Nearing the end of October/42

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Nearing the end of October/42

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 >> Nearing the end of October/42

Page: << < prev 16 17 [18] 19 20 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Nearing the end of October/42 - 5/24/2011 8:18:09 PM

SqzMyLemon

Posts: 4239
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline

With the end of October near I looked at what aircraft are coming online and made some factory adjustments. The Ki-43-IIa Oscar will now be available in November which will allow a few more Nate squadrons to upgrade. Ki-27 Nate pools are currently at 189 aircraft so I finally stopped production of this aircraft at Harbin, and switched the factory over to Ki-43-IIa Oscar production. A factory researching the Ki-43-IIa has been fully switched over to Ki-43-IIb research at 20(0). I have a second factory also researching the IIb, but this factory is still repairing so I'm receiving no research points. I'll keep expanding this particular factory as it will immediately switch to production.

The Irving also comes into production, but I'll determine whether to keep an R&D factory or switch over to production. As far as I remember, I don't have many air units that use this recon plane. I'll be sure to double check prior to the end of the month. I also believe the Ki-21-IIb Sally is due right away. Again, I need to look at Sally production and either convert straight to production, or switch to another aircraft while it's still in R&D mode.

Garrison units are outbound for Sumatra, Java and Timor to strengthen the defences. The 2nd Division has been recombined at Lae and will be earmarked for operations in the Hawaiian Islands. I'm deciding whether to reinforce PM as I've completely neglected the base to date. I'd rather defend the north coast of New Guinea and around Lae. Is PM a base that should be defended? The fact it's on the south coast makes reinforcement by sea extremely risky to air attack from the Australian mainland. Considering most of my bases are already within 4E range from Australia, PM doesn't seem that important to me from a defensive standpoint, nor as a potential Allied airbase. I should be able to suppress is initially anyway.

I still don't know what to do with the Wake CD unit. I'd obviously like to place it in a must invade base or one that controls a strait to be able to harass enemy shipping. So many choices. I may even deploy it in the Hawaiian Islands if the invasion is a go. Speaking of Hawaii, I have a Glen based submarine placed gathering intelligence on the base. Initial reports indicate five LCU's on Oahu, no reports on ship or aircraft numbers so far. I've decided to invade Johnston Island and set up a search base for direct recon of Pearl Harbor and hopefully pick up some Allied naval movements. Johnston being an Atoll, I'll designate strictly combat units to invade and deploy a BF later. Johnston will be a one-off operation, so I must hit fast and hard bringing everything I need in one go. I have not decided on whether to sortie the entire Combined Fleet for this operation in the hopes the Allies commit naval forces. My initial thought is my opponent will expect the operation to be a trap and will not risk his carriers. D-Day for the planned operation will be the end of November. Not much time to prep LCU's, but the sooner I get eyes in the sky over PH the better.

I believe the Allies have routed most of their TF's well to the south all game, and as Chickenboy has pointed out, PH may not be that important to my opponent. Still, if it's weakly held I believe it will pay dividends in Japanese hands. First Johnston Island, then I'll worry about PH.

The massive reorganization of my entire Empire continues and right now the preparations are overwhelming as I work on the next turn. Recon in Burma indicates Cox's Bazar currently has 51 fighters present. I'm planning a night air bombardment to be followed up by a 100 fighter sweep to see if I can catch the CAP as I did at Shwebo. Other than that, it should be another quiet turn.

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 5/25/2011 5:24:02 PM >

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 511

RE: Nearing the end of October/42 - 5/25/2011 9:18:38 PM

SqzMyLemon

Posts: 4239
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline

Oct. 28/42 pre-update

I had a rare chance to run the last turn over my lunch hour and disappointing sums it up. I'll post more when I go over the combat reports, but my bombing and sweep missions against Cox's Bazar did not go well. Off the top of my head I believe 27 Japanese aircraft were lost against only 6 Allied.

I truly do not understand how the air model works. There's no consistency and it seems coordination is the exception and not the rule. I'll post the results of this air action in greater detail later and ask for input. This isn't a rant, I'm just tired of watching my airplanes shot out of the sky following the replay, and later looking over the combat report and wondering why I got my ass handed to me when it seemed like my forces were not at a huge disadvantage. I'll be paying another visit to Lobaron's air co-ordination thread once again.

Weather was crappy and that is probably the culprit right there, but essentially I don't understand why a sweep of three Sentai's operating from two airbases, at the same altitude, under the same HQ all go in separately. My first Oscar sweep of 30+ aircraft was decimated by Allied CAP despite only 7 aircraft airborne at the time of the raid with a further 17 scrambling. The defending CAP then got the dive on my attacking sweepers which were 4k lower so it turned into a turkey shoot.

The second sweep of 25+ Oscar's, which once again outnumbered the defenders initially, performed poorly.

The third sweep of 30+ Tojo's got the dive on the defending CAP, unfortunately by this time only 5 enemy P-40K's scrambled.

A Tojo and Oscar Sentai were both based at Toungoo and these units never coordinated. Why did my Tojo's go in last to face the fewest CAP? Just how does the air model determine the order of attacks by multiple units that lose coordination? I have many more questions and I may post this particular report in the air thread or war room as well to get everyone's thoughts. Either way, I'll post the actual combat reports later and post my interpretation of what I'm reading and get input from others to see if I'm not reading the combat reports correctly.

On a happier note, two Allied ships were sunk by Japanese submarines today

so it's not all bad.

More later.

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 5/25/2011 9:21:49 PM >

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 512

RE: Nearing the end of October/42 - 5/25/2011 9:44:10 PM

Chickenboy

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon
I also believe the Ki-21-IIb Sally is due right away. Again, I need to look at Sally production and either convert straight to production, or switch to another aircraft while it's still in R&D mode.

My opinion is that the Helen IIa is superior due to the armor. I apologize if this has been discussed before and therefore redundant, but it makes a difference in terms of airframe surviveability.

quote:

Is PM a base that should be defended? The fact it's on the south coast makes reinforcement by sea extremely risky to air attack from the Australian mainland. Considering most of my bases are already within 4E range from Australia, PM doesn't seem that important to me from a defensive standpoint, nor as a potential Allied airbase. I should be able to suppress is initially anyway.

I wouldn't give him PM on the cheap, nor would I give him Milne Bay on the cheap. A fully built PM is within extended range of Rabaul, so yes-it could be an annoyance to your Rabaul operations. If you can hold PM for several more months at comparatively limited cost, I'd recommend you look at it more closely.

Why not (slowly) build your infantry support there via air transport? It's unlikely he'll detect it, very unlikely he'll LRCAP it and you can bring it up to speed within a month or so by air transport, thereby mitigating some of the risk at shipborne reinforcement.

quote:

I still don't know what to do with the Wake CD unit. I'd obviously like to place it in a must invade base or one that controls a strait to be able to harass enemy shipping. So many choices. I may even deploy it in the Hawaiian Islands if the invasion is a go.

Interesting ideas. In February 1943, you'll get some unrestricted CD units from the mainland as well (at least two, IIRC), so you can always backfill with the Wake CD unit if you need it in the interim.

quote:

I have not decided on whether to sortie the entire Combined Fleet for this operation in the hopes the Allies commit naval forces.

If the Allies do rise to the bait, you should take pains to ensure that you have a big hammer there with which to hit them. Their great reaction MAY come at the invasion of Johnston, so I'd assume that they will come after you. Better to have too much force on hand versus insufficient force in this case, IMO.

_____________________________

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 513

RE: Nearing the end of October/42 - 5/25/2011 9:47:04 PM

Chickenboy

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon
Off the top of my head I believe 27 Japanese aircraft were lost against only 6 Allied.

Bummer, dude. Please do post the details of your turn for us to look at.

Thanks!

_____________________________

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 514

RE: Nearing the end of October/42 - 5/25/2011 10:34:21 PM

SqzMyLemon

Posts: 4239
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

My opinion is that the Helen IIa is superior due to the armor. I apologize if this has been discussed before and therefore redundant, but it makes a difference in terms of airframe surviveability.

I wouldn't give him PM on the cheap, nor would I give him Milne Bay on the cheap. A fully built PM is within extended range of Rabaul, so yes-it could be an annoyance to your Rabaul operations. If you can hold PM for several more months at comparatively limited cost, I'd recommend you look at it more closely.

Why not (slowly) build your infantry support there via air transport? It's unlikely he'll detect it, very unlikely he'll LRCAP it and you can bring it up to speed within a month or so by air transport, thereby mitigating some of the risk at shipborne reinforcement.

If the Allies do rise to the bait, you should take pains to ensure that you have a big hammer there with which to hit them. Their great reaction MAY come at the invasion of Johnston, so I'd assume that they will come after you. Better to have too much force on hand versus insufficient force in this case, IMO.

I love the Helen too, unfortunately the majority of my bomber units can only only upgrade to the Sally IIb. I only have one bomber unit currently equipped with the Helen Ia. PDU off remember.

I think there are maybe two more that equip the IIa, but they are still in the reinforcement que.

I forgot about your earlier air transport suggestion for getting troops into PM. Best not make things any easier for him than I already have. I have the Topsy's available at Rabaul, just need to start shuttling the troops over. Can air transport still move the heavy equipment, or will that have to be shipped in? I expect an Allied move fairly soon in the Southeast Pacific as my opponent has hinted it's time for some new invasions.

As to Johnston, you are absolutely right. I hate falling into the trap of preparing for an operation and then to inadvertly bail on trying to accomplish it from poor force allocation. Time to remind myself what am I trying to accomplish. To entice the Allied Fleet out and defeat it. How was I going to accomplish that? Start moves in the Central Pacific that would put me into a position to eventually assault Pearl Harbor. By invading Johnston I also hope to draw out Allied naval vessels, so I'd better bring the darn Combined Fleet in case he shows up! Duh...sometimes I really am a dork.

Previously, I worried that I'd have to get in and out quickly at Johnston...again...dumb. The point is the Allies just might react how I'd like them to, so rather than rush something or skimp, it's best to go in prepared for any eventuality. As you said, nothing would be worse than having the Allied carriers show up and I have nothing available other than a spent bombardment and various amphibious TF's for them to feast on. Thank goodness I'm still in the "get my crap together" phase prior to making any decisions/plans.

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 515

RE: Nearing the end of October/42 - 5/26/2011 10:50:20 PM

SqzMyLemon

Posts: 4239
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline

A quiet day at work so I'm bouncing ideas off the walls here.

Since I've decided to invade Johnston Island it occurred to me I should start trying to get the Allies to focus elsewhere. Two things have come to mind. A winter offensive in the Aleutians and offensive operations around Ndeni. I believe I can draw Allied strength to both regions which may weaken their dispositions around PH in time for my planned operations in the Hawaiian Islands.

Why the Aleutians in winter? I believe the Allies will do nothing in the Aleutians during winter, and my opponent has hinted as much in an e-mail. That being said, the Aleutians are also lightly defended with only Dutch Harbor and Umrak Island occupied and expanded. I'm thinking the Allies will not react to any offensive moves I make in this theatre until Spring, when conditions will improve. I see this operation as complimentary to my goal of buying time for the Empire and indirectly helping my offensive against PH. Do I want the Aleutians...no. Why move on them?

1. I hope to force the Allied start position for any northern offensive back hundreds of miles.
2. By attacking in winter, I may cause the Allies to start prepping units now for counterinvasion that were planned to be used elsewhere, namely the Southeast Pacific.
3. If the Allies ever did plan a northern thrust, this will clearly upset those plans.
4. If my Hawaiian Islands campaign is succesful, it might force the Allies to look north as a possible route to Japan which would now be much harder.

I have no clue on the effects of winter so first I should find out the penalties. Other than increased ship damage while operating in northern waters during winter, I don't know what the effect on LCU's or air units will be. I will commit minimal naval forces for this operation, namely surface ships and possibly a CVL or two. I'm not looking for the Aleutians to become a battlefield until the Spring. I want to use minimal force and gain my objectives quickly and then a slow buildup to draw more Allied assets in their recapture.

Why Ndeni now?

Originally, I intended to recapture Ndeni once it had fallen to Allied forces and then changed my mind. I felt it didn't offer anything to my overall defence nor was it worth losing shipping trying to take it back. In light of my planned operations in the Hawaiian Islands, I have rethought my opinion on Ndeni. Currently, the Allies are trying to sneak in support units while extricating the combat units that took the base, especially the paratroop Bn. At least that's what I think they are doing. The two APD's sunk during yesterdays turn were loaded with troops and they were en route to Ndeni, not simply withdrawing the forces currently there. That tells me the Allies want Ndeni on the cheap, but what if they are not willing to lose the base now?

If I counter amphib at Ndeni perhaps that will draw additional Allied units into securing it. If I commit just enough troops to recapture it, that may mean the Allies will then launch another amphib assault against the base committing more ships and assets to secure it. This could give me the chance to attrition Allied naval forces and draw strength away from the Hawaiian Islands. It will also focus attention away from the Central Pacific. If I'm wrong and the Allies abandon Ndeni, well as least I will learn that the base doesn't really figure into their plans to recapture the Solomons.

As I reorganize my forces I have numerous LCU's capabale of offensive operations sitting around doing nothing. The lack of territory I've taken means I definitely have forces at hand for operations for both the Aleutians and Ndeni operations. Naval guard and various SNLF units are available. I can even use a few garrison units to give me some teeth in holding onto these objectives.

I'm looking at also hitting Baker and Canton Islands, but here ask for opinions. My thoughts are that taking these islands will give the appearance of threatening the Allied LOC somewhat from PH to Fiji/Australia. I want to draw aircraft/LCU's/ships away from the Hawaiian Islands. How do you think an Allied player would react to losing these islands...would they move assets to strengthening surrounding Islands. Would they pull back? Would they reinforce Hawaii?

Thinking of my timeline I'm looking at a smash and grab of these Islands. Multiple invasion TF's to hit Baker, Canton and Johnston Islands simulataneously supported by the Combined Fleet. My thoughts are to have the Hawaiian invasion force fully ready at this stage as well. I fear a move on any of these islands and then a delay of months to move on Hawaii will give the Allies far too much time to reinforce directly at PH, even if PH isn't felt to be threatened directly. Essentially Johnston Island gives me a recon base to learn whether PH is weakly held and after a week of recon I should know all I need to know, I either move quickly or lose the element of surprise. The other bases will give me a land bridge to move air units quickly to the Hawaiian Islands when needed. I may hit one of the dot bases between PH and Midway to establish a seaplane base as well. Part of me feels Midway may be a threat to my LOC if I don't capture it, but I fear that would be more heavily defended than Johnston and require too much force commitment to capture quickly. Perhaps that can be a secondary target if operations against Hawaii go well.

What do you think? Possible? Over ambitious?

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 5/26/2011 11:00:20 PM >

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 516

RE: Nearing the end of October/42 - 5/27/2011 7:29:48 PM

Chickenboy

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

A quiet day at work so I'm bouncing ideas off the walls here.

Since I've decided to invade Johnston Island it occurred to me I should start trying to get the Allies to focus elsewhere.

Why? The purpose of your sortie to the waters near Hawaii is to draw the Allies into the 'decisive battle', isn't it? You want them to respond there and then with their available fleet, no? You want to make the argument that if they *don't* respond, then they will feel pain by loss of an important fleet base.

If they respond to your alternative landings / diversions, then they'll have forces involved in those responses. Will you be in an advantageous position to respond to those responses when and if they occur or will your units be sacrificed in the name of the diversion? Won't you then be sacrificing units for a diversion that you don't really want?

quote:

Two things have come to mind. A winter offensive in the Aleutians and offensive operations around Ndeni. I believe I can draw Allied strength to both regions which may weaken their dispositions around PH in time for my planned operations in the Hawaiian Islands.

Why the Aleutians in winter? I believe the Allies will do nothing in the Aleutians during winter, and my opponent has hinted as much in an e-mail. That being said, the Aleutians are also lightly defended with only Dutch Harbor and Umrak Island occupied and expanded. I'm thinking the Allies will not react to any offensive moves I make in this theatre until Spring, when conditions will improve. I see this operation as complimentary to my goal of buying time for the Empire and indirectly helping my offensive against PH. Do I want the Aleutians...no. Why move on them?

Aleutians / winter invasions after the expiration of your amphibious bonus with only partially prepped troops are murder. You should expect significant disruption, slow unloading and severely reduced combat effectiveness for your troops so engaged.

quote:

1. I hope to force the Allied start position for any northern offensive back hundreds of miles.
2. By attacking in winter, I may cause the Allies to start prepping units now for counterinvasion that were planned to be used elsewhere, namely the Southeast Pacific.
3. If the Allies ever did plan a northern thrust, this will clearly upset those plans.
4. If my Hawaiian Islands campaign is succesful, it might force the Allies to look north as a possible route to Japan which would now be much harder.

I have no clue on the effects of winter so first I should find out the penalties.Other than increased ship damage while operating in northern waters during winter, I don't know what the effect on LCU's or air units will be.

The effects of winter in this theatre are significant and will impede your landing, recovery of disruption and air activities, just like IRL.

Why not use the intervening Winter to fully prep forces for an Aleutian target or two. Land them the day after the winter penalty expires. You'll go a long way to reducing these two significant disadvantages.

In the meantime, you'll have some time to see how the main show goes. Beat the snot out of the Allies and capture Oahu? Where do you think he'll be looking to attack you next? The Aleutians / Northern route or Hawaii or elsewhere in SoPac?

Lose bad on the main show? You'll have to regroup and fall back. You want to have a frozen Aleutian outpost just hanging out there without support?

quote:

Why Ndeni now?

Good question...

quote:

I'm looking at also hitting Baker and Canton Islands, but here ask for opinions.

My opinion is that you're channeling Isoruku Yamamoto, but in a bad way. No plan was ever too complicated for him or had enough redundant or superfluous landings or intricate moving pieces. You're now talking about 5 different objectives for your actions in the Pacific (Aleutians, Baker, Canton, Johnston, Ndeni and, of course, the Hawaiian islands) with multiple interarticulating pieces to support one another.

What is your main goal? How will these objectives help you realize that main goal? Will you have sufficient resources (particularly LCUs with transport) available for all of these or will you need to prioritize? If the Hawaiian adventure is the most important goal, will the Ndeni counteroffensive help with that or possibly distract?

quote:

I fear a move on any of these islands and then a delay of months to move on Hawaii will give the Allies far too much time to reinforce directly at PH, even if PH isn't felt to be threatened directly. Essentially Johnston Island gives me a recon base to learn whether PH is weakly held and after a week of recon I should know all I need to know, I either move quickly or lose the element of surprise.

I agree with this message: once you tip your hand, you should be prepared to move with speed and force. Otherwise, attempting to take the Hawaiian islands slowly, on the cheap with the other attendant distractions you suggest will-IMO-negatively impact your ability to get the job done.

quote:

The other bases will give me a land bridge to move air units quickly to the Hawaiian Islands when needed. I may hit one of the dot bases between PH and Midway to establish a seaplane base as well. Part of me feels Midway may be a threat to my LOC if I don't capture it, but I fear that would be more heavily defended than Johnston and require too much force commitment to capture quickly. Perhaps that can be a secondary target if operations against Hawaii go well.

Sounds good-see how your main ops versus Hawaii go before identifying secondary operations.

_____________________________

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 517

RE: Nearing the end of October/42 - 5/27/2011 9:41:38 PM

SqzMyLemon

Posts: 4239
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline

I never said they were good ideas.

I'm guilty of feeling I should be doing more, trying to make up for 10 months of relatively poor play. I'm not beating myself up here, but ultimately I've not played a smart game to date, so I feel pressure to "perform" somewhat.

I'm seeing the chickens hatch before the eggs are even lain. Everything you've pointed out and what I indeed wrote yesterday is premature and detracts from the main objective. I stated earlier that a successul operation at Hawaii might allow me to exploit other theatres...later, not before.

I looked at the winter penalties last night and you are right, there are more negatives than positives and it would truly detract from the main objective. I can deal with the Aleutians in the Spring if I have to, or even not at all.

Sigh, this is hard.

I'm thinking way too much. I need to dumb this down in order for me to pull this off. Right now, I need to look at only three objectives: Johnston Island, the Hawaiian Islands and the defence of Sumatra/Java while the Combined Fleet is tied to the Central Pacific.

Johnston Island is an Atoll, so I'm looking at 6k worth of defenders dug in behind at least level 6 forts at this stage. I know overstacking is a real bear, but I need to take the base quickly. I may have to chance a larger invasion package and just continually pump in supply.

I'm going to take a risk, and gather as much force as possible to hit the Hawaiian Islands with. Right now I have the 2nd, 16th, 48th and 54th available, but I'd like to commit 6-7 divisions and all the support troops necessary to facilitate base expansions and operations. I can buy out another division from either China or the Home Islands within a month. I'll need to buy out more engineer, support and AA units as well, not to mention additional air units from China. I get the Tony in February and two Nate units of 2nd Air in Manchuquo can upgrade to it.

All my garrison units will go to replacing these divisions. My priority is to first reinforce Sumatra and New Guinea, then Java. Burma is in no danger at the moment, and if anything I really should pull back, form a defensive line and then I could deploy another two divisions to Hawaii.

I wish I'd taken Midway at least, that base would be ideal right now for raiding the LOC between Hawaii and the West Coast. Above all, I do not want Hawaii reinforced.

I'm going to set things in motion and start to move LCU's and supply to Saipan, Truk and Kwajelein. I'll have a better idea of the forces I have available once they get moving. I have tons of shipping capacity at Singapore to facilitate moving units east. The 16th and 48th divisions are at Ambon and Makassar respectively, while the 2nd Division is at Lae and the 54th at Saipan.

Would it be worthwhile having the 1st Tank Division available for Hawaii? It will have formed at Tougoo within a week and I could easily get it to Truk in time. Would the terrain at PH negate having armour?

This all depends of course on what recon shows at PH. If PH is weakly held I hit it with a sledgehammer. If it's strongly defended I go for isolation and blockade to draw the Allies out. Either way I have to be prepared for any situation. There is much to do. I will first reploy my submarine forces to CENTPAC and SOPAC theatres to gather intelligence as the Combined Fleet gathers.

I'm going to post more on Hawaii in a week or so, I have so many things to sort out and it's completely overwhelming me at the moment, I'm not focusing. I don't think I'm capable of any kind of Maskirovka or devious planning to facilitate this operation, my previous post was a dismal failure at even attempting to

. Next time I'll be better prepared, right now...I'll prepare myself as best I can, but essentially I'm going to just bludgeon whatever Allied force is between me and my Hawaiian objectives. If I keep it simple this operation is doable at this stage. I don't have months and months to prepare anymore, the longer I wait the stronger the Allies will get and the less strategic Hawaii becomes. That's not to say I'm going to act rashly...I'll face what I have to with as much thought as I can and maybe get rewarded with success.

So, in a week I'll post specifically what I've done towards the Hawaiian operation. Until then, it will be business as usual in Burma, China and reinforcing the Empire. I'm going to start shifting LCU's immediately and gradually shifting air units to the east. No sideshows.

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 5/28/2011 5:41:38 AM >

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 518

RE: Nearing the end of October/42 - 5/28/2011 5:06:48 AM

PaxMondo

Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

Watching this with GREAT interest. Very impressive to contemplate PH at this time.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 519

Oct. 28/42 - 5/28/2011 5:19:06 AM

SqzMyLemon

Posts: 4239
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline

Oct. 28/42 Update:

Sub Ops:

A rare successful day for Japanese submariners today.

SS I-173 near Utupua torpedoes and sinks the APD Manley carrying support units to Ndeni. 1(4) non-combat squds were lost totalling 30 troops.

SS RO-64 near Ndeni hits the APD Ward which loses 2(0) non-combat squads totalling 24 casualties. The APD sinks later in the turn. Three near miss DC hits are received which severly damage the fuel tanks of RO-64. She'll head to Manila for repairs.

SS S-28 duds on the PB Nichiro Maru near Rossel Island.

Burma:

The night airbase attack against Cox's Bazar was a failure. Of 40+ Sallys that were ordered to bomb the airfield only six planes flew. I'm guessing Chiang Mai is overstacked. Only 1 Runway hit is recorded.

Ok, here are the combat reports for the sweeps against Cox's Bazar. Japanese losses for the sweeps totalled (14) Ki-43-Ic 's Oscar's in A2A with (3) more lost to Ops. One Tojo Ki-44 IIa was lost to A2A. The Allies lost P-40K Warhawks (6) to A2A. These totals are based on the intelligence report and I suffered a 3:1 loss ratio. I lost a further (9) aircraft of various models including G4M1 Betty's (5) to Ops! My ops losses are horrendous.

All sweeps were set to 20k and an Oscar and Tojo Sentai were based at Toungoo, while the other Oscar unit was based at Taung Gyi. All are assigned the same HQ which is located at Taung Gyi with a command radius of 5. The first sweep launched was from Taung Gyi as it suffered the most losses. All units were 65-72 average experience with the Tojo and Oscar Sentai based at Toungoo the better pilots while the Oscar's from Taung Gyi were a mixture with some rookies making up about 25% of the unit. Here are the combat reports:

The first sweep -

Morning Air attack on Cox's Bazar , at 54,43

Weather in hex: Severe storms (The reason for no co-ordination? Or do sweeps not coordinate in general?)

Raid detected at 16 NM, estimated altitude 23,000 feet. (almost on target before detection)
Estimated time to target is 5 minutes (not a lot of time for the defenders to scramble)

Japanese aircraft
Ki-43-Ic Oscar x 38 (I outnumber intitially by 38 to 6 if I read the report correctly and what transpired watching the replay, Allied planes kept joining the fray and getting dive attacks from behind, shredding my aircraft)

Allied aircraft
P-40K Warhawk x 25 (there are 7 or so fighters shown initially during the replay, I think)

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-43-Ic Oscar: 7 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
P-40K Warhawk: 1 destroyed

Aircraft Attacking:
5 x Ki-43-Ic Oscar sweeping at 20000 feet

CAP engaged:
23rd FG/76th FS with P-40K Warhawk (0 airborne, 6 on standby, 17 scrambling)
6 plane(s) intercepting now. (these planes getting the dive I completely understand, the rest I don't)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 2 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 24000 , scrambling fighters between 18000 and 24000. (why did my sweeps not dive on these fighters as they climbed and instead ignored these aircraft until they in turn dove on my aircraft?)
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 44 minutes (does this actually mean anything?)

This Sentai suffered the greatest loss of 14 aircraft. I did not rerun the replay to record the actual number of dive attacks, but if that would provide further understanding as to why this particular Sentai was handled so roughly I will.

The second sweep -

Morning Air attack on Cox's Bazar , at 54,43

Weather in hex: Severe storms

Raid detected at 17 NM, estimated altitude 24,000 feet. (again, little warning)
Estimated time to target is 5 minutes (same time to scramble)

Japanese aircraft
Ki-43-Ic Oscar x 28 (Again heavily outnumber the CAP intitially)

Allied aircraft
P-40K Warhawk x 11

No Japanese losses
(I actually lost 3 aircraft)

Allied aircraft losses
P-40K Warhawk: 1 destroyed

Aircraft Attacking:
23 x Ki-43-Ic Oscar sweeping at 20000 feet

CAP engaged:
23rd FG/76th FS with P-40K Warhawk (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
10 plane(s) not yet engaged, 1 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 24000 , scrambling fighters between 19000 and 22000. (I don't recall which side if any got the dive, I can check if needed)
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 63 minutes

This Sentai was experienced, rested and high morale yet very poor results.

The third sweep:

Morning Air attack on Cox's Bazar , at 54,43

Weather in hex: Severe storms

Raid detected at 33 NM, estimated altitude 23,000 feet. (Spotted farther away yet less aircraft sortie)
Estimated time to target is 8 minutes (More time to scramble)

Japanese aircraft
Ki-44-IIa Tojo x 30 (A 6:1 advantage)

Allied aircraft
P-40K Warhawk x 5 (Is the CAP overwhelmed at this point?)

No Japanese losses
(I actually lost 1 aircraft)

Allied aircraft losses
P-40K Warhawk: 1 destroyed

Aircraft Attacking:
30 x Ki-44-IIa Tojo sweeping at 20000 feet *

CAP engaged:
23rd FG/76th FS with P-40K Warhawk (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 3 scrambling)
2 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 24000 , scrambling fighters between 19000 and 21000. (I got the dive against the CAP)
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 20 minutes

This sweep appears to have given the Allied planes the most time to react, the shortest interception time, yet it's the lowest number of CAP available. I believe this sweep caused the most downed enemy aircraft.

Some more questions:

1. Since the target hex was 7 hexes distant from each of my airfields, what determines which Sentai attacks first?
2. Is it bad luck my weakest unit attacked first?
3. Would the leader with the highest air skill and aggression determine the order of attack?
4. My best fighter attacked last, is this random or is there a sequence to the order the air model commits units?
5. Did I get 3 subpar "rolls" causing these results?
6. Did I just end up engaging a better Allied unit?
7. Does preparation of the air HQ come into play? Should it be set to the target, or the base occupied by the HQ?

In this case, the weakest Sentai attacked first and faced the most CAP, yet I look at the combat report and think I was in a pretty good tactical position. Granted, I had some rookies, but the other half were all mid 60's to mid 70's experience, only a couple kills at best? What am I missing, just a bad roll or the possibility of better experience and aircraft on the Allied side being the deciding factor? Why did the CAP continually get the dive, just because their patrol altitude was 24k compared to my 20k. The Oscar has a great rate of climb, doesn't this factor in at all?

I know there are numerous factors involved. I'm just trying to understand so I can make better decisions. If I learn the factors that determine why these sweeps didn't coordinate I can change my settings. If the leader aggression plays a role, I can switch them so my better fighters might engage first. Is it just the weather limiting coordination, air skill levels of the leaders? If I learn things are completely random then I can learn from that too. It just seems like I was in a good position, yet lost 3 times as many aircraft and if the order of sweeps was different, or they had coordinated I'd have had better results. Like anyone else, I just want to put my forces into a position to succeed, but if you don't know why things are happening it's pretty hard to apply better tactics. I appreciate any thoughts on this particular subject.

China:

Was pretty quiet today.

Changsha's airbase was bombed for a further 4 AB, 4 ABS and 54 Runway hits.

An artillery bombardment caused 6(4) infantry and 2(2) non-combat squad losses totalling 80 casualties for the Chinese. 0(9) non-combat squads totalling 42 casualties for the Japanese. I plan on launching another deliberate attack in a few days when more disabled squads recover. AV comparison is now 2259 to 998 in favour of the Japanese.

Miscellaneous:

Wakkanai expands fortifications to size 1
Tinian expands fortifications to size 3
Lanchow expands fortifications to size 4

Previous report of sinking of BB West Virginia incorrect. Intelligence reports ship is still in service (sigh, not a very good PH attack, in hindsight I should have stayed two days)

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 5/28/2011 5:43:37 AM >

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 520

RE: Nearing the end of October/42 - 5/28/2011 5:35:49 AM

SqzMyLemon

Posts: 4239
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

Watching this with GREAT interest.� Very impressive to contemplate PH at this time.

Thanks for following along Pax.

It will only be impressive if it accomplishes something

. Otherwise, it may go down as one of the dumbest moves in recent game memory

. Sometimes you just have to say "what the %^&# and go for it", if I remember correctly from Risky Business.

Stay tuned as it could get wild. I just hope my opponent cooperates so there might be a naval clash when it is still doubtful as to the outcome.

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 5/28/2011 5:36:50 AM >

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 521

Oct. 29-30/42 - 5/30/2011 5:53:08 AM

SqzMyLemon

Posts: 4239
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline

Oct. 29/42:

Burma:

After the poor result over Cox's Bazar I wanted to try something with my air units. I launched a bombing raid on Shwebo with numerous units of bombers and fighters. The results were poor, but I was more interested in seeing how the AI committed my forces, the order of attack and how my units would coordinate. Weather at Shwebo was thunderstorms. Shwebo was picked because there were no enemy air units present, a good testing ground and an added benefit of causing damage to the airbase unopposed.

Here's the list of aircraft involved, base flown from, number of aircraft, the range to Shwebo, altitude, mission set and the actual mission performed. The order written is the order in which the air units attacked from the combat reports. All occurred during the morning air phase.

33rd Sentai (Ki-43-Ic Oscar) - Taung Gyi - 30 aircraft - Range 3 - 24k - Sweep - Sweep
64th Sentai (Ki-43-Ic Oscar) - Toungoo - 36 aircraft - Range 5 - 12k - Escort - Sweep
59th Sentai (Ki-43-Ic Oscar) - Lashio - 36 aircraft - Range 3 - 15k - Sweep - Sweep
85th Sentai (Ki-44-IIa Tojo) - Toungoo - 28 aircraft - 5 - 20k - Sweep - Sweep
87th Sentai (Ki-44-IIa Tojo) - Toungoo - 23 aircraft - 5 - 25k - Sweep - Sweep
12th Sentai (Ki-21-Ic Sally) - Chaing Mai - 24 aircraft - 8 - 10k - Airfield - Airfield (This unit was escorted by the unit below)
13th Sentai (Ki-45 KAIa Nick) -Taung Gyi - 22 aircraft - 3 - 15k - Escort - Escort (Note the different altitude! Bombers at 10k and fighters at 15k)
98th Sentai (Ki-21-Ic Sally) - Chaing Mai - 29 aircraft - 8 - 12k - Airfield - Airfield (This unit was to be escorted by 64th Sentai above set to same altitude)

Damage to Shwebo was 4 AB and 12 Runway hits. Disappointing to be sure, but thunderstorms over the target.

Why am I posting this? It's one day of combat over a single target and proves nothing, but I note a few interesting things. With the exception of 64th and 13th Sentai's, every unit attacked in numerical order by the Sentai unit designation numerically from lowest to highest. Is this by design, or due to the range to target as stated below?

Other than the 64th Sentai which was set to escort and swept instead, all fighters designated sweep missions attacked Shwebo in order of range to the target. The closet unit (33rd Sentai) swept first, followed by 59th, 85th and 87th Sentai's. This is important, because I'd generally like to have the Tojo's be the first sweepers initially to inflict the greatest loss on the enemy. This means I must move them closer to the target in order to attack first, or at least I hope that will happen. That being said though, why did 59th Sentai attack first even though the Tojo's were also range 5 away form Shwebo. What determined the order of attack? Is there a chance a Tojo unit could have swept sooner?

It appears the altitude of each individual unit had no bearing on the order of attacks by the fighters. The bombers did attack in order of altitude and operated from the same airbase.

The bombers also attacked in order of unit designation. What was most interesting, was that a bomber unit set to 10k was escorted by a fighter unit set to 15k. Does this debunk the consensus that bombers and fighters must be set to the same altitude to increase coordination between bomber and escort, or did something else cause this?

I plan on following my air missions much more closely to learn if I can improve coordination, the order in which my aircraft attack and above all to improve the effectiveness of my air operations. I'm not saying things don't work, or is fubar, but I do want to understand what is happening so I make better decisions for improved results.

China:

Changsha airbase was pounded by Sonia's again inflicting 8 AB, 1 ABS and 82 Runway hits. The defenders of Changsha were bombed by Ki-21-Ic Sally's (18) for 0(6) infantry and 0(10) non-combat squad losses totalling 109 casualties. It all adds up. Ground troops followed up with an artillery bombardment that caused 2(1) infantry and 0(2) non-combat squads lost for 60 casualties. I plan a deliberate attack tomorrow, it may be too soon but I want Changsha dealt with sooner than later now.

The 17th Chinese/b Corps near Sining was bombed for 8(0) infantry and 4(1) non-combat squad losses totalling 92 casualties. This unit is close to being destroyed.

Miscellaneous:

Peleliu expands fortifications to size 1
Madang expands airfield to size 4
Ambon expands fortifications to size 4
Ankang expands fortifications to size 3

Oct. 30/42:

Sub Ops:

SS I-175 is spotted by the AM Madras near Vanua Lava, but the enemy ship does not attack. Leter in the phase, the SS I-175 decides it will attack the AM Madras and actually hits and sinks her with a torpedo hit!

This is more like it. It's been a long time coming, but now that the Allies are operating where I can find them, they are taking losses. Small ships to be sure, but I can only hope as bigger Allied ships are commited they will vulnerable too.

Ndeni

Yesterday, I had attempted to intercept another Allied fast transport TF unloading at the base, unfortunately the DD's did not move as planned under full speed and no interception of the enemy occurred. Either a CD unit or a base unit has now been landed. Construction of an enemy airfield will result shortly.

China:

All bomber units were set to ground attack at Changsha today in preparation for another assault on the base. The Chinese defenders suffered 0(14) infantry, 1(15) non-combat and 0(1) engineer squads lost totalling 203 casualties.

A deliberate attack followed, and as feared, the attack suffered heavy losses. Japanese losses were 96(107) infantry, 59(110) non-combat and 1(30) engineer squads lost totalling 3569 casualties. the Chinese suffered only 16(58) infantry, 18(37) non-combat and 7(7) guns lost totalling 949 casualties. The odds were 1:1 however and the forts reduced to level 2. It's soon to fall, the question is do I drag it out to reduce losses or drive hard to finish it and move on?

After today's movements, I now have Changsha completely surrounded, although the W. and N.W. internal hexsides at Changsha are still open to the Chinese. This would allow them to retreat across these hexsides after a successful Japanese attack if I understand correctly. I'd like to close them but that will require Japanese units to assault across the river to do so. To the N.W. I have moved the 8th Recon Rgt. and to the West lies the bulk of the 11th Army. I goofed moving the 8th Recon Rgt. as I mistakenly thought of it in terms of an armoured car unit and not a component part of a division as it is. I was going to risk it being destroyed by crossing the river to close the hexside to Chinese retreat. This would mean a succesful ground assault at Changsha would force the defenders to retreat across the river against the 11th Army waiting at Siangtan and be bludgeoned. Then the 11th army could shock attack and wipe out this Chinese force.

My Dilemma is this, if I don't order the unit to cross, Chinese units from Changteh can march and force it out of the hex opening the way for a Chinese retreat to Changteh, or units from Changsha itself can assault across the river to escape by easily dislocating the 8th Recon Rgt. Or, I can risk wiping out the unit by ordering a river assault to close the hexside, allowing the complete destruction of every Chinese unit at Changsha. It appears to me I have to risk the unit, otherwise it can be dislodged/defeated/destroyed without serving a purpose. It's probable destruction would ensure the elimination of nine enemy formations. I'll sleep on it and decide tomorrow.

Miscellaneous:

Fusan expands port to size 8 (I hope this increases the draw of fuel and resources to the base for transport to the Home Islands)
Pisanuloke expands fortifications to size 2
Rabaul expands airfield to size 7
Memboro expands fortifications to size 2
Ruteng expands fortifications to size 2

SC Ch 37 arrives at Okayama
SC Ch 39 arrives at Kobe

The movement of LCU's and supplies has begun for the Hawaiian operation. At the same time, I'm reinforcing New Guinea in an effort to mask my true intentions. The increased traffic around Truk without a corresponding increase around New Guinea might tip the Allies off that something is up in the Central Pacific. It's hard to say how the Allies will respond. I hope it leads to the idea that I'm simply committing more troops to counter Allied moves in the theatre while strengthening my overall defence, and NOT lead to the possibility that I actually intend to threaten Hawaii. Is this an attempt at Maskirovka that makes sense?

The next turn is the end of October and I'll post screenshots Empire wide. One thing of note, I'm contemplating a pull back in Burma to free up troops for a reserve and strengthen Sumatra. I may voluntarily give up the rail line and Mandalay to form a defensive line solely in rough terrain. Defending against an Allied thrust against Mandalay is an albatros around my neck. As the Allies build up every available airbase I see the potential for a disaster. The Allied air force can simply bomb my defending troops in open terrain into oblivion prior to any ground assault. If I pull back into rough terrain I ensure any Allied moves will have to occur in open terrain where I can at least bomb them forcing the Allied fighters to CAP their ground troops, or face heavy losses to air bombardment. It seems the smart thing to do and doesn't weaken my overall position as I see it. The eventual Burma screenshot will show what I mean more clearly.

Busy days ahead for the Empire!

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 5/30/2011 4:00:49 PM >

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 522

Morning of Oct. 31/42 - 5/30/2011 7:25:25 AM

SqzMyLemon

Posts: 4239
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline

Here's the current situation in Southern China. I've decided to quickly reduce Changsha and get my forces moving again. The following screenshot goes into greater detail explaining my next moves against the base.

13th Army in the west continues to move north. I'm relying on the 21st Ind. Mixed Bde. to deal with the lone Chinese unit across the river prior to the arrival of 13th Army. I'd like the large 16 unit Chinese force to move on Luichow, but it seems doubtful at this point.

23rd Army is waiting at Hengyang already in strat mode for a quick deployment to either Kweilin or Luichow depending on Chinese moves. Once Changsha falls the 11th Army can be quickly redeployed west to assault Tuyun. Once Changsha falls, the 1st Army will be responsible for defending the recent gains and keeping the rail line open against any possible Chinese threat. Any potential move by Chinese units into clear terrain will unleash every Japanese bomber on ground attack in order to decimate the enemy.

More to come...

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 5/30/2011 7:26:58 AM >

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 523

RE: Morning of Oct. 31/42 - 5/30/2011 8:59:55 AM

fcharton

Posts: 1112
Joined: 10/4/2010
From: France
Status: offline

Hi Lemon

In Changsha, your current disposition will force the enemy to surrender (units don't seem to retreat into enemy occupied hexes, or through enemy controlled hexsides). Keep in mind that this takes more time than just forcing them out of the hex. Basically, a unit with a "way out" will retreat once odds get around 3:1 or more, units fenced in will get disabled, and damaged, and surrender corps by corps...

On the other hand, destroying the whole stack is a very good idea. Infantry will respawn, but then they will have to eat, from a smaller rice bowl... and HQ, base forces, and all others are gone for good, and don't get to play guerillas behind your lines.

Francois

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 524

RE: Morning of Oct. 31/42 - 5/30/2011 4:40:54 PM

SqzMyLemon

Posts: 4239
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: fcharton

In Changsha, your current disposition will force the enemy to surrender (units don't seem to retreat into enemy occupied hexes, or through enemy controlled hexsides). Keep in mind that this takes more time than just forcing them out of the hex. Basically, a unit with a "way out" will retreat once odds get around 3:1 or more, units fenced in will get disabled, and damaged, and surrender corps by corps...

On the other hand, destroying the whole stack is a very good idea. Infantry will respawn, but then they will have to eat, from a smaller rice bowl... and HQ, base forces, and all others are gone for good, and don't get to play guerillas behind your lines.

Francois

Hi Francois,

After you posted it reminded me of a situation I may end up facing that occurred in Criptop's AAR. I have to act quickly to close the N.W. hex side, otherwise if an enemy force from Changteh marches S.E. and enters the hex occupied by the 8th Recon Rgt. it will allow any Chinese unit that also enters this hex from Changsha to escape. If the enemy decides to march from Changsha, or if I end up forcing them to retreat to the N.W. without closing that hex side, I risk them getting away. The defenders at Changsha amount to nine Corps of 67k worth of troops and I definitely do not want this force to escape now.

I'm going to risk the 8th Recon Rgt. and send it across. I'll rest the 1st Army one day and then shock attack in conjunction with the 8th Recon Rgt. crossing the river. I have decided to also use the paratroops, as I want to see how this aspect of the combat model works with halving the defenders. As much as I don't want to take excessive casualties taking Changsha, the fall of the base sooner than later outweighs the loss of the ground troops. Also, once Changsha falls the 1st Army is designated for a defensive role and can recover its strength.

I'd like to test whether a force will indeed not retreat into an enemy controlled hex, but I no longer believe I have the time to find out. Who knows, maybe the defence will simply crumble and I'll bag the lot in one go!

(in reply to fcharton)

Post #: 525

RE: Morning of Oct. 31/42 - 5/30/2011 5:33:00 PM

fcharton

Posts: 1112
Joined: 10/4/2010
From: France
Status: offline

Hi SqzMyLemon,

If the unit is not totally destroyed by the shock attack, you're trading the hexside for the losses, which is probably a good deal here. Only problem is that if you vacate the hex, the enemy can take it back, and then march on Changsha. Personally, I would use armor to open the hexside (against the chinese, they stand a decent chance of surviving, even at very bad odds, and they move very fast), and then send it back AND reinforce the hex from Changsha... You'll have less troops in Changsha, but a better chance of finishing the defenders.

The enemy needs four days to move from Changteh to Changsha. Your armor can double back in two, you can reinforce in three, and once you hold the hexside, they need to push you away to advance and rescue Changsha, and you get the benefits of the defensive terrain...

Francois

< Message edited by fcharton -- 5/30/2011 5:39:32 PM >

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 526

Trick or Treat? - 6/1/2011 6:35:03 AM

SqzMyLemon

Posts: 4239
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline

No treats for Allied forces today and unfortunately no Japanese tricks to punish them either. Maybe next year

. Other than another day of heavy Ops losses it was a good day for the Empire.

Oct. 31/42 Update:

Sub Ops:

I'm still trying to coordinate air ASW with hunting ASW TF's to make things a little tougher on the Allied submarine service. Today my efforts paid off.

SS KIX spotted near Batavia at 45,98. No ASW Attack from SC Ch 22.
SS KVII is spotted near Shortlands by a surface ASW TF and is attacked. The E Kari scores with 2 direct DC hits and 4 near misses that further damage the submarine. The Dutch boat is forced to surface and a few 12.7 cm rounds finish her off. She does launch a torpedo attack before she slips beneath the waves, but all miss. Score one for Japanese ASW!

A note on my ASW efforts. I'm still frustrated as heck with my poor showing in enemy subs sunk. It looks like my tactics will eventually pay off though. I spot numerous enemy subs daily by air ASW and always vector in the surface ASW to try and get intercepts. I still use mainly SC's and DD's in this role, but the results have been poor. I'm now starting to deploy my E boats which have upgraded their DC capabilities, and I've noticed they are reacting and attacking enemy submarines much more effectively. I'll focus on getting these particular ships into the areas of greatest enemy submarine concentrations and hopefully they will have continued success.

Burma:

Ugh, a night airfield attack in partial cloud against Shwebo sees little to no damage done for the loss of five Sally's. The Sally's will get tomorrow off.

China:

I bomb the ground forces at Changteh to slow any potential movement against the 8th Recon Rgt. and the effort yields 0(1) non-combat squad losses totalling 5 casualties. Wasted effort as no movement S.E. was detected. They bomb Changsha tomorrow instead in preparation for the combined arms shock attack against the base by the 8th Recon Rgt. and the 1st Army. The 2nd Raiding Rgt. will airdrop on the base in conjunction with the ground assault. The current AV comparison is 2227 vs. 960 in my favour and the defenders are behind level two forts.

Other ground bombing mission's in China were ineffective.

Artillery units bombarded the Changsha defenders and inflicted 0(4) infantry and 1(1) non-combat squad losses totalling 45 casualties.

Artillery bombarded the defenders of Sining and caused the disablement of one Chinese non-combat squad. The AV comparison here is 946 vs. 767 in my favour, with Japanese reinforcements on the way. I will try and surround Sining as well to destroy the defenders.

A Shock attack by the 4th Ind. Mixed Rgt. at 75,52 located directly S.E. of Tuyun, forced the 62nd Chinese Corps to retreat into the base after losing 6 guns destroyed out of a possible 28

. I tried destroying this unit by air, but was not inflicting any damage. I had to rely on simply pushing them back with ground forces since the combat model is loath to destroy combat ineffective units at times.

Miscellaneous:

Port Moresby expands fortifications to size 1 (Yes, way too late to get started on this

)

DD Hatsuzuki arrives at Nagoya
DD Onami arrives at Maizuru (More DD's are always welcome)

Sasebo Ku S-1 arrives at Nagasaki/Sasebo (Sadly, a restricted Zero unit)

253 Ku S-1 converting to size 36 from 27
Sasebo Ku T-2 converting to size 18 from 12
582 Ku S-1 converting to size 27 from 12
582 Ku K-1 converting to size 18 from 12
25th Sentai converting to size 30 from 12 (Always nice to get more aircraft capacity!)

There are a few things that can go wrong at Changsha for my next attack. The 1st Army might attack prior to the 8th Recon's and force the defenders to retreat N.W. before the crucial hex side is closed. The 8th Recon attacks first, is wiped out and doesn't close the hex side. It could also all go according to plan and yet fail while suffering heavy losses with a bad roll against the level two forts.

The KI-43-IIa Oscar is now available and I was completely wrong about being able to upgrade some Nate units. The only units that can upgrade to the KI-43-IIa Oscar are already equipped with the Ki-43-Ic model

. So no love until the Tony and Oscar IIb become available in early/mid 43. There are quite a few air units that can upgrade to the Ki-43-IIb, so production will need to be ramped up to get the maximum number of aircraft ASAP. I'd like to be producing at least 100/month when she comes online.

Musashi joins the fleet in 17 days and I get another CVL and CVE in 30+ days. I'd halted the Ryujo since she doesn't get an air complement until Nov. 43, but I definitely can use the transport capabilty for the Hawaiin operation so construction was restarted.

I decided to wait until the end of the month to update the Empire's situation. When I find the time I'll put something together.

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 6/1/2011 6:38:38 AM >

(in reply to fcharton)

Post #: 527

Strategic Musings - 6/4/2011 7:42:14 AM

SqzMyLemon

Posts: 4239
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline

I'm looking at how to bolster my overal defence Empire wide and I come across the Kuriles. Just how the heck do you get restricted units to these bases? The Kuriles are assigned to the 5th Fleet. That's fine, there are even a few LCU's assigned to the 5th Fleet that can be transported to the various islands, but the 5th Fleet has no assigned air component and that leaves the Kuriles extremely vulnerable. Just what is the trick to getting restricted air units to these islands? Do you change the islands from under 5th Fleet to General Defence or some other restricted HQ that has air units to spare? It seems pointless to add LCU's to 5th Fleet as that does not address the fact there are no unrestricted air units available to base here. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

A note on the Hawaiian operation. Nemo, a few post's ago, suggested I do not make any plans yet and ask questions to formulate my strategy. Having sat back and thought on things, I think my idea will be modified somewhat. Since the primary goal is to bring the Allied Fleet to battle and not at the expense of further weakening the Empire, it now seems that an isolation strategy may be the route to go. The amount of sheer AV it will take to capture Pearl Harbor at this stage is simply prohibitive. However, that doesn't mean I can't neutralize the value of Pearl Harbor and achieve more limited goals that could have the same impact.

Committing the majority of my available LCU strength in an effort to draw out the Allied Fleet is a mistake. If the Allies are going to react, I can still encourage that by invading the surrounding Hawaiian Islands with far less of a troop committment. Taking a few key bases on the way to Hawaii can also have the desired effect of drawing out the Allied Fleet. It's a question of ramping up the threat level to PH. I think a sudden landing doesn't achieve the desired intent on having the Allied Fleet race to it's defence. PH will be able to endure a long siege, be it from direct assault or isolation. KB cannot be tied to patrolling the theatre indefinitely in the hopes the Allied Fleet commits, and it is precisely for that reason that the Allies won't commit their fleet PRIOR to KB having to leave the theatre.

However, if I conduct a series of moves, each building upon the other that directly threatens the effectiveness of PH, I believe THAT will force the Allied player to commit his fleet or lose the use of PH. The longer the Allies delay a response, the greater the threat of isolating/capturing PH becomes. It's either react or give up on using that base as a means of attacking the Central Pacific, which helps to achieve my secondary goal of strengthening my defences whether the Allied Fleet reacts or not. I need to help steer the direction the Allied advance will come from. If the Allies already have no intention of advancing in the Central Pacific, that at least allows me to rule it out and prepare an adequate defence exactly where I need to.

It's late and I'll continue my thoughts later. I hope this makes some sense and I won't have to completely re-edit this post tomorrow upon reading it again. Hawaii is still the target, but how I intend to deal with it has changed. I believe I can achieve more with less in this case, I just have to be clear with myself what it is I wish to achieve. And that is to entice the Allied Fleet out to battle, but on my terms and in a way that I can realistically sustain at this stage of the war.

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 6/4/2011 7:45:12 AM >

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 528

RE: Trick or Treat? - 6/4/2011 1:23:42 PM

PaxMondo

Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

Sub Ops:

I'm still trying to coordinate air ASW with hunting ASW TF's to make things a little tougher on the Allied submarine service. Today my efforts paid off.

A note on my ASW efforts. I'm still frustrated as heck with my poor showing in enemy subs sunk. It looks like my tactics will eventually pay off though. I spot numerous enemy subs daily by air ASW and always vector in the surface ASW to try and get intercepts. I still use mainly SC's and DD's in this role, but the results have been poor. I'm now starting to deploy my E boats which have upgraded their DC capabilities, and I've noticed they are reacting and attacking enemy submarines much more effectively. I'll focus on getting these particular ships into the areas of greatest enemy submarine concentrations and hopefully they will have continued success.

How do you organize your surface ASW forces?

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 529

RE: Strategic Musings - 6/5/2011 3:36:30 PM

Walker84

Posts: 850
Joined: 7/5/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

I'm looking at how to bolster my overal defence Empire wide and I come across the Kuriles. Just how the heck do you get restricted units to these bases? The Kuriles are assigned to the 5th Fleet. That's fine, there are even a few LCU's assigned to the 5th Fleet that can be transported to the various islands, but the 5th Fleet has no assigned air component and that leaves the Kuriles extremely vulnerable. Just what is the trick to getting restricted air units to these islands? Do you change the islands from under 5th Fleet to General Defence or some other restricted HQ that has air units to spare? It seems pointless to add LCU's to 5th Fleet as that does not address the fact there are no unrestricted air units available to base here. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

In my own PBEM I have been forced to build up the Kuriles as my opponent has developed the Aleutians massively and started launching B-24 raids on Para-jima and the next island down the chain. My solution has been to transfer some of the Home Islands air units to 5th fleet HQ. Later on I believe the 5th fleet receives some dedicated air HQs but I can't afford to wait for these. I now have a full unit of Oscars plus Zeros in support. I am also developing the bases in case of amphibious invasion. There will be plenty of torpedo and land-based bombers to contend with if he decides to enter Tokyo's back yard.

For land units I have generally bought out to an unrestricted command such as Southern Army.

I did consider changing the Kuriles to General Defense but decided the other approach was more flexible. Other people may have different suggestions.

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 530

RE: Strategic Musings - 6/5/2011 3:39:33 PM

Nemo121

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

Sqzy, Post 528 makes sense to me.

FWIW as far as ASW goes. I just make SC TFs and load them with ASW ships. With 12 ships you more than make up for any penalty due to not having the "right" mission set.

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to Walker84)

Post #: 531

RE: Strategic Musings - 6/5/2011 3:56:27 PM

PaxMondo

Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Sqzy, Post 528 makes sense to me.

FWIW as far as ASW goes. I just make SC TFs and load them with ASW ships. With 12 ships you more than make up for any penalty due to not having the "right" mission set.

So, surface combat mission TF's will engage subs? I did not know that. Thanks for the tip.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Nemo121)

Post #: 532

RE: Strategic Musings - 6/5/2011 4:06:06 PM

Nemo121

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

Absolutely. There's less chance of them spotting the sub first which means that, generally, the SC TF gets shot at by the sub and then prosecutes the sub which attacked it. Since you are filling the SC TF with fast, manoeuvrable ships your loss rate isn't actually too bad at all. I've lost something like 5 Escorts and 2 DDs filling this role in my Armaggedon game but I've sunk at least 20 subs using them like this. That's a very favourable exchange ratio and has allowed me to re-open a crucial shipping lane by making it too expensive for subs to operate there.

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 533

RE: Strategic Musings - 6/5/2011 4:37:21 PM

PaxMondo

Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

How about mine sweeping TF's? Will they prosecute subs?

Thanks!

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Nemo121)

Post #: 534

RE: Trick or Treat? - 6/6/2011 5:21:09 PM

SqzMyLemon

Posts: 4239
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

How do you organize your surface ASW forces?

Hi Pax,

Generally groups of two to four SC's or DD's in a TF. I'm not sure on the benefits of having four ships per TF as it's rare that more than one or two ever attack during a combat phase. With two ships per TF I hope to get more mileage covering more area and suppressing a wider swath of ocean. In my game experience so far, the two ship TF's have been no better or worse than my four ship ASW TF's. Hence the decision to have more two ship TF's.

With the dedicated escort ships (E's) having been upgraded to a ASW values of 4 they seem to be the ones reacting and getting in DC attacks that actually damage the enemy. Even my DD's or SC's with ASW values of 4 rarely hit anything if they attack. The experience of my E's are higher than the SC's but generally lower than the DD's.

A note on air ASW. As my bomber formations have gained ASW experience I'm getting a lot of reported "hits" on enemy submarines during the air search phases every turn, but how effective they are I have no clue.

I tend to stay away from Nemo's suggestion of larger SC TF's to hunt down subs simply because my surface ships do get hit by enemy torps far too often for my liking with no subsequent effective DC attack in return most times. I also just can't take away more DD's from my important fuel/oil TF's, I've lost very few tankers to date and I'd like to keep it that way. So far the enemy has not discovered my fuel routes nor been interdicting these particular TF's. I'd like to keep it that way!

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 535

RE: Strategic Musings - 6/6/2011 6:37:27 PM

SqzMyLemon

Posts: 4239
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Walker84

In my own PBEM I have been forced to build up the Kuriles as my opponent has developed the Aleutians massively and started launching B-24 raids on Para-jima and the next island down the chain. My solution has been to transfer some of the Home Islands air units to 5th fleet HQ. Later on I believe the 5th fleet receives some dedicated air HQs but I can't afford to wait for these. I now have a full unit of Oscars plus Zeros in support. I am also developing the bases in case of amphibious invasion. There will be plenty of torpedo and land-based bombers to contend with if he decides to enter Tokyo's back yard.

For land units I have generally bought out to an unrestricted command such as Southern Army.

I did consider changing the Kuriles to General Defense but decided the other approach was more flexible. Other people may have different suggestions.

I noticed the air HQ assigned to 5th Fleet as well, I believe it appears in May/43, but like you I don't want to wait until then. I'll figure something out. I do believe the Allies will test this theatre in 43 so I'd like to be more prepared. I'm still looking at whether to possibly change some of the Kuriles to General Defence HQ, but that might require too many PP's and it may be better to buy the units out and assign them, as you suggested, to an unrestricted HQ for more flexibility.

(in reply to Walker84)

Post #: 536

RE: Strategic Musings - 6/6/2011 10:27:20 PM

crsutton

Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

As an Allied player I can say that is is almost always a mistake to surround and destroy Chinese Infantry units. The key to taking China is to grind Chinese AV down. This is done by defeating and retreating Chinese units where they will take massive losses anyways. The design of the game and the critical supply situation facing China once Sian and Changsha fall means that Chinese units will almost never take replacments and rebuild. I pesonally believe this is a design flaw but there you have it. Destroyed units come back at 1/3 strength. For the average Chinese units that is generally better than the unit you just killed. So don't destroy them. BTW most Chinese HQ units are regenerated as well-not just infantry.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 537

RE: Strategic Musings - 6/6/2011 11:45:16 PM

SqzMyLemon

Posts: 4239
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

As an Allied player I can say that is is almost always a mistake to surround and destroy Chinese Infantry units. The key to taking China is to grind Chinese AV down. This is done by defeating and retreating Chinese units where they will take massive losses anyways. The design of the game and the critical supply situation facing China once Sian and Changsha fall means that Chinese units will almost never take replacments and rebuild. I pesonally believe this is a design flaw but there you have it. Destroyed units come back at 1/3 strength. For the average Chinese units that is generally better than the unit you just killed. So don't destroy them. BTW most Chinese HQ units are regenerated as well-not just infantry.

I completely understand your point crsutton and agree to a certain degree...in game terms. I've thought about my overall China strategy quite a bit, as it's been my most active theatre all game. Originally I was quite content to simply drive the Chinese before me, capturing their key economic bases and moving forward without the need to destroy them. However, I've come to the determination that a destroyed Chinese unit overall is a good thing.

For one, the VP's I collect can't be taken away, dead is dead. I'll lose so many VP's when I start losing bases to the Allied counter offensives that the losses I inflict on my opponent are important. I am certainly not going to let VP's determine my performance overall when all is said and done, I expect most games have an incredibly lopsided score once the Allies get rolling, but they are important to me in terms of what I've been able to accomplish in destroying enemy formations.

Second, I simply don't want my forces mired down in China simply pushing back small units or stacks back endlessly. My opponent utilizes the fact that China has so many expendable LCU's that can be used to disrupt behind the lines quite well. I simply won't allow my efforts to be harassed by this tactic, and allow a meaningless unit to achieve something out of all proportion to it's combat value.

Thirdly, the more Chinese units that respawn at Chungking the better, the farther away from anything of importance buys me time. I want to eventually shift units out of China for defence in the Pacific. The longer and harder the Chinese have to push me back the better, and destroying as many of them now lets me operate to my tune, not the enemies. For example, if I simply push back the defenders at Changsha, that's nine units still free to harass and block my path to Chungking. Yes, they'll be weak, but they still have much potential to harass my LOC's and cause me to have to garrison rear areas above the already substantial garrison requirements. It's also nine units that can still lend to the defence of Changteh, or which ever base I head to next for example. If I destroy these nine units now, I can advance with my entire force to achieve my goals and not have to continually bleed off my force in simply suppressing them.

I know it's a trade off. I destroy a unit I get the VP's and it is temporarily removed from the theatre which allows me to move forward. My opponent gains a fresh unit again in 30 days at 1/3 strength. Which is better? I don't know at this stage. To be honest, the decision to destroy the units is simply a play style I prefer. Looking back, other than small units my opponent has intentionally allowed to be destroyed, this will be the first pocket of Chinese troops I've actually cornered in almost a year of combat.

Perhaps this example might shed light on my reasoning and which simply doesn't take into consideration the implications in game terms. The Eastern Front, hundreds of thousands of Russian soldiers forming partisan units behind the lines because they weren't captured or destroyed. How many German forces were removed from front line duty to deal with this threat? The numbers are probably comparable. How many troops were removed from the point of attack compromising offensive operations? The way I see it, I destroy these Chinese units now, I can then bring the full might of my forces against the next objective without having to detach a unit here or there to protect my LOC's. It all adds up. To me, having units sitting around simply containing the enemy is a complete mismanagement of my forces, troops sitting around not engaging the enemy are wasted and achieve absolutely nothing.

Also, in real life, what general didn't try and completely vanquish his foe, or complete an encirclement if given the chance? With the exception of such countries such as China and Russia, with seemingly endless manpower reserves, what other nation would have the benefit of hindsight to say when fighting them, "well, we better not destroy this enemy force, as they'll simply respawn in 30 days at 1/3 their original strength in their capital, so tell the troops to go easy on this bunch and leave them an escape route."

I understand it's a game and this is a consequence of destroying Chinese units, but I also look at it in terms of real life. The foe is before me...and I intend to do three things...crush my enemy, see them driven before me, and hear the lamentation of their women! Just like any real life commander would have attempted.

(in reply to crsutton)

Post #: 538

RE: Strategic Musings - 6/6/2011 11:59:35 PM

SqzMyLemon

Posts: 4239
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Sqzy, Post 528 makes sense to me.

Nemo, I'm glad to hear that. I definitely see the merit in your suggestion to step back and look at things objectively and not simply start making plans. As I remove ideas that don't stay on task or lend weight to the main objective, or that I just can't accomplish at this time, what's left starts to formulate the actual plan. There's much to still figure out, but I'm a step closer. I hope I can throw enough curveballs at my opponent to disrupt him and open up other potential opportunities, if this one is successful.

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 6/7/2011 12:00:57 AM >

(in reply to Nemo121)

Post #: 539

RE: Strategic Musings - 6/7/2011 2:43:18 AM

crsutton

Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

As an Allied player I can say that is is almost always a mistake to surround and destroy Chinese Infantry units. The key to taking China is to grind Chinese AV down. This is done by defeating and retreating Chinese units where they will take massive losses anyways. The design of the game and the critical supply situation facing China once Sian and Changsha fall means that Chinese units will almost never take replacments and rebuild. I pesonally believe this is a design flaw but there you have it. Destroyed units come back at 1/3 strength. For the average Chinese units that is generally better than the unit you just killed. So don't destroy them. BTW most Chinese HQ units are regenerated as well-not just infantry.

I completely understand your point crsutton and agree to a certain degree...in game terms. I've thought about my overall China strategy quite a bit, as it's been my most active theatre all game. Originally I was quite content to simply drive the Chinese before me, capturing their key economic bases and moving forward without the need to destroy them. However, I've come to the determination that a destroyed Chinese unit overall is a good thing.

For one, the VP's I collect can't be taken away, dead is dead. I'll lose so many VP's when I start losing bases to the Allied counter offensives that the losses I inflict on my opponent are important. I am certainly not going to let VP's determine my performance overall when all is said and done, I expect most games have an incredibly lopsided score once the Allies get rolling, but they are important to me in terms of what I've been able to accomplish in destroying enemy formations.

Second, I simply don't want my forces mired down in China simply pushing back small units or stacks back endlessly. My opponent utilizes the fact that China has so many expendable LCU's that can be used to disrupt behind the lines quite well. I simply won't allow my efforts to be harassed by this tactic, and allow a meaningless unit to achieve something out of all proportion to it's combat value.

Thirdly, the more Chinese units that respawn at Chungking the better, the farther away from anything of importance buys me time. I want to eventually shift units out of China for defence in the Pacific. The longer and harder the Chinese have to push me back the better, and destroying as many of them now lets me operate to my tune, not the enemies. For example, if I simply push back the defenders at Changsha, that's nine units still free to harass and block my path to Chungking. Yes, they'll be weak, but they still have much potential to harass my LOC's and cause me to have to garrison rear areas above the already substantial garrison requirements. It's also nine units that can still lend to the defence of Changteh, or which ever base I head to next for example. If I destroy these nine units now, I can advance with my entire force to achieve my goals and not have to continually bleed off my force in simply suppressing them.

I know it's a trade off. I destroy a unit I get the VP's and it is temporarily removed from the theatre which allows me to move forward. My opponent gains a fresh unit again in 30 days at 1/3 strength. Which is better? I don't know at this stage. To be honest, the decision to destroy the units is simply a play style I prefer. Looking back, other than small units my opponent has intentionally allowed to be destroyed, this will be the first pocket of Chinese troops I've actually cornered in almost a year of combat.

Perhaps this example might shed light on my reasoning and which simply doesn't take into consideration the implications in game terms. The Eastern Front, hundreds of thousands of Russian soldiers forming partisan units behind the lines because they weren't captured or destroyed. How many German forces were removed from front line duty to deal with this threat? The numbers are probably comparable. How many troops were removed from the point of attack compromising offensive operations? The way I see it, I destroy these Chinese units now, I can then bring the full might of my forces against the next objective without having to detach a unit here or there to protect my LOC's. It all adds up. To me, having units sitting around simply containing the enemy is a complete mismanagement of my forces, troops sitting around not engaging the enemy are wasted and achieve absolutely nothing.

Also, in real life, what general didn't try and completely vanquish his foe, or complete an encirclement if given the chance? With the exception of such countries such as China and Russia, with seemingly endless manpower reserves, what other nation would have the benefit of hindsight to say when fighting them, "well, we better not destroy this enemy force, as they'll simply respawn in 30 days at 1/3 their original strength in their capital, so tell the troops to go easy on this bunch and leave them an escape route."

I understand it's a game and this is a consequence of destroying Chinese units, but I also look at it in terms of real life. The foe is before me...and I intend to do three things...crush my enemy, see them driven before me, and hear the lamentation of their women! Just like any real life commander would have attempted.

I see your point. However, now I believe that given a full commitment, a Japanese player can actually go all the way and take China out of the war. I hate to say it, but it should be standard operating procedure for all Japanese players. I am no slouch when it comes to ground combat but my opponent Viperpol has shown me that it can be done and fairly easily. He never surrounds my units and is posed to take Chungking by the end of 1943. (1200 VP) I personally don't think it can be stopped the way the game is designed. There is one thing that might help. In one of the recent betas it was changed sot that players can now select cities for stockpiling supplies in. This city perhaps can be used to rebuild units and support an air force in China-but it is questionable that it is enough. Using tank units, it was amazingly simple for him to take out all of North China as well. Very demoralizing...

We are playing scen #2 but I think it can be done in scen #1 as well.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 540