RE: SUDDENLY HAIRY

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: SUDDENLY HAIRY

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: SUDDENLY HAIRY

Page: << < prev 136 137 [138] 139 140 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: SUDDENLY HAIRY - 12/6/2011 4:37:37 AM

pat.casey

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

Have to agree with Nemo, although, like a few others I think his comments lack his usual deft touch, he's a bit more ... blunt than I'd have expected.

That said, this definitely feels like a case of paralysis by success e.g. "holy %^%! it worked, I own Hokaido ... err... now what?"

As others have suggested the war winning move is to bomb the home islands into rubble. I'm not enough of a Japanese production expect to know where the bottlenecks are, but if others think its airframes I'd trust their judgement.

Bases, give or take, don't really matter ... destroy Japanese industry and you can collect bases whenever you want.
Take bases, but leave his industry intact, and the war goes one.

As for the last parts of Hokaido, my $0.02 A) looks like you can take it w/o air support B) who cares if you take it so long as the Japanese cannot mass enough troops there to evict you from the rest of the island?

(in reply to desicat)

Post #: 4111

RE: SUDDENLY HAIRY - 12/6/2011 5:51:40 AM

CaptBeefheart

Posts: 2301
Joined: 7/4/2003
From: Seoul, Korea
Status: offline

Saying Rader can't take too many more air losses like that last Hakodate battle is like saying the North Korean regime can't last much longer. It's been said dozens of times over the last few months (in North Korea's case: thousands of times over decades) and he still has airplanes in the pool, while the Fat Man is still in charge to my north. That said, I'd have to go along with Nemo and hit airframe production hard and some day those pools may run dry. There's certainly no need for 4Es anywhere else on the planet besides Hokkaido or environs.

I have a question for the JFBs: At this point, does the Empire usually have a big pool of engines? Could certain aircraft engines be hit hard to create a bottleneck or is it better to hit airframes? I always like hitting those engine factories but have no idea whether it's the most effective tactic.

Cheers,
CC

_____________________________

Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.

(in reply to pat.casey)

Post #: 4112

RE: SUDDENLY HAIRY - 12/6/2011 6:09:21 AM

jmalter

Posts: 1673
Joined: 10/12/2010
Status: offline

wrt advices posted here, the commentariat suffers FOW b/c we read only what GJ posts, & can only surmise about what he don't post.

for example, we've no access to info 'bout his supply-state, air sqn fatigue & airframe replacement pools, & that's just for the current OKdo battle.

however, some advices seem relevant:
A) stop it w/ the sweeps, use LRcap instead
B) methodically concentrate strat-bombing against individual targets
C) land-attack in south OKdo to attrit enemy LCU
C1) attack enemy reinf convoys w/ PTs, CL/DD TFs, & 100' FB sqns
D) improve recon over north Honshu in search for strat-bomb targets

(in reply to pat.casey)

Post #: 4113

RE: SUDDENLY HAIRY - 12/6/2011 6:43:27 AM

GreyJoy

Posts: 6750
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline

Thanks guys, i'll reply in detail to Nemo's and others' posts as soon as i get to office.

In the meanwhile i'll report the last turn...

Was a good one...the lack of air cover in SOPAC is giving the allies a good shot to japanese transports...lots of ships sunk today, both around Rabaul and near Hakkodate.

But the crucial part is that my CVs and CVEs started to moved back to US coast...escorting 730 ships....and Rader immediately spotted me and react violently...several subs are already spotted around my TFs...and i bet that tomorrow we'll have to fight against those damned pesky bastards again....as we did when our CVEs were transfered to SOPAC back in early 43....do you remember? 5 CVEs sunk in few days....

Now i've done my best to counter his pack wolves strategy...

My transports TFs have all PFs, SCs, DDs and some YMS with them. Every TF is following a ASW TF which is following a SCTF

Same for the CVEs and the CVs. They are organized following an ASW TFs that follows a SCTF...so that the latters should enter the hex for first and attack/get attacked earlier than the CV/CVEs....

my subs are creating a long range safety belt south and west of my ships...he cannot arrive with the KB unseen! (i hope so at least...)

April 27, 28 1944

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Ominato at 118,53, Range 4,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
xAKL Raizan Maru
xAKL Kizugawa Maru
LST T-104, Shell hits 4, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
LST T-106, Shell hits 16, heavy fires, heavy damage
E Teiko, Shell hits 4, heavy fires

Allied Ships
PT-161
PT-242
PT-258
PT-345
PT-357
PT-359
PT-463
PT-465
PT-469
PT-493
PT-494, Shell hits 1, and is sunk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Ominato at 118,53, Range 2,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
LST T-114, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk

Allied Ships
PT-161
PT-242
PT-258
PT-345
PT-357
PT-359
PT-463
PT-465
PT-469
PT-493

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Ominato at 118,53, Range 4,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
E Oki, Shell hits 7, on fire
AMc Wa 13
AMc Wa 16, Shell hits 5, heavy fires, heavy damage
AMc Kaiyo Maru #1, Shell hits 4, heavy fires, heavy damage
LB-122
LB-123, Shell hits 1, and is sunk
LB-124, Shell hits 4, and is sunk
LB-125, Shell hits 2, and is sunk
LB-126
LB-127, Shell hits 4, and is sunk
LB-128, Shell hits 1, and is sunk
LB-129, Shell hits 1, on fire
LB-130, Shell hits 1, and is sunk
LB-131, Shell hits 1, and is sunk
LB-133
LB-134, Shell hits 4, and is sunk
PB Hakka Maru, Shell hits 3, on fire

Allied Ships
PT-161
PT-242
PT-258
PT-345
PT-357
PT-359, Shell hits 1, on fire
PT-463
PT-465
PT-469
PT-493

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submarine attack near Ominato at 118,53

Japanese Ships
LST T-106, Torpedo hits 1, heavy fires, heavy damage

Allied Ships
SS Swordfish
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Mussau Island at 105,120

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid detected at 54 NM, estimated altitude 9,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 15 minutes

Allied aircraft
B-25D1 Mitchell x 6

No Allied losses

Japanese Ships
xAP Teiritsu Maru, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires
CM Nuwashima, Bomb hits 1, on fire
xAP Montevideo Maru

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Rabaul at 106,125

Weather in hex: Moderate rain

Raid detected at 80 NM, estimated altitude 11,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 23 minutes

Allied aircraft
B-25C Mitchell x 18
Beaufighter X x 24
Boomerang C-12 x 24
B-25D1 Mitchell x 16

Allied aircraft losses
B-25C Mitchell: 1 damaged
B-25D1 Mitchell: 1 damaged

Japanese Ships
AMc Wa 1, Bomb hits 1, and is sunk
LB-565, Bomb hits 1, and is sunk
LB-164, Bomb hits 1, and is sunk
PB Saiko Maru
SC CHa-72
AMc Wa 8, Bomb hits 1, and is sunk
PB Nanpo Maru, Bomb hits 1, on fire
ML G-208
LB-101, Bomb hits 1, and is sunk
LB-163, Bomb hits 1, and is sunk
LB-118
LB-136, Bomb hits 1, and is sunk
LB-116, Bomb hits 1, and is sunk
LB-167, Bomb hits 1, and is sunk
LB-506, Bomb hits 1, and is sunk
AM Wa 105, Bomb hits 2, and is sunk
AMc Wa 17, Bomb hits 2, and is sunk
ML G-201

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Hakodate at 119,53, Range 2,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
xAKL Raizan Maru, Shell hits 12, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
xAKL Kizugawa Maru, Shell hits 37, heavy fires, heavy damage

Allied Ships
PT-450
PT-452
PT-453

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submarine attack near Guiuan at 89,85

Japanese Ships
AK Kinka Maru, Torpedo hits 2, heavy damage

Allied Ships
SS Seadragon

Japanese ground losses:
46 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 2 destroyed, 2 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Mussau Island at 105,120

Weather in hex: Partial cloud

Raid detected at 65 NM, estimated altitude 10,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 18 minutes

Allied aircraft
B-25D1 Mitchell x 12

Allied aircraft losses
B-25D1 Mitchell: 1 damaged

Japanese Ships
CM Nuwashima, Bomb hits 2, and is sunk
DD Nokaze
xAP Montevideo Maru, Bomb hits 1, on fire
xAP Teibi Maru, Bomb hits 1, on fire
LSD Nigitsu Maru, Bomb hits 2, on fire
LSD Akitsu Maru, Bomb hits 2, on fire

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ground combat at 119,52 (near Hakodate)

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 3801 troops, 313 guns, 267 vehicles, Assault Value = 6025

Defending force 39930 troops, 250 guns, 79 vehicles, Assault Value = 967

Japanese ground losses:
150 casualties reported
Squads: 4 destroyed, 10 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Guns lost 2 (1 destroyed, 1 disabled)

Assaulting units:
2nd USMC Amphb Tank Battalion
Americal Infantry Division
93rd Infantry Division
754th Tank Battalion
32nd Infantry Division
8th Indian Division
6th Infantry Division
4th USMC Tank Battalion
41st Infantry Division
1st USMC Amphb Tank Battalion
193rd Tank Battalion
3rd NZ Armoured Sqn
2nd USMC Tank Battalion
40th Infantry Division
7th Infantry Division
3rd Marine Division
131st Combat Engineer Regiment
43rd Infantry Division
33rd Infantry Division
5th USMC Tank Battalion
104th Combat Engineer Regiment
37th Infantry Division
632nd Tank Destroyer Battalion
4th Marine Division
2nd Marine Division
9th Australian Division
7th USMC Field Artillery Battalion
10th USMC Field Artillery Battalion
Eighth US Army
148th Field Artillery Battalion
225th Field Artillery Battalion
V US Amphib Corps
181st Field Artillery Regiment
33rd Medium Regiment
198th Field Artillery Battalion
134th Field Artillery Battalion
147th Field Artillery Regiment
XI US Corps
109th Tank Attack Regiment
249th Field Artillery Battalion
XIV Corps Artillery
XXI Indian Corps

Defending units:
1st Mobile Brigade
4th Depot Division
51st Depot Division
86th Division
2nd Depot Division
57th Depot Division
Guards Depot Division
77th Div /2
43rd Ind.Mixed Brigade
81st Division
5th Area Army
56th Depot Div /12
11th Div /1

(in reply to jmalter)

Post #: 4114

RE: SUDDENLY HAIRY - 12/6/2011 6:54:16 AM

cwDeici

Posts: 70
Joined: 12/6/2011
Status: offline

I have never played this game, not even read it but bits of one other WiTP game.

I'm pretty good at selecting and synthezising advice though.
It seems what to do is:

#1 Scout airframe factories. Move all 4Es to the primary theater.
-> #2 Massively attack the least defended airframe factory/ies (not sure what would be prudent force concentration and if there is overkill at all) with 4Es escorted by fighters that are on patrol over the area. -> #1

PS. Ask Nemo if/when and how to split attacks against weakly defended factories.

Also, it seems unfair to update to the most recent rules unless there is a prior agreement to do so, or precedent.

< Message edited by cwDeici -- 12/6/2011 7:02:38 AM >

(in reply to GreyJoy)

Post #: 4115

RE: SUDDENLY HAIRY - 12/6/2011 7:54:15 AM

JeffroK

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

From post 3 of the thread

Oh, forgot to say that we're still playing with the official patch and not the latest beta one cause my opponent feels it's too risky to update now till it goes official.
Really do not know which are the differences, so i'll wait and see

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to cwDeici)

Post #: 4116

RE: SUDDENLY HAIRY - 12/6/2011 10:38:28 AM

GreyJoy

Posts: 6750
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline

Sorry guys...busy morning....

Just to underline that we both agreed that was Rader, being the japanese player, the one who has to decide when and if to upgrade to a new Beta. We've been upgrading to the betas since this summer and i never had anything to regret about (even if many of the changes have been a "downgrade" for the allies - i.e. the PP needed to be spent for a change from 2E to 4E or the I AUS Corp moved to a restricted command).

So Rader didn't do anything bad. He acted strictly following our agreement

(in reply to JeffroK)

Post #: 4117

RE: SUDDENLY HAIRY - 12/6/2011 12:19:38 PM

Nemo121

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

Pat.casey,
That really wasn't my intent.... I think though I've given this advice 2 to 3 times already so decided to be absolutely explicit this time - which may account for the bluntness.

Commander Cody,
Often the Empire has a stockpile of engines since if you have overproduction of engines they got stockpiled while if you overproduce airframes they just get wasted.

The bigger point is that if you destroy engine production and there's a stockpile the impact on number of enemy fighters produced might take months to be apparent as Rader can just
1. use the stockpile to make up for the deficit in engine production AND
2. simply stop producing bombers using the same engine - for each bomber he stops producing he can produce 2 fighters using that engine at no increased cost to his economy AND
3. Preferentially reduce production of obsolete fighter types in order to concentrate on more modern fighters using the same engines.

In short going for engines allows the Japanese to adjust and eke out their defensive productive ability for a long time.

On the other hand if you go for airframes:
1. YOU get to target the destruction at his most effective fighter types
2. There's no possibility of using stockpiles to make up for lost production and
3. There's no way to switch bomber production to fighter production without long retooling times ( which you can spot with enough recon ).

So, hitting airframes has more effect, more rapidly on his best planes. So that's the way to go in this situation.

Really the issue here (as with many problem-based scenarios in the real world ) is that people simply aren't simplifying the issues down to their basics sufficiently. When you simplify it down enough the correct courses of action are usually very readily apparent. I often tell students and even post-graduates I'm lecturing that if they don't understand something it is usually because their cognitive models are too complex and unwieldy and they should simplify things down. Over the course of 6 months to a year as they start to do that they tend to get quicker and more applicable plans.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to GreyJoy)

Post #: 4118

RE: SUDDENLY HAIRY - 12/6/2011 12:49:12 PM

modrow

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

Nemo,

is your post re. Greyjoy's strategic bombing based on the information he provides thereon in this thread? If it is, he might just be reporting one thing and doing/preparing something completely different. After all, he can play the meta-game, can't he?

Just my 2cts

Hartwig

(in reply to Nemo121)

Post #: 4119

RE: SUDDENLY HAIRY - 12/6/2011 12:53:26 PM

yubari

Posts: 365
Joined: 3/24/2006
Status: offline

I have been following this very interesting game for the past three months or so of game time.

I have to say that the last thing I would be trying to do now would be trying to destroy the Japanese defensive position north of Hakodate. While Rader is still trying to defend it with hundreds of fighters on CAP and sending more troops in to defend across a very risky sea corridor then it is serving a very good purpose as a fake target and to direct the Japanese attention away from the real targets, the fighter factories. Instead I would be trying to keep the Japanese player sending more and more troops over to the hopeless position. I would even give the Japanese player a couple of victories such as running destroyers into minefields or letting a small 2E bomber group or two get destroyed overhead. Above all make it appear like I was still fighting for the position but in reality leaving it alone. Obviously that illusion is rather harder to create when the Japanese ground troops have already been so badly battered.

When one has complete control over the rest of Hokkaido then Hakkodate on its own is of very little use, apart from encouraging the Japanese player to continue to send fighters on LRCAP and sending more troops to their inevitable deaths. As a Japanese player, I have to say it scares me to see what the late war allied troops can do to even fortified Japanese troops.

(in reply to Nemo121)

Post #: 4120

RE: SUDDENLY HAIRY - 12/6/2011 1:19:23 PM

n01487477

Posts: 4779
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121
...

Nemo121 Shhhhh

.... I laugh when I hear some Allied players bandy around bombing targets.(No, I'm not talking anyone here specifically). If there is one reason an Allied player must understand the economic model of the "dark side" it's to know how to bring it down quickly and ruthlessly.

Sorry GreyJoy, this is your thread ... PAX.

_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java

(in reply to Nemo121)

Post #: 4121

RE: SUDDENLY HAIRY - 12/6/2011 1:38:30 PM

Nemo121

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

Hartwig,

Good point. On the other hand:
a) Last time he played the meta-game I was very much "in" on it and knew what was coming for many months and advised regarding landing composition/strength/phasing etc. GJ knew more about amphib landings than he does about strat bombing so I'm sure he'd be asking for advice if he were up to something very sneaky - of course, that's also what I'd say if I knew he was up to something sneaky.
b) There's no need or room for nicety at this point. He has identified a critical weakness and has a force uniquely capable of attacking that weakness. Dissipating 85% of that force elsewhere isn't a sneaky meta-narrative. It is simply mis-allocation. GJ is very new and still learning so that's no harm. It doesn't mean it shouldn't be pointed out in order to help him though.

Damian,
Indeed. I know precisely what you mean. Based on some of the advice here strategic bombing would achieve nothing of consequence. Sometimes though I just feel I have to simplify things when they're going off-kilter. It would have pained me to see the lesson of Hokkaido wasted by a Hannibal-like inability to turn a major victory into a decisive one.

I'm conscious that people are going to be referring to this for years to come. A lot of them will draw the wrong conclusions but, at the very least, I didn't want the erroneous ineffectiveness of strategic bombing to be one of them when, in fact, strategic bombing is vastly overpowered in the game ( if you do it right ). I'm perfectly happy to let people get all sorts of erroneous ideas since challenging the ideas of people more concerned with being right than correct usually means being attacked by the mob around here and I'm not interested in being a target. With that said if too many people draw erroneous conclusions they'll petition michaelm for changes and the modelling of strategic bombing will be even worse. It is with that meta-narrative in mind ( and not whether or not GJ does well in this game ) that I decided to speak up. I don't want future patches making strat bombing even more over-powered because people draw the wrong conclusions from GJ's inexperienced and dissipated efforts at making an effective strategic bombing campaign.

GJ,
Well, in that case it seems Rader's well within his rights to ask for the upgrade. After all FOW IS actually realistic. I'm sure it hasn't escaped his attention it aids him though more than you.

< Message edited by Nemo121 -- 12/6/2011 1:43:38 PM >

_____________________________

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

(in reply to n01487477)

Post #: 4122

RE: SUDDENLY HAIRY - 12/6/2011 2:05:45 PM

JohnDillworth

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

I don't normally play the Japanese. Are the plants hat produce the best interceptors hard coded? Could GJ just start up a game as the Japanese, figure out what factory will be producing Georges or Franks and target them? If not will recon tell him what the plant will be producing? Are Franks and Georges the best interceptors?
thanks

_____________________________

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 Nemo121)

Post #: 4123

RE: SUDDENLY HAIRY - 12/6/2011 2:20:02 PM

Nemo121

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

Up until the latest beta recon gave you perfect intel. As it is I'm sure that a combination of GJ's memory and current FOW-ed recon would suffice.

I'm not on the latest beta and don't know how much it randomises info but even a general hint that its an airframe factory and producing some type of fighter would more than suffice for targetting purposes.... Why? Simple, you have to hit them all so so long as you can ID the fighter factories you add them to the target list. Sure there'll be some errors but you don't need to hit 100%. Even hitting 50% would, over the course of a couple of months, cripple IJAAF and IJNAF defensive operations.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to JohnDillworth)

Post #: 4124

RE: SUDDENLY HAIRY - 12/6/2011 2:20:42 PM

n01487477

Posts: 4779
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline

Last post here ... back to reading...

quote:

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth

I don't normally play the Japanese. Are the plants hat produce the best interceptors hard coded?

No.

quote:

Could GJ just start up a game as the Japanese, figure out what factory will be producing Georges or Franks and target them?

Probably, if he hasn't changed them since '41. But I guess there are multiples now.

quote:

If not will recon tell him what the plant will be producing? Are Franks and Georges the best interceptors?
thanks

Having asked Michael for this for a while and reminding him recently he gave us the strategic FOW model. I'm thrilled! It does a great job and DL reveals all the necessary details. It's bloody marvellous from what I've tested so far.

PS. And yes the strategic bombing model is powerful in the wrong hands. Thanks Nemo121 for leaving no doubt in the matter - I've tested it and concur.

Cheers and a hearty good-morrow (Dec 7)

_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java

(in reply to JohnDillworth)

Post #: 4125

RE: SUDDENLY HAIRY - 12/6/2011 2:29:59 PM

Nemo121

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

Yes, happy December 7th - the day the Soviets re-took the Krasnaya Polyana just west of Moskva

_____________________________

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

(in reply to n01487477)

Post #: 4126

RE: SUDDENLY HAIRY - 12/6/2011 3:29:58 PM

cwDeici

Posts: 70
Joined: 12/6/2011
Status: offline

Some commentators have been worried about Rader making a counter-gamble to achieve more than delaying a defeat, to turn the tables again.
I agree with them that it can only be done at sea.
It just occured to me, that those kamiz that have ominously not appeared are perhaps being saved for such a gargantuan operation. If he intends to make such a move he will do so while your other fleet elements are gone.

Anyway, great thread and game GreyJoy, I don't think I'll ever have the time for WiTP but it's a joy just watching you guys have at it. : )

< Message edited by cwDeici -- 12/6/2011 3:32:08 PM >

(in reply to Nemo121)

Post #: 4127

RE: SUDDENLY HAIRY - 12/6/2011 3:33:51 PM

ny59giants

Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline

Playing Japan with latest Beta now shows LA like this. FOW is now in effect which is a good thing.

The amount damage that strategic bombing inflicts is still too much, IMO.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by ny59giants -- 12/6/2011 3:34:16 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Nemo121)

Post #: 4128

RE: SUDDENLY HAIRY - 12/6/2011 4:13:02 PM

witpqs

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

Playing Japan with latest Beta now shows LA like this. FOW is now in effect which is a good thing.

The amount damage that strategic bombing inflicts is still too much, IMO.

I also have not yet seen the newest Beta - based on Damian's comments you get more info and increasing accuracy with better DL?

(in reply to ny59giants)

Post #: 4129

RE: SUDDENLY HAIRY - 12/6/2011 4:55:23 PM

GreyJoy

Posts: 6750
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

GJ,

Your analysis is letting you down again. You are making statements without evidence to back them up, letting hyperbole get in the way of sober assessment. YOu did very well with spotting the huge gap Rader left in the north BUT you do have a tendency to just take hyperbole as fact which is unfortunate.

Lets examine them in turn....

quote:

A part from Harbin, where i found no opposition, all his bases are covered with thousands of fighters

That's incorrect. At best he could have 100 to 200 fighter per base over Japan. Some bases may have more at the expense of leaving others less-defended. You've already thrown away your best opportunity to kill his aircraft factories quickly by hitting them while he was disorganised. Now you'll have to fight for them BUT there's no reason you can't ID bases with relatively fewer fighters and tackle them first. What I see in this game is that now you are AGAIN throwing yourself right at his best-CAPed bases and then are talking about his strength.... well, of course, if you throw yourself into the meatgrinder you can't expect not to be minced. Why are you throwing yourself into the meatgrinder though? It is unnecessary.

quote:

i still don't have the numbers of long-legged fighters to sweep and LRCAP the targeted bases efficiently

But you have enough bombers to bull through lightly/moderately defended bases and you have enough fighters to support them in a limited offensive if you don't continue wasting your long-ranged fighters on hugely outnumbered sweeps of Hakodate. You say you don't have enough but every day you throw many away needlessly over Hakodate. Your lack of P-47s is due to your using them in roles which other fighters could fill, leaving you with too few for the roles ONLY P-47s can currently perform. That's another mis-allocation of resources within your power to fix.

quote:

(i barely have 200 4Es in the theatre).

Thats not true and it also misses a larger point.
In one recent day you commited 120 4-engineds to strategic bombing raids over Harbin and on the same day commited over 140 to ground attacks over Hakodate. In addition, recently, you talked of having 4-engined bombers commited to the fighting around Rabaul.

So, even within the theatre you have 260+ 4-engined bombers and are losing UNDER 50% for what you have identified as strategically decisive missions which will end the war - which, at present, only the 4-engineds can accomplish.... using over 50% of them for missions which won't end the war and which any SBD or B-25 could easily accomplish. A serious misallocation of 4-engineds within the theatre.

Beyond that you have, based on what I can glean, at least 200 more 4-engineds in action in other theatres... theatres where they are engaged in far, far less important missions - none of which will end the war as quickly as strategic bombing of fighter airframe factories in the Home Islands.

quote:

April 25, 26 1944
Rabaul has been emptied by his Air force...tomorrow sweeps and 4Es over the big base...

Here's a quote from today about misallocation of 4-engineds.

So, you are using 120 4-engineds for strategic bombing but conservatively could be using at least 4 times that number for strategic bombing. Of the 120 you are using it looks like half are being tasked for fire bombing or engine attacks ( at least ). So, your strategic bombing offensive is working at, roughly, 1/8th of its maximal efficiency. You COULD with a small amount of discipline be getting 8 times the results with the planes you have on-map.

All of the arguments about FOW etc etc are simply comfort myths. They aren't affecting your effectiveness nearly as much as the fact that you are misallocating about 85% of your 4-engined bombers to subsidiary theatres or subsidiary missions other bombers could easily do instead.

quote:

...i have to convert many 2Es to 4Es

Another comfort myth. No, you need to begin using what you have properly. ONly when all of that fails do you need to start worrying about PP and swapping twin-engineds over. Right now you should use your pools as a reserve to replace losses but should concentrate all of your 4-engineds on strategically decisive targets ( fighter airframe factories ) - a single base at a time. Accept the losses and smash his fighter production in a fortnight and you'll rapidly see significant results. As it is you are entirely playing into Rader's hands.

quote:

have to get better planes for many of my fighter units (P-47s and P-38s instead of P-39s and P-40s).

That would also help but the primary issue is the huge misallocation of 4-engineds in which you are engaging.

Hakodate:
Well he won't flood it because it looks like you are going to take it soon. If you back off you could lure him into a mistake.

quote:

I imagine what a fleet of BBs could do starting from Hakkodate.... the work the 4Es cannot done will be taken by the ships...

NO they won't. They'll kill planes at the airfield, fight CD gun emplacements and run into mines and subs. They won't destroy his factories and they won't disintegrate his divisions. Your imagination, here, is running away and embracing wishful fantasies as opposed to the objective reality of the algorithms.

Last point:
Whenever I see a picture you take of Honshu I'm struck by how few airbase signs there are.
Either your recon is abysmal ( and you aren't reconning these bases ) or those bases are empty. In either case it speaks to the unsupportability of the statement that he has strong fighter concentrations everywhere.

Sheer air unit size limits will tend to limit his fighter groups. He may have 4,000 or 5,000 potential fighter slots at this point but the key is there is a limit and even 5,000 fighters at 500 per base means he can only cover 10 bases. Leaving you free to hit other bases until he spreads out to cover 25 at 200 per base --- a small enough force that you can actually punch through.

Air co-ordination....
Well people have posted the answer here several times but you haven't taken it. At a certain point people stop posting the answer if it keeps just being ignored.

The answer, which others have posted ( not me), is to stop sweeping and, instead, LRCAP at highest altitude. Then, when bombers come in, the fighters will act as extempore escorts.

It has been posted many times going back several months but has been ignored each time.

quote:

I don't think GJ needs much advice at this point as his play has been absolutely brilliant

Guys, let's not get carried away. This isn't a Hollywood script where people have to be either down and out or brilliant and triumphant. GJ played an excellent strategic meta-layer but operationally and tactically there is still much to be worked on. Excessive praise is just as pointless as excessive excoriation.

Right now the bottom line is that IF strategic bombing of aircraft factories is his war-winning strategy then he is mis-allocating about 85% ( at a minimum ) of the planes best-suited to that mission. Obviously things will go better if he uses more than 15% of these planes for this war-winning mission type.

As to fighters: The answer is there also. He is losing his best long-range fighters in sweeps of Hakodate.
A) he shouldn't be sweeping Hakodate with any fighters ( as others pointed out long ago wrt other bases)
B) he shouldn't be committing his best long-range fighters ( capable of enagement to the enemy's operational depth - 15 hexes or so ) to sweeps 3 or 4 hexes from his bases which other fighters could do just as easily - fighters which can't engage at the ranges of the P-47s.

As to the benefits of Hakodate: I'm not convinced the cost/benefit analysis here is anything more than "it is a base, I want it". Certainly the fantasy of BBs raining down terror on strategically important targets as they tyrannously reign the seas is just that, a fantasy. They can close a couple of airfields but with the numbers of midgets Japan gets they will eventually get attrited out of action. Furthermore they cannot damage factories and so cannot achieve what GJ identifies as his primary strategical mission right now.

Ok, got your points Nemo.
I agree on the bad allocation of forces. I have 3 groups of nearly 200 B-24s in 3 different theatres (India, SOPAC/SWPAC and Okkaido)...and i need to move all them back to Okkaido in order to start having the critical mass of 4Es needed to smash every defence of his. But, at the moment, i have 194 4Es in Okkaido theatre. Nothing more. There are 40 more waiting to be transfered from the Aleutinas but that's all for the moment.
I have 400 more 2Es in theatre...but they cannot hope to penetrate a solid and stiff CAP as we all know...

About sweep and LRCAP, i tried Nemo to LRCAP instead of sweep...many times....and i discovered that it only works when the targetted hex is no more than 5 hexes of distance. For any objective more disatant the number of LRCAP fighters becomes so low that it is worthless.
I tried to explain this problem in the past in this AAR but nobody noticed it.
Sweep remains the best solution for distant targets.
Let's take PM and Rabaul as example. 11 hexes...only the P-38s with drop tanks can cover that distance...what's the better solution providing i have 100 P-38s? Send them all on sweep, send them all on LRCAP at 100% over Rabaul, or send them half on sweep and half on escort?
I think for what concerns the 4Es safety the third option is the best one...

What do u think?

About my recon...i try to do the best i can with the limited number of recon squadrons i have at my disposal...there are so many bases that needs to be reconned and i try to select those that are reachable by my long legged fighters. I cannot do much more in that field at the moment. I cannot strip every single recon squadron i have around the map and send it to Okkaido...i'd like my forces to remain balanced...

However, I can say that i'll move those 200 4Es i have in SOPAC back to Okkaido (will take 8 days i think) and probably move more bombers from Calcutta to Okkaido (if i manage to land at Chunking...only 400 supplies at day present there). As soon as i have 4/500 4Es massed togheder i'll try to select a major target and will follow your suggestion. Aiming for the George or Frank production and see how it goes.

In the meanwhile i'll keep on pushing towards Hakkodate.

And no Hw...i'm not meta-gaming now. As Nemo pointed out there's no need anymore to do that... also because the "show" has already been given...no need to replicate

(in reply to Nemo121)

Post #: 4130

RE: SUDDENLY HAIRY - 12/6/2011 5:26:53 PM

witpqs

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

Let's take PM and Rabaul as example. 11 hexes...only the P-38s with drop tanks can cover that distance...what's the better solution providing i have 100 P-38s? Send them all on sweep, send them all on LRCAP at 100% over Rabaul, or send them half on sweep and half on escort?
I think for what concerns the 4Es safety the third option is the best one...

What do u think?

Pull them out of theatre and move them to Hokaido! (Yes, I know you were only giving an example, and my point is for emphasis that they are a suitable fighter for up north just now.

)

quote:

About my recon...i try to do the best i can with the limited number of recon squadrons i have at my disposal...there are so many bases that needs to be reconned and i try to select those that are reachable by my long legged fighters. I cannot do much more in that field at the moment. I cannot strip every single recon squadron i have around the map and send it to Okkaido...i'd like my forces to remain balanced...

Don't know if you've done this - many of your air recon units can be divided into 1/3. That gives you the ability to specifically target more locales for recon.

(in reply to GreyJoy)

Post #: 4131

RE: SUDDENLY HAIRY - 12/6/2011 6:07:36 PM

Nemo121

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

As re: sweep....

LRCAP number is proportional to the distance of the base AND the distance the fighter can fly to. That is why it is SOOOOO important to have your long-range fighters equipped with drop tanks and use them exclusively for these LRCAP missions. In those circumstances you can get very good results out to 10 hexes. YOu don't have anough of those fighters concentrated in the decisive theatre though. You should fix this.

quote:

Sweep remains the best solution for distant targets.

Perhaps. You don't have to waste your P-47s on sweeping Hakodate etc though. Also there's another argument to be had about whether or not you'll even need to sweep when you can mass 600 bombers.

With 600 4-engineds hitting a single target in a single day they'll damage and destroy so many fighters in the air and present so many targets that sheer weight of numbers will prevent the cumulative damage model from accumulating. I've written about how this interaction between fighter and bomber numbers affects 4-engined loss rates significantly before so I won't go into it again. You can read it in one of my late-war AARs if you want the background.

As re: the Rabaul example: Witpqs is right. The correct answer is those P-38s shouldn't be near Rabaul, they should be on Hokkaido.

Here's a suggestion:
Wait until you have your 600 4-engineds ( it shouldn't take you more than a week to gather them. They should be able to reach Hokkaido in 3 transits from anywhere on the map ) and a mass of P47s and P38s then pick ONE BASE to target. SWEEP the base with ALL of your P47s and P38s on the same day as you send in ALL the 4-engineds. If there are 200 fighter airframe factory points there split the bombers proportionally ( 3 bombers per fighter airframe factory point ).

Then watch what happens. When you look at your losses before you go "Oh my god I lost so many, I can't continue this" remember to factor in that this game may well go on for an additional 6 months ( it shouldn't but I think you are going to have difficulty figuring out how to finish Rader off quickly ). So, if you lose 60 bombers destroyed and 40 fighters in return for downing 20 enemy fighters you might think, "I've lost 100 planes vs 20, that's a disaster". Instead you should think.... "I've lost 100 vs 20 today BUT over the next 6 months he has lost the ability to produce ( for example ) 100 fighters per month ( if you damage 100 aircraft assembly points ). So, in total for 100 fighters and bombers I've removed 620 enemy fighters from the war over the next 6 months. WIN !!!! "

Eventually if you hit enough factories so that his total fighter production comes down from what must be about 3,000 fighters per month to something more like 1,000 fighters per month you'll begin seeing fewer fighters in the air and more scope for adding 2-engineds etc to the medium-range missions.

quote:

I think for what concerns the 4Es safety the third option is the best one...

No, the best option is to achieve concentration of force. You should read what I've written elsewhere about the interaction between bomber vs fighter ratios and the cumulative damage model of A2A warfare as it relates to high durability planes like 4-engineds. That would help you understand how to keep your 4-engineds safe.

Hakodate:
Fine, its your mistake to make. Not giving Rader an opportunity to waste ground forces and ships is a major mistake though. If you take Hokaido entirely ALL he can do with reinforcements is garrison the coast of Honshu ( whereas instead he shows every willigness to rush reinforcements north to Hokaido where you can butcher them easily ) - which you'll have to invade sooner or later. Your rush to take a meaningless base ASAP means you will be making your job in 2 to 3 months time much, much tougher. I've said it 3 times though so that's as far as I go.

quote:

I cannot strip every single recon squadron i have around the map and send it to Okkaido...i'd like my forces to remain balanced...

AN interesting quote. It starts off with "I cannot" and then ends with "I'd like". What that says is that you CAN but CHOOSE not to. Well, I suppose if you think those reconaissance planes are doing mroe important work over Calcutta than they could be doing in ending the war in 2 months over Honshu then you should keep them in over Calcutta. Obviously though if you believe the war will end quicker with them over Honshu than Calcutta then they shouldn't be in Calcutta.

Balance is something feng shui masters and scale makers need to worry about. In terms of strategy balance is just a good way to disperse your forces. Succesful forces eschew balance in favour of effectiveness.

< Message edited by Nemo121 -- 12/6/2011 6:09:59 PM >

_____________________________

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

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 4132

RE: SUDDENLY HAIRY - 12/6/2011 6:16:33 PM

witpqs

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Balance is something feng shui masters and scale makers need to worry about. In terms of strategy balance is just a good way to disperse your forces. Succesful forces eschew balance in favour of effectiveness.

GJ,

Look at it this way. What you seek is complete and irresistible UNBALANCE. You want as much of your force as possible against the enemy's vital weak point so it will finish him ASAP.

(in reply to Nemo121)

Post #: 4133

RE: SUDDENLY HAIRY - 12/6/2011 6:24:25 PM

kfsgo

Posts: 446
Joined: 9/16/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

About sweep and LRCAP, i tried Nemo to LRCAP instead of sweep...many times....and i discovered that it only works when the targetted hex is no more than 5 hexes of distance. For any objective more disatant the number of LRCAP fighters becomes so low that it is worthless.
I tried to explain this problem in the past in this AAR but nobody noticed it.
Sweep remains the best solution for distant targets.
Let's take PM and Rabaul as example. 11 hexes...only the P-38s with drop tanks can cover that distance...what's the better solution providing i have 100 P-38s? Send them all on sweep, send them all on LRCAP at 100% over Rabaul, or send them half on sweep and half on escort?
I think for what concerns the 4Es safety the third option is the best one...

I've not found (purely in sandbox test scenarios; I haven't been doing it in my ongoing game) that there are any problems with LRCAP at range per se, but you do end up with massive pilot fatigue after doing it - so it's not very 'sustainable' unless you have a lot of aircraft in reserve...and if you do, you might have better results by just committing them all to regular sweeps at once. That fatigue also seems to accumulate by the time they arrive over their target (as opposed to after they land), so you get substantially higher ops losses among LRCAP fighters.

There is another point, which is that LRCAP fighters seem to be less 'involved' in fights over the target; my assumption is that the game quite often considers them to have been 'loitering' over the target for a while before the sweeping fighters arrive (which begins the actual engagement) and so they end up leaving early. It's not something you can put a definite number on, but I'd say that aircraft losses tend to be substantially lower on both ends - at a very rough estimate, by 50% when 50% of fighters on offense are on LRCAP & etc. Similarly, while dispersed sweeps tend to shoot down less aircraft relative to losses than concentrated sweeps, the total losses tend to be higher - I guess more combat 'events' bringing up more enemy reserves - and they don't always do badly, of course. So, as far as using LRCAP in combination with sweeps - I guess what you should figure out is whether you want to trade aircraft at a favourable rate or whether you want to break down resistance at a point, even if it's just for a day. I mean, if that's all it takes...

None of this necessarily applies to using LRCAP as a method of bomber escort, which I haven't looked into in any real way & so can't comment on.

Do you think you could provide us with a brief summary of what fighter units you have on Hokkaido? Say, X number of Y aircraft in Z squadrons?

e: that'll teach me to write a post and run a sandbox scenario at the same time...can't disagree with any of that.

< Message edited by kfsgo -- 12/6/2011 6:31:18 PM >

(in reply to GreyJoy)

Post #: 4134

RE: SUDDENLY HAIRY - 12/6/2011 7:04:27 PM

Nemo121

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

quote:

If its a fair fight, you've done something wrong.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to kfsgo)

Post #: 4135

RE: SUDDENLY HAIRY - 12/6/2011 7:46:17 PM

crsutton

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

I almost never sweep as the Allies. Even in 44 my pilot and air frame pools can't handle the losses. I find it amazing that in mid 44 I am still carefully counting my losses and watching my pools, but there you have it....it can't be helped. I use LRCAP to protect my bombers. Much more cost effective. With their much larger sized air units, sweeping benefits the Japanese player more. (I find this odd as you would expect the opposite from radioless planes). One Japanese fighter unit is 90 freaking planes...

For the life of me, I can't figure out why they designed the game so that Allies can't combine squadrons into a much larger group. It would go a long way towards solving the sweep coordination problem for the Allies. Sigh...it is out cross to bear...

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Nemo121)

Post #: 4136

RE: SUDDENLY HAIRY - 12/6/2011 8:09:27 PM

tkbomber7285

Posts: 1
Joined: 12/6/2011
Status: offline

Having read this entire thread, I have to say that I feel that Rader is still ahead in this game. That sounds crazy given GreyJoy's offensive in northern Japan, but the thing is that Rader has way more experience in the game then GreyJoy does. Not sure how often he has faced a player who made the move that GreyJoy did, probably never admittedly, but from what I've read of Rader's games if anyone has the strategy to take back Hokkaido it is him. This war is about to swing again into Rader's favor, and there is no way a second offensive like this will be allowed to happen.

(in reply to crsutton)

Post #: 4137

RE: SUDDENLY HAIRY - 12/6/2011 8:17:44 PM

USSAmerica

Posts: 18715
Joined: 10/28/2002
From: Graham, NC, USA
Status: offline

Oh, ok.

_____________________________

Mike

"Good times will set you free" - Jimmy Buffett

"They need more rum punch" - Me

Artwork by The Amazing Dixie

(in reply to tkbomber7285)

Post #: 4138

RE: SUDDENLY HAIRY - 12/6/2011 9:11:57 PM

pat.casey

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: tkbomber7285

Having read this entire thread, I have to say that I feel that Rader is still ahead in this game. That sounds crazy given GreyJoy's offensive in northern Japan, but the thing is that Rader has way more experience in the game then GreyJoy does. Not sure how often he has faced a player who made the move that GreyJoy did, probably never admittedly, but from what I've read of Rader's games if anyone has the strategy to take back Hokkaido it is him. This war is about to swing again into Rader's favor, and there is no way a second offensive like this will be allowed to happen.

I think Greyjoy could clearly make a mistake here, but he'd have to make some seriously bad decisions to lose Hokaido at this point. Barring running out of supplies, I'm not sure the entire Honshu garrison could push him out of Hokaido at this point given the firepower of late war allied LCUs.

The open question though is whether Greyjoy breaks Japan economically and gets a win, or plays for a draw and turns an operational victory into a stalemate :)

(in reply to tkbomber7285)

Post #: 4139

RE: SUDDENLY HAIRY - 12/6/2011 9:34:52 PM

modrow

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

GreyJoy,

quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy
And no Hw...i'm not meta-gaming now. As Nemo pointed out there's no need anymore to do that... also because the "show" has already been given...no need to replicate

Here's a quote for you from Col. Glantz: "On this intense and fluid battlefield, advantage will go to the force that can shift and concentrate resources rapidly and secretly. Deception and surprise will condition success, which can only be achieved by an opportunistic and swift advance."

Just one more question before I revert back to read only mode: What could make you start meta-gaming again?

Hartwig

(in reply to GreyJoy)

Post #: 4140