and the much greater-than anticipated ship losses has left me unable to have the remotest hope of accomplishing meaningful at sea or in the air around Para.  The best I can do is string things out so that Miller has to give it his best shot. If he dallies, or if he runs into bad luck, I'll re-commit.  The Allied carriers will be at Pearl, and all the combat ships damaged during the invasion are repairing at Seattle.  So in six weeks or so the Allies will have a pretty potent combat force in NoPac. 

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 746
RE: Developments - 1/25/2010 2:19:57 AM   
janh

 

Posts: 1216
Joined: 6/12/2007
Status: offline 		Interesting AAR, very interesting.  Is your opponent posting his side?  I couldn't find anything, so I will take the freedom to comment on your strategy without disclosing anything.

I agree with Bullwinkle58.  Your Kurile Operation involved too many forces and was clearly devised as a major offensive, not as a economy of force measure or a mere demonstration (a quick raid and withdrawal).  You could be a bit steadier on your efforts, and you should be able to gain the initiative now -- just don't surrender it so easily again and decide what character your operations are supposed to have.  Miller seems to know well how to "play you".   It actually will probably not matter so much in the end whether you run the Kuriles as demonstration and focus your center of gravity to DEI, or whether you consider Para an economy of force measure to bind and attrit him or even turn it into your main operation.

I think you presently are at the turning point and skillful management of DEI and NoPac will keep him off balance as he is already.  His first naval counter-attack shows the high cost he pays for such "unprepared" tries to break up your operations before they solidfy -- and with every week that passes he has less options other than to counter immediatly and hit your forces while the operations are still in progess and vulnerable -- like a fast counterstrike into airborne assaults.

Presently he can still take time to concentrate, but DEI and NoPac are so far apart that -- despite inner lines -- he simply will have to split his forces again if he doesn't want to loose in one theater soon.  You could even worsen his problem by applying a little (naval/air) pressure in the India/Burma AO or at Rabaul -- this could be done with small TF's, an economically way of binding is forces and keep him off balance, and guessing as to your main (==sustained) axis of approach. 
Attrit him at Paramushiro as best as you can.  Maybe you can even hold?  If nothing, you gain time, and the initiative since he is already reacting.  Further, he must violate the principle of concentration of forces, or he has to switch over to a holding/securing stance in the DEI, thus surrendering local initiative also there to you.  Since games don't include the political level, it is ok to go through the "what-if" scenario and see whether you can hold Paramushiro.  There is no politician in your back starting discussions about a peace offer...

I would avoid putting valuable assests in spots where they presently are of little value -- such as your carriers at Pearl.  It is too far for them to react to any opportunity fast enough.  Since they are weak, I wouldn't split them permanently, but I would keep them closer to an AO -- be it NoPac, or DEI.  Maybe I'd send a CarDiv to raid an island in Centpac, and keep the bulk hidden near the Kuriles.  Or send it to West Oz, and carefully make use of it to draw the KB back to a theater, where LBA can better leverage the present weakness of your carrier force. 

Just my $0.02.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 747
RE: Developments - 1/25/2010 4:23:13 AM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I have to keep up the appearance that Paramushiro is "the real thing," so I'll continue to send supply transports and perhaps I'll try to slip in a combat TF just to make some noise.  But I don't have many AKLs left - go back and look at the number of ships I've lost (post made on previous page) and you'll see that I've stripped the cupboard nearly bare.

If I thought there was any realistic way to hold Paramushiro I would commit to a suicide struggle.  I would do whatever it took to hold the base until the Allied carrier reinforcements arrive in July.  Allied CD forces seem to be much, much less effective than they were in WitP, however. That, the fact Miller got many garrison reinforcements when I stepped foot in Japan (allowing him to mount a big counter-invasion much sooner than othersie), and the much greater-than anticipated ship losses has left me unable to have the remotest hope of accomplishing meaningful at sea or in the air around Para.  The best I can do is string things out so that Miller has to give it his best shot. If he dallies, or if he runs into bad luck, I'll re-commit.  The Allied carriers will be at Pearl, and all the combat ships damaged during the invasion are repairing at Seattle.  So in six weeks or so the Allies will have a pretty potent combat force in NoPac. 


Well, my basic point was to make him continue to commit large numbers of forces (and fuel/time) with a very small commitment of your forces. It sounds like you'll try to do that. It's the best thing you can do to help out in the DEI. Small force, large leverage. I agree if he wants it he can have it, but if making him believe you still want it is the best you can do with your currrent ship inventory then by all means do that. Pin him down with small investment is all I'm saying.

As fo rthe CD stuff, as a "veteran" of the long PH CD thread, which may have led to the "air thread" which made many of the devs decamp from the forums, I don't want to beat that horse. I'll only say that, yes, it seems Allied CD is less hairy than in WITP, but the truth lies in examining the individual TOEs, as I only did when that other thread got busy. A lot of what's tagged as "CD" in the DB, rellly isn't anymore. It's mobile arty in unified LCUs, along with organic defenses, some observers, some AA, etc. Other CD is "true' CD--integrated fire control, static emplacements, BIG guns, etc. I think DB limits make the devs use the CD tag as an umbrella, but a lot of CD is really not fit for anti-ship use, either in numbers, ranges, penetrations, or soft attack defenses. And within the Allied, especially the USMC's, CD units, there is a huge variation in devices.

It seems that, re island defense, forts and supply are kings, HQ's are queens, and CD is a bishop at best. That first counter-attack, while the landing forces have huge disruption, is your best bet to throw them back into the sea.

Anyway, motor on. This AAR is still interesting. You'll feel differently when you get those new carriers, and by late 1943 you're getting DDs and DEs in blocks of a dozen every few days it seems.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 748
RE: Developments - 1/25/2010 5:21:45 AM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline 		I think it was Joe who wrote early in this process that more than WITP, AE is a naval game. That is he who controls the sea lanes will dominate. Your points about Miller and the KB show this to be true. Until you reach carrier parity, he is going to be able to dictate the war.

Lesson no. 1 for all Allied players. Give a lot of thought about how you use your carrier resources in the first year of the game. Lose a few of them early and you are out of offensive options for quite a while.

In May of 42 my pbemail opponent has invaded Northern OZ. While making me quite nervous, I am beginnin to think that unlike in WITP invading OZ is a serious mistake for Japan. I know holding Darwin creates a buffer for the DEI but it opens of a free land front where the Allies can fight Japan every day without risking major fleet assets. Combine that with land campaigns in China and Burma and it has to eventually put too much of a drain on Japanese resources. I know he may go for Sulva and Noumea but I am now thinking that I should not worry too much and only fight him there if I can really nail him.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 749
RE: Developments - 1/25/2010 6:03:10 AM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		Interesting comments, gents. Thanks. I'll give the entire matter Para defense further thought, including how best to use and position my carriers. I remain convinced that my analsyis is right, but I'll re-examine everything.

crsutton is right about Allied carriers. Look at the difference between this game and Q-Ball's game. In this game I took more chances with my carriers. It resulted in some gains, but at great cost. In comparison, Q-Ball still has his carriers and, as a result, has parity in the DEI. His advance in late '42 has gone smoothly while mine has been very costly and halting.

< Message edited by Canoerebel -- 1/25/2010 6:04:23 AM >

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 750
Page:   <<   < prev  23 24 [25] 26 27   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Just Total Carnage Page: <<   < prev  23 24 [25] 26 27   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

1.375