JohnDillworth
Posts: 3100
Joined: 3/19/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: crsutton
quote:
ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
When this game finally concludes, I'll have three major questions to mull over:
1. Would John have been better off grouping his combat ships and carriers and striking en masse, along with massed LBA, when the Allies ventured deep to strike Luzon, Formosa, China or Korea? If he had consolidated KB and struck with 1200 naval aircraft and massed kamikazes and LBA from interlocking airfields, would he have done material damage to Death Star? Would he have done enough damage that I'd have been unable or reluctant to take on big airfields for some time? I think there's a chance that the answer is yes.
Instead he played a soft defense, devoting a considerable amount of his navy to nipping at the edges, usually far away. The advantage is that he kept his navy mostly intact while forcing me to cover supply lines and missions carefully. The cost was that the Allies invaded all four areas without meaningful opposition. That boggles my mind.
He only chose to attack when Death Star was far away on escort missions. He felt like he could achieve local superiority. But too much of his fleet was far away, leaving him to send in modest numbers of valuable combat ships. in each case - at Shanghai, at Ningpo, at Gunzan - he lost those surface clashes, thus frittering away his fleet ineffectually without ever concentrating and striking hard.
2. How could I have done Sumatra better? That was a wild and crazy invasion for November 1942. By about late January, I knew I was eventually going to lose. Still it took John until about June to really take control. He didn't take Sabang until July, I think. And the last Allied units weren't vanquished until August. I think if I'd have had 300k more supply, I might've made a stand there and employed Death Star to provide support. The two biggest mistakes I made was siphoning off units to invade Malaya and not understanding the meager Allied fighter pools. In the end, because of the peculiarities of how John and I play, and because I have a good feel for his proclivities, Sumatra turned into a strategic Allied victory. But I wouldn't want to repeat the experience against a player who doesn't leave holes in his defenses that can be exploited while his focus is elsewhere.
3. Did I manage the strategic war right? I elected not to directly engage John's major bases in the DEI or to seriously impede his shipping so that I could concentrate on pushing as deep as possible as fast as possible. I wanted to pursue points directly (strategic bombing) rather than indirectly (by strangling the enemy economy). I felt this would be more efficient. Had John not left holes in his defenses, I would've altered plans and instead targeted his resource/oil centers. I think it was more effective to target a weekly defended Luzon, China and Formosa rather than going sideways, but by doing so his economy remained far more robust. Tradeoffs.
What about strategic bombing? I struggled here, taking heavy losses (including a miserable B-29 raid against Singapore that cost me 37 of the valuable bombers). To this point, I haven't figured out how to score the "thousand points a day" that Lowpe predicted. Yet strategic bombing has contributed 27,000 points to my current 55,000 point lead. And I think the upcoming campaign from Korea will prove decisive. To this point, I'd give myself a C for strategic warfare with perhaps a chance to raise that a notch or two with Korea. But I do think the emphasis on strategic warfare was the right way to achieve victory.
Nothing to say. You played your opponent's weaknesses and that was good enough to do the job. I do firmly believe that it is a major mistake for the Japanese player to hold back in 1943 in an effort to save his ships. After mid 44 the hope for a major naval victory really diminishes as the Allies are just too strong. The Sumatra invasion set the table but your carrier victory around the Line Islands sealed the deal. John is a good naval player and has great tactics but you out played him in this particular battle. You held the DL advantage and your attacks were more effective as a result. That was probably his last good chance to defeat you at sea. Your Sumatra plan was good, you just underestimated the power of the Japanese air force at that stage. This is pretty easy for an Allied player to do.
quote:
Nothing to say. You played your opponent's weaknesses and that was good enough to do the job. I do firmly believe that it is a major mistake for the Japanese player to hold back in 1943 in an effort to save his ships. After mid 44 the hope for a major naval victory really diminishes as the Allies are just too strong. The Sumatra invasion set the table but your carrier victory around the Line Islands sealed the deal. John is a good naval player and has great tactics but you out played him in this particular battle. You held the DL advantage and your attacks were more effective as a result. That was probably his last good chance to defeat you at sea. Your Sumatra plan was good, you just underestimated the power of the Japanese air force at that stage. This is pretty easy for an Allied player to do.
Not really sure why John became so reluctant to commit his carriers after the Line Islands battle. IIRC he lost 1 CV all of his CVE's and had some damaged CV's. A net lose of 1 CV. Sure he had to repair and Dan pulled off a pretty aggressive invasion right into the heart of Indian country (can I still say that?). John probably never quite had CV parity after that be he was not too far off and he had interior lines. Still, he would never commit his carriers. He probably thought his land units would hold up better. I certainly did. The complete collapse at Formosa was the most surprising. He had good units there, air support, some forts and supply. Still, his defenses collapsed almost overnight. Not sure what went wrong there. All that being said John's late game got much better. He handled his home industry well, accelerated and produced excellent fighters and had plenty of trained pilots to man them. Plus, with pretty much stock night fighters, continues to put up a credible home island defense. I expect John learned an awful lot and will play a bit different next time and be better prepared for the late game. It's been a real privileged to to enjoy both AAR's
_____________________________
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
|
Printable Version
RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 
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