RE: One Weird Battle

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: One Weird Battle

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

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: One Weird Battle

Page: << < prev 31 32 [33] 34 35 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: One Weird Battle - 12/3/2010 11:12:03 PM

JohnDillworth

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

quote:

I cannot yet judge the situation late in the game. Losing 32 planes to flak (plus some ops losses caused by damage) in a decisive all-out carrier battle seems to be about right for June of 1942, considering that most of my raids had enough numbers to swamp their targets. Japanese flak in the same battle might have been too effective in proportion to the number of attacking planes, but half of its victims were British biplanes.

I intend to watch Nemo/Panzerjager Hortlund pair of AARs very carefully to see how flak works in 1945. The free use of exploits, like kamikaze approaches at extreme altitude will skew the picture somewhat, though.

I'll do the same. You might want to check out Canoerebel's last AAR as it went into 45. The name slips my mind right now. As mentioned the disconnect seems to come late in the war. I believe I read that proximity shells should not show up until 44 as they were not common. That is by design. I also read that there might be an acknowledge problem with the 5" DP guns. Something to do with them being dual purpose and they are kind of anti-ship guns first and then AA guns. I wish I was good with the editor so I could run some simulations. I am playing the Downfall scenario against the AI now so I might be able to run some tests.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to FatR)

Post #: 961

RE: One Weird Battle - 12/3/2010 11:57:45 PM

Canoerebel

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

I'll address your comments later, but at the moment I want to address the first major faux pas of the game.

An IJ invasion TF arrived at the base north of Auckland, began unloading a tank unit, and triggered the Kiwi reinforcements. In his email, Brad said it was unintentional; that he set this hex as a deception and then forgot; he has been very busy of late, turns have been infrequent, and his mind isn't on the game.

I'm insisting that he re-do the turn. I don't want to benefit from all those Kiwi reinforcements. I hope he'll accept as this would otherwise tarnish a taut game that has been well-played by Brad.

Now, three points about the turn:

1. I didn't see the invasion force coming! All of my air units at Auckland are training. I don't have any patrol aircraft there - the closest is at Suva. I have not been very concerend about NZ because it is pretty strongly defended - nearly 700 AV at Auckland behind good forts.

2. Allied fighters at Bombay ripped apart a major Japanese raid, downing 50+ aircraft. I hope the re-do doesn't affect what was probably the biggest Allied air victory of the war.

3. I did take a look at SigInt and found a report that part of 53rd Division is aboard a Maru bound for Truk. This is interesting because the previous turn I had a report that 53rd is prepping for Suva. That is the second division prepping for that outpost. I think it is very likely a genuine target. But the Allies have 550 AV there behind 4 forts, and 200 more AV at Nadi (with Fiji Brigade set to arrive there in 58 days). I think it will take three or four divisions to handle the garrison. What do you think?

< Message edited by Canoerebel -- 12/4/2010 12:02:01 AM >

(in reply to JohnDillworth)

Post #: 962

RE: One Weird Battle - 12/4/2010 1:27:13 AM

JohnDillworth

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

quote:

I think it will take three or four divisions to handle the garrison. What do you think?

I think he has 3 or 4 divisions. I think that the New Zealand diversion is meant to draw your carriers to the SW Pacific. I think that the KB is near. I think Brad has not been posting an AAR lately so I can speak freely. I think it is time for your North Pacific move because he is trying to trap you in the SW Pacific. But hey, you asked. BTW if your Carriers are still around Africa I would send the lot of them into the Bay of Bengal to clean up whatever support TF's he has in there, cause the KB ain't there. And if you want to go Sumatra things might get mighty interesting.

< Message edited by JohnDillworth -- 12/4/2010 1:32:14 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 963

RE: One Weird Battle - 12/4/2010 1:36:52 AM

Canoerebel

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

It's looking that way - four divisions now in Rabaul or Truk; two of them prepping for Suva; diversion to New Zealand, Hiei and Kirishima at Truk, etc. My general plan of action:

1. If the KB shows up around Fiji or New Zealand (or India), the Allies will immediately proceed with the invasions of Marcus and Wake.

2. My carriers are still at Capetown (yes, that's no-man's-land, but they are snug and awaiting the right opportunity to move). I will carefully consider using them around India if the KB is in the Pacific, but I will weigh against that the cost of revealing their position. Honestly, Brad has been totally frozen in the Pacific since the beginning of 1942. The minute he sees my carriers in the IO, he's going to pounce with surface raiders and possibly proceed with some invasions. I'll have to pull back much of my shipping. It's hard for you guys to judge things "from a distance," but the hiding of the Allied carriers has had just immense benefits in this game.

3. The Allies are very close to advancing in India - I need Ahmadebad's airfield at level nine, which should be the case within a month (it's 8.6 now). The Japanese have a stack of six units (estimated at least two divisions) advancing on Jalagon (between Bombay and Indore) from the east. The Allies have 1200 AV at Jalagon and another 600+ AV at Indore with 27th USA Division and some other units on the way. The Allies will fight there and, at the same time, may move south from Surat to threaten Bombay from the north.

(in reply to JohnDillworth)

Post #: 964

RE: One Weird Battle - 12/4/2010 2:41:18 AM

witpqs

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

1. I didn't see the invasion force coming! All of my air units at Auckland are training. I don't have any patrol aircraft there - the closest is at Suva. I have not been very concerend about NZ because it is pretty strongly defended - nearly 700 AV at Auckland behind good forts.

Proof that a diversion is just no good if your opponent doesn't know about it!

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 965

RE: One Weird Battle - 12/4/2010 4:23:17 AM

JeffroK

Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline

1. CR is far too forgiving to his opponents, seems to be a constant in his games.
2. Is Nadi secure, its usually a weak spot that allows an Amphib landing to provide a secure base for a attack on Suva.
3. The Fiji's dont really threaten much do they?
4. Are you sure your VP are safe from an Auto Victory offensive?

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 966

RE: One Weird Battle - 12/4/2010 1:25:29 PM

Canoerebel

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

An analysis of Japanese chances for auto victory.

Points: The Japanese lead 32,448 to 9,532, or 3.4:1. The auto-victory ratio has actually been very slowly declining over the past few months, as Japanese conquests have slowed. Most points scored are in the air war, which has been about 1:1 for months. The Japanese score more at sea, thanks to subs, but the Allies offset that by base building. Overall, the chances of Japanese auto victory are minimal unless Japan can take some high points bases and/or win a big victory at sea. VP chances for Japan:

Hawaii: No chance here. As a staging base for future Allied invasions, Pearl Harbor currently has 1900 AV behind seven forts.

Australia: No chance here. As a staging base for future Allied invasions, Oz's defenses are augmented by 32nd, 40th and 41st USA divisions, a Marine RCT, a USA tank unit, and one of the Australian divisions that arrived at Aden early in the game. All bases are well-supplied with good forts. This should be more than enough to counter an invasion by even four or five enemy divisions.

India: Japan has a powerful army in India, and Bombay is isolated and under siege. While this theater has my full attention, I am growing more certain that the Allies have enough ground troops and aircraft to stop the Japanese. Before the end of the year, I expect the Allies to be moving forward, at least to probe for weakenesses in the Japanese lines. The prospect for enemy victory points in India are diminishing steadily.

New Zealand: Long ago, I decided to risk that New Zealand was safe mostly because Brad has to assume New Zealand has long since been reinforced. He doesn't know the whereabouts of any USA Army of Marine divisions, so this is a risk I am willing to take. The South Island is weakly defended but doesn't offer Japan any VP. To the north, Auckland has 660 AV behind five forts, and the other cities can contribute 330 AV. A commitment by Japan of five divisions to the North Island a could make things tough, but I rate the odds of such a move as low. The fact that an invasion would trigger nice reinforcements reduces the odds even further.

Fiji: This is where I would go if I were Brad. It's close to his own bases, meaning he can commit his carriers with the knowlege that there are friendly ports nearby. But he isn't going to have an easy time of it. Nadi has 215 AV including 9th Marines, an army arty unit, and 276th Coastal Artillery CD that has eight 150mm guns. These units are behind three forts. Suva has 535 AV including 6th Marines, 147 and 148 RCT, an arty unit, and 8th Marine CD with six 150mm guns. These are behind four forts. Brad would likely land two divisions at Nadi, take the base, and then land his Suva force, which should be at least two more divisions. These two bases are worth a combined 1325 points - not enough to get Brad to auto victory. In addition, he should take considerable losses during the invasion.

Samoa: Unlikely target as it's worth just 325 VP and Brad is sure to believe it's heavily garrisoned. Actually, I have just 340 AV including 8th Marines, 2nd Marine CD, and 32nd RCT behind four forts (80% to five).

Tahiti: This base is worth 345 points to the Allies and is held by just 90 AV behind five forts, but it is incredibly remote. Brad would be most worried about the distance to friendly ports for damaged ships. He won't come this far, me thinks.

American Carriers: This is Brad's best chance of achieving victory. I'm sure he is anxious to lure the Allies into a carrier battle, both for VP purposes and to reduce the risk of Allied offensives in 1943. From the start of the game, I have been willing to commit the carriers in 1942 only to prevent the fall of India, Australia, or Hawaii. Of those, only India remains in play, and even that seems pretty safe as long as the KB isn't employed to shut down Karachi. So there's no need to commit the carriers there. Thus, the Allied carriers are likely to remain at Capetown unless Brad invades NZ and triggers reinforcements. In that event, and if the KB remains near NZ, the Allies might bump up the invasion of Sumatra. With those extra Kiwi units, I'd be more inclined to move quickly.

(in reply to JeffroK)

Post #: 967

RE: One Weird Battle - 12/4/2010 1:55:43 PM

paullus99

Posts: 1985
Joined: 1/23/2002
Status: offline

What does your carrier force currently look like? Since you haven't lost anything, I assume you have all the British Carriers, plus Lex, Enterprise, Saratoga, Wasp, Hornet, Yorktown, Long Island - I'm a little rusty on the overall composition.

I think you've frustrated the heck out of him by refusing the reveal where your carriers are located. I'm sure he's probably figured that they are off the map (but not exactly where) - which is why he's trying to draw them out. I agree that Fiji is the target (the diversion to Auckland makes Fiji the only sensible invasion spot). He will probably hit hard & fast - expect 3 - 4 divisions (I would) and pour resources into the area as well. I'm sure he feels that if he makes a big enough stink & threatens your supply lines, you'll be forced to commit your carriers.

In this case, proceeding with the Marcus & Wake invasions will really throw a wrench into the works - since the only way he'll be able to counter is with the KB, which will be absolutely necessary to support his Fiji ops. Once the KB makes itself known (which should be very soon), you'll be able to commit to your other targets. It is all about hitting him where he ain't right now. You have the luxury of trading space for time, while he does not. No single base or objective is going to win the war for him at this point, if you don't give him the satisfaction of a carrier battle.

_____________________________

Never Underestimate the Power of a Small Tactical Nuclear Weapon...

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 968

RE: One Weird Battle - 12/4/2010 2:13:19 PM

Canoerebel

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

The six American fleet carriers plus RN CV Illustrious and CVL Hermes are at Capetown (the other RN CVs have been withdrawn on schedule).

CVEs Long Island and Copahee are at Pearl Harbor. Three more American CVEs arrive at Tacoma in the next 40 days.

If the KB shows up around Fiji, the Allies are ready to move on Wake and Marcus. All ground forces are at Pearl Harbor with the exception of one CD unit slated for Wake (it's in transit from Pago Pago and should arrive in about ten days). All transports, combat ships, and the two CVE are at Pearl Harbor. These invasion forces can load immediately. Ideally, patrols should provide a few days notice of a move on Fiji, so the Allied invasion Marcus/Wake forces should be able to get underway before Brad can wrap things up at Fiji.

(in reply to paullus99)

Post #: 969

RE: One Weird Battle - 12/4/2010 5:16:42 PM

paullus99

Posts: 1985
Joined: 1/23/2002
Status: offline

If he does move on Fiji, do you have the airpower to at least bleed him a bit? It will be interesting to see which way he jumps on this one - whether it is really an invasion or just a big feint.

_____________________________

Never Underestimate the Power of a Small Tactical Nuclear Weapon...

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 970

RE: One Weird Battle - 12/4/2010 6:35:29 PM

Canoerebel

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

Not really, but I've been trying to keep up appearances. I've built the airfield at Suva to level six and have three B-17 squadrons based there. I've used them a few times against Luganville and Noumea. So Brad has to assume that the Allies might have the capability of putting up some resistance in the air, but I really can't.

P.S. We've just gone through the hassle of re-doing the last turn. I'm hoping that it will result in the same lopsided Allied air victory over Bombay. Other than that the turn should be pretty quiet.

(in reply to paullus99)

Post #: 971

RE: One Weird Battle - 12/4/2010 6:44:33 PM

erstad

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

quote:

Overall, the chances of Japanese auto victory are minimal unless Japan can take some high points bases and/or win a big victory at sea.

That'd have to be one monster sea battle. He needs 9.5K*4-32.5K = 5.5K "free and clear" victory points to close the gap to AV, even assuming that he gets a 4:1 on all other exchanges/effects between September and December.

As a rough benchmark, I have two PBEMs in June 44, and the total game-to-date ship losses for the four sides involved are about 5K, 6K, 6K, and 9K. The odds of losing 5.5K in one exchange are pretty slim.

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 972

RE: One Weird Battle - 12/4/2010 7:00:28 PM

Canoerebel

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

Right, but if Q-Ball wins a lopsided carrier battle, he is then much more free to move on some of the high-value bases. Fiji, Auckland, Karachi, Bombay, and Midway are then open to either invasion, bombardment, or blockade. That combination is his best path to victory.

(in reply to erstad)

Post #: 973

RE: One Weird Battle - 12/4/2010 10:56:55 PM

JeffroK

Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline

Just prolonging the arguement

Add a few of these together, the loss of Noumea, Samoa & the Fijis including their LCU & aircraft.

The fall of Bombay

Could make the numbers interesting.

Plus Auckland, if you are only sending a diversion why send a Tank Regiment???

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 974

RE: One Weird Battle - 12/4/2010 10:59:03 PM

paullus99

Posts: 1985
Joined: 1/23/2002
Status: offline

He may have done it to "imply" through radio intercepts that something bigger was in the works. Of course, if he does hit Auckland, it activates a bunch of reinforcements anyway - which given Q's continued presence in India, isn't a good thing for him in this part of the world.

_____________________________

Never Underestimate the Power of a Small Tactical Nuclear Weapon...

(in reply to JeffroK)

Post #: 975

RE: One Weird Battle - 12/5/2010 12:27:03 AM

JohnDillworth

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

quote:

Plus Auckland, if you are only sending a diversion why send a Tank Regiment???

begs the question, "What was the composition of the task force" If it was one or 2 or 3 AK's, it was meant to be spotted and sunk at sea. I presume these came from Raubal or thereabouts and traveled a route where they would be spotted and sunk. Now if the task force contained 2 BB's 3 CA's and lots of other escorts, well maybe that's not a feint.

_____________________________

(in reply to paullus99)

Post #: 976

RE: One Weird Battle - 12/5/2010 4:22:44 AM

crsutton

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

As long as he does not know where your carriers are he is limited to one operation at a time. Only a big risk taker would split KB at this point to support multiple operations. Stay the course. You can offer him a carrier battle anytime after January 1. I think it is best to fight before he gets the Judy diverbomber but it all just depends. Just bear in mind. One mildly sucessful carrier fight for me in my game cost me a ton of SBDs and wildcats. My ships were OK but I had little or nothing to put on them as the replacement rate for naval aircraft just sucks until the hellcat and SBD5 come on line. So a big fight with KB in early 43 might be a one shot affair for a while. For this reason alone, I would avoid a big carrier fight in 1942 unless it is really required.

In scen #2 the Japanese player can wake up in the morning and sh*t out more planes after breakfast than you will in months.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to JohnDillworth)

Post #: 977

RE: One Weird Battle - 12/5/2010 12:43:36 PM

JohnDillworth

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

quote:

Japanese player can wake up in the morning and sh*t out more planes after breakfast than you will in months.

I believe this was the working tittle of the game before Matrix settled on "Admirals Edition"

_____________________________

(in reply to crsutton)

Post #: 978

RE: One Weird Battle - 12/5/2010 1:02:03 PM

paullus99

Posts: 1985
Joined: 1/23/2002
Status: offline

And John wins the Internets this morning!

_____________________________

Never Underestimate the Power of a Small Tactical Nuclear Weapon...

(in reply to JohnDillworth)

Post #: 979

RE: One Weird Battle - 12/5/2010 1:41:17 PM

Canoerebel

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

Several times in the game Brad has created mock invasion TFs and set them to Allied-held bases. His intention is for the Allies to pick up SigInt. On one occasion I did - a force bound for the base adjacent to Surat, India. But the "invasion" never arrived. It was all a deception and was recalled.

That's what happened this time, too. The TF consisted of a few xAK carrying tanks. Brad set it for the base at the northern tip of NZ, but then forgot about it over the next few weeks because he's been so busy at work. The few turns he's been able to crank out have been "on the fly." I never got a SigInt report on this force. It sailed down the Coral Sea, where I have no bases, to New Zealand, where I had no patrols, and arrived undected.

I wonder what he'll deduce from this experience?

Also, he asked me what reinforcements I received, as if we both hadn't the benefit of Bullwinkle's helpful posts. Brad knows as well as I do what forces the "invasion" triggered.

< Message edited by Canoerebel -- 12/5/2010 1:44:35 PM >

(in reply to paullus99)

Post #: 980

RE: One Weird Battle - 12/5/2010 2:55:39 PM

vettim89

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

Well one lesson I hoped you learned is that having all your assets training at vulnerable bases is a bad idea. I had the same thing happen when a cruiser TF that was bombarding Johnston Island got intercepted by IJN CV's. ALl my air power in Hawaii all the way down to Midway was in full training mode. Needless to say that required some rethinking.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 981

RE: One Weird Battle - 12/5/2010 10:57:19 PM

Capt. Harlock

Posts: 5358
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline

quote:

Several times in the game Brad has created mock invasion TFs and set them to Allied-held bases. His intention is for the Allies to pick up SigInt. On one occasion I did - a force bound for the base adjacent to Surat, India. But the "invasion" never arrived. It was all a deception and was recalled.

That's what happened this time, too. The TF consisted of a few xAK carrying tanks. Brad set it for the base at the northern tip of NZ, but then forgot about it over the next few weeks because he's been so busy at work.

If that's the case, I think you should have kept the turn. The result seems entirely realistic. Japanese field commanders were often overly aggressive, and Japanese communications not always the best. Let it be a potential penalty for trying to mess with SIGINT. (Unless you feel the reinforcements gained are not worth the losses incurred.)

_____________________________

Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

--Victor Hugo

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 982

RE: One Weird Battle - 12/6/2010 1:50:08 AM

Canoerebel

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

CaptHarlock: There's alot of merit to what you say. I would have seriously contemplated taking that position, but I know that Brad has really been under the gun lately at work. I truly believe this oversight was purely a result of unusual pressures he's facing in real life. (I do wish, however, that he had made the same offer to me on the game's first turn. I was incorrectly under the impression that House Rules prohibited me from issuing orders to Force Z. So I didn't issue any and lost both the BC and BB. Had Brad offered a re-do just to correct that oversight, I would have accepted.)

Vettim: Early in the game I made the strategic decisions to send all troops to the Aleutians, Hawaii, Oz, and India. NZ was to be left expendable. I also knew that the further we went into the game, the more likely it would seem to Brad that NZ had been reinforced, thus dissuading him from attacking. Thus, from day one, NZ has been left to fend for itself. I haven't sent patrol aircraft there because I need them more other places. Even if I detected an approaching invasion, there's nothing I would or could do in reaction. Nevertheless, there's no sense in not having any Hudsons set to naval search, so I've made that change.

(in reply to Capt. Harlock)

Post #: 983

RE: One Weird Battle - 12/6/2010 1:55:20 PM

princep01

Posts: 943
Joined: 8/7/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline

Well Canoe, since Oz is well protected (and under no apparent pressure from the enemy), is it wise to leave NZ unprotected with the enemy in striking range of the 4-1? Surely India is still the greatest danger, but you have reacted well to reinforce it to the point that you are capable of offensive action there. But, sigint has given some indication that he is going to try to pick up additional points before the end of the year in the southern and eastern Pacific. KBs long absence has given time for a shift in its focus. Some land units appear to be headed eastward.

I still think he will make his grab in the last quarter to minimize your reaction time. Many points can be garnered with the fall of Bombay, capture of Indian villes above THE LINE, successful capture of Auckland, some of the rest of NZ and other South Pacific islands. If you cannot get much back by year's end, he could win.

This is why I'd be fighting this a bit differently from you, especially at this point. Make him react to you for a change. Attack in India now. Reinforce NZ. If KB is in the Pacific, then use the CVs to attack his LOC in the Bay of Bengal and anywhere else you can garner points. So what he knows their general location for a short time? Knock of 200 points in Japanese shipping and it is hard to get the 800 it takes to even that out and maintain the 4-1. "Kill Japs....kill more Japs".

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 984

RE: One Weird Battle - 12/6/2010 2:55:26 PM

Canoerebel

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

That's one of the real beauties of this game - trying to allocate limited resources among unlimited needs. It's a blast trying to figure out what's going where, especially under the immense amount of pressure that Brad has exerted in this game.

I can't send anything to New Zealand without stripping away troops already committed to higher priorities. Take any from Oz, and I've weakened Oz too much. Take any from Suva, and I've weakened Suva too much. Take any from Hawaii, and I lose the ability to invade Marcus and Wake (eventually I do have to go on the offensive!).

I believe I made a good assessment of New Zealand: Brad has to believe it has been strongly garrisoned (we're now ten months into the war and he hasn't seen a single USA Army division to date - for all he knows one or two could be sitting in Auckland). I just don't think he'll take a stab at NZ.

I do think he's likely to target Fiji. I'm trying to get a few more men there, but it's pretty well defended. (Early in the game, Fiji was left totally unprotected as I had much higher priorities, but the island's garrison was substantially boosted in the late spring and early summer - 200 AV at Nadi and 530 at Suva).

(in reply to princep01)

Post #: 985

RE: One Weird Battle - 12/6/2010 9:47:07 PM

cookie monster

Posts: 1693
Joined: 5/22/2005
From: Birmingham,England
Status: offline

How are you getting on with pilot training?

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 986

RE: One Weird Battle - 12/6/2010 11:10:20 PM

Canoerebel

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

I have 12 zillion USAAF fighter pilots well trained (experience low 50s, skill low 70s).

I don't seem to have enough USAAF bomber pilots or RAF pilots of any kind.

I don't know yet about USN pilots, only because my carriers have been parked the entire game, so I haven't lost any carrier pilots. I suspect my stocks of those are pretty low, though.

(in reply to cookie monster)

Post #: 987

RE: One Weird Battle - 12/6/2010 11:17:22 PM

cookie monster

Posts: 1693
Joined: 5/22/2005
From: Birmingham,England
Status: offline

For the USN pilots you get a lot of navy float planes,

these can be trained on sweep,nav search,naval bombing,asw etc. You will have so many you can train all the navy pilots you want, only probs is they cant train torpedo.

Only way to train torp skill I think is with patrol planes but their always in use.

I guess could always substitute a marine TB squadon with a navy to free up a navy aquadron for torp training.

Ahh I remember all those CVE replenishment squadrons can be used to train pilots, so in the end there's tons of training potential available.

As for army bomber pilots I would use the trained men from Pearl and North Pacific to fill front line squadrons.

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 988

RE: One Weird Battle - 12/6/2010 11:49:02 PM

JohnDillworth

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

quote:

I don't seem to have enough USAAF bomber pilots

I have never found an answer to this one. Against the AI I was able to remove a trickle from the B-17, B-26 and B-25 squadrons. but I am in late 42 and I am in low double digits of reserves. I am presently playing the Downfall scenario and that is a blast because I have thousands of bombers and they all have pilots in the 60's it seems. Of course the AI has thousands of fighters but US bombers do not go down easily and if you fly em high enough you start to get messages like "some fighters could not reach altitude in time" or something like that

_____________________________

(in reply to cookie monster)

Post #: 989

RE: One Weird Battle - 12/7/2010 12:59:17 AM

paullus99

Posts: 1985
Joined: 1/23/2002
Status: offline

The United States had no lack of pilots (to the detriment of the infantry corps, but whatever) - so what is behind this decision to artificially limit the number of bomber pilots for the US?

_____________________________

Never Underestimate the Power of a Small Tactical Nuclear Weapon...

(in reply to JohnDillworth)

Post #: 990