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: The armchair strategists club (formerly Temptations) – Hartwig (A) vs. Aztez (J), no Aztez

 
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: The armchair strategists club (formerly Temptations) – Hartwig (A) vs. Aztez (J), no Aztez Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: The armchair strategists club (formerly Temptations... - 8/11/2011 4:44:05 PM   
Wirraway_Ace


Posts: 1400
Joined: 10/8/2007
From: Austin / Brisbane
Status: offline 		As Nemo’s construct emphasizes, national policy objectives drive military strategy. But these policy objectives ideally also define what it means to win. Did you win if you defeated your enemy, razed his cities and occupied his territory but lost 10% of your population in combat or burdened two generations with heavy debt?

To that end, hartwig.modrow, your current strategy looks more like a national policy objective without a clear definition of what success really looks like. You can imagine a number of different scenarios for the political situation in which you find yourself within the game as the leader of a multitude of nations, but your policy objective might be edited thus to help guide the development of military strategy:
“To ensure that Japan will not remain a menace to world peace and to turn Japan into a peaceful nation beneficial to our policy at the lowest cost in lives of our population. “

Alternatively, “To ensure that Japan will not remain a menace to world peace and to turn Japan into a peaceful nation beneficial to our policy as quickly as possible at any cost in order to preclude other Allied nations from having time to establish hegemony over any of Japan’s territories”

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)
Post #: 31
Marriage and other festivities... - 8/16/2011 10:49:35 PM   
modrow

 

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

I have to apologize for my absence from our little club for the last few days. A cousin of my wife got married last weekend, so we were on the move and once again I could not log in.

The party was - interesting to say the least. Beautifully located in a small moated castle some 30 miles from Hannover, Germany. Lots of juicy insights into the mechanics of my wife's family, which I always enjoy. The father of the bride managed to make a fool of himself by philosophizing that each marriage was an expedition and he wished the new couple many expeditions, which remained remarkably unnoticed amongst many of the guests. A "black tie optional" dress code imposed on the guests which was boycotted full of joy by most of the bride's (my wife's cousin's) family and complied with full of joy by most of the grooms family and friends. Ah, so much fun in family festivities.

Anyway, I get carried away by sweet memories and deviate from both the game and our enjoyable discussions.

As a matter of fact, the game went on well synchronized - I sent the turn to aztez on Thursday before I started my travel to the marriage, he sent it back on Sunday evening after I had returned and I sent back the May 11 turn today. So there are two turns of two days each to comment on, which are still sort of slow but slowly begin to take shape.

First, some news on sub wars: Aztez positioned subs well on standard routes and managed to sink a TK and damage another one in the Indian Ocean on May 7th. In return, O19 sank an xAK on May 9th. Oh, and a RO sub sailed onto a mine at Chittagong

From the China theatre: On May 7, we took Paotow in China (Ichang was previously taken after the Japanese left the city). Also, there was action at 84,55 on May 7th and 8th in which the Chinese were not instantaneously wiped out in spite of being in the open:

Ground combat at 84,55

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 5550 troops, 38 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 192

Defending force 9808 troops, 97 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 316

Japanese adjusted assault: 140

Allied adjusted defense: 140

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: morale(-), experience(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
617 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 35 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 18 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled


Allied ground losses:
198 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 20 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 21 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

And on day 2:

Ground combat at 84,55

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 5123 troops, 38 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 157

Defending force 9587 troops, 97 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 296

Japanese adjusted assault: 129

Allied adjusted defense: 100

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: morale(-), experience(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
40 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 8 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Allied ground losses:
152 casualties reported
Squads: 2 destroyed, 25 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 35 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 1 disabled

For those who want to know - air support was used both days by my opponent, but more successfully on day 2.

On the next day, both sides sent their air force in, which was more successful for the Alliedm but no one attacked on the ground.

Other than that, I bombed Mytkina and bombarded Tarawa and Shortlands as psychological attacks to which aztez - correctly - did not respond. He, in return, dropped forces at Tulagi, which will fall next turn.

Ok, that's about all the action I can report for now. As it is getting late, I'll finish my drink and return tomorrow to pick up the interesting discussion on national goals and what may be derived from them. For now, thanks for your interest and good night.

Thank you for your interest.

Hartwig

< Message edited by hartwig.modrow -- 8/16/2011 10:53:33 PM >

(in reply to Wirraway_Ace)
Post #: 32
RE: Marriage and other festivities... - 8/17/2011 8:01:44 PM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline 		Hmn, some young devil, I estimate aged about 57 years old, just woke me up from my slumber. He had the gall to ask out aloud for the sommelier. No manners, doesn't he realise that one merely raises one's eyebrow to attract the attention of the staff.

Anyway, a few words whilst the sommelier is fetching the bottle.

One needs to be aware that real world strategy and game strategy is not the same thing. the same definition for one will not be adequate for the other. Partly this because a geopolitical/military game is always an abstraction of the real world. In a game, one simply does not have available all the tools (tactics) available in real life. The pressures of the real world are also not present in a game.

The bottom line is that in a game, there really is only one ultimate objective, and that is to win. In a game, you don't have to win 100% of every encounter to achieve the only valid objective. In a home and away football cup tie, in the second match of the tie, the away team may have the advantage of knowing they will progress to the next round even if they lose the away match provided they score an away goal.

Now hartwig is determining an appropriate strategy for this specific AE match. His initial thought was to borrow from real geopolitical/military world praxis. My simpler definition is tailored for playing a game. To introduce into a game the idea of national goals is not IMHO, all that useful. In the real world, remember there we have the full box of ideas to work with, national goals need not be about winning at all. Finland in 1939 knew it would lose, but that if it resisted it might lose less than if it just caved in to Soviet demands. Nations which are confronted with internal revolts know that what matters ultimately is reconciling the disaffected population to the state. Coalition leaders are often faced with the situation that maintaining either the coalition together or their leadership is far more important than "winning".

Ah, I see the sommelier approaching with that 1996 Pol Roger.

Alfred

(in reply to modrow)
Post #: 33
RE: Marriage and other festivities... - 8/17/2011 10:04:16 PM   
PaxMondo


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

ORIGINAL: Alfred

One needs to be aware that real world strategy and game strategy is not the same thing. Alfred

+1

Thank you.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 34
RE: Marriage and other festivities... - 8/18/2011 3:58:24 AM   
Cap Mandrake


Posts: 23184
Joined: 11/15/2002
From: Southern California
Status: offline
quote:

The father of the bride managed to make a fool of himself by philosophizing that each marriage was an expedition and he wished the new couple many expeditions, which remained remarkably unnoticed amongst many of the guests.


Maybe he just watched too many specials on Shackleton and got carried away. It does seem he was advising his daughter to sleep around.

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 35
RE: Marriage and other festivities... - 8/18/2011 2:20:38 PM   
Wirraway_Ace


Posts: 1400
Joined: 10/8/2007
From: Austin / Brisbane
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

One needs to be aware that real world strategy and game strategy is not the same thing. the same definition for one will not be adequate for the other. Partly this because a geopolitical/military game is always an abstraction of the real world. In a game, one simply does not have available all the tools (tactics) available in real life. The pressures of the real world are also not present in a game.

The bottom line is that in a game, there really is only one ultimate objective, and that is to win. In a game, you don't have to win 100% of every encounter to achieve the only valid objective. In a home and away football cup tie, in the second match of the tie, the away team may have the advantage of knowing they will progress to the next round even if they lose the away match provided they score an away goal.

Now hartwig is determining an appropriate strategy for this specific AE match. His initial thought was to borrow from real geopolitical/military world praxis. My simpler definition is tailored for playing a game. To introduce into a game the idea of national goals is not IMHO, all that useful. In the real world, remember there we have the full box of ideas to work with, national goals need not be about winning at all. Finland in 1939 knew it would lose, but that if it resisted it might lose less than if it just caved in to Soviet demands. Nations which are confronted with internal revolts know that what matters ultimately is reconciling the disaffected population to the state. Coalition leaders are often faced with the situation that maintaining either the coalition together or their leadership is far more important than "winning".

Alfred

To me, this is a matter of taste. When playing the Allies, except against a very experienced opponent in Scenario 2, I find I need to borrow from real geopolitics of the time to make it truly interesting. Winning as the Allies is inevitable with competent play. It is how you win that makes it interesting.

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 36
Back for another drink... - 8/18/2011 11:28:00 PM   
modrow

 

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

It’s about time I add some comments to the many interesting posts that have been added to this thread in the last few days.

First, @ Nemo121 re. Versailles as national goal: I really tried to reconciliate my point of view with what you say, but fail. There are several reasons for that. First of all, IMHO there was not really a joint national goal between the UK and France (if you want to read an extreme presentation, have a look at Neal Ferguson’s “The Pity of war”), thus the treaty is a result of an attempt to realize competing national goals of several nations by the respective nation’s representatives. The French wanted supremacy on the continent (there is a continuous line at least since Bonaparte, which was continued by Napoleon IIIrd, that is characterized by hostility against the other major powers, (Russia in the Crimean war, then Franco-Austrian war, then Prussia, where Napoleon III blundered). After the setback of 1871, the basic concept was still hostility against the major power – then Germany, with a bit of fear of German power added.

Also, a treaty is a legal act, whereas a goal is a concept or an idea. Consequently, the treaty may serve as a tool or an attempt to realize a given national goal, but not as the goal per se. The outcome may be quite different, as history showed – in effect, Versailles was not beneficial for the French national goals, thus it cannot serve as the national goal, but is an attempt to realize that goal as part of executing a dual strategy of destruction of both military and economic power. Last not least it is this executional aspect of a peace treaty that causes my qualms to assign it to either national goal or strategy. It is a real world implementation we are facing, a battlefield on which the guns of diplomacy are blazing.

Next, @ Wirraway_ace’s suggestion to define the conditions under which the realization of a given aim is desirable or not as part of the national goal: I agree that such a definition is helpful for the development (actually I would rather say the selection) of a military strategy, but I would not interpret it as part of the goal but rather as a definition of the price you have to pay if you want to achieve the goal in a given way. The problem is that by adding this aspect to the national goal, you will rule out alternatives by definition, whereas I think all possibilities should be considered and then the one with the lowest “price” that still serves the purpose can be chosen.

Alfred, as usual, comes up with an analysis that really identifies the core of the problem. Borrowing from the real world practice may in fact not be the best approach. There is, however, the inherent problem that “winning” may mean a lot of things and is, as Alfred mentions correctly, not just limited to a single aspect, like winning a military encounter. As he illustrated adroitly, losing a military encounter can lead to a “win”-situation in real life.

But, as Wirraway ace commented correctly, what means “winning” in a game like this? I did win my short WitP match against Nemo121 that I picked up after 2nd ACR was unable to continue. He wiped the floor (or the map) with me, but I think I learned something, thus I did win. Even a lot, so it was a legendary victory. In contrast, I think he did not learn much from playing against me, so he definitely lost.

Wirraway ace wins if he uses an aspect of geopolitics of the time to add some difficulty. Thus, perhaps in a game like this the personal goal replaces the national goal and determines the strategy. Which would also explain why I did not feel as much of a problem to derive my strategy from the “national goal” I postulated: In reality, this chosen national goal may be a reflection of my personal goal, which in turn allows to work with it.

Thanks for every input posted so far to foster to this stimulating discussion and your interest. I really do like our club even if occasionally, like tonight, there would have been action to report from the PBEM game, which now has to wait till next time I find a couple of minutes to drop in at the club.

Hartwig



< Message edited by hartwig.modrow -- 8/18/2011 11:31:22 PM >

(in reply to Wirraway_Ace)
Post #: 37
Axtion summary May 09 - 16 1942 - 8/21/2011 10:05:39 PM   
modrow

 

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

As this is still the “After action report” section, I would like to share a bit of the action. The last days I had commented on was May7/8, today I sent back the turn that will uncover the events on May 17/18 1942, so there is a bit of action to report in spite of the fact that we are still both mostly preparing our operations.


Sub wars:

Both of us start have more and more subs arrive at locations where we expect enemy shipping:

May 09:
Japanese Ships
xAK Maya Maru, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
Allied Ships
SS O19

May 11:
Japanese Ships
SS I-28
Allied Ships
xAK Mormacland, Shell hits 1, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage

May 12:Japanese Ships
SS I-28
Allied Ships
xAK San Angelo, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage

May 13:
Japanese Ships
TK Nisshin Maru #2
PB Keiko Maru
PB Kyo Maru #8
PB Kiso Maru

Allied Ships
SS Pike

SS Pike launches 4 torpedoes at TK Nisshin Maru #2

May 14:
Japanese Ships
SS I-22

Allied Ships
xAK Maetsuycker

SS I-22 launches 2 torpedoes at xAK Maetsuycker

Japanese Ships
xAK Hokkai Maru, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
PB Sento Maru

Allied Ships
SS S-37, hits 5

May 15.
Japanese Ships
CM Hatsutaka

Allied Ships
SS Pike

SS Pike launches 4 torpedoes at CM Hatsutaka

Japanese Ships
SS I-30

Allied Ships
xAK George Livanos

xAK George Livanos is sighted by SS I-30
SS I-30 launches 2 torpedoes

Japanese Ships
SS I-172

Allied Ships
xAK Admiral Williams, Torpedo hits 1, heavy damage

xAK Admiral Williams is sighted by SS I-172
SS I-172 launches 2 torpedoes

Japanese Ships
SS I-30

Allied Ships
xAK George Livanos, Shell hits 1, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage

May 16:

Japanese Ships
SS I-171, hits 4

Allied Ships
DD Monaghan

Japanese Ships
PB Saiko Maru
xAP Huso Maru
PB Santos Maru

Allied Ships
SS O21

SS O21 launches 2 torpedoes at PB Saiko Maru


China:

Here, the major events are Japanese attempts to take the heroically defended Chuhsien:

May 13:

Ground combat at Chuhsien (88,56)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 22659 troops, 192 guns, 73 vehicles, Assault Value = 811

Defending force 17948 troops, 81 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 595

Japanese engineers reduce fortifications to 0

Japanese adjusted assault: 386

Allied adjusted defense: 721

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 2 (fort level 0)

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), preparation(-), experience(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
1110 casualties reported
Squads: 2 destroyed, 47 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 35 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 5 disabled


Allied ground losses:
262 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 54 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 34 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled


Assaulting units:
2nd Ind.Mixed Regiment
17th Division
22nd/A Division
22nd/B Division

Defending units:
88th Chinese Corps
100th Chinese Corps
3rd War Area
25th Group Army
14th Chinese Base Force

May 15:

Ground combat at Chuhsien (88,56)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 21706 troops, 192 guns, 73 vehicles, Assault Value = 737

Defending force 17502 troops, 81 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 553

Japanese adjusted assault: 510

Allied adjusted defense: 697

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 2 (fort level 1)

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), leaders(+), preparation(-), experience(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
2763 casualties reported
Squads: 4 destroyed, 173 disabled
Non Combat: 2 destroyed, 136 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 10 disabled
Vehicles lost 5 (1 destroyed, 4 disabled)


Allied ground losses:
184 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 25 disabled
Non Combat: 3 destroyed, 10 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled


Assaulting units:
22nd/A Division
2nd Ind.Mixed Regiment
17th Division
22nd/B Division

Defending units:
88th Chinese Corps
100th Chinese Corps
3rd War Area
25th Group Army
14th Chinese Base Force


Southern pacific:

As expected, Tulagi was taken by the Japanese (2nd JNAF AF unit) – but at a price. I had two guesses free, the second one was right…

May 11, 1942:
Night Time Surface Combat, near Tulagi

Japanese Ships
PB Keijo Maru, Shell hits 15, and is sunk
PB Takunan Maru #5, Shell hits 2, and is sunk
xAK Eizan Maru, Shell hits 36, and is sunk
xAK Kotobuki Maru #5, Shell hits 6, and is sunk

Allied Ships
CA Canberra
DD Whipple

Also, my opponent started to sweep PM. Because that did not suit my purpose, I had unescorted Marauders attacking Lae two turns in a row, which promptly switched the Zero’s attention to LRCAP over that base in the second turn (at a cost of 4 Marauders, which I was willing to pay) .

Ok, these are the bits of info on the action that I consider to be worth reporting. If there are any questions, just ask.

As always, thanks for your interest

Hartwig




(in reply to modrow)
Post #: 38
RE: Axtion summary May 09 - 16 1942 - 8/21/2011 11:27:54 PM   
Ketza


Posts: 2227
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Columbia, Maryland
Status: offline
quote:

Japanese Ships
PB Keijo Maru, Shell hits 15, and is sunk
PB Takunan Maru #5, Shell hits 2, and is sunk
xAK Eizan Maru, Shell hits 36, and is sunk
xAK Kotobuki Maru #5, Shell hits 6, and is sunk

Allied Ships
CA Canberra
DD Whipple


You and those little TFs cause people to get headaches.

Glad to see you still at it

(in reply to modrow)
Post #: 39
Strategy... or not ? - 8/24/2011 7:53:59 PM   
modrow

 

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

While waiting for the next turn, I want to return to the presentation of my strategic approach but more briefly than I intended originally. Feel free to ask if you want me to post some more details.

Without wanting to stir up the appropriateness of national goals from real life debate again, for me the national goal described implied right from the start the need to invade (and thus was able to serve me as a basis for the development of a strategic approach). IMHO reeducation of a population is the only effective way to change the way of thinking of a nation and break a long-time military tradition, and the only way to achieve thorough reeducation is occupation. In lieu of possibilities to negotiate a peace including an occupation in game, the only way to occupy appears to be an invasion (note that I hinted at that in the original national goal post already), which in turn means that the Japanese war machine must be disabled.

As Alfred pointed out previously, in general this may be done in an indirect way via destruction of the economical capacities needed to support the forces or in a direct way based on destruction of the forces itself. However, my interpretation of the data presented via pictures from WitP Tracker in a previous post is that in this scenario the first may be more difficult than usual, whereas the second may be more easy than usual.

I think that the Japanese economy may be more resilient in this scenario than in the standard GC game. Usually, they have an oil and resource, supply and fuel nest egg that is invested to acquire the DEI in a damaged state, which then supports further operations and allows Japan to build up a storage for the bad times to come. Now, they have said nest egg and the DEI in an undamaged state.

In addition, I believe that the notably increased HI surplus in the May 42 campaign may allow for accumulation of a store of HI points as well, especially as for some time to come HI usage will not be as high as it would be in a GC1 game at this point of time due to the fact that expansions of HI consuming assets has not really occurred so far. Consequently, I assume that in 1944/1945 the reserve of HI points, oil and resources will be higher in this scenario than in the standard game, making the effective reduction of Japan’s industrial capacities more difficult.

At the same time, I believe that at least some of the facts that may lead to a more resilient economic situation simultaneously lead to a situation in which Japan can absorb losses worse. The availability of vehicle and armament points is reduced, production numbers of planes are lower than in most GC1 campaigns at this point of time, and the advancement of the arrival of plane types by concerted R&D activities will be much less significant. This caused me to ask myself whether a strategy based on destruction of the enemy armed forces in combat may be more promising.

Now there is one thing I have to admit as a weakness of mine in front of the entire club membership: I have no illusions about my ability to implement actions on the map. I do not believe that my AE-skills are sufficient to make me a good player at this point of time. Therefore, I believe that I need to run a simple approach with little finesse required, which I am most likely to manage to implement. Outmaneuvering the enemy in such a way that he ends up with most of his assets at the wrong end of the map or that I can be sure I will be able to destroy him peacemeal may be beyond what I can realize.

But I believe that attrition is a much more basic (though much less elegant) approach. I can let the enemy gain victories as long as I make sure that they are phyrric. Will my experience be sufficient to make sure I extract a high price from the enemy? Well, the game will show it. I hope so.

Of course, the additional requirement is that there are the tools available to implement a direct destruction strategy implemented by staging operations which will atrite the enemy from a point of time close to the beginning of the game. At first, I actually did have some doubts about that. As stated previously, a problem of many Allied units at the start of the May 42 scenario is the fact that upgrades have not happened and experience has not been improved.

As an additional condition, the “counter-attrition” experienced by the Allied troops should preferably affect units whose replacement rates are sufficiently high to be able to bring them back to strength in a reasonable time scale, however if such units have too low experience and outdated equipment it is unlikely that they will be able to deal sufficient damage to the enemy to achieve the desired effect. It is quite instructive to analyze how equipment influences the losses dealt - to me, it looks like it really really does, so do take a look at the statistics of the devices of different units and do optimize your upgrades.

There are, however, a number of units available scattered over the map that qualify for that purpose. They will be concentrated as the previously mentioned imperial shock army and put to use. Therefore I guess I can manage to start the desired process of attrition relatively early in the game after all.

Ok, that’s a rough sketch of the strategic approach I plan to follow. Feel free to rip it apart, I can only learn from that!

As always, thanks for your interest

Hartwig


(in reply to modrow)
Post #: 40
RE: Strategy... or not ? - 8/24/2011 8:30:17 PM   
Cap Mandrake


Posts: 23184
Joined: 11/15/2002
From: Southern California
Status: offline 		OK...I will ask it if nobody else will. Why did the Temptations break up? I'm sure others want to know as well.



By the way, is the is one of those amped-up Japanese scenarios? Someone pointed out to me that in scenario 2, for example, one can't count on Allied fighter production (or even qualtiy) and pilot training to outstrip Japanese production early on. This means (I am told) that one can't just trade fighters 1:1. We are finding this to be true with the proliferation of Tojos in late Summer of 42.

(in reply to modrow)
Post #: 41
RE: Strategy... or not ? - 8/24/2011 8:40:33 PM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: hartwig.modrow

... Now there is one thing I have to admit as a weakness of mine in front of the entire club membership ...

Hartwig




You don't drink either cognac or rum?

You have a weakness for drinking vodka, lime and soda?

Your club tab is in the black?

You surrepticiously read Der Spiegel whilst pretending to read the London Times?

You do understand that these are all heinous crimes and not worthy of a gentleman occupying one of the club's plush red leather chesterfields.

Alfred

(in reply to modrow)
Post #: 42
RE: Strategy... or not ? - 8/24/2011 9:54:28 PM   
modrow

 

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

You don't drink either cognac or rum?

You have a weakness for drinking vodka, lime and soda?

Your club tab is in the black?

You surrepticiously read Der Spiegel whilst pretending to read the London Times?

You do understand that these are all heinous crimes and not worthy of a gentleman occupying one of the club's plush red leather chesterfields.

Alfred


no, nothing as juicy as that. Just the implementation problems. Of course, one might ask the question whether one could argue that those are a requirement for membership in an armchair strategist club .

Hartwig

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 43
RE: Strategy... or not ? - 8/24/2011 10:23:40 PM   
modrow

 

Posts: 1100
Joined: 8/27/2006
Status: offline 		Cap'n,

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake
OK...I will ask it if nobody else will. Why did the Temptations break up? I'm sure others want to know as well.


Oh, I am sure the temptations are still around. I just could not resist the club atmosphere Alfred created. On the other hand, I am told there are clubs that are full of temptations as well.

quote:


By the way, is the is one of those amped-up Japanese scenarios? Someone pointed out to me that in scenario 2, for example, one can't count on Allied fighter production (or even qualtiy) and pilot training to outstrip Japanese production early on. This means (I am told) that one can't just trade fighters 1:1. We are finding this to be true with the proliferation of Tojos in late Summer of 42.


I *think* it is not, but then again I am not an expert on the Japanese economy.

The way I interprete the available information (see tracker data in posts 9 an 10), Japan's factories of May 1942 are essentially those of December 1941. To provide some more detail, I will attach the Japaneses plane production numbers at the beginning of this
scenario according to the tracker, ordered by number of planes in the pool. For a GC1 May 1942 situation, this plane production does not really seem to be adequate, and I believe that this actually improves my starting situation with respect to the situation in the air notably. But maybe I'm wrong. Specifically, this will be the case if the necessary upgrades and expansions of factories can take effect very quickly.

Hartwig








Attachment (1)

< Message edited by hartwig.modrow -- 8/24/2011 10:24:13 PM >

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)
Post #: 44
Skills - 8/28/2011 9:20:52 PM   
modrow

 

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

Still no turn… for an entire week now, but my opponent just informed me he was away for a few days. I really start to feel the symptoms of WitP-withdrawal...

Still, maybe this presents an opportunity to settle down in a comfortable chair of the club for a drink. And read the London Times. I really need to relax. Here's why_

The in-laws had been visiting at our new house for the last few days, and my father in law showed his proficiency as a craftsman. One day, he decided a nail should be cut off a small wooden gate with an angle grater while I was at work. He did cut the nail, but the gate looks like… well, maybe the sculpture of a garden gate created by a modern artist. A very modern artist. Although on the other hand I think cubism is no longer really modern…

Oh well, good to have our club as a place to retreat. Even though a bit of thrilling gaming would be nice as well. A game of whist, anyone ?

As always, thanks for your interest

Hartwig


< Message edited by hartwig.modrow -- 8/28/2011 9:22:20 PM >

(in reply to modrow)
Post #: 45
RE: The armchair strategists club (formerly Temptations... - 8/28/2011 9:39:15 PM   
Cap Mandrake


Posts: 23184
Joined: 11/15/2002
From: Southern California
Status: offline 		Sir;

An occasion such as this is precisely why they sell that wonderful nectar of the Juniper berry in those distinctive aqua-blue bottles.


Besides, you could easily recoup your loss if you sell the property...provided you can convince the listing agent the gate is an original Jaques Braque. In the meantime you had best hide the power tools.

(in reply to Wirraway_Ace)
Post #: 46
Operational musings - 8/29/2011 10:25:41 AM   
modrow

 

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

Next on the list are a few operational ideas. As mentioned above, I would like to come to grips with the enemy sooner rather than later at places where I can create favorable conditions. Note that the latter is an important restriction. Even though I think this is not a “steroids” scenario, as Cap Mandrake pointed out correctly, one has to keep an eye on available assets and play in a disciplined way. Sometimes, you just have to sit back and accept being bombed. If you do that, at the same time you will gain assets that can be used to achieve local superiority elsewhere.

I do not intend to attempt attrition by simply throwing units at the enemy and putting up resistance everywhere just to wear him down. On the contrary, I will even try to select the units that will suffer in such a way that I use the ones with adequate replacement rates. AIF squads are, e.g., quite difficult to replace right now, thus I will try to avoid using them right now.

If you look at the map of the May 1942 scenario, it is evident that at the beginning of the game the respective forces are quite disentangled. Of course, there is China, but China may be an even more difficult theatre for the Allied than usual, because in GC1 and/or GC2 it is possible to provide China with an injection of additional supplies, which is not possible in this scenario, which essentially starts with the December 41 starting conditions with a transferred timeline. My take on this situation is that a simple “running to the woods” strategy is more problematic than usual, because it robs the Chinese quickly of resources that may be more important than usual. I’ll try to impede the flow of supplies to Japanese troops using forward deployed units and maybe attempt to stir up some trouble in the south eastern parts of China while fallback positions are created elsewhere. But currently I do not see much of a chance to really increase these operations to a significant level due to supply shortage.

One front on which I would like to see some heating up occurring is the India-Burma border region. Favorable conditions would mean an air war over my bases (of which I have plenty, mostly with railway connection), which is one of the reasons why I have started agitating attacks (edited to avoid **** in the post) the Japanese bases in Northern Burma. I would also welcome an invasion at Chittagong or Diamond Harbor and will try to make sure that such an operation appears to be worth conducting. Even if this should not occur, I believe that corresponding actions will be beneficial for a potential later Allied offensive into Burma.

More later… as always, thanks for your interest, and feel free to comment.

Hartwig



< Message edited by hartwig.modrow -- 8/29/2011 10:30:14 AM >

(in reply to modrow)
Post #: 47
eye-poking - 8/31/2011 2:01:09 PM   
modrow

 

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

a very brief update - as you have been waiting for action reports for almost as long as I have been waiting for the turn to come, I haste to share the two major events (from my perspecitve) - actually, almost the only events, there was not even a single sub attack - with you:

a) Eye-peekíng

SigInt and Combat event reports had shown indications that the enemy had activated Shortlands as a base for reconning. I think it really is bad manners to peep into my backyard, thus I sent in a bombardment TF which managed to score a hit on an AV in port (reported as causing heavy engine damage) and a couple of hits at the base.

Night Naval bombardment of Shortlands at 109,131

Japanese Ships
AV Sanuki Maru, Shell hits 1

Allied Ships
CA Australia
DD Stuart

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



Port hits 17
Port supply hits 1


b) Air war in Burma

As mentioned previously in the above operational musings, I would like some more action in Burma, thus I sent a sweep from Chittagong to Magwe to stress that Chittagong is a PITA.

Heavy A2A battles occurred (there were 37 Oscars in the air when the first segment of planes arrived, thus it looks like my refinery raid did cause him to react); over course of 2 days it seems like the enemy lost 18 fighters to 11 of ours.

Let's see what response we get...

Thanks for your interest

Hartwig

(in reply to modrow)
Post #: 48
Pangs of conscience - 8/31/2011 10:19:53 PM   
modrow

 

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


I'm really curious how she will respond

Hartwig

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by hartwig.modrow -- 8/31/2011 10:20:55 PM >

(in reply to modrow)
Post #: 49
Device / upgrade questions - 9/3/2011 9:33:14 AM   
modrow

 

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

as I am waiting for the response to the turn I sent on Thursday afternoon, I tried to optimize my device-upgrading schedule yesterday. By now, there are almost no upgrades to Indian Inf42 squads left to be done and we are on a good way to change CMF militia to CMF inf.

So far so good, but yesterday I noticed that I have 60pdr guns sitting in the pool, so I tried to find out using the splendid WitP tracker how those can be used (it's not an upgrade for the 25 pdr) - and failed.

Can anyone help?

A thing that does not seem to work as expected (I was aware of related problems but I thought they were fixed - but note that we use the last official patch and not a beta) is the armor upgrade. I had expected that if I have a heavy improvised armored fighting vehicle that may upgrade via Matilda II to the Lee/Grant and don't have enough latest generation tanks in the pool, at least the upgrade to Matilda II can occur - but it seems like this is not the case . Or am I just too unpatient? Any comments ?

Thank you in advance

Hartwig

(in reply to modrow)
Post #: 50
Acts of boredom - 9/4/2011 9:01:02 AM   
modrow

 

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

I hang out at the club on this morning,
for a turn in my inbox I’m yearning,
back on Thursday I sent,
now my patience is spent,
my desire to play is so burning.

Hartwig

(in reply to modrow)
Post #: 51
RE: Acts of boredom - 9/4/2011 3:44:01 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline 		As regards the burning; Are you sure that isn't cystitis?

_____________________________

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

(in reply to modrow)
Post #: 52
RE: Acts of boredom - 9/4/2011 5:17:26 PM   
modrow

 

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

you can see how desperate I am from the fact that I pick up every straw for entertainment.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

As regards the burning; Are you sure that isn't cystitis?


How could I possibly be sure? Even if one would assume that a burning desire to play is not one of symptoms of the hitherto known forms of cystitis, maybe it is a symptom of a new, hitherto unknown type of cystitis, which may also not show any indication of red or white blood cells and bacteria.

But I am pretty optimistic that I can accept the remaining element of risk if I assume the burning is not related to cystitis.

Hartwig

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 53
brief briefing - 9/6/2011 3:44:03 PM   
modrow

 

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

Relax – for now, no limerick, no discussion of the possibility to be sure of something, not even a letter to Ms Manners this post. Though I cannot promise this is going to stay that way for long - the turn I received on Sunday evening has been answered some time ago

Instead, a very brief report on last turn’s action (of which there was extremely little, just two successful Japanese sub attacks on peaceful merchant shipping near Brisbane and some inconclusive air battles in Burma and China (with hardly any losses on both sides) and some reports from different theatres:

There are increasing indicators that my opponent is concentrating the combat troops that start in Burma somewhere, there are troops marching south (map direction) from Akyab and west from Ledo. I will try to exploit that – as you know, I am interested in making a Chittagong invasion look like a good idea. Interestingly, so far I haven’t seen any indicators of an increasing number of ships in Rangoon, thus maybe they will be shipped from Singapore.

In China, a Japanese 19 unit stack has been formed and awaits deployment. If an enemy LCU on a road means problems for supplies getting through, though, this stack may not remain well supplied for long (though it is probably supplied by supply available in the cities in the region for the time being. Southern China is looking quite stable for now, but aztez apparently tries to create a second stack, most likely at Canton.

I am a little bit surprised about the seeming lack of pressure on PM and in the Solomons. On the other hand, it may take some time for the Japanese player to get his assets into position.

That’s all I want to say right now.

As always, thanks for your interest, and feel free to comment.

Hartwig


(in reply to modrow)
Post #: 54
RE: brief briefing - 9/11/2011 10:48:59 AM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: hartwig.modrow

Gentlemen,

Relax – for now, no limerick, no discussion of the possibility to be sure of something, not even a letter to Ms Manners this post. Though I cannot promise this is going to stay that way for long - the turn I received on Sunday evening has been answered some time ago



Oh come on. I think we all know which you would rather do, a limerick or mowing the lawn. Even a letter to Ms Manners would be preferable.

If none of the above appeals, how about doing the Times crossword puzzle. That is a very popular activity at the club. I' certain the denizens of the club would be quite forthcoming in assisting you on the crossword.

Alfred

(in reply to modrow)
Post #: 55
No escape from gardening... - 9/11/2011 11:35:44 AM   
modrow

 

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

Oh come on. I think we all know which you would rather do, a limerick or mowing the lawn. Even a letter to Ms Manners would be preferable.

If none of the above appeals, how about doing the Times crossword puzzle. That is a very popular activity at the club. I' certain the denizens of the club would be quite forthcoming in assisting you on the crossword.

Alfred


in view of your spot-on comment, let me share the currently least well-liked activity in my new garden (which was how I spent Saturday afternoon, but it kept me from checking my E-mail too frequently, as I am and have been waiting for an incoming turn for a few days once again):

There was a pond when we bougth the house. Water depth was between 30 and 50 cm, roughly elliptic in shape, major axes about 3,50 meter and about 2 meter.

In view of my kids aged 3 and 1, I had planned that it should be transformed into a playing area with sand, preferably by some gardening company at a suitable point of time (i.e. when they bring my garden into shape next spring).

But as you know, the in-laws visited for a few days and were not always properly supervised because of my work-related absence. My father-in-law decided that the pond is an immediate threat for my children, so he pumped the water out. Actually, twice, because after the first time it rained and only thereafter he realized that there is a foil keeping the water in the pond.

As a consequence, after the second time he dug a hole in the mud near the edge of the pond (slipping and falling into it several times, which must have been a spectacular scene as my daughter keeps telling about this event; only the time he hit his toe with the spade tops it in her favourite scenes repertoire) and removed some of the foil before deciding that the complete removal was too arduous a task for his taste and the project should be completed by someone else. (In addition, he had found a nail in a small wooden gate, which of course presents an immediate threat to the kids... but I told you that story already.)

Now, unfortunately the complete removal of the water sort of destabilized the border of the pond, as the water-loving plants that had stabilized it died, whereas the incomplete removal of the foil was keeping the mud muddy. My father in law suggested to just fill up with playsand for the kids, but I was able to veto that in time (even tough I am aware how much kids love to play in the mud). Since then, if it is Saturday afternoon (during the week I don't have time, and Saturday afternoon is the only weekend time when my neighborhood accepts noisy gardening activities) and the weather is fine on top of the standard gardening activities I have some digging to do in order to uncover the foil (which is covered by a lot of sand, ballast chipping and crisscrossed by roots, mainly waterlily roots whose thickness compares to the diameter of a man's arm so that digging is slow) and remove it.

I think I haven't done that much digging since I left the army (and probably did dig more in the army only during the time I was assigned to a sapper unit). Yesterday, I finally reached the lowest point of the foil , which is about 1,60 meter below ground level and about 1,10 meter below the former ground of the pond.

Btw, when the in-laws left, my father in law complained why the foil was still not removed and when that project would finally be completed. My house is now off-limits for him. Including the garden.

Hartwig

< Message edited by hartwig.modrow -- 9/11/2011 11:42:58 AM >

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 56
RE: No escape from gardening... - 9/11/2011 11:59:59 AM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: hartwig.modrow

...In view of my kids aged 3 and 1...


Mein gott, don't you realise such a confession will get you thrown out of the club.

Quick, edit it to read your "grandchildren" and you might just get away with it. I don't think anyone else has seen it. To be on the safe side you better make them your great grandchildren.

Unless of course you wish to show off about having a young wife and rename them your stepchildren.

Alfred

< Message edited by Alfred -- 9/11/2011 12:00:45 PM >

(in reply to modrow)
Post #: 57
RE: No escape from gardening... - 9/11/2011 1:29:49 PM   
Nemo121


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

I deplore your lack of open-mindedness to twilight and sunrise relationships. Herr Modrow is evidently refering to two children from his latest, much, much, much, much younger wife. Undoubtedly his 3rd, perhaps even 4th wife. It would appear that while age may have dulled his senses it has not taken his "fervour".

Evidently the reason his father-in-law had to do the gardening work can best be explained by the fact that while his father-in-law is, evidently, an old man and the father to Herr Modrow's wife Herr Modrow is not only old enough to be her father, but by a process of deduction old enough to be her father's father - which does have a touch of the licentious about it to be fair.


P.s. Hartwig, pictures are your friend. At this stage I have no idea what the situation in China/Burma actually is. I'd be interested in a picture.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 58
RE: No escape from gardening... - 9/11/2011 3:17:00 PM   
modrow

 

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

Mein gott, don't you realise such a confession will get you thrown out of the club.

Quick, edit it to read your "grandchildren" and you might just get away with it. I don't think anyone else has seen it. To be on the safe side you better make them your great grandchildren.

Unless of course you wish to show off about having a young wife and rename them your stepchildren.

Alfred


while being painfully aware of the fact that my latest confession does, in fact, put my membership card at risk, I thought the problem would rather reside in the fact that a gentleman does not descend (sic!) to manual labour.

Nemo, thanks for adroitly explaining the situation to Alfred. Nothing like a good bit of fervour, eh? With respect to the picture request, I will comply for China later today or tomorrow. In Burma (or rather north of Burma), there's not much to be seen from a screenshot right now. I am in process of stuffing the (constantly reconned) bases with small units in order to show there is something to bag available, but garrison requirements and the more important squad upgrades of Indian LCUs cause this to be a work in progress right now.

First, however, I think I'll process the turn that arrived today (resolution of May 23 and 24 1942, orders for May 25 and 26).

Thanks for your interest

Hartwig

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 59
RE: No escape from gardening... - 9/11/2011 4:29:00 PM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline 		And just how do you think the salt and pepper shakers get moved about on the dining table in those after dinner tactical discussions. That's manual labour if ever I saw it. Plus wielding your officer's sword in mano a mano combat also clearly constitutes, ahem, acceptable manual labour.

As to Nemo's request for a picture, in typical teutonic style you have missed the nuance. He meant a picture of your, ahem, much younger wife. Had he really meant China/Burma, he would have requested a screenshot instead of a picture.

Yes, I think a picture of your young wife, posing arm in arm with you as you stand with a raised foot resting on your just recently shot lion will prove a popular addition to the club. Even better would be if you have some "Askaris" in the background, just to reinforce your direct Wilhelmine connection.

Alfred

(in reply to modrow)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: The armchair strategists club (formerly Temptations) – Hartwig (A) vs. Aztez (J), no Aztez Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





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


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.125