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: Iwo Jima: [U.S.]

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Storm over the Pacific >> After Action Reports >> RE: Iwo Jima: [U.S.] Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Iwo Jima: [U.S.] - 7/2/2010 7:22:29 AM   
Anraz

 

Posts: 785
Joined: 7/25/2008
Status: offline
quote:

This game is cool.


The more I look at your mod the more I think the mod is very very cool


_____________________________


(in reply to Magpius)
Post #: 31
RE: Iwo Jima: [U.S.] - 7/3/2010 3:39:18 AM   
Magpius


Posts: 1632
Joined: 9/21/2007
From: Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline 		Thanks A.,
It's still a little rough around the edges.
But I have to say, once I'm in playing it, I almost forget it's on a computer, and I'm back playing paper and cardboard. (feline free!)
Yes it is spartan, in appearance, but having dusted off some of the old games, all their tiles were simple graphics, and the maps, were rather basic.
So it is a case of keep it simple.
regards
A


_____________________________


(in reply to Anraz)
Post #: 32
RE: Iwo Jima: [U.S.] - 7/7/2010 1:51:43 AM   
jomni


Posts: 2827
Joined: 11/19/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Agent S
Some big concerns.
I now have -1 PP, following turn it went to -2!
How do I generate PP?
I also seem to have used up my task force bombardments.
Air strikes are also becoming rare.
- do they regenerate?
- do I need to disband units to get some PP back for front line troops?


What is the PP production and unit upkeep status?
There should be an info screen about this one.

Airstrikes from carriers? They should be repaired in a port with the right size. Don't think there is in the Iwo Jima map.

_____________________________

My Blog
Random Wargame Name Generator

(in reply to Magpius)
Post #: 33
RE: Iwo Jima: [U.S.] - 7/12/2010 1:24:14 AM   
Magpius


Posts: 1632
Joined: 9/21/2007
From: Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline 		Turn 13



Troops press forward and encircle/ strangle defending units

Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Magpius)
Post #: 34
RE: Iwo Jima: [U.S.] - 7/12/2010 1:25:58 AM   
Magpius


Posts: 1632
Joined: 9/21/2007
From: Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline 		Turn 14
Jap Naval HG engaged.
No Air strikes or bombardments left.
Negative PP has started moving back up.
Thinking of Disbanding some of the units at the rear to strengthen the assault forces.
Have sent in no recon, but it appears that the enemy never had large unit numbers




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Agent S -- 7/12/2010 1:26:48 AM >

_____________________________


(in reply to Magpius)
Post #: 35
RE: Iwo Jima: [U.S.] - 7/12/2010 1:28:45 AM   
Magpius


Posts: 1632
Joined: 9/21/2007
From: Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline 		Turn 15
The grip tightens, some resistance met, but this outcome appears inevitable.



Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Magpius)
Post #: 36
RE: Iwo Jima: [U.S.] - 7/12/2010 1:30:18 AM   
Magpius


Posts: 1632
Joined: 9/21/2007
From: Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline 		Turn 16
Endgame:
Does not look like 40 turns are needed for this scenario...?



Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Magpius)
Post #: 37
RE: Iwo Jima: [U.S.] - 7/12/2010 1:32:20 AM   
Magpius


Posts: 1632
Joined: 9/21/2007
From: Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline 		Turn 17
A large cull of rear troops, redeployed/ rested.
PP's spent on level and AP strength increases ready for final assaults.



Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Magpius)
Post #: 38
RE: Iwo Jima: [U.S.] - 7/12/2010 1:34:23 AM   
Magpius


Posts: 1632
Joined: 9/21/2007
From: Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline 		Turn 18
only a matter of time.



Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Magpius)
Post #: 39
RE: Iwo Jima: [U.S.] - 7/12/2010 1:35:45 AM   
Magpius


Posts: 1632
Joined: 9/21/2007
From: Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline 		Turn 19
1 down 1 to go, (in the north at least!)
Jap HQ down to 6 AP. The stranglehold appears to be working.



Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Agent S -- 7/12/2010 1:36:43 AM >

_____________________________


(in reply to Magpius)
Post #: 40
RE: Iwo Jima: [U.S.] - 7/12/2010 1:39:30 AM   
Magpius


Posts: 1632
Joined: 9/21/2007
From: Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline 		Turns 20-40





Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Magpius)
Post #: 41
RE: Iwo Jima: [U.S.] - 7/12/2010 1:51:55 AM   
Magpius


Posts: 1632
Joined: 9/21/2007
From: Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline 		Review:
Okay so what went wrong.
  • I used the Air Strikes and bombardments too early, to establish a beach head and get momentum to my front lines. In hindsight, they were probably not needed at all initially.
  • I should have assigned out all the commanders I had available, prior to landing on the beach. It seems I could not assign unit commanders, once they had landed on the beach.
  • I am still a newb with Naval, and was unable to determine how many air strikes or bombardments I had used or how many I had left. (is there some report that outlines this info?)
Can I replenish Naval units to begin bombardments once expired?

The outcome was rather frustrating.
The stranglehold of the remaining 3 units, did not work. Despite maxing out my assault troops with commanders, level and AP. The Jap HQ did not fall for 20 turns.
The stranglehold reduced unit level, but then the AP would increase significantly. No matter what combination of combined attack and followup individual unit hits, the defence modifiers made it invincible.
98% of the island fell in 18 turns, and 3 units could not be destroyed in a further 20!
If anything, I would have expected greater resistance early, and then a withering capitulation as there supplies ran out, but for the half of the game, the US just rolled over the top. There was some assaults from the armored battalion, but little else.

Thanks for reading.


_____________________________


(in reply to Magpius)
Post #: 42
RE: Iwo Jima: [U.S.] - 7/12/2010 2:52:21 AM   
Razz1


Posts: 2560
Joined: 10/21/2007
From: CaLiForNia
Status: offline 		I haven't played this scenario.
Airstrikes come from Carriers or planes. Carriers can strike unitl it hits two.
Planes can strike until they are dead. Bombardment is 1 to two hexes inland but will change on next patch.
Script should be updated to add more suppies to AI Japs so you have more fun.
Unless their are extra troops, the AI won't come out to attack. It's programed to hold those forts.

A player can reinforce a unit and make the PP go in the red once. You get PP from the cities and any other designated spot.

Have you tried this on hard setting yet?

The real game is the 1937 or 41 Campaign

(in reply to Magpius)
Post #: 43
RE: Iwo Jima: [U.S.] - 7/12/2010 4:01:59 AM   
Magpius


Posts: 1632
Joined: 9/21/2007
From: Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline 		@Razz,
Ahhh, this was played at Normal settings. I'll try this on hard, and see what happens... good call.
-working up to the full campaigns, after a couple of A.I. matches, I'll put my hand up for some pbem action.

_____________________________


(in reply to Razz1)
Post #: 44
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Storm over the Pacific >> After Action Reports >> RE: Iwo Jima: [U.S.] Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Jump to:





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


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.391