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 Good The Bad & The Indifferent

 
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 Good The Bad & The Indifferent Page: <<   < prev  396 397 [398] 399 400   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 8/22/2017 10:38:18 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

The cracks in Japan's China are showing, and Gorilla Glue is not going to be enough to hold it together any more! Give them more cowbell!


This is a rhetorical rant. I don't want any answers, explanations, etc. In fact, feel free to ignore me as some of you most certainly do. I certainly don't mean to hurt anyone's feelings, but my own, and I am not casting aspersions on anything or anyone, but wow.

"Cracks in Japan's China are showing". Seriously?

My goodness the cracks have been showing since before the Foochow invasion, before Luzon fell. I don't get you AFBs at all.

Nothing is more important than the strategic bombing of Honshu according to High Command, but here we seem to be going north and west into China away from closer and closer bases to Honshu and to rack up those VPs from bombing Japan you need daytime bombing which means close fighter bases. Night bombing is strong, but slow and weather prone.

So, there is obviously something else afoot, and certainly the Allies are so strong they can walk and chew gum at the same time (i.e. have multiple operations) or this has been a huge waste of tempo. China was ready to fall when the Allies were parachuting all across Vietnam months and months ago, but holding those bases was not deemed any kind of priority since the Allies didn't want to fight in a supply suck that is China...and yet here we are.

China, Formosa, and now China again, but China to the North and West.

I don't get it, I never have gotten it despite CR's explanations to stupid slow ole me. I will never get it. I am a JFB and can't understand why the Allies haven't gone for the throat (and make no mistake when the KB is revealed for months on end, Japan is asking for it in a multitude of ways), and continue not to go for the throat, with the throat seemingly being offered up every week in a variety of forms. I do understand the slow downs because of supply...so I guess I ain't hopeless.

But there are lots of ways for the Allies to win...but it seems clear to me we are taking the long road here. It is a safe road, but very long. Constantly we are told Japan should be committing the KB, and yet there have been many times when a run by the deathstar would have forced a fight. Why in the world would you expect Japan to commit the KB against the Deathstar when you are unwilling to commit the DS against the KB? Why hasn't the DS sought out and destroyed elements of the KB on favorable terms when the opportunity has presented itself, most notably near Cam Ranh Bay, but also going all the way back to the ludicrous circling the mini KB did way way back in 43?

Japan has literally been flat on her back exposing her throat since Luzon was invaded from everything CR has posted. Now don't get me wrong, Japan has powerful tools (KB) but for the most part the location of the KB has been known with near certainty for months.

Of course, I have no idea what is really going on. CR likes misdirection and is in total control of what is posted. So, in other words I am sure that I am all wet so don't take anything I typed seriously.

Ok, I feel better. Cracks in China showing, lol.

rant off.

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 8/23/2017 12:08:28 AM >

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 11911
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 8/23/2017 1:12:00 AM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline 		I understand what you are saying about priority to strat bombing, Lowpe, but one of CRs stated goals was to demolish the IJA and recoup points for troops lost - the area on the scoreboard where he has the most ground to make up. Turning China into a rout and hopefully trapping most of the troops in the southwestern quadrant will help a lot with that. Thus the cheers for seeing a trap slowly spring.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 11912
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 8/23/2017 1:31:51 AM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		The answer to Lowpe's question is far simpler than he realizes: logistics.

I do not have the supply to move forward any further. As it is, Ningpo will have difficulty supporting 4EB. Going deeper would be asking for more trouble - low supply, tough to defend, in the enemy's wheelhouse where he could bombard exposed airfields.

Japanese players may lose sight of the difficulty of maintaining supply levels at the end of a 4,000-mile LOC. Yes the Allies have huge lift capacity, but supporting massive armies and air forces is a logistical challenge. Fun but challenging.

I bet Lowpe has no idea how many merchant ships I have or where there are or how and why hundreds got hung up in Luzon for so long.

In a game this immensely complex, it's impossible for any reader to have a strong grasp of what constraints I'm operating under. Could a more aggressive player have done more? Probably. Could a more aggressive player made a mistake and set himself much further back than I am? Probably? Have I conceived, planned, and executed a plan that has put the Allies in a favorable position to win this game in a timely manner? You answer. Am I learning a lot and having a blast? You know I am.

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 11913
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 8/23/2017 1:59:38 AM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel


I bet Lowpe has no idea how many merchant ships I have or where there are or how and why hundreds got hung up in Luzon for so long.


At this point in the game, I am eating my shoes.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 11914
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 8/23/2017 2:22:51 AM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		You're comparing apples to oranges. Japan is chronically low on supply. I get it. The Allies are flush with supply. I get it. But it takes time and ships to get that forward and then hungry airplanes and men use it up too fast.

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 11915
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 8/23/2017 2:57:29 AM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline 		I would trade 50 or more B-29s for 2800 points of industry damage, worth 5600+ VPs. I don't care if that's not "sustainable" - that rate of VP gain is not "sustainable" for him at a far great "rate of unsustainability."

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 11916
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 8/23/2017 12:22:22 PM   
AcePylut


Posts: 1494
Joined: 3/19/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

You're comparing apples to oranges. Japan is chronically low on supply. I get it. The Allies are flush with supply. I get it. But it takes time and ships to get that forward and then hungry airplanes and men use it up too fast.


Question - based on your supply route "West Coast to PH to Oz (via the far South Pacific) to Northern Oz to the Southern DEI to PI to Formosa to China" - and looking back on it - do you feel that if you had perhaps traded a few more warships/troops and gone through the Marshalls to Saipan to parts beyond, you would be in a better place with supply now?

Also - does the mere existence of the KB, even though it's done nothing but exist since Wake Island, have an effect on your supply lines?

I know there's been a whole ****ton of criticism from the peanut gallery about John not committing his CV's in multiple areas in this thread... but if he had committed them and lost them, would that supply line be much smaller (PH direct to PI?) and the threat to the Home Islands that much greater? As such, perhaps the best move John has made in regards to his CV's is to, indeed, keep them afloat and not commit them to a battle.

I know hindsight is 20/20 and it's not a criticism, just a question for us poor AFB's that don't get committed opponents like John to make it to late '44.


< Message edited by AcePylut -- 8/23/2017 12:23:52 PM >

_____________________________


(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 11917
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 8/23/2017 1:05:50 PM   
JohnDillworth


Posts: 3100
Joined: 3/19/2009
Status: offline 		B-24's bombing the Home Islands in 1944. No further justification for your strategy is nessesary. Everything else is is playtime

< Message edited by JohnDillworth -- 8/23/2017 1:06:30 PM >

_____________________________

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 AcePylut)
Post #: 11918
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 8/23/2017 1:07:58 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		1. I think a more direct LOC through the Marianas would be just as problematic. john could raid into that LOC, thus necessitating a pretty heavy commitment of warships and carriers along the LOC to provide adequate protection. In other words, to create a significantly better LOC, I'd have needed an unimaginably wide LOC. (Really, what's hampered me the most is all the xAKs I lost early in the game when I really didn't know what I was doing; if I'd conserved them properly I'd have so much shipping that the current configuration of my LOC wouldn't matter.)

2. Yes, the existence of KB is a check on my LOC operations. It keeps me honest and slows me down to an extent.

3. I don't think John's use of KB was his highest possible use. I pointed out a few days ago that I think his most effective use would've been an attack against Death Star combined with LBA. Even if he had lost badly, it would have made a material difference if he had knocked out some fleet carriers. Death Star, in reduced numbers, wouldn't have the strength to sail with impunity close to big interlocking enemy airfields, thus dampening my ability to strike against Formosa or near Shanghai or the Home Islands. Also, my LOC would still be vulnerable to surface combat raiders or what would be left of his carrier force, so that I'd still need to be cautious in protecting supply ships.

Lowpe mentioned yesterday that I should deploy Death Star against KB. I did, of course, in September '43 at Wake Island. After that, KB as used was no longer a material brake on the Allied advance. It wasn't necessary for me to veer off - KB was no longer preventing me from taking the war to the enemy heartland. I didn't need to mess with KB as long as it was out on the peripheries. Since KB wasn't a threat out there it was up to John to make it a threat if he wanted to slow me down.


< Message edited by Canoerebel -- 8/23/2017 1:09:08 PM >

(in reply to AcePylut)
Post #: 11919
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 8/23/2017 1:34:43 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		Perceptions about the game vary widely with experience, information, effective salesmanship by me or John, and biases of a reader.

I think I've done a good job in the game, so that's the way I come at things from my AAR. AFBs who read the AAR get a lot of information with my spin on things and may therefore view things similarly to the way I do.

The same may hold for JFBs reading John's AAR. The best example is Yaab. Back in the early summer of '43, he posted in here after I lost a cruiser in the Marshalls campaign. I think his exact words were, "You seem off your game." I was surprised at his take on things. The Allies had just managed to surprise Japan in the Aluetians, the Marshalls and the Gilberts back-to-back-to-back in short order and with almost no losses. How could Yaab see things differently?

But in his case, he was reading John's AAR, no doubt flush with optimism as the Sumatra campaign was coming to an end and the Allies were engaged in ops that might have seemed fairly far out. (I recall John saying he had already pulled out some of his garrisons from the Marshalls, so that he undoubtedly spun things that way in his AAR.)

By the summer of '43 I knew what my plans were through the DEI, Luzon and Foochow, China. I knew that there were holes in his defenses. I knew those holes were likely to remain. I knew that Sumatra had taken too much of John's attention for too long and too far away, even if he and his readers thought it was a great victory.

If the game ended today, some of John's readers would probably pop in with an analysis of why he'd won the game or at least done much better than we're giving him credit for. I understand their biases and preferences and support of him as a person and a player. But how badly must John have played if they're opinion is that I should have beat him faster?

I believe the state of the war in November 1944 is pretty consistent with what I was saying all along. That Sumatra was really an affair that would prove to my advantage. That John was making a mistake by committing big troops to Celebes since he probably hadn't attended to Luzon properly. That sending KB to whack Allied CVEs in SoPac would allow the Allies to take Foochow and to take control of the Formosa campaign (through bombardments). And that heavy fighting early and often was an investment - a front-loading - that would allow the Allies to harvest victory points efficiently late.

Of course, my play has in no ways been optimal. No doubt I've missed countless opportunities or messed up things. And in this there is no question: some (many) players could've taken these circumstances and done more with them.

But I was operating at about my peak efficiency. For proof of that I point you to Nemo's comments when I invaded Sumatra in November 1942. That smart man had a vision for how the invasion could be so much more than it was, mainly by invading Malaya too. I respected him and bought into his vision. I diverted troops to Malaya. But I was not the player to implement his vision. Trying to do so exceeded my ability and ended up diminishing what I could've done on my own. Nemo would've done far better than I did but I should've stuck with my vision own vision rather than trying to play someone else's.

If JFBs assess some kind of Japanese victory here, that's Yaab Vision. He genuinely saw things that way.


< Message edited by Canoerebel -- 8/23/2017 1:43:16 PM >

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 11920
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 8/23/2017 2:14:22 PM   
DRF99


Posts: 90
Joined: 9/3/2009
Status: offline 		I've been following this AAR from the beginning. A great read!

Despite the losses at Sumatra, it took the initiative from John and he's been reacting to you ever since. As long as you don't let him take it back, it was well worth the losses. Now it's too late for him to take back the initiative.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 11921
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 8/23/2017 3:20:23 PM   
Jellicoe


Posts: 157
Joined: 9/26/2012
From: Kent, UK
Status: offline 		Out of interest and learning could you define for us what a 'well attended to' Luzon would have looked like thought the canoerebel lenses? Plugging defensive holes as Japan always seems like sticking fingers in the dyke, especially if the AFB takes a multi vector approach or rapidly switches theatre as you have done.

(in reply to DRF99)
Post #: 11922
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 8/23/2017 3:23:41 PM   
Bif1961


Posts: 2014
Joined: 6/26/2008
From: Phenix City, Alabama
Status: offline 		I hope your unanswered question can be answered as this contest continues. Logistics, without it no war could be fought or won, the old saying for the want of a nail. Germany was defeated in WWI because they had been blockaded and rationing at home was finally making life unbearable and intolerable. Japan didn't have the same constraints with it's population as Germany did in WWI, Japan was use to more suffering and therefore could bear up longer but you can't trade blood for oil. The KB has survived because he has played keep away with it and used it for other purposes, but did they help in the long run? If the war ended tomorrow could you say Japan was in a better position now than historically? PI liberated before the actual invasion began, coastal China in Allied hands. Regardless of what you decide it is a very good learning experience for us who are allowed to peak behind the curtain and see your planning, ideas and then the execution.

(in reply to DRF99)
Post #: 11923
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 8/23/2017 3:24:26 PM   
MakeeLearn


Posts: 4278
Joined: 9/11/2016
Status: offline
quote:

In a game this immensely complex, it's impossible for any reader to have a strong grasp of what constraints I'm operating under. Could a more aggressive player have done more? Probably. Could a more aggressive player made a mistake and set himself much further back than I am? Probably? Have I conceived, planned, and executed a plan that has put the Allies in a favorable position to win this game in a timely manner? You answer. Am I learning a lot and having a blast? You know I am.



It's interesting and entertaining to see people doing different strategies, instead of a recipe.


< Message edited by MakeeLearn -- 8/23/2017 3:25:36 PM >

(in reply to Jellicoe)
Post #: 11924
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 8/23/2017 3:29:31 PM   
Canoerebel


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

ORIGINAL: Jellicoe

Out of interest and learning could you define for us what a 'well attended to' Luzon would have looked like thought the canoerebel lenses? Plugging defensive holes as Japan always seems like sticking fingers in the dyke, especially if the AFB takes a multi vector approach or rapidly switches theatre as you have done.


Luzon is critical terrain - lots of big airfields; Manila's big port and shipyard; situated so that it gives the Allies access to Formosa, China, the Ryukus and the Homes Islands while also potentially cutting the empire in two, denying Japan access to the DEI (that hasn't happened in this game, but that's what Luzon represents).

Since Luzon has lots of open ground, defending it can be difficult.

Japan needs multiple interlocking airfields, lots of forts, bases with sufficient garrisons to prevent them from being taken cheaply, probably a few citadels, and plenty of supply so that the Japanese can hold out as long as possible.

John hadn't built up airfields; he didn't have forts; most of the bases weren't even defended. Instead of attending to those bases, however, he sent two divisions and several mixed brigades to the Celebes to successfully counterattack the Allied invasion there. To me it showed his mania for attacking while exposing his failure to properly attend to his defenses.

(in reply to Jellicoe)
Post #: 11925
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 8/23/2017 4:21:14 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: offline 		I just started reading this AAR, I am up to page 32. I am enjoying this and I am learning a lot.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 11926
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 8/23/2017 4:25:02 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		For those of you who wonder what a good defense of Luzon looks like, I suggest you drop by Obvert's AAR and ask him. I have no idea what he's done and I'm poorly acquainted with his notions of defense. But I suspect his view on things will be something like what I posted just above.

In his game with me, it's March 1944 and the Allies are something like 2,000 miles from Luzon. But he'll have attended to it's defenses.

In my game with John III it was March 1944 and the Allies had just spent six months in the DEI establishing a massive base of operations....and Luzon was wide open, unprepared, and largely undefended.

Madness.

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 11927
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 8/23/2017 4:33:43 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel


In his game with me, it's March 1944 and the Allies are something like 2,000 miles from Luzon. But he'll have attended to it's defenses.
Madness.


Runway sizes from a quick mouse-over will tell you a lot.

Not mentioned earlier, is that Luzon has rails and inland runways important details in any Japanese defensive area.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 11928
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 8/23/2017 4:49:06 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		Good point, Jeff. You're exactly right and that was one of the big things I used to identify potential holes in John's defenses.

I haven't look at rear-area airfield/port size in my game with Obvert yet, but I will (thanks to your prodding). But I'll do so with this in mind: Erik seems like the kind who intentionally chooses bases to build large and leaves others unbuilt, both as bait and so that the Allies don't benefit quickly when taking them. I think that's how Nemo would've played it anyway.

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 11929
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 8/23/2017 6:19:24 PM   
AcePylut


Posts: 1494
Joined: 3/19/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jellicoe

Out of interest and learning could you define for us what a 'well attended to' Luzon would have looked like thought the canoerebel lenses? Plugging defensive holes as Japan always seems like sticking fingers in the dyke, especially if the AFB takes a multi vector approach or rapidly switches theatre as you have done.


Luzon is critical terrain - lots of big airfields; Manila's big port and shipyard; situated so that it gives the Allies access to Formosa, China, the Ryukus and the Homes Islands while also potentially cutting the empire in two, denying Japan access to the DEI (that hasn't happened in this game, but that's what Luzon represents).

Since Luzon has lots of open ground, defending it can be difficult.

Japan needs multiple interlocking airfields, lots of forts, bases with sufficient garrisons to prevent them from being taken cheaply, probably a few citadels, and plenty of supply so that the Japanese can hold out as long as possible.

John hadn't built up airfields; he didn't have forts; most of the bases weren't even defended. Instead of attending to those bases, however, he sent two divisions and several mixed brigades to the Celebes to successfully counterattack the Allied invasion there. To me it showed his mania for attacking while exposing his failure to properly attend to his defenses.



Here's the thing - imho - I don't think he would have built up the rear areas even if you hadn't invaded Sumatra.

_____________________________


(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 11930
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 8/23/2017 6:27:06 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		He probably wouldn't have. But his preoccupation with Sumatra made it easier to feed him false notions as to where I was going (I did lots of little things that put him on the scent of New Guinea/SoPac in a big way). And it made it easier to strike with overpowering surprise in the Aleutians and Marshalls. That, in turn, through him off balance and ultimately led to him making mistakes, like pushing KB forward to raid when he had no idea where my carriers were.

(in reply to AcePylut)
Post #: 11931
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 8/23/2017 7:57:20 PM   
palioboy2

 

Posts: 190
Joined: 12/16/2009
From: Canada
Status: offline 		It seems like John would perform that sort of reckless carrier raid either way.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 11932
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 8/23/2017 8:21:20 PM   
Grfin Zeppelin


Posts: 1515
Joined: 12/3/2007
From: Germany
Status: offline 		Woah finally catched up. Thanks alot for writing all this up, I really appreciate the effort.

I have also done a deep evaluation of the situation. I have done alot of calculations, thinking and talking with other people about this game.

My conclusion is that there are cracks showing in Japan´s China.

_____________________________



(in reply to palioboy2)
Post #: 11933
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 8/23/2017 8:21:27 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		Maybe. But you get an opponent rattled or upset and they're much more likely to make a mistake. I think that was at the core of Nemo's gaming philosophy.

(in reply to palioboy2)
Post #: 11934
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 8/23/2017 8:25:28 PM   
AcePylut


Posts: 1494
Joined: 3/19/2004
Status: offline 		I think John's going to learn a heck of a lot from this game and be much more dangerous in his next one. Of course, maybe not, because in his next one, he's going to have all the !powah! for the first couple of years and it'll be back to BANZAI! :)

_____________________________


(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 11935
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 8/23/2017 8:29:48 PM   
JeffroK


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

ORIGINAL: DRF99

I've been following this AAR from the beginning. A great read!

Despite the losses at Sumatra, it took the initiative from John and he's been reacting to you ever since. As long as you don't let him take it back, it was well worth the losses. Now it's too late for him to take back the initiative.

I dont think that CR took the initiative after Sumatra, more that JIII did not take the initiative after what was as a very expensive defeat for CR.
We know, and maybe JIII didnt, that the Allied pools were very low and that maybe this was his best chance to build on his win.


_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to DRF99)
Post #: 11936
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 8/23/2017 9:08:12 PM   
MakeeLearn


Posts: 4278
Joined: 9/11/2016
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Gräfin Zeppelin

Woah finally catched up. Thanks alot for writing all this up, I really appreciate the effort.

I have also done a deep evaluation of the situation. I have done alot of calculations, thinking and talking with other people about this game.

My conclusion is that there are cracks showing in Japan´s China.



"Bull" Halsey's China Campaign...




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Grfin Zeppelin)
Post #: 11937
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 8/23/2017 9:41:09 PM   
Grfin Zeppelin


Posts: 1515
Joined: 12/3/2007
From: Germany
Status: offline

_____________________________



(in reply to MakeeLearn)
Post #: 11938
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 8/23/2017 10:43:58 PM   
JohnDillworth


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

quote:

In my game with John III it was March 1944 and the Allies had just spent six months in the DEI establishing a massive base of operations....and Luzon was wide open, unprepared, and largely undefended.

Madness.


I think I am too used to the Allies. I assume you can move in a few of your easily available engineer units and build up forts and airfields to 8 in a couple of months at most. Still Japan had 6 months to firm up defense in the Philippines and Formosa. I suspect you got some good die rolls in Formosa but it was astonishing how fast it fell. The AI actually put up a better fight for Formosa in a recent game I played. It has been said countless times here. The Japanese player has to start planning his 1944 defenses in January 1942. The inner crust has to be as hard as possible.
I can't comment in depth as I read both sides but you and John both had great ideas during the game that you did not act on. I think you both will have much to contemplate once the game end you read the other AAR. I think your initial incursion into the DEI was well timed. you had a window when the IJN CV's were licking their wounds and your prep allowed you to take full advantage. John still has some cards to play, but this game is decided

_____________________________

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 Canoerebel)
Post #: 11939
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 8/23/2017 10:48:29 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		11/9/44

Miss Zeppelin is right about China. It's beginning to look like France in July 1944.


Fancy Pants: Things happening all over eastern China now. I think John is collapsing his MLR east. Things should begin deteriorating very fast now.





Attachment (1)

(in reply to JohnDillworth)
Post #: 11940
Page:   <<   < prev  396 397 [398] 399 400   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent Page: <<   < prev  396 397 [398] 399 400   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

2.172