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: Wrangling Loki - Mind_Messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A)

 
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: Wrangling Loki - Mind_Messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) Page: <<   < prev  15 16 [17] 18 19   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Wrangling Loki - Mind_Messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 7/14/2015 8:51:33 PM   
Walker84


Posts: 850
Joined: 7/5/2009
Status: offline
That's a good, positive update for this stage in the war - you've clearly got your mojo working

_____________________________

The most advanced nations are always those who navigate the most -
Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803 -1882)

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 481
RE: Wrangling Loki - Mind_Messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 7/20/2015 5:52:52 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Walker84

That's a good, positive update for this stage in the war - you've clearly got your mojo working


Yeah, for early '44 I feel pretty good about the situation. What is really pleasing me is the number of invasions that Lokasenna has mounted that have ended up as long-term slogging matches between us.

Saumlaki, where the Allies have a full US division and a bunch of brigades stuck against Japanese troops behind level 5 forts.

Lae is the most recent one, where the Allies have two divisions worth of troops trying to dislodge a single IJA division

Buna has been the textbook example of this. Though it looks like it will fall soon, I've managed to keep a US division tied down here for five or so months with a C-grade IJA division.

It's all about time at this point. My R&D is progressing, as is my kami training program, so it's a race for me to get the good quality airframes while the Allies are still far enough away for it to make a difference.

I'm somewhat worried about the New Guinea theater - with the Allies on New Ireland, I'm worried about a thrust for Aitpae or regions north of that to cut off my units around Hansa Bay - this I do not want. The KB is on standby at Babeldoab to make this region as unhealthy as it can be.

If I buy another month or two here, I can march my support troops northwards up New Guinea and leave the combat troops to die defending the bases.

(in reply to Walker84)
Post #: 482
RE: Wrangling Loki - Mind_Messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 7/21/2015 1:21:35 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline
Question for the Hive Mind:

What's the best way to go about defending the Philippines south of Luzon?

Mindano is difficult to defend, seeing as the road network is too poor to permit rapid redeployment of troops, but I intend to garrison Davao and Dadjangas, as well as Jolo and Zamboanga with a fairly robust garrison. It's a real pity that the only inland base on Mindano cannot be built any higher than a size 6, otherwise I would consider making Mindano a serious fortress.

Cebu will be my main redoubt in the Philippines archipelago proper. I'm undecided about what to do with Leyte, Samar or Panay. I like the fact that Panay has two bases connected by a rail-road, both of which can be built up to size 9...

Obviously the main effort of my defense will be to keep Manila in Japanese hands, but I've stat to worry about the possibility that the Allies take the Southern Philippines and then head for the Bonin or Ryukyu islands.

Any advice would be welcomed here, as the Philippines seems a different problem attacking from the south than it was attacking from the north at the start of the game.

(in reply to Walker84)
Post #: 483
RE: Wrangling Loki - Mind_Messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 7/21/2015 2:13:44 PM   
vicberg

 

Posts: 1176
Joined: 4/19/2008
Status: offline
How do you train for kamis?

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 484
RE: Wrangling Loki - Mind_Messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 7/21/2015 2:23:33 PM   
vicberg

 

Posts: 1176
Joined: 4/19/2008
Status: offline
IMO, I don't think you worry about a northern thrust from Philippines directly into Japan Home Islands. The supply lines from there to Japan with Luzon in Japanese hands can be too easily harassed from multiple locations. Very difficult for him to protect that long of a supply line next to enemy held bases, even in this stage of the game.

From there, I would think Cam Ranh or Luzon. I'm guessing Luzon as he seems to be playing historically.

(in reply to vicberg)
Post #: 485
RE: Wrangling Loki - Mind_Messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 7/22/2015 8:55:38 AM   
Rio Bravo


Posts: 1794
Joined: 7/13/2013
From: Grass Valley, California
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Question for the Hive Mind:

What's the best way to go about defending the Philippines south of Luzon?

Mindano is difficult to defend, seeing as the road network is too poor to permit rapid redeployment of troops, but I intend to garrison Davao and Dadjangas, as well as Jolo and Zamboanga with a fairly robust garrison. It's a real pity that the only inland base on Mindano cannot be built any higher than a size 6, otherwise I would consider making Mindano a serious fortress.

Cebu will be my main redoubt in the Philippines archipelago proper. I'm undecided about what to do with Leyte, Samar or Panay. I like the fact that Panay has two bases connected by a rail-road, both of which can be built up to size 9...

Obviously the main effort of my defense will be to keep Manila in Japanese hands, but I've stat to worry about the possibility that the Allies take the Southern Philippines and then head for the Bonin or Ryukyu islands.

Any advice would be welcomed here, as the Philippines seems a different problem attacking from the south than it was attacking from the north at the start of the game.



mind_messing-

As an Allied player, I have taken a close look at the Bonin Islands...more than a few times.

Best Regards,

-Terry

_____________________________

"No one throws me my own guns and tells me to run. No one."

-Bret (James Coburn); The Magnificent Seven

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 486
RE: Wrangling Loki - Mind_Messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 7/23/2015 8:02:29 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: vicberg

IMO, I don't think you worry about a northern thrust from Philippines directly into Japan Home Islands. The supply lines from there to Japan with Luzon in Japanese hands can be too easily harassed from multiple locations. Very difficult for him to protect that long of a supply line next to enemy held bases, even in this stage of the game.

From there, I would think Cam Ranh or Luzon. I'm guessing Luzon as he seems to be playing historically.


Cam Rahn as the target is something that worries me. Once Cebu is built up enough, I intend to throw the engineers into making Palawan a shield against any thrusts across the South China Sea.

As for kami tranining:

- Much of the present IJN kami cadres come from pilots I trained in LowNav early in the war using floatplanes. I've not actually used the IJN for kami attacks yet as the best airframes for these attacks are (Judy, Jill) are better spent in conventional attacks.

- The IJA kami pilots are few in number at present. I mounted a single kami attack with IJA bombers off Burma, but was pretty disapointed with the results (1 minor hit on a CA). As I've an abundance of GroundBombing trained pilots in the pools, the IJA bomber training schools are shifting over to churning out LowNav pilots.

- There are no plans as of yet to cross train fighter pilots with LowNav. I figure my fighter pilots would be better spent as actual fighter pilots (more chance of them making it home than otherwise).

(in reply to vicberg)
Post #: 487
RE: Wrangling Loki - Mind_Messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 8/3/2015 8:03:08 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline
I would do a proper update, but there isn't really much to update since my last.

The current date is February 10th, 1944.

- The Allies are working to hammer Rabual. The old battleships, as well as the PoW and Repulse along with a smattering of crusiers keep on shelling the base every turn or so. The smaller units are trashed or destroyed, but the garrison remains fairly intact. I suspect Loka will mount a landing here to clear his rear areas at some point in the next few months.

- The KB is moving to Truk, ready to spring into action if the Allies make a leap forward from New Ireland.

- In Burma, the situation is excellent. Despite some heavy fighting on the Akyab road, IJA troops withdraw in good order to regroup outside Ramree Island. In the air, heavy fighting in the skies above Rangoon has attritioned Japanese air power in the region, but I'm moving better airframes and pilots into play here.

- Aggressive Japanese sweeps of Darwin net acceptable results, abet against 2nd generation Allied air frames. I'm willing to accept this as the price I need to pay to build more experience in my units.

- On the ground, US troops are still bogged down in Lae and on Saumlaki. Long may that last.

(in reply to Walker84)
Post #: 488
RE: Wrangling Loki - Mind_Messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 8/8/2015 9:43:45 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline
February 11th to February 15th, 1944

Still too busy for proper updates, so excuse the brevity of this one.

Major events:

- Allies land at Rabual after shelling it for a full month. The base promptly falls.
- The Yamato, headed home after eating two torpedoes, takes three more on the way home and sinks. She fired her guns once in anger.
- The Allies are still bogged down at Lae and Saumlaki, though they have landed more troops at Lae.
- Japanese defenders of New Guinea are gearing up to resist any moves past Rabual. As CentPac is now a side-show, I'm starting to draw-down my strength here. If I get the chance, I'll pull out everything bar token garrisons in the Marshals, and move what I can back to Minadano and the Southern PI
- In Burma, the Allies are just reaching the Rangoon Line in strength. Japanese air power in the region is at an all time high, and I'm making an active effort to interdict Allied bombing raids in the area.
- Major injection of reinforcements into Northern Sumatra. Next on the list for reinforcement is North-Western New Guinea.

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 489
RE: Wrangling Loki - Mind_Messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 8/11/2015 2:37:39 PM   
Walker84


Posts: 850
Joined: 7/5/2009
Status: offline
Shame about the Yamato - kind of mirrors the fate of a lot of Japanese BBs in real life I guess. Sounds as if your opponent is getting bogged down in places which is good news and on the whole your strategy is working. The defence in Burma sounds promising, with good air cover being fielded at this stage in the war.

_____________________________

The most advanced nations are always those who navigate the most -
Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803 -1882)

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 490
RE: Wrangling Loki - Mind_Messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 8/30/2015 3:20:03 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Walker84

Shame about the Yamato - kind of mirrors the fate of a lot of Japanese BBs in real life I guess. Sounds as if your opponent is getting bogged down in places which is good news and on the whole your strategy is working. The defence in Burma sounds promising, with good air cover being fielded at this stage in the war.


The Yamato was a massive waste of HI. It sat in the Kuriles for most of the war as a deterrent, and its first combat operation was its last. The Musashi hasn't fared much better either, it's just after taking a pair of torpedoes that has forced it back to Japan for repairs.

Lokasenna isn't really getting bogged down, it's more that he is trying to get the maximum level of results with the minimum level of investment in terms of ground troops. I've caught him out twice now, at Lae and at Saumlaki, but he seems to have learned his lesson: recent invasions have used overwhelming strength to smash my defenses.

The air war in Burma is interesting. I've probably overcommited here in terms of air groups, but if I abandon the fight for the skies above Burma, then Rangoon will fall, and I'm hoping to keep a hold of Burma till 6/44. After that, it will be a massed withdrawal to Thailand and Malaya, before battening down the hatches against an Allied landing on the Sumatra-Malaya-Thailand axis.

Big update to follow shortly.

(in reply to Walker84)
Post #: 491
RE: Wrangling Loki - Mind_Messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 8/30/2015 3:47:39 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline
Question to the Gallery:

Currently I'm building 50 G4M2, 42 G3M3 and 50 P1Y1

Is it a worthwhile idea to consolidate these three lines down into two? I'm considering converting the G3M3 line to the G4M2 line, in the hope that the trade-off of the G3's range will be worth it when the G4 line gets armor?

Obviously the real prize for the IJN 2E fleet is the P1Y2 (fast, armor, service rating of 2), but all the late-war IJN 2E's suffer from short legs...

Anyone have some thoughts on this that might help me make my mind up??

(in reply to Walker84)
Post #: 492
RE: Wrangling Loki - Mind_Messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 8/30/2015 3:52:03 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
Not going to get much thru with Betties. Range becomes less and less important, except from bypassed bases.

They can't fly without heavy escorts anyhow.

Armored Betties die just as fast.


(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 493
RE: Wrangling Loki - Mind_Messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 8/30/2015 3:56:42 PM   
vicberg

 

Posts: 1176
Joined: 4/19/2008
Status: offline
I'm not really one to offer advice as I'm learning the mechanics of what works and doesn't work. My experience so far is short range can be ineffective as naval bombardment TFs can get in and out quickly, as just happened to me even with long range Nells. So it comes down to what and where you are defending. The G3 has radar, though I'm not certain of the affects of it. The G4 doesn't until the A model. Again, depends on what the radar does.

If the radar is removed, the G4 looks to be a better choice, though a bit shorter range. It does make sense to choose between the Nell or Betty.

Strategically, you should probably have both short and long range for flexibility.

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 494
RE: Wrangling Loki - Mind_Messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 8/30/2015 4:24:20 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline
I'm thinking towards eliminating the Betty now...

Reasoning:
- Nell has exceptional range, and radar. Torpedoes out to 21 hexes. Excellent as a long-range search/strike plane.
- Betty falls in the middle ground between the Frances and the Nell. While the planes performance improves down the line, it loses a great deal of range, and even then it cannot go as fast as the Frances.
- Frances has moderate range, radar, speed and armor. Torpedoes out to 15 hexes (13 on the Y2 model). Looks like a good medium-range 2E attack bomber...

Alright, that settles it. Min/max my air frame production and eliminate the Betty. I'll likely switch my Betty factories to the Nell. I'll keep my R&D for the G4M2e, because Okha's are cool.

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 495
RE: Wrangling Loki - Mind_Messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 8/30/2015 9:34:42 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline
February 16th to February 28th


So, what have we been up to?

Quite a lot.

The Allies continue to grind away in several theaters, and seem to be making good progress, at least in the South-West Pacific. This theater has very much came to life since the Fall of Rabual.

The main event here occurs on the 19th of February, when a large Allied CV and amphibious task force is spotted at Kavieng. Nuisance attacks by Japanese PT boats establishes that there are alot of ships for a high value operation. The KB, having been lurking around Truk for such an opportunity, pounces.

quote:

apanese aircraft
A6M5b Zero x 83
B5N1 Kate x 5
B5N2 Kate x 8
B6N2 Jill x 103
D4Y3 Judy x 37

Allied aircraft
Hurricane IIc Trop x 32
P-40K Warhawk x 20
F4F-4 Wildcat x 18
FM-2 Wildcat x 17
F4U-1A Corsair x 12
F6F-3 Hellcat x 142

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M5b Zero: 3 destroyed
B5N1 Kate: 1 destroyed by flak
B5N2 Kate: 1 destroyed
B6N2 Jill: 35 destroyed, 12 damaged
B6N2 Jill: 3 destroyed by flak
D4Y3 Judy: 17 destroyed, 1 damaged
D4Y3 Judy: 1 destroyed by flak

Allied aircraft losses
Hurricane IIc Trop: 1 destroyed
F6F-3 Hellcat: 2 destroyed

Allied Ships
CVE Corregidor, Torpedo hits 3, on fire, heavy damage Ammo explosion
CVE Sangamon, Bomb hits 1, on fire
CVE Kalinin Bay
CVE Anzio, Bomb hits 1, on fire
CVE Kitkun Bay, Bomb hits 2, on fire
xAP William L. Garrison
CVE Casablanca
CVE Santee, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage Ammo explosion
BB Colorado
xAP William T. Sherman, Torpedo hits 1, heavy fires, heavy damage
CVE Wake Island, Bomb hits 1
CVE St. Lo
CVE Fanshaw Bay, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
CVE Kasaan Bay, Torpedo hits 1
xAP William E. Channing, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage


Sadly, the Japanese squadrons based on New Guinea don't manage to fly at all, so the sweeps designed to clear away the Allied carrier and land-based CAP don't materialize.

There is no return strike from the Allies.

Losses to the KB are pretty fair, but with the Allied fleet carriers unsighted I decide to run back to Babeldoab to replenish planes and pilots.

On the 22nd Feb, one of the biggest missed opportunities of the war occurs:

quote:

Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Manus at 100,121

Weather in hex: Moderate rain

Raid detected at 108 NM, estimated altitude 22,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 35 minutes

Japanese aircraft
B6N2 Jill x 28
N1K2-J George x 6

Japanese aircraft losses
B6N2 Jill: 15 damaged
B6N2 Jill: 2 destroyed by flak

Allied Ships
BB North Carolina
BB Washington, Torpedo hits 1
BB Prince of Wales
BB New Jersey
BB Indiana
CL Leander

Aircraft Attacking:
26 x B6N2 Jill launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 18in Type 91 Torpedo



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Manus at 100,121

Weather in hex: Moderate rain

Raid detected at 39 NM, estimated altitude 24,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 9 minutes

Japanese aircraft
D4Y2 Judy x 54

Japanese aircraft losses
D4Y2 Judy: 19 damaged
D4Y2 Judy: 7 destroyed by flak

Allied Ships
BB Washington
BB Prince of Wales, Bomb hits 1
BB New Jersey
BC Repulse, Bomb hits 1
BB North Carolina
BB Indiana
CLAA Reno
BB Iowa


These ships should, by rights, have been severely mauled for operating without air cover in range of my bases on New Guinea.

Instead, on the 23rd, these ships breeze into Hansa Bay Aitpae and bombard the airbases there into dust, taking the sails right out of my air groups in this region.

The losses in planes is bad, but the pools can handle it, but too many groups have their morale shattered and I'm forced to start withdrawing aircraft from New Guinea. The fact that the airbases are both out of commission merely adds to my misery.

The 24th is not much better, the Allied fleet carriers materialize north of Darwin, and strike at the IJN shipping assembled at Timor for the suppression of Saumlaki:

quote:

Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Lautem at 72,115

Weather in hex: Severe storms

Raid detected at 79 NM, estimated altitude 13,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 34 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M5b Zero x 7
N1K1-J George x 8
Ki-84a Frank x 16

Allied aircraft
F6F-3 Hellcat x 48
SB2C-1C Helldiver x 34
SBD-5 Dauntless x 65
TBF-1 Avenger x 67

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-84a Frank: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
F6F-3 Hellcat: 12 destroyed
SB2C-1C Helldiver: 1 destroyed, 5 damaged
SB2C-1C Helldiver: 1 destroyed by flak
SBD-5 Dauntless: 1 destroyed, 7 damaged
SBD-5 Dauntless: 1 destroyed by flak
TBF-1 Avenger: 9 damaged
TBF-1 Avenger: 1 destroyed by flak

Japanese Ships
BB Nagato, Bomb hits 1
BB Mutsu, Bomb hits 1, Torpedo hits 3, heavy damage
DD Amatsukaze
CA Suzuya, Bomb hits 1, Torpedo hits 1, on fire
DD Suzunami
CA Kako
BB Ise, Bomb hits 7, on fire
BB Fuso, Torpedo hits 1
DD Yukikaze, Bomb hits 1, on fire
DD Nowaki
DD Kagero
DD Tokitsukaze
DD Hamakaze
DD Hayanami
DD Kiyonami


Thankfully, the damage to all ships is fairly minimal, and all make it back to Surabaya for repairs.

The good news on the 24th is that the Allies continue to dig themselves into deeper holes at Lae and in Burma:

quote:

Ground combat at Lae (99,126)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 22656 troops, 443 guns, 521 vehicles, Assault Value = 758

Defending force 16721 troops, 191 guns, 148 vehicles, Assault Value = 457

Allied adjusted assault: 790

Japanese adjusted defense: 7471

Allied assault odds: 1 to 9 (fort level 4)

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), forts(+), leaders(+), disruption(-)
preparation(-), fatigue(-), supply(-) The minus supply is an issue, with the bombardments of Aitpae and Hansa Bay, supplies are scarce. Plenty at Hollandia, but the issue is moving them.
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
327 casualties reported
Squads: 2 destroyed, 14 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 5 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 7 disabled
Vehicles lost 5 (1 destroyed, 4 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
1802 casualties reported
Squads: 8 destroyed, 184 disabled
Non Combat: 2 destroyed, 22 disabled
Engineers: 2 destroyed, 15 disabled
Guns lost 35 (2 destroyed, 33 disabled)
Vehicles lost 35 (1 destroyed, 34 disabled)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ground combat at 55,48 (near Ramree Island)

Allied Shock attack

Attacking force 235801 troops, 1557 guns, 1334 vehicles, Assault Value = 7638

Defending force 69724 troops, 999 guns, 1119 vehicles, Assault Value = 2166

Allied adjusted assault: 3682

Japanese adjusted defense: 8398

Allied assault odds: 1 to 2

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+)
Attacker: shock(+)

Japanese ground losses:
1267 casualties reported
Squads: 14 destroyed, 195 disabled
Non Combat: 11 destroyed, 114 disabled
Engineers: 2 destroyed, 57 disabled
Guns lost 136 (13 destroyed, 123 disabled)
Vehicles lost 175 (22 destroyed, 153 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
20952 casualties reported
Squads: 231 destroyed, 2067 disabled
Non Combat: 180 destroyed, 252 disabled
Engineers: 37 destroyed, 187 disabled
Guns lost 261 (70 destroyed, 191 disabled)
Vehicles lost 281 (80 destroyed, 201 disabled)


The 25th Feb sees the Allies land on Manus. After the inital attack meets stiffer resistance than expected, more troops land, and they take the base. The 25th is also the day where the Allies have a rare good day in Burma, where they manage to turn the far eastern flank of the Japanese line in Burma after bringing overwhelming force to bear:

quote:

Ground combat at 58,50 (near Toungoo)

Allied Shock attack

Attacking force 48299 troops, 355 guns, 473 vehicles, Assault Value = 1795

Defending force 15338 troops, 217 guns, 125 vehicles, Assault Value = 470

Allied adjusted assault: 1947

Japanese adjusted defense: 727

Allied assault odds: 2 to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), fatigue(-), experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker: shock(+)

Japanese ground losses:
5100 casualties reported
Squads: 96 destroyed, 135 disabled
Non Combat: 150 destroyed, 81 disabled
Engineers: 7 destroyed, 22 disabled
Guns lost 104 (58 destroyed, 46 disabled)
Vehicles lost 66 (22 destroyed, 44 disabled)
Units retreated 5

Allied ground losses:
3623 casualties reported
Squads: 31 destroyed, 309 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 47 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 23 disabled
Vehicles lost 11 (1 destroyed, 10 disabled)


I respond by committing my local reserves to shoring up this flank with an eye to counterattacking. Of the five Allied combat units, three are Chinese units, supported by an Indian division and the 255th Armoured Brigade. These Allied units are well within comfortable bombing range, so I plan to unleash the IJA bombers in Burma in a focused attack on them with the goal to drive them back.

I'm combining this with a limited offensive from my troops garrisoning Paoshan. The goal is to catch some Allied units out of position, give them a severe mauling, and then fall back.

Even if I fail, the geography prevents the Allies from exploiting this success, unless they wish to go cross country. To advance towards Rangoon would require some off-road tanking from the Allies, or a cross-river attack into x3 terrain.

Elsewhere, I'm replacing the divisions I had posted there as garrisons with brigades and regiments bought back from the Pacific front. These divisions (one from Malaya, one from Sumatra) will become my new local reserve for the Burma front.

The other big event is the Allies move to reinforce Saumlaki under the cover of their fleet carriers. Following up on the strike of the 24th, the USN moves a great deal of shipping in the direction of Saumlaki on the 26/27th.

I respond by throwing aircraft at the Allied carriers on the 27th, which loses me a couple of hundred aircraft for nothing in return. However, I stage more aircraft in, and I'm going to have another go once Loka flips the turn.

My expectations are not high. However, there is some hope that the IJN may be able to inflict some damage, as there's a destroyer squadron and a battleship sitting off Timor in perfect striking range of the Allies, as well as a group of E-class escorts. I have some small hope that together, these units may be able to get in among the Allied fleet and cause all sorts of chaos with reactions, retreats, and so on.

More IJN units are moving down from Surabaya, and the KB and Mini-KB are moving to combine at Babeldoab, so we'll see what happens. Ideally, I want to keep Sumalaki flying the Japanese flag for as long as possible.


< Message edited by mind_messing -- 8/30/2015 10:35:27 PM >

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 496
RE: Wrangling Loki - Mind_Messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 8/30/2015 9:35:44 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline

Side Note

Feb 27th sees me suffer what I can only describe as a night time bombing campaign that would have made the Allies giddy. Massed 4E attacks on several airbases causes absolute chaos to my air defense network, especially in New Guinea. After just getting things secured after the cataclysmic naval bombardments, this was a rough blow. Combat report attached.

quote:

Night Air attack on Lautem , at 72,115

Weather in hex: Light cloud

Raid detected at 36 NM, estimated altitude 3,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 12 minutes

Japanese aircraft
J1N1-S Irving x 9

Allied aircraft
B-24J Liberator x 3

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
B-24J Liberator: 1 destroyed, 2 damaged

Aircraft Attacking:
2 x B-24J Liberator bombing from 2000 feet
Airfield Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb

CAP engaged:
Yokosuka Ku S-3 with J1N1-S Irving (9 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
9 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 2000 , scrambling fighters to 8000.
Raid is overhead



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Air attack on Hollandia , at 93,116

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid detected at 40 NM, estimated altitude 3,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 13 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-45 KAIc Nick x 17

Allied aircraft
B-24J Liberator x 5
PB4Y-1 Liberator x 8

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-45 KAIc Nick: 1 destroyed, 8 damaged
Ki-45 KAIc Nick: 1 destroyed on ground
J2M2 Jack: 1 destroyed on ground

Allied aircraft losses
B-24J Liberator: 2 damaged
PB4Y-1 Liberator: 5 damaged

Runway hits 6

Aircraft Attacking:
8 x PB4Y-1 Liberator bombing from 2000 feet
Airfield Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb
5 x B-24J Liberator bombing from 2000 feet
Airfield Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb

CAP engaged:
21st Sentai with Ki-45 KAIc Nick (3 airborne, 11 on standby, 3 scrambling)
3 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 2000 , scrambling fighters between 3000 and 8000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 32 minutes



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Air attack on Hollandia , at 93,116

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid detected at 40 NM, estimated altitude 3,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 13 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-45 KAIc Nick x 14

Allied aircraft
B-24J Liberator x 21

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-45 KAIc Nick: 1 destroyed, 13 damaged
Ki-45 KAIc Nick: 3 destroyed on ground
Ki-100-I Tony: 3 destroyed on ground
N1K2-J George: 1 destroyed on ground

Allied aircraft losses
B-24J Liberator: 11 damaged

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

Airbase hits 10
Airbase supply hits 2
Runway hits 33

Aircraft Attacking:
8 x B-24J Liberator bombing from 2000 feet
Airfield Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb
5 x B-24J Liberator bombing from 2000 feet
Airfield Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb
8 x B-24J Liberator bombing from 2000 feet
Airfield Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb

CAP engaged:
21st Sentai with Ki-45 KAIc Nick (11 airborne, 0 on standby, 3 scrambling)
11 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 2000 , scrambling fighters between 3000 and 35200.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 55 minutes



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Air attack on Kai-eilanden , at 81,115

Weather in hex: Partial cloud

Raid spotted at 1 NM, estimated altitude 5,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 0 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-45 KAIc Nick x 5

Allied aircraft
B-17E Fortress x 4

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-45 KAIc Nick: 5 damaged
Ki-45 KAIc Nick: 1 destroyed on ground
J2M2 Jack: 1 destroyed on ground
A6M5b Zero: 1 destroyed on ground
D4Y1 Judy: 1 destroyed on ground
N1K2-J George: 1 destroyed on ground

No Allied losses

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

Airbase hits 4
Airbase supply hits 3
Runway hits 21

Aircraft Attacking:
4 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 2000 feet
Airfield Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb

CAP engaged:
5th Sentai with Ki-45 KAIc Nick (1 airborne, 4 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 2000 , scrambling fighters to 6000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 7 minutes



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Air attack on Hollandia , at 93,116

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid detected at 40 NM, estimated altitude 6,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 13 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-45 KAIc Nick x 13

Allied aircraft
B-24J Liberator x 11

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-45 KAIc Nick: 6 damaged
Ki-45 KAIc Nick: 1 destroyed on ground
N1K2-J George: 1 destroyed on ground
Ki-100-I Tony: 1 destroyed on ground

Allied aircraft losses
B-24J Liberator: 2 damaged
B-24J Liberator: 1 destroyed by flak

Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 9

Aircraft Attacking:
6 x B-24J Liberator bombing from 2000 feet *
Airfield Attack: 5 x 500 lb GP Bomb
5 x B-24J Liberator bombing from 2000 feet
Airfield Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb

CAP engaged:
21st Sentai with Ki-45 KAIc Nick (10 airborne, 0 on standby, 3 scrambling)
10 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 2000 , scrambling fighters between 3000 and 4000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 44 minutes



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Air attack on Lautem , at 72,115

Weather in hex: Light cloud

Raid detected at 40 NM, estimated altitude 6,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 13 minutes

Japanese aircraft
J1N1-S Irving x 3

Allied aircraft
B-24J Liberator x 3

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
B-24J Liberator: 3 damaged

Airbase supply hits 1

Aircraft Attacking:
3 x B-24J Liberator bombing from 2000 feet
Airfield Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb

CAP engaged:
Yokosuka Ku S-3 with J1N1-S Irving (3 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
3 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 2000 , scrambling fighters between 0 and 2000.
Raid is overhead



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Air attack on Hollandia , at 93,116

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid detected at 40 NM, estimated altitude 5,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 13 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-45 KAIc Nick x 12

Allied aircraft
B-24J Liberator x 9

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-100-I Tony: 1 destroyed on ground

Allied aircraft losses
B-24J Liberator: 1 damaged

Airbase hits 2

Aircraft Attacking:
9 x B-24J Liberator bombing from 2000 feet
Airfield Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb

CAP engaged:
21st Sentai with Ki-45 KAIc Nick (9 airborne, 0 on standby, 3 scrambling)
9 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 2000 , scrambling fighters between 2000 and 4000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 46 minutes



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Air attack on Hollandia , at 93,116

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid detected at 36 NM, estimated altitude 5,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 12 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-45 KAIc Nick x 12

Allied aircraft
B-24J Liberator x 8

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-45 KAIc Nick: 1 destroyed, 11 damaged
Ki-45 KAIc Nick: 2 destroyed on ground
N1K2-J George: 1 destroyed on ground
Ki-100-I Tony: 1 destroyed on ground

Allied aircraft losses
B-24J Liberator: 4 damaged

Airbase hits 2
Runway hits 4

Aircraft Attacking:
8 x B-24J Liberator bombing from 2000 feet
Airfield Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb

CAP engaged:
21st Sentai with Ki-45 KAIc Nick (9 airborne, 0 on standby, 3 scrambling)
9 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 2000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 32 minutes



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Air attack on Hollandia , at 93,116

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid detected at 40 NM, estimated altitude 7,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 13 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-45 KAIc Nick x 9

Allied aircraft
B-24J Liberator x 7

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
B-24J Liberator: 3 damaged

Runway hits 1

Aircraft Attacking:
7 x B-24J Liberator bombing from 2000 feet
Airfield Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb

CAP engaged:
21st Sentai with Ki-45 KAIc Nick (6 airborne, 0 on standby, 3 scrambling)
6 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 2000 , scrambling fighters between 2000 and 4000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 27 minutes



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Air attack on Hollandia , at 93,116

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid detected at 34 NM, estimated altitude 4,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 11 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-45 KAIc Nick x 8

Allied aircraft
PB4Y-1 Liberator x 6

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
PB4Y-1 Liberator: 2 damaged

Aircraft Attacking:
6 x PB4Y-1 Liberator bombing from 2000 feet *
Airfield Attack: 5 x 500 lb GP Bomb

CAP engaged:
21st Sentai with Ki-45 KAIc Nick (5 airborne, 0 on standby, 3 scrambling)
5 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 2000 , scrambling fighters between 2000 and 35200.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 55 minutes



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Air attack on Lautem , at 72,115

Weather in hex: Light cloud

Raid detected at 28 NM, estimated altitude 8,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 9 minutes

Japanese aircraft
no flights

Allied aircraft
PB4Y-1 Liberator x 6

Japanese aircraft losses
N1K2-J George: 1 destroyed on ground

Allied aircraft losses
PB4Y-1 Liberator: 6 damaged

Runway hits 8

Aircraft Attacking:
6 x PB4Y-1 Liberator bombing from 2000 feet
Airfield Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Air attack on Hollandia , at 93,116

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid detected at 18 NM, estimated altitude 6,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 6 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-45 KAIc Nick x 6

Allied aircraft
B-24J Liberator x 6

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-45 KAIc Nick: 2 damaged
Ki-45 KAIc Nick: 1 destroyed on ground
Ki-100-I Tony: 2 destroyed on ground

Allied aircraft losses
B-24J Liberator: 4 damaged

Airbase hits 1
Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 2

Aircraft Attacking:
6 x B-24J Liberator bombing from 2000 feet
Airfield Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb

CAP engaged:
21st Sentai with Ki-45 KAIc Nick (6 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
6 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 2000 , scrambling fighters to 35200.
Raid is overhead



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Air attack on Hollandia , at 93,116

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid detected at 46 NM, estimated altitude 6,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 15 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-45 KAIc Nick x 6

Allied aircraft
B-24J Liberator x 6

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-45 KAIc Nick: 1 destroyed
J2M2 Jack: 1 destroyed on ground
Ki-100-I Tony: 1 destroyed on ground

Allied aircraft losses
B-24J Liberator: 2 damaged

Airbase hits 1
Runway hits 1

Aircraft Attacking:
6 x B-24J Liberator bombing from 2000 feet
Airfield Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb

CAP engaged:
21st Sentai with Ki-45 KAIc Nick (6 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
6 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 2000 , scrambling fighters to 27370.
Raid is overhead



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Air attack on Lautem , at 72,115

Weather in hex: Light cloud

Raid detected at 41 NM, estimated altitude 3,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 14 minutes

Japanese aircraft
no flights

Allied aircraft
B-24D1 Liberator x 3

Japanese aircraft losses
J2M2 Jack: 1 destroyed on ground
A6M5b Zero: 1 destroyed on ground

Allied aircraft losses
B-24D1 Liberator: 3 damaged

Airbase hits 1
Airbase supply hits 2
Runway hits 8

Aircraft Attacking:
3 x B-24D1 Liberator bombing from 2000 feet
Airfield Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Air attack on Hollandia , at 93,116

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid detected at 34 NM, estimated altitude 6,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 11 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-45 KAIc Nick x 5

Allied aircraft
B-24J Liberator x 7

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-45 KAIc Nick: 5 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
B-24J Liberator: 4 damaged

Aircraft Attacking:
7 x B-24J Liberator bombing from 2000 feet
Airfield Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb

CAP engaged:
21st Sentai with Ki-45 KAIc Nick (5 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
5 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 2000 , scrambling fighters to 19540.
Raid is overhead



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Air attack on Lautem , at 72,115

Weather in hex: Light cloud

Raid detected at 32 NM, estimated altitude 5,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 10 minutes

Japanese aircraft
no flights

Allied aircraft
B-24D1 Liberator x 3

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M5b Zero: 4 destroyed on ground

No Allied losses

Airbase hits 5
Runway hits 5

Aircraft Attacking:
3 x B-24D1 Liberator bombing from 2000 feet
Airfield Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Air attack on Hollandia , at 93,116

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid detected at 40 NM, estimated altitude 7,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 13 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-45 KAIc Nick x 4

Allied aircraft
B-24J Liberator x 4

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-45 KAIc Nick: 4 damaged
Ki-45 KAIc Nick: 1 destroyed on ground
N1K2-J George: 1 destroyed on ground

Allied aircraft losses
B-24J Liberator: 3 damaged

Airbase hits 1
Airbase supply hits 2
Runway hits 3

Aircraft Attacking:
4 x B-24J Liberator bombing from 2000 feet
Airfield Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb

CAP engaged:
21st Sentai with Ki-45 KAIc Nick (4 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
4 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 2000 , scrambling fighters to 19540.
Raid is overhead



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Air attack on Hollandia , at 93,116

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid detected at 19 NM, estimated altitude 4,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 6 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-45 KAIc Nick x 4

Allied aircraft
B-24J Liberator x 4

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-45 KAIc Nick: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
B-24J Liberator: 2 damaged

Aircraft Attacking:
4 x B-24J Liberator bombing from 2000 feet
Airfield Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb

CAP engaged:
21st Sentai with Ki-45 KAIc Nick (4 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
4 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 2000 , scrambling fighters to 11710.
Raid is overhead



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Air attack on Hollandia , at 93,116

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid spotted at 29 NM, estimated altitude 4,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 9 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-45 KAIc Nick x 2

Allied aircraft
B-24J Liberator x 6

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-45 KAIc Nick: 2 damaged
Ki-45 KAIc Nick: 1 destroyed on ground
N1K2-J George: 1 destroyed on ground

Allied aircraft losses
B-24J Liberator: 3 damaged

Airbase hits 1
Runway hits 1

Aircraft Attacking:
6 x B-24J Liberator bombing from 2000 feet
Airfield Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb

CAP engaged:
21st Sentai with Ki-45 KAIc Nick (2 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
2 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 2000 , scrambling fighters between 0 and 2000.
Raid is overhead


I bemoaned these results in several wordy emails to Loka. For flying at 2000ft, his bombers are taking far too few losses/disruption from flak (not to mention the balloons that are supposed to stop these kinds of attacks) and inflicting losses that are just out of whack (my favourite are the 4 B-17s that destroy 5 planes and damage a bunch more without any damage). This was moonlight in the high teens as well, IIRC.

I proposed a 6k altitude limit for night bombing with 4Es, seeing as flak and balloons should really make this the lowest practical altitude to bomb at for the Allies, but Loka wasn't interested.

This all leaves me feeling somewhat salty, seeing as there is no counter to massed night bombing. Non-NF squadrons are utterly useless at night CAP (and arguably safer getting bombed on the ground than on night CAP!), NF squadrons are at a premium, and flak and balloons don't seem to factor in.

Essentally, night bombing has replaced daytime bombing for Loka's 4E's, which just seems off to me.

However, I've got no leg to stand on, nor can I take the moral high ground, having spent the past two years of this game forcibly injecting my IJNAF OOB full of steroids, sneakily leaving bases uncaptured to activate kamikazies at the earliest possible date and a whole host of other gamey little tricks to give the empire an edge. I suppose he can have his precision night bombing campaign.

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 497
RE: Wrangling Loki - Mind_Messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 8/30/2015 11:48:52 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
I proposed a 6k altitude limit for night bombing with 4Es, seeing as flak and balloons should really make this the lowest practical altitude to bomb at for the Allies, but Loka wasn't interested.

This all leaves me feeling somewhat salty, seeing as there is no counter to massed night bombing. Non-NF squadrons are utterly useless at night CAP (and arguably safer getting bombed on the ground than on night CAP!), NF squadrons are at a premium, and flak and balloons don't seem to factor in.

Essentally, night bombing has replaced daytime bombing for Loka's 4E's, which just seems off to me.

However, I've got no leg to stand on, nor can I take the moral high ground, having spent the past two years of this game forcibly injecting my IJNAF OOB full of steroids, sneakily leaving bases uncaptured to activate kamikazies at the earliest possible date and a whole host of other gamey little tricks to give the empire an edge. I suppose he can have his precision night bombing campaign.



You are right! No legs to stand on. Get some Pete's up doing CAP, so they interfere with the bombing and then AA and Radar. No other defense since NF are off protecting other targets.

Balloons are a function of fort size and pilot experience with a good modifier for 4E. What you need are your 20 mike-mikes there. JNAF Eng squadrons have them as do the auto cannon AA groups. When the Army upgrades to them it will be painful for the Allies to do this, but you are what 3 months away from that. Painful in damaged planes and op losses.

If you had plentiful 20mm there, planes damaged would be quite high. Have to say one squadron of Irving Sa would have done wonders with good pilots.





< Message edited by Lowpe -- 8/31/2015 12:51:01 AM >

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 498
RE: Wrangling Loki - Mind_Messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 8/31/2015 12:45:20 AM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe
You are right! No legs to stand on. Get some Pete's up doing CAP, so they interfere with the bombing and then AA and Radar. No other defense since NF are off protecting other targets.

Balloons are a function of fort size and pilot experience with a good modifier for 4E. What you need are your 20 mike-mikes there. JNAF Eng squadrons have them as do the auto cannon AA groups. When the Army upgrades to them it will be painful for the Allies to do this, but you are what 3 months away from that. Painful in damaged planes and op losses.

If you had plentiful 20mm there, planes damaged would be quite high. Have to say one squadron of Irving Sa would have done wonders with good pilots.


Back in 1943 when Loka's low-level night bombing campaign was getting started, I said to myself that the IJNAF Airbase Unit TOE upgrades that would add the 25mm guns would make a great deal of difference. That upgrade happened...and didn't make much difference. I don't hold out much hope for the IJA Airbase Unit TOE upgrade, but I'll be glad of it nonetheless.

Keep in mind, at 2000ft, the only thing that can't fire on the 4E's is the dinky 7.7mm machine guns and the Nambu pistols of the pilots. The 13.2mm machine guns, the 25mm's in the AF units, as well as the 8cm stuff. Under those circumstances, I just expect...more. More disruption, more aircraft damaged, more aircraft destroyed outright.

It seems to me he's getting the benefit of the increased accuracy flying at 2000ft, without paying the price of the increased losses. Via email he tells me that his pools are low, but evidently not low enough as to make it an unsustainable tactic (which I think it should be, at least in the long term) seeing as it's been going on since late '42 now.

Well, I'll move some Jake squadrons up to the frontline and get them flying night CAP.

< Message edited by mind_messing -- 8/31/2015 1:47:26 AM >

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 499
RE: Wrangling Loki - Mind_Messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 8/31/2015 6:35:16 AM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline
Personally I avoid going as low as 2k for whatever mission. It seriously messes with the engine and detection times. No matter what CAP you have and at what altitude they are flying I´ve very, very rarely (if ever) seen the CAP able to react.

I can´t remember who it was but someone tested this and posted the results in their AAR. Basically you can wipe out any CV force by just setting your strikes to 1-2k. The person in question refrained from doing that after testing it.

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 500
RE: Wrangling Loki - Mind_Messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 8/31/2015 10:05:00 AM   
Encircled


Posts: 2024
Joined: 12/30/2010
From: Northern England
Status: offline
quote:

Personally I avoid going as low as 2k for whatever mission. It seriously messes with the engine and detection times. No matter what CAP you have and at what altitude they are flying I´ve very, very rarely (if ever) seen the CAP able to react.


Still a valid tactic as part of a mass strike at all altitudes I'd have thought.

_____________________________


(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 501
RE: Wrangling Loki - Mind_Messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 8/31/2015 10:18:47 AM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Encircled

quote:

Personally I avoid going as low as 2k for whatever mission. It seriously messes with the engine and detection times. No matter what CAP you have and at what altitude they are flying I´ve very, very rarely (if ever) seen the CAP able to react.


Still a valid tactic as part of a mass strike at all altitudes I'd have thought.


Depends on how you look at it IMO. I have never tested this myself but going by what I read in that AAR going in at 1-2k means CAP will never be able to respond. If that is true and the engine can´t handle it I would deem it an exploit weather or not you use it in a mass strike with other altitudes.

Perhaps not a major issue on land but if you can get say 50 TBs right through CAP it can be a war changing event.

As I said I havn´t tested it myself so I´m only going by what I read. Its a bloody shame I can´t remember whos AAR it was. Hopefully whoever it was reads this and can give more info!

(in reply to Encircled)
Post #: 502
RE: Wrangling Loki - Mind_Messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 8/31/2015 11:04:05 AM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Encircled

quote:

Personally I avoid going as low as 2k for whatever mission. It seriously messes with the engine and detection times. No matter what CAP you have and at what altitude they are flying I´ve very, very rarely (if ever) seen the CAP able to react.


Still a valid tactic as part of a mass strike at all altitudes I'd have thought.


I agree, it's as valid a tactic as any I've used, and I've used some real scrub tactics.

At least I get radar equipped night fighters for the IJN, and the first IJA night fighters as well. Hopefully they can make a difference.

The crux of the issue for me is that the benefits of flying at 2k (increased accuracy, to the point that moonlight becomes irrelevant) far, far outweigh the costs (flak, mainly, but balloons as well).


quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister


quote:

ORIGINAL: Encircled

quote:

Personally I avoid going as low as 2k for whatever mission. It seriously messes with the engine and detection times. No matter what CAP you have and at what altitude they are flying I´ve very, very rarely (if ever) seen the CAP able to react.


Still a valid tactic as part of a mass strike at all altitudes I'd have thought.


Depends on how you look at it IMO. I have never tested this myself but going by what I read in that AAR going in at 1-2k means CAP will never be able to respond. If that is true and the engine can´t handle it I would deem it an exploit weather or not you use it in a mass strike with other altitudes.

Perhaps not a major issue on land but if you can get say 50 TBs right through CAP it can be a war changing event.

As I said I havn´t tested it myself so I´m only going by what I read. Its a bloody shame I can´t remember whos AAR it was. Hopefully whoever it was reads this and can give more info!


I wouldn't go as far as calling it an exploit. Perhaps one of the oddities in the code would be a better explanation. As I've said, the balance of benefit versus cost just seems a little off in regards to low level night bombing.

I think it's also important to keep in mind that there's a lot of info about Loka's 4E groups that I don't see. Morale, fatigue ect. It could be that his pilots require copious quantities of medicinal alcohol after a night raid to deal with the fear of flying into Japanese night fighters, flak and balloons!

Mass strikes as a perfectly valid tactic as far as I'm concerned. In fact, they'll be my resort to breaching the late-war Allied super-carrier-CAP!

(in reply to Encircled)
Post #: 503
RE: Wrangling Loki - Mind_Messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 8/31/2015 11:26:36 AM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
You can intercept low flying planes. Your CAP has to be low, and generally at the base attacked but not always.

With ships, I have intercepted low flying planes all time. Again you need to have low CAP.

At least that has been my experience.

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 504
RE: Wrangling Loki - Mind_Messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 8/31/2015 11:33:17 AM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing
I wouldn't go as far as calling it an exploit. Perhaps one of the oddities in the code would be a better explanation. As I've said, the balance of benefit versus cost just seems a little off in regards to low level night bombing.


Just to be clear I´m not saying massed strikes are an exploit.

But if the code can´t handle strikes that low I think its pretty much the definition of an exploit/bug?

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 505
RE: Wrangling Loki - Mind_Messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 8/31/2015 11:34:24 AM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

You can intercept low flying planes. Your CAP has to be low, and generally at the base attacked but not always.

With ships, I have intercepted low flying planes all time. Again you need to have low CAP.

At least that has been my experience.


That sound comforting. Might have been fixed in one of the BETAs. Not sure what version was used when I read about it so if there was an issue it may very well have been corrected.

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 506
RE: Wrangling Loki - Mind_Messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 8/31/2015 11:35:21 AM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

You can intercept low flying planes. Your CAP has to be low, and generally at the base attacked but not always.

With ships, I have intercepted low flying planes all time. Again you need to have low CAP.

At least that has been my experience.


My night fighters (both dedicated NF and otherwise) have always flown at 2k. Loka always flys his bombers at 2k.

At best, I get a half-dozen passes where I'll lose a couple of NF to the 4E's defensive armament before the bombers get through.

My favorite combat reports are always the ones where I have a dozen or so NF still left in the air, I get one or two firing passes, then the good old "Air to air combat done" line in the replay screen.

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 507
RE: Wrangling Loki - Mind_Messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 8/31/2015 11:47:09 AM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing


quote:

ORIGINAL: Encircled

quote:

Personally I avoid going as low as 2k for whatever mission. It seriously messes with the engine and detection times. No matter what CAP you have and at what altitude they are flying I´ve very, very rarely (if ever) seen the CAP able to react.


Still a valid tactic as part of a mass strike at all altitudes I'd have thought.


I agree, it's as valid a tactic as any I've used, and I've used some real scrub tactics.

At least I get radar equipped night fighters for the IJN, and the first IJA night fighters as well. Hopefully they can make a difference.

The crux of the issue for me is that the benefits of flying at 2k (increased accuracy, to the point that moonlight becomes irrelevant) far, far outweigh the costs (flak, mainly, but balloons as well).


quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister


quote:

ORIGINAL: Encircled

quote:

Personally I avoid going as low as 2k for whatever mission. It seriously messes with the engine and detection times. No matter what CAP you have and at what altitude they are flying I´ve very, very rarely (if ever) seen the CAP able to react.


Still a valid tactic as part of a mass strike at all altitudes I'd have thought.


Depends on how you look at it IMO. I have never tested this myself but going by what I read in that AAR going in at 1-2k means CAP will never be able to respond. If that is true and the engine can´t handle it I would deem it an exploit weather or not you use it in a mass strike with other altitudes.

Perhaps not a major issue on land but if you can get say 50 TBs right through CAP it can be a war changing event.

As I said I havn´t tested it myself so I´m only going by what I read. Its a bloody shame I can´t remember whos AAR it was. Hopefully whoever it was reads this and can give more info!


I wouldn't go as far as calling it an exploit. Perhaps one of the oddities in the code would be a better explanation. As I've said, the balance of benefit versus cost just seems a little off in regards to low level night bombing.

I think it's also important to keep in mind that there's a lot of info about Loka's 4E groups that I don't see. Morale, fatigue ect. It could be that his pilots require copious quantities of medicinal alcohol after a night raid to deal with the fear of flying into Japanese night fighters, flak and balloons!

Mass strikes as a perfectly valid tactic as far as I'm concerned. In fact, they'll be my resort to breaching the late-war Allied super-carrier-CAP!



"One of my very early addition to counter low level attacks.

The Balloon effect is determined by maximum value of (a) plus (b) below. The overall maximum of the sum is 9.
(a) Balloons are present in a base if the AF + port > 6. The value is the fort level of the hex.
(b) Balloons can be added to a base/LCU by creating a device of type BALLOON. The value is the number of devices. [not currently in use]

They affect aircraft flying below 6000'.

Twin-engine or higher planes increase the number of balloons by 4.

Balloon level is not reported but is usually the fort level if the combined value of the base is >6.
Pilot experience should help to avoid balloons (except for the bug I just found which is not always using the right pilot!!!)

< Message edited by michaelm -- 4/6/2010 4:09:22 AM >

_____________________________


Michael"

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2206908&mpage=1&key=�

I exchanged a few emails with Loka on the subject of night bombing during your discussions. It's a game area where it's ridiculous to lean on history for Japan's case given how various mechanisms work in the game.

Your posts here also leave out an important piece of the negotiations, so far as I understand them. He offered a compromise to the 6000ft. proposal; you weren't interested in THAT either. It wasn't as one sided as you propose here.

Night bombing from the Allied perspective is a tool. It certainly is not cost-free or some kind of wonder weapon. Japan players see only a fraction of the downsides, however. If you want to maximize your defenses against it do not rely on NFs. Any fighter--Nates even--that engages ruins aim. If you focus on how many bombers you destroyed you miss the point of the defense.



< Message edited by Bullwinkle58 -- 8/31/2015 12:48:43 PM >


_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 508
RE: Wrangling Loki - Mind_Messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 8/31/2015 11:58:05 AM   
Lowpe


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
Any fighter--Nates even--that engages ruins aim. If you focus on how many bombers you destroyed you miss the point of the defense.


+1

Petes, Alfs, Daves...work well too. Fighters with horrendous climb rates, set at 10% CAP worked well for me.

You also need AA; so it is a holistic approach. NF need lots of radar just like daytime CAP.

I saw a big improvement going from Irving S to Sa; they don't run out of ammo so fast.

What percent do your run your Irvings at?

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 509
RE: Wrangling Loki - Mind_Messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) - 8/31/2015 12:47:51 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing


quote:

ORIGINAL: Encircled

quote:

Personally I avoid going as low as 2k for whatever mission. It seriously messes with the engine and detection times. No matter what CAP you have and at what altitude they are flying I´ve very, very rarely (if ever) seen the CAP able to react.


Still a valid tactic as part of a mass strike at all altitudes I'd have thought.


I agree, it's as valid a tactic as any I've used, and I've used some real scrub tactics.

At least I get radar equipped night fighters for the IJN, and the first IJA night fighters as well. Hopefully they can make a difference.

The crux of the issue for me is that the benefits of flying at 2k (increased accuracy, to the point that moonlight becomes irrelevant) far, far outweigh the costs (flak, mainly, but balloons as well).


quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister


quote:

ORIGINAL: Encircled

quote:

Personally I avoid going as low as 2k for whatever mission. It seriously messes with the engine and detection times. No matter what CAP you have and at what altitude they are flying I´ve very, very rarely (if ever) seen the CAP able to react.


Still a valid tactic as part of a mass strike at all altitudes I'd have thought.


Depends on how you look at it IMO. I have never tested this myself but going by what I read in that AAR going in at 1-2k means CAP will never be able to respond. If that is true and the engine can´t handle it I would deem it an exploit weather or not you use it in a mass strike with other altitudes.

Perhaps not a major issue on land but if you can get say 50 TBs right through CAP it can be a war changing event.

As I said I havn´t tested it myself so I´m only going by what I read. Its a bloody shame I can´t remember whos AAR it was. Hopefully whoever it was reads this and can give more info!


I wouldn't go as far as calling it an exploit. Perhaps one of the oddities in the code would be a better explanation. As I've said, the balance of benefit versus cost just seems a little off in regards to low level night bombing.

I think it's also important to keep in mind that there's a lot of info about Loka's 4E groups that I don't see. Morale, fatigue ect. It could be that his pilots require copious quantities of medicinal alcohol after a night raid to deal with the fear of flying into Japanese night fighters, flak and balloons!

Mass strikes as a perfectly valid tactic as far as I'm concerned. In fact, they'll be my resort to breaching the late-war Allied super-carrier-CAP!



http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2206908&mpage=1&key=�

I exchanged a few emails with Loka on the subject of night bombing during your discussions. It's a game area where it's ridiculous to lean on history for Japan's case given how various mechanisms work in the game.

Your posts here also leave out an important piece of the negotiations, so far as I understand them. He offered a compromise to the 6000ft. proposal; you weren't interested in THAT either. It wasn't as one sided as you propose here.



Regarding barrage balloons: I've tested it. At night, they are nerfed to the point of being completely irrelevant.

Losses to barrage balloons during the day are reported as flak losses. At 5k, in daylight, 4E's run into them left, right and center.

At night, at 5k, is nothing in comparison. I think I had one plane reported lost due to flak - there was no flak at the base, so it was a balloon. That was out of a hundred plane raid, IIRC.

Obviously, one trial does not an experiment make, as at the time I wanted to verify that the code for balloons at night actually worked, rather than assess it's effectiveness. Even so, there was a stark difference in planes destroyed/damaged due to balloons between the day/night strikes.

I might go back and run that experiment ten times or so to see what sort of losses balloons cause at night.

RE: House Rules

There was no compromise, as I read it. The 6k limit was my proposal. Loka pointed out quite rightly that I had oversized groups and active kamikazes and there was no further mention of house rules. I can forward you the email chain or post it here if you wish.

quote:

Night bombing from the Allied perspective is a tool. It certainly is not cost-free or some kind of wonder weapon. Japan players see only a fraction of the downsides, however. If you want to maximize your defenses against it do not rely on NFs. Any fighter--Nates even--that engages ruins aim. If you focus on how many bombers you destroyed you miss the point of the defense.


Therein lies the crux. It's getting fighters to engage that's the real issue for night CAP. Even then, they'll get worn down due to the fragmented nature of night strikes. The first few raids might get disrupted, but the vast majority will get a good run at things.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
Any fighter--Nates even--that engages ruins aim. If you focus on how many bombers you destroyed you miss the point of the defense.


+1

Petes, Alfs, Daves...work well too. Fighters with horrendous climb rates, set at 10% CAP worked well for me.

You also need AA; so it is a holistic approach. NF need lots of radar just like daytime CAP.

I saw a big improvement going from Irving S to Sa; they don't run out of ammo so fast.

What percent do your run your Irvings at?



I have everything you list marked off. AA, NF, radar. It's all there, it just doesn't seem to work together holistically.

I can't check the settings on my Irvings just now, give me a couple of hours and I'll get back to you.

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 510
Page:   <<   < prev  15 16 [17] 18 19   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Wrangling Loki - Mind_Messing (J) vs Lokasenna (A) Page: <<   < prev  15 16 [17] 18 19   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

1.000