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: We're Not In Kansas Any More

 
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: We're Not In Kansas Any More Page: <<   < prev  38 39 [40] 41 42   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: We're Not In Kansas Any More - 3/12/2010 3:43:08 PM   
Grotius


Posts: 5798
Joined: 10/18/2002
From: The Imperial Palace.
Status: offline 		I should have added some implications for your game. Given the added pressure on Japan's heavy industry in Scenario 2, strategic bombing is at least as important as in Scenario 1. And if you succeed in separating him from the DEI, as you are embarked on doing, I can't see how he'll sustain his economy for long.

_____________________________


(in reply to Grotius)
Post #: 1171
RE: A Non-Historic Luxury - 3/12/2010 3:44:00 PM   
LoBaron


Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton


quote:

ORIGINAL: wpurdom

Bravo.

That's why I'm a little leery of forcing the IJ player into historic constraints without a lot of careful thought - the game might become a drudge, rather than a blast after mid-1943.



Yes, there is a trade off and quite frankly a strictly historical game would mean a game against the AI as nobody would want to play Japan. Hats off to those JFBs out there.


You both hit the nail I think. Very sensible posts!

As a Japanese player it already a success when you reach a par at games end.
The constraints are already present in the naval and ground troop aspect, to limit them additionally in the air would only make the game frustrating. You would know that you have
a very small chance to continue to be effective in the Air after a couple of high-loss battles and this combined with the Allied knowledge of future Japanese weaknesses would ruin
the game IMO.



< Message edited by LoBaron -- 3/12/2010 3:45:13 PM >

_____________________________


(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 1172
RE: We're Not In Kansas Any More - 3/12/2010 4:06:54 PM   
witpqs


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

ORIGINAL: hartwig.modrow

III) Once you reach the desired skill levels for a given pilot, rotate him out of the unit. I think there is a 180 day delay before he is available again, but after those 180 days, you will have a pilot who is trained already. Of course, you refill the unit and go on training...



Hartwig,

This point is wrong and could mess you up. When a pilot is Active, left-click on him to put him in Group Reserve, then (when he is in Group Reserve), left-click on him again to put him in General Reserve.

When a pilot is already in the Group Reserve, right-click on him to make him Active.

Now here is the trap: when a pilot is Active, right-click on him to rotate him home for 180 days! Never do that because it has no benefit.

(in reply to modrow)
Post #: 1173
RE: We're Not In Kansas Any More - 3/12/2010 4:17:21 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs
quote:

ORIGINAL: hartwig.modrow
III) Once you reach the desired skill levels for a given pilot, rotate him out of the unit. I think there is a 180 day delay before he is available again, but after those 180 days, you will have a pilot who is trained already. Of course, you refill the unit and go on training...

Hartwig,

This point is wrong and could mess you up. When a pilot is Active, left-click on him to put him in Group Reserve, then (when he is in Group Reserve), left-click on him again to put him in General Reserve.

When a pilot is already in the Group Reserve, right-click on him to make him Active.

Now here is the trap: when a pilot is Active, right-click on him to rotate him home for 180 days! Never do that because it has no benefit.


(not at you, witpqs, because I appreciate your comments and help!, but rather at this kind of micromanagement.

Is there anyone else out there who doesn't like this kind of micromanagement, or am I destined to be a lone passenger pigeon winging his way to extinction?

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 1174
RE: We're Not In Kansas Any More - 3/12/2010 4:24:08 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		*bows to Grotius-san*

Thanks, Grotius, for many helpful pointers and comments.

I began the game with the impression that Scenario Two gives the Japanese more DDs, four more infantry divisions, and some kind of beginning enhancement in pilot quality or quantity.  I could be wrong about those, but that's my recollection. 

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 1175
RE: We're Not In Kansas Any More - 3/12/2010 4:24:51 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline 		I could see managing squadron leaders, like ships' captains, but individual pilots is too much.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 1176
RE: We're Not In Kansas Any More - 3/12/2010 4:24:58 PM   
Grfin Zeppelin


Posts: 1515
Joined: 12/3/2007
From: Germany
Status: offline 		Personaly I find it rather fun.

_____________________________



(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 1177
RE: We're Not In Kansas Any More - 3/12/2010 4:25:29 PM   
wpurdom

 

Posts: 476
Joined: 10/27/2000
From: Decatur, GA, USA
Status: offline
quote:

Is there anything else I'm overlooking?


Maybe. I'm no expert, but here are some suggestions:

1. The consensus on the boards seems to be that a better use for the TRACOM pilots, is to first assign 1 to each squadron in order of priority as far as it goes. This results in a quicker pick-up of experience, we're told. Others suggest have no more than two yellow TRACOM pilots in any frontline squadron so as not to waste their training talents (but keep a replacement for one being shot down.)

To rotate out, you don't have to send them off for 180 days. You can send them to TRACOM, you can use get veteran to get them from TRACOM, or using a right click you can put them into reserve in the squadron they're in and then use get veteran to pull them directly to the squadron where needed.

2. 100% training. Some people seem to do that without special measures and let the fatigue rise without terrible things happening. I overfill my training squadrons to 125%+ of the number of planes to keep the fatigue reasonable because I believe without a lot of evidence that it keeps ops losses down.

3. Overfill frontline squadrons with pilots. General Kenney believed that frontline squadrons should have two arcrew for every plane and I agree in AE with planes facing a lot of combat. It lets you sustain a higher rate of operational tempo and accumulate more net experience. CAUTION - the computer can handle excess pilots well up to a certain point (130%-150%?? - there are folks who could tell you better), but if you go all the way up to double, probably some pilots will just sit there sidelined in group reserve.

< Message edited by wpurdom -- 3/12/2010 5:29:20 PM >

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 1178
RE: We're Not In Kansas Any More - 3/12/2010 4:26:22 PM   
anarchyintheuk

 

Posts: 3921
Joined: 5/5/2004
From: Dallas
Status: offline 		I'm right there with you on this. Unfortunately, it's AE's version of homework. I do pilot/squadron fu twice a month . . . at least it will limit the time you spend on it to maybe an hour real time per month.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 1179
RE: We're Not In Kansas Any More - 3/12/2010 4:31:37 PM   
AcePylut


Posts: 1494
Joined: 3/19/2004
Status: offline 		Canoe, I agree with you on pilot training.  It does seem like a lot of unnecessary micro-management work.  But I'm glad it's being discussed, cuz now I"m going to have to add it to my list of "weekly chores", lest I end up in 44 with all exp 40 pilots, on the US Side.

I'm not sure why there is this level of management for pilots and not other stuff.  Seems to me if you wanted this level, the supplies could have been broken out into "toilet paper rolls, ammo >.50cal, C-rations" etc. 

Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of pilot training, but this is a little too much imho.



_____________________________


(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 1180
RE: We're Not In Kansas Any More - 3/12/2010 4:31:58 PM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 9088
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline 		too much BS to play, did he get a date last week, BS with all the pilot rotation, click once to rotate clockwise, twice to rotate conterclockwise, left click to . vlah blah blah.. such rediculas levels..
what is next?
ok, rant over.. just being in agreement with you here buddy, the pilot managment system is totally borked

(in reply to anarchyintheuk)
Post #: 1181
RE: We're Not In Kansas Any More - 3/12/2010 4:48:39 PM   
Grotius


Posts: 5798
Joined: 10/18/2002
From: The Imperial Palace.
Status: offline 		I guess I'm one of the nut-cases who enjoys the pilot management. And I find it takes much less time than running Japan's economy. I wonder if Allied players tend to dislike pilot management more than Japanese players, who have already resigned themselves to lots of micromanagement.

_____________________________


(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 1182
RE: We're Not In Kansas Any More - 3/12/2010 5:01:59 PM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 9088
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline 		well Japan may need its economy run, there is alot to do for both sides,,, simply put, some poeple tend to take pleasure in the arreiging and ordering of things.. others not so much.. NEITHER is right or better... I am married to very make things right type person, for myself the creative is more "fun"
no worries...
No idea why they even added all the levels.. it would have been easier to simply have POOL, and Deployed
and use non combat units to train...
and back to the aar..

(in reply to Grotius)
Post #: 1183
RE: We're Not In Kansas Any More - 3/12/2010 5:11:40 PM   
JohnDillworth


Posts: 3100
Joined: 3/19/2009
Status: offline
quote:

I guess I'm one of the nut-cases who enjoys the pilot management. And I find it takes much less time than running Japan's economy. I wonder if Allied players tend to dislike pilot management more than Japanese players, who have already resigned themselves to lots of micromanagement.

Perhaps, I am one player who stays away from playing the Japanese as I don't want to do all the production stuff. I suppose once I got to know it there would be some rewards but I have finished just a single game against the AI and that took a huge chuck out of my life, don't know If I would make it with the addtional managment.
my 2 cents

_____________________________

Today I come bearing an olive branch in one hand, and the freedom fighter's gun in the other. Do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. I repeat, do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. - Yasser Arafat Speech to UN General Assembly

(in reply to Grotius)
Post #: 1184
At what cost? - 3/12/2010 5:24:45 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		There has been a great deal of interest and focus on the recent lopsided carrier battle and understandably so. But the Allies have accomplished a great deal over the past four months (see map below).

As of mid-July, the Allies were confined to the growing and strategically important chain of mainly island bases (Babar, Saumlaki, Taberfane, Kai-eilenden, and Kaimana) just west of Darwin. The entire Japanese navy - all carriers and all BBs except four lost in the Kuriles - were stationed in theater. The Japanese had just pounded Darwin (at great cost in carrier pilots) and were sending regular combat TFs to these Allied island bases.

Four months later, the Alliied frontier has expanded greatly, especially in the northwest vector, reaching the southwest frontier of the Pacific Ocean. No longer does a mighty Japanese Empire have the Allies boxed up within a fairly confined perimeter. Now the Allies have major bases with which to threaten Java, Celebes, Borneo, Philippines, Palau, and the Saipan group.

This has been accomplished at high cost - higher than I'd like for the Allies. But the Japanese have suffered a significant attrition, too. Here is a partial tally sheet:

CV: Allies 4 (Victorious, Constitution, Essex Wasp); IJN 2 (Kaga, Hiryu)
CVL: Allies 1 (Independence); IJN 1 (Shoho) plus maybe Chiyoda
CVE: Allies 7
BB: Allies 5 (S. Dakota, Calif., Colo., Maryland, Mississipi); IJN 2 (Hyuga and Ise) with three others suffering major damage (Yamato, Mutsu, Nagato).
CA: Allies 3; IJN 7
CL/CLAA: Allies 3; IJN 6
DD: Alllies 9; IJN 10

Transports: The Allies suffered modest losses (nearly all in the Morotai invasion) - and nearly all were xAK or xAP. In terms of lift capacity, the Allies emerged from this long series of amphibious operations nearly untouched.

Aircraft: Heavy losses to both sides, but the Japanese probably lost 2x or more and likely suffered total losses well in excess of 2,000 aircraft.

Troops: Allied losses have been negligible (an important factor since the Allies really don't have a surplus). At least three IJA divisions have been hammered (those at Lautem, Morotai, and Sorong).

1943 has indeed proven to be a year of attrition, and the eastern DEI has been the "meat grinder." I lament the recent carrier battle debacle, but I believe the Allies are in very good position at this point in the war.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Canoerebel -- 3/12/2010 5:27:10 PM >

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 1185
RE: We're Not In Kansas Any More - 3/12/2010 5:30:15 PM   
modrow

 

Posts: 1100
Joined: 8/27/2006
Status: offline 		Witpqs,

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs
Hartwig,

This point is wrong and could mess you up. When a pilot is Active, left-click on him to put him in Group Reserve, then (when he is in Group Reserve), left-click on him again to put him in General Reserve.

When a pilot is already in the Group Reserve, right-click on him to make him Active.

Now here is the trap: when a pilot is Active, right-click on him to rotate him home for 180 days! Never do that because it has no benefit.


Thanks for pointing that out !

Hartwig

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 1186
RE: We're Not In Kansas Any More - 3/12/2010 5:34:30 PM   
Skacee

 

Posts: 79
Joined: 11/25/2009
Status: offline 		I like the idea with using computer to help with mechanical managing stuff, like current pilot training is.
There could be some window where i can manage larger amount of pilots to be trained in chosen skills and from there I could choose which one I want to assign somewhere else or to other area of mass training. Like I have 150 pilots training NavB and then 150 NavT. Then 50 pilots with enough exp from first group will move to the other and then to squadrons or reserve etc. As player wish.
But sometimes also I like to train pilots in the field. Like large masses of pilots will be managed in that window to get ready with some curently available pilots training in real squadrons using oportunity to improve. 
I think something like that window could save time spend with micromanaging pilots. Just my 2 cents, as you say here. 

(in reply to JohnDillworth)
Post #: 1187
RE: We're Not In Kansas Any More - 3/12/2010 6:00:03 PM   
wpurdom

 

Posts: 476
Joined: 10/27/2000
From: Decatur, GA, USA
Status: offline 		supplemental:

quote:

This point is wrong and could mess you up. When a pilot is Active, left-click on him to put him in Group Reserve, then (when he is in Group Reserve), left-click on him again to put him in General Reserve.


IIRC, it's slightly different for TRACOM eligible (yellow) pilots. I think there the left click usually puts them straight into TRACOM and the right click makes them inactive in Group reserve.

The real safety net though is that the game tells you what it is doing and asks for confirmation. I don't know why you ever want to send someone home for 180 days.

quote:

Is there anyone else out there who doesn't like this kind of micromanagement, or am I destined to be a lone passenger pigeon winging his way to extinction?


Well, to get the most out, you have to treat the TRACOM (yellow) pilots as individually assignable, like squadron leaders. For the balance of the techniques there are in-between approaches which give you most of the benefits once you learn a few tricks.

If you put your training squadrons on 100% training and overfill them up to the level you can use Get Pilot, they train well on their own for weeks at a time. Then when you need experienced pilots, you can just do mass transfers out of an individual squadron to another squadron, using the Group Reserve and Get Veteran commands, and replace them with the Get Pilot command in one big group.

If you overfill your frontline squadrons with pilots the computer handles assignments fine generally. For a below strength squadron it can handle pilots up to the establishment (or establishment + 25%?). So for instance if I have a rear area squadron that has 2 planes in it, I will put in 4 pilots to train. It also handles overfilled squadrons fine up to the point it continues to offer "Get pilot" as an option. Many people do a little pilot mangement adjustment once a week (in game time) and you don't need to look at most squadrons most of the time. But at the point of active continuous combat, a review once a week of pilots and squadron leaders may be needed to hold your own against an active manager.

One final suggestion - Ask Rob Brennan for his ideas on the subject. I know he has a number of good ideas on maximizing the return, maybe he has also found techniques for minimizing the hassle. I bet he has a "method" or routine for pilot management. Maybe it isn't too micro.

< Message edited by wpurdom -- 3/12/2010 6:01:49 PM >

(in reply to modrow)
Post #: 1188
RE: We're Not In Kansas Any More - 3/12/2010 6:33:57 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline 		Canoerebel,

I was quite specific in what I said. I said fight, not advance... Your counterpoints were examples of single-axis advances which are, of course, possible. What I was speaking of is what you seem to be doing in this game - FIGHTING along a single axis.

E.g. In my current AAR I have operations in China, the Pacific, Australia and Burma ALL designed to support the primary operation in the DEI


In your current game you are advancing along a single axis ( fine ) but you aren't fighting him on multiple axes in any meaningful way ( meaningful being my shorthand for stuff which is effective in helping break the strength of the forces which he needs to resist you along your primary axis )...

You may say "But I have operations along other axes"... That may be so but are those operations meaningfully aiding you in attriting his IJNAF air? From what you write here I see no indication that's the case.



As to your pilots not gaining much experience over 2 years..... You MUST be doing something wrong or there's a huge bug in your game. I am able to put 65 A2A Exp pilots into my squadrons after less than 2 months of game time.... I figure it takes about 3 months to get a pilot from entry to usefulness ( 65 Exp or so )...

As to why your bombers are such low Exp.... Operational losses. You need to maintain operational losses below 3% of sorties in order to gain experience in the squadron. You are probably losing more than that and seeing the results of that.



Again, if other players can play Scenario 2 and train pilots rapidly and then commit those pilots to combat and get better than 1:1 exchange ratios ( yesterday I downed 42 Japanese planes for the loss of a single Allied fighter ) and you can't then the problem doesn't lie in the game, it must lie in how you are playing it.... Personally I think you are seeing the knock-on of your dislike of the training micromanagement. Whether you like the micromanagement or not is a separate issue.... what you are seeing though appears to be due to the experience differential which Miller is able to generate through his care for pilot training.... and what's more, he deserves it since he's expending the time and effort you aren't... Again though the question of whether a game at this level should have this level of micromanagement is another thing entirely. Within the parameters of this game system Miller is getting his just rewards.

(in reply to Grotius)
Post #: 1189
RE: We're Not In Kansas Any More - 3/12/2010 6:43:42 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		I'm grateful for the time you guys took in outlining many of the finer points of pilot training.  I started by thinking I might have to suck it up and learn.  I finished by concluding:  "Not for me." 

So this game will continue pretty much as it's going now.  In effect it will be a Scenario Two "test" to see whether an experienced Allied player foregoing micro pilot training can best an experienced Japanese player attending to micro pilot training.

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 1190
RE: We're Not In Kansas Any More - 3/12/2010 7:57:45 PM   
wpurdom

 

Posts: 476
Joined: 10/27/2000
From: Decatur, GA, USA
Status: offline 		100% training and slightly overfilling your squadrons 20-25% with pilots alone may increase your accumulation of experience and skills in training by a third over what you have been getting. And you can do that with the Get pilot command.

< Message edited by wpurdom -- 3/12/2010 7:58:34 PM >

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 1191
RE: We're Not In Kansas Any More - 3/12/2010 8:36:18 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: wpurdom
100% training and slightly overfilling your squadrons 20-25% with pilots alone may increase your accumulation of experience and skills in training by a third over what you have been getting. And you can do that with the Get pilot command.


That I can handle. Most of my squadrons are set at 80%, 90% or 100% training, so changing them all won't be a problem. Many of my training squadrons have extra pilots but I"ll try to make sure they're all at about 125%.

Thanks for sticking with me long enough to give a suggestion for a simplified process.

(in reply to wpurdom)
Post #: 1192
RE: We're Not In Kansas Any More - 3/12/2010 8:41:53 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121....


The Allies have (and have had) many operations in other areas:

1) Kuriles invasion - ultimately unsuccessful, but a major attritional battle for the Japanese in terms of combat ships and aircraft.

2) Burma - there were big battles over Akyab (since taken by the Allies) and then Rangoon. Miller recently stripped Burma of aircraft in order to reinforce the DEI. As a result the Rangoon airfield is shut down and no Japanese aircraft have been seen there in a month or more. Allied ground troops are now moving on Rangoon and Prome - I couldn't earlier because I imposed a rule on myself that requires me to "buy out" restricted units before moving them further thank Akyab).

3) CenPac and SoPac - there were long running battles of PM and Milne Bay, but Miller eventually conceded the air over those bases. The Allies are about to move on Milne Bay and probably later will move on other nearby bases. We also had some engagements in the Tarawa/Makin vicinity as the Allies advanced and took the latter base. Miller recently lost 20 or 30 Bettys to CVE CAP, for instance, in one engagement in that vicinity.

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 1193
RE: We're Not In Kansas Any More - 3/12/2010 11:05:11 PM   
wpurdom

 

Posts: 476
Joined: 10/27/2000
From: Decatur, GA, USA
Status: offline 		Of course to the extent you have already switched from 70-80% training to 100% or have already overfilled, there's not so much room for payoff as I suggested.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 1194
RE: We're Not In Kansas Any More - 3/13/2010 12:42:06 AM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline 		Canoerebel,

Key word in your reply.... "were". If you assume that it takes 3 months to train up replacements then operations which occurred several months ago aren't going to achieve the meaningful results you look for. Sure you can point to losses he has suffered in the past 3 months in other axes but they don't appear to be of the necessary scale.


I think, however, the key is that I and others are pointing things out to you which you wish not to be so and in such a circumstance there's little point continuing to point them out further. I'll try one last time though.... You aren't achieving meaningful levels of attrition of his critical forces on non-primary axes in a concomittant manner.

That doesn't make you a bad playe or anything but it does explain your in-game situation as being a result of play and not, entirely, of the game.

(in reply to wpurdom)
Post #: 1195
RE: We're Not In Kansas Any More - 3/13/2010 3:36:29 AM   
Altaris

 

Posts: 216
Joined: 8/14/2009
Status: offline 		Hey, CR, I started a thread on a mod idea for seriously reducing or maybe even removing the need altogether for pilot training micro-management. It's as this thread, feel free to throw in some ideas as I'm still trying to fully formulize what I want to do.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2400944

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 1196
RE: We're Not In Kansas Any More - 3/13/2010 4:32:34 AM   
erstad

 

Posts: 1944
Joined: 8/3/2004
From: Midwest USA
Status: offline 		<overly redundant post deleted>

< Message edited by erstad -- 3/13/2010 4:34:48 AM >

(in reply to modrow)
Post #: 1197
RE: We're Not In Kansas Any More - 3/13/2010 7:45:29 AM   
T Rav

 

Posts: 387
Joined: 5/29/2004
Status: offline 		For what its worth, pilots are a pain in real life too...

Best Regards,
T Rav

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 1198
RE: We're Not In Kansas Any More - 3/13/2010 3:20:15 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		11/15/43 and 11/16/43
 
Ambon:  My troops don't seem to have quite enough oomph to wipe out the defenders.  The most recent deliberate attack just missed achieving a 1:1, didn't drop forts from 3, and inflicted 530 casualties while taking 290 (despite the 1:2 odds the attacks have been inflicting more damage, so I been continuing).  I have two Aussie brigades at nearby Saumlaki that are each 85% prepped for Ambon, so I'm going to bring them into the fray.

Lobaloto:  This small base with big potential adjacent to Ternate was take by Marine 'chutes during the Morotai invasion.  It has been reinforced by a Raider battalion and by engineers.  I am beginning air transport of an Aussie brigade from Sorong to beef up the garrison.  Once built up, this base, in tandem with Morotai, would control the area and, I think, neutralize Ternate and Manado.

Manikwari:  Miller is reinforcing by fast transport (and just lost CLAA Tatsuta to LBA in the effort).  The Allies will reinforce, too.  The reserve troops are at Babo and Sorong and I'm organizing things to bring them forward in about ten days.

More Troops!:  Nearly all Allied infantry units are now committed in fighting at or garrisoning forwards bases (Ambon, Morotai, and Sorong).  The troops at Lautem are prepping for Kendari.  The Morotai and Sorong troops are prepping for Manado.  I need to bring additional ground units forward to permit the Allies to maintain a steady pressure and rotation system - prep and then advance one army while others are prepping for others bases.  I have four "armies" in the region and I think I need at least six to maintain a steady advance.  These additional armies will come from two places - the troops currently prepping for Milne Bay (an operation that will likely take place in a week or two) and the troops at Pearl Harbor that had been prepping for Wake Island.  On the other hand, I have decided that the Allies may indeed wish to hit Marcus Island in 1944, so the army at Adak Island prepped for that target will remain committed.

Burma:  The two Allied stacks are advancing on Rangoon and Prome.  I should know in a few days if Miller is concerened or if he intendes to hunker down and fight.

Damaged Capital Ships:  Most of these have arrived or will soon arrive at Sydney.  BB Alabama and most of the CAs and DDs will repair at Sydney.  The three fleet CVs at least three BBs (North Carolina, Indiana, and Prince of Wales) and some escorts will return to the West Coast.  Counting travel time to and from theater, I estimate these ships will be available for further duty in the DEI within 75 - 90 days.

(in reply to T Rav)
Post #: 1199
RE: We're Not In Kansas Any More - 3/13/2010 7:16:45 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		11/17/43 and 11/18/43
 
Ambon:  The Japanese are reinforcing - either via fast transport or air.  Part of an infantry regiment has joined the beleaugered defenders.  Barring some major moves quick, though, I think it will be too late.  The two Aussie brigades at Saumlaki should arrive in no more than three days.  Also, the Allied troops already at Ambon whiped out disruption after three days of rest.  The Allies will send a CA/CL force to Ambon to protect the transports.  Of course, Miller may have some moves of his own in mind.

Lobaloto:  The Allied air transports ferrying an Aussie unit from Sorong to Lobalato got chewed up by CAP.  I don't know if it's regular CAP over adjacent Ternate or whether Miller is flying LRCAP.  The Allies have about 65 AV at the base now, with forts two.  I want about 150 AV there in case Miller marches a force cross-country from Ternate.

Sorong:  This base is developing quickly and nicely, but needs more air base support.  I have a small convoy on the way from Darwin.  A CA/CL force will escort.

Milne Bay:  The invasion troops are loading at Darwin and D-Day may be as soon as 5 or 6 days away.  I'm a little worried about Miller anticipating this move even though things have been pretty much status quo in this area for many, many months.

Rangoon:  Allied troops have begun to arrive at the hexes adjacent to Rangoon and Pegu, though it will be a few days before all will be in place.  The Allies will have about 2000 AV for Rangoon and about 1300 AV for Pegu.  Miller has 32 units at Rangoon and about three at Pegu.  My hope is that the Allied threat against Pegu will persuade Miller to withdraw from both bases.  I don't think the Allies have enough to threaten Rangoon even if Miller siphons off a few units to reinforce Pegu.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 1200
Page:   <<   < prev  38 39 [40] 41 42   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: We're Not In Kansas Any More Page: <<   < prev  38 39 [40] 41 42   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

0.719