Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific >> Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
- 3/11/2003 8:13:16 AM   
Mr.Frag


Posts: 13410
Joined: 12/18/2002
From: Purgatory
Status: offline
Just some facts:

Assault differences: Japan above Allied troops (looking at raw numbers, no factoring for fatigue/skill/etc)

396 difference turn 59
425 difference turn 80

Additional to this which must be factored in Northern Command (347 Assault value can not be moved from Australia) which shifts this to:

743 turn 59 :)
772 turn 80 :)

To put in perspective, the strongest Allied brigade weighs in at 117.

Between turn 77 until turn 179 Japan gets 72 :(

Between turn 77 until turn 179 Allies get 1318 :eek:

As you can see, the advantage Japan had has now completely vanished.

We are now looking at a -845.

Now we apply the same Penalty for Northern Command (403 now) and you end up with Japan being -442.

If Japan has not made their mark by turn 85, they are not going to, purely from a math standpoint. It can no longer be done.

From a 772 advantage to a -442 disadvantage in raw assault power which is the measure of troops.

You really think you can hold PM against an 772 advantage do you? ( this is assault numbers, not TROOP numbers :D )

Pipe dreams are a wonderful thing until the puff of smoke gets blown away ;)

(edit)

As you can see from the raw numbers here, the implications to lets say loosing the 7th division because your transports get creamed trying to get to PM or the 3rd division etc is 351 to those odds, so that 743 early in the game just shifted to 1094 !!! because you were in a rush :rolleyes:

(edit some more lol)

These numbers are reflective of scenario 17, scenario 19 i just downright scary, with Japan reaching the 720 mark advantage by turn 21 and holding it longer...

(in reply to Deban)
Post #: 31
- 3/11/2003 8:42:13 AM   
denisonh


Posts: 2194
Joined: 12/21/2001
From: Upstate SC
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mr.Frag
[B]Just some facts:

Assault differences: Japan above Allied troops (looking at raw numbers, no factoring for fatigue/skill/etc)

396 difference turn 59
425 difference turn 80

Additional to this which must be factored in Northern Command (347 Assault value can not be moved from Australia) which shifts this to:

743 turn 59 :)
772 turn 80 :)

To put in perspective, the strongest Allied brigade weighs in at 117.

Between turn 77 until turn 179 Japan gets 72 :(

Between turn 77 until turn 179 Allies get 1318 :eek:

As you can see, the advantage Japan had has now completely vanished.

We are now looking at a -845.

Now we apply the same Penalty for Northern Command (403 now) and you end up with Japan being -442.

If Japan has not made their mark by turn 85, they are not going to, purely from a math standpoint. It can no longer be done.

From a 772 advantage to a -442 disadvantage in raw assault power which is the measure of troops.

You really think you can hold PM against an 772 advantage do you? ( this is assault numbers, not TROOP numbers :D )

Pipe dreams are a wonderful thing until the puff of smoke gets blown away ;)

(edit)

As you can see from the raw numbers here, the implications to lets say loosing the 7th division because your transports get creamed trying to get to PM or the 3rd division etc is 351 to those odds, so that 743 early in the game just shifted to 1094 !!! because you were in a rush :rolleyes:

(edit some more lol)

These numbers are reflective of scenario 17, scenario 19 i just downright scary, with Japan reaching the 720 mark advantage by turn 21 and holding it longer... [/B][/QUOTE]

Ahh, but they have to [I]get there[/I] .

If you look at the 4 principles of combat power - Firepower, leadership, manuever and protection, the situation is not as clear cut as you would make it.

Relative combat power is how the firepower is applied, through manuever and tactics.

Greater numbers is only effective if they can be applied. Naval and air forces, and thier handling, in part determine the amount of groundpower applied to PM.

I do not say by any means that it is not unlikely that PM will fall to an IJN player, but a good USN player has a good chance of keeping the IJN out.

Those units have to get to PM. And it ain't a walk in the park for an IJN player facing a quality and determined USN foe.

Like in the NFL, one team has everything on it's side, yet gets beat on Sunday. That is why they play the game:) .

_____________________________


"Life is tough, it's even tougher when you're stupid" -SGT John M. Stryker, USMC

(in reply to Deban)
Post #: 32
- 3/11/2003 9:20:44 AM   
Mr.Frag


Posts: 13410
Joined: 12/18/2002
From: Purgatory
Status: offline
Actually, now that level bombing of ships has been toned down to something akin to reality :D it is a walk in the park.

Based on range of air units, PM is under fire from Lae, Rabaul and very shortly after, 3 CV's worth of aircraft which close the base completely.

Once the airfield is trashed, one shifts fire to the port complex, preventing the airfield from ever getting repaired.

Now that the port is damaged (here's the fun part!) Allied attempts to unload ships take dramatically longer, which means that a lot of losses are going to be felt by them, all the while units located at PM are suffering from the high fatigue levels by non-stop air attacks. This has the double effect of prepping PM for a fall AND causing additional troop losses by the attempted transport missions.

This can all be done from the safety of the north side of NG, which puts the Allied in the situation of bringing their CV's north of Gili Gili to push Japan's CV fleet back.

As this is happening (very early in the game), Japan is also sneaking units down the east island chains prepping for Luganville and farther south.

Turn 21 is the first set of AP's for the Allied player. Until then, they only have the starting group at Brisbane. These are being tied up trying to prevent PM's rapid fall.

The Allied player is stuck with a tough choice: Continue to commit to trying to save PM, or regroup and deal with reality :)

One of the cute things that Japan can do is park the A6M2's in LRCAP right on PM to kill all those pesky C-47's trying to sneak troops in by air.

At this point in the game, Japan has risked absolutely nothing while the Allied are desperately attempting to save PM. Aircraft losses on the Allied side have depleted the pool of pilots as the pathetic units of fighters with skills in the 50 range and rapidly falling towards 30 continue to gain experience for Japan's pilots. 70+ Zeros fill the sky, raining down bits and pieces of Allied pilots. :D

The choice is entirely in Japan's hands, with the Allied player only able to react based on intel of what Japan is going to do.

As you put it:

Firepower - Clearly Japan in the early game (they have more of EVERYTHING)
Leadership - always a great debate ;)
Manuever - Hands down Japan at this stage!
Protection - Japan's airpower pre-p-38's rule!

Remember, the values I am using are Assault values, which is the measure used to determine outcome of all land combat. 2 to 1 odds are all that are needed to capture a base.

(in reply to Deban)
Post #: 33
- 3/11/2003 9:56:21 AM   
denisonh


Posts: 2194
Joined: 12/21/2001
From: Upstate SC
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mr.Frag
[B]Actually, now that level bombing of ships has been toned down to something akin to reality :D it is a walk in the park.

Based on range of air units, PM is under fire from Lae, Rabaul and very shortly after, 3 CV's worth of aircraft which close the base completely.

Once the airfield is trashed, one shifts fire to the port complex, preventing the airfield from ever getting repaired.

Now that the port is damaged (here's the fun part!) Allied attempts to unload ships take dramatically longer, which means that a lot of losses are going to be felt by them, all the while units located at PM are suffering from the high fatigue levels by non-stop air attacks. This has the double effect of prepping PM for a fall AND causing additional troop losses by the attempted transport missions.

This can all be done from the safety of the north side of NG, which puts the Allied in the situation of bringing their CV's north of Gili Gili to push Japan's CV fleet back.

As this is happening (very early in the game), Japan is also sneaking units down the east island chains prepping for Luganville and farther south.

Turn 21 is the first set of AP's for the Allied player. Until then, they only have the starting group at Brisbane. These are being tied up trying to prevent PM's rapid fall.

The Allied player is stuck with a tough choice: Continue to commit to trying to save PM, or regroup and deal with reality :)

One of the cute things that Japan can do is park the A6M2's in LRCAP right on PM to kill all those pesky C-47's trying to sneak troops in by air.

At this point in the game, Japan has risked absolutely nothing while the Allied are desperately attempting to save PM. Aircraft losses on the Allied side have depleted the pool of pilots as the pathetic units of fighters with skills in the 50 range and rapidly falling towards 30 continue to gain experience for Japan's pilots. 70+ Zeros fill the sky, raining down bits and pieces of Allied pilots. :D

The choice is entirely in Japan's hands, with the Allied player only able to react based on intel of what Japan is going to do.

As you put it:

Firepower - Clearly Japan in the early game (they have more of EVERYTHING)
Leadership - always a great debate ;)
Manuever - Hands down Japan at this stage!
Protection - Japan's airpower pre-p-38's rule!

Remember, the values I am using are Assault values, which is the measure used to determine outcome of all land combat. 2 to 1 odds are all that are needed to capture a base. [/B][/QUOTE]

As a great NFL quarterback used to say before every game
:

"Talk is cheap, lets go play"

Now I'd like to see some PBEM results to add some realistic, quantifiable evidence to support your assertions that it is a walk in the park (Not against me, Mr Frag ;) ).

I suggest it is not as easy as you make it out to be. It looks good on paper, but it is not that simple.

Firepower maybe in the IJN favor, but manuever is a function of how you employ your forces. I do not see how you can automatically credit the IJN superioirity. Care to share how you came to that conclusion? Interior lines of communication may be all well and good, but if the issue is taking PM, that does not apply, and ship speeds are pretty much the same on both sides.

Leadership is the strategy and way to manage the battle. That is a funstion of the player.

Protection in carrier warfare is often a function of leadership and manuever.

I say it ain't easy, and you still have yet to convince me otherwise.

_____________________________


"Life is tough, it's even tougher when you're stupid" -SGT John M. Stryker, USMC

(in reply to Deban)
Post #: 34
- 3/11/2003 11:26:25 AM   
Mr.Frag


Posts: 13410
Joined: 12/18/2002
From: Purgatory
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Firepower maybe in the IJN favor, but manuever is a function of how you employ your forces. I do not see how you can automatically credit the IJN superioirity. Care to share how you came to that conclusion? Interior lines of communication may be all well and good, but if the issue is taking PM, that does not apply, and ship speeds are pretty much the same on both sides.[/QUOTE]

Take a look at the skill levels of Japan's ships vs Allied ships at the start of the game. The USA is sadly lacking in skills, especially at night. Both sides have some quality aggressive surface commanders that negate each other. The Allied have the edge with Radar AND Damage control, but the ships available until the Enterprise and Hornet show up are not terribly effective overall.

Any Allied ships coming to PM are under Japan airspace. Japan can sit back on the other side near Lae and demolish the port while being completely out of reach of Allied CV's. Japan has a very short term fuel advantage (very useful now that CV's don't fly aircraft without fuel).

You asked why I think Japan wins on ships:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 05/08/42

Weather: Overcast

Night Time Surface Combat, near Port Moresby at 10,40

Japanese Ships
CA Myoko, Shell hits 3, on fire
CA Haguro, Shell hits 1
CA Aoba, Shell hits 1, on fire
CA Kinugasa, Shell hits 4, on fire
CA Furutaka, Shell hits 2
CA Kako, Shell hits 2
DD Shiratsuyu, Shell hits 3
DD Shigure, Shell hits 2
DD Yugure, Shell hits 3, on fire
DD Ariake, Shell hits 4, on fire
DD Akebono, Shell hits 2
DD Sazanami, Shell hits 4, on fire
DD Ushio, Shell hits 4, on fire, heavy damage

Allied Ships
CA Portland, Shell hits 19, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
CA Chester, Shell hits 11, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
CA New Orleans, Shell hits 6, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
CA Astoria, Shell hits 9, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
CA Minneapolis, Shell hits 5, on fire
DD Sims, Shell hits 2, on fire
DD Anderson
DD Hammann, Shell hits 2, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
DD Morris, Shell hits 1, on fire
DD Phelps, Shell hits 1
DD Dewey, Shell hits 3, on fire
DD Monaghan
DD Aylwin, Shell hits 1


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Port Moresby at 10,40

Japanese Ships
CA Myoko, Shell hits 2, on fire
CA Haguro
CA Aoba, Shell hits 1, on fire
CA Kinugasa, on fire
CA Furutaka, Shell hits 12
CA Kako, Shell hits 3
DD Shiratsuyu
DD Shigure, Shell hits 4, on fire, heavy damage
DD Yugure, Shell hits 1, on fire
DD Ariake, Shell hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
DD Akebono, Shell hits 2, on fire
DD Sazanami, on fire
DD Ushio, on fire, heavy damage

Allied Ships
CA Portland, and is sunk
CA Chester, Shell hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
CA New Orleans, Shell hits 17, and is sunk
CA Astoria, and is sunk
CA Minneapolis, Shell hits 13, Torpedo hits 3, and is sunk
DD Sims, Shell hits 13, on fire, heavy damage
DD Anderson, Shell hits 1
DD Hammann, Shell hits 25, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
DD Morris, Shell hits 2, on fire
DD Phelps
DD Dewey, on fire
DD Monaghan
DD Aylwin, Shell hits 18, on fire, heavy damage

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Time Surface Combat, near Port Moresby at 10,40

Japanese Ships
CA Myoko, Shell hits 1, on fire
CA Haguro
CA Aoba, Shell hits 2, on fire
CA Kinugasa, Shell hits 2, on fire
CA Furutaka, Shell hits 2
CA Kako
DD Shiratsuyu, Shell hits 2, on fire
DD Yugure
DD Akebono, Shell hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
DD Sazanami, on fire

Allied Ships
DD Anderson, Shell hits 3, on fire, heavy damage
DD Morris, Shell hits 3, on fire, heavy damage
DD Phelps
DD Dewey, Shell hits 5, on fire, heavy damage
DD Monaghan, Shell hits 1

Thats roughly normal, with both being given good commanders.

(in reply to Deban)
Post #: 35
- 3/11/2003 3:21:24 PM   
denisonh


Posts: 2194
Joined: 12/21/2001
From: Upstate SC
Status: offline
Mr Frag,

I do not dispute that in a dogfight, the IJN has the advantage. I would not classify that as manuever, but as firepower. I do not recall engaging in a surface combat in any of my PBEM games in May, except one. :)

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 05/30/42

Night Time Surface Combat, near Irau at 42,43

Japanese Ships
AP Aiyo Maru, Shell hits 7, on fire, heavy damage
AP Akashisan Maru, Shell hits 11, and is sunk
AP Aki Maru, Shell hits 23, and is sunk
AP Batavia Maru, on fire
AP Canberra Maru

Allied Ships
CA Portland
CA Astoria
DD Hammann
DD Perkins
DD Monaghan
DD Arunta
DD Warramunga
DMS Southard

Japanese ground losses:
Men lost 947
Guns lost 1


That is where manuever and leadership make the difference, in positioning of your assets and affecting a local superiority in combat power. Do not fight the enemy's fight, fight your fight. But if you do not make any mistakes, and are perfect in your anticipation of the enemy, then I would benefit greatly from engaging you in a PBEM game.

But of course, you discount out of hand the allies as capable of disrupting you plan. I would say that is a small problem with the program you are supporting, and which I do not buy.

Again, you say it is easy. I say maybe it is for you, but not against me.

_____________________________


"Life is tough, it's even tougher when you're stupid" -SGT John M. Stryker, USMC

(in reply to Deban)
Post #: 36
- 3/11/2003 11:05:27 PM   
Mr.Frag


Posts: 13410
Joined: 12/18/2002
From: Purgatory
Status: offline
[QUOTE]But of course, you discount out of hand the allies as capable of disrupting you plan. I would say that is a small problem with the program you are supporting, and which I do not buy.[/QUOTE]

No I do not, I am merely pointing out that:

(a) Japan has a large advantage during the first 84 moves of the game.

(b) The Allies can not counter Japan's plans during this stage of the game without seriously hurting themselves.

(c) The Allies attempting to seriously stop Japan during this phase will result in losses severe enough to increase this 84 turn advantage that Japan has.

(d) Careful defensive play as the Allies results in not increasing this 84 turn advantage.

(e) Attempting to retain PM during this timeframe can result in the Allied player loosing the turn 85 to 180 advantage they have.

(f) It costs less to capture a base with proper resources then to defend a base with inproper resources.

(g) The starting troops at PM even including the 2.30 additional factors to base unit/engineers/aa/cd etc is not even enough to hold against the starting troops Japan has within transport range without factoring any additions into the mix.

(h) Japan can deny Air transport via CAP over PM which is well within range of Rabaul & Lae.

(i) Japan can completely close PM in less then 15 days even with the Allies throwing every ship they have at the attack since it comes from above Lae via CV's. To counter this force, Allied CV's must advance north of Gili Gili which brings them well within range of Rabaul's Nells & Bettys which are torpedo bombers and generally get hits of a floatation damage variety.

(j) Japan's pilot skills far exceed Allied pilot skills during this time period. This means that the lower skilled Allied pilots are doing nothing more then helping to train Japan's pilots.

(k) Naval combat advantages rest with Japan as the Allied ships must come within bomber range of Rabaul/Lae to interdict Japan, coupled with the night fighting abilities of the Japan ships.

(l) Japan recieves more CV's in much higher numbers then the Allies. Ship for ship, Allied CV's are fewer with more aircraft which makes them higher value. Japan can inflict a 1 to 1 rate of exchange and come out on top.

(m) Japan has a ready supply of replacement fighters to compensate for poor results on the CV front. Multiple squadrons are available soon in the game to offset the higher Allied fighter groups.

I am simply stating that the Allied player does not have the resources to disrupt Japan early in the game. You cannot defend in depth when you have no depth. You have precicely 9 mobile INF units at game start. Thats it! I discount 1 of those because it is already at PM and not likely to leave. You have tranports ONLY in brisbane where 3 of the remaining 8 are. 2 of the remaining 5 are located within Japan torpedo bomber range. I doubt there is anyone who has played UV who didn't get a convoy creamed at Cairns ;)

Each naval loss (troops on transports) due to the large size of Allied INF units represents as much as 1/8th! of their combat power! Sinking the transport itself is totally pointless overall, but the loaded transport is a HUGE shift in Allied power.

Say you are really brave and you think you can hold PM. You load the entire 7th division on transports. Japan sinks them by simply having a naval unit in the PM hex the turn you arrive (which also prevents unloading I might add). That is 3 out of 8 INF units gone, almost 50% !!! of all your troops in one convoy. It is very simple to have rotating bombardment groups deny the port access and once the port is damaged, even if you get there, unload speed is comprimised allowing addtional turns to excert air power losses.

Go ahead, send them to PM if you want. The choice and price is in your hands.

I really don't understand why you seem to be giving imaginary credit and quality to the Allies that simply does not exist in '42. Simply put, they were completely outmatched until the American war machine kicked into production mode (which is what you start to see in '43, ships galore, troops, planes, kitchen sinks, etc)

This in no way implies that the Allies were not good fighters/thinkers/etc, they just didn't have the materials available to fight the war at this time period. Lets not confuse these two things together. If on the other hand, Japan was fuel limited, this would be a no contest debase, but such is not the case. We are talking about UV, not history :D

(in reply to Deban)
Post #: 37
- 3/11/2003 11:47:28 PM   
denisonh


Posts: 2194
Joined: 12/21/2001
From: Upstate SC
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mr.Frag
[B]No I do not, I am merely pointing out that:

(a) Japan has a large advantage during the first 84 moves of the game.

[/B]-- Given
[B]
(b) The Allies can not counter Japan's plans during this stage of the game without seriously hurting themselves.

[/B]-- Strong assumption that I do not believe is true.
[B]
(c) The Allies attempting to seriously stop Japan during this phase will result in losses severe enough to increase this 84 turn advantage that Japan has.
[/B]
-- Another assumption. Assumes draw or IJN victory.
[B]
(d) Careful defensive play as the Allies results in not increasing this 84 turn advantage.
[/B]
-- USN can effectivelt attrit and delay the IJN
[B]
(e) Attempting to retain PM during this timeframe can result in the Allied player loosing the turn 85 to 180 advantage they have.
[/B]
-- Potentialy so, if the USN doesn't play it right and the IJN makes no mistakes
[B]
(f) It costs less to capture a base with proper resources then to defend a base with inproper resources.
[/B]
-- Defense is a function of more than ground forces, but do not necessarily disagree
[B]
(g) The starting troops at PM even including the 2.30 additional factors to base unit/engineers/aa/cd etc is not even enough to hold against the starting troops Japan has within transport range without factoring any additions into the mix.
[/B]
--You have to get the IJN there, and that is the issue pertinent to the defense of PM
[B]
(h) Japan can deny Air transport via CAP over PM which is well within range of Rabaul & Lae.
[/B]
--True enough, but maintaining LRCAP form Rabaul? will be expensive. (Lae will be unsupprtable as an airbase by week 2)
[B]
(i) Japan can completely close PM in less then 15 days even with the Allies throwing every ship they have at the attack since it comes from above Lae via CV's. To counter this force, Allied CV's must advance north of Gili Gili which brings them well within range of Rabaul's Nells & Bettys which are torpedo bombers and generally get hits of a floatation damage variety.
[/B]
--How long will the carriers maintain thier station? And assumes that they will not be needed elswhere. And no sane alied player would do that with his CVs in that stage of the game.
[B]
(j) Japan's pilot skills far exceed Allied pilot skills during this time period. This means that the lower skilled Allied pilots are doing nothing more then helping to train Japan's pilots.
[/B]
--Every skilled pilot lost by the IJN is a victory for the Allies. The bloodier the combat is, the better for the allies.
[B]
(k) Naval combat advantages rest with Japan as the Allied ships must come within bomber range of Rabaul/Lae to interdict Japan, coupled with the night fighting abilities of the Japan ships.
[/B]
--Given. But the Allies don't have to deal with that for the defense of PM. The only related issue is bombing Lae into the stone age, which can be done.
[B]
(l) Japan recieves more CV's in much higher numbers then the Allies. Ship for ship, Allied CV's are fewer with more aircraft which makes them higher value. Japan can inflict a 1 to 1 rate of exchange and come out on top.
[/B]
-- Early on yes. But with your carriers in the Bismark Sea, what has the USN player to worry about engaging you carriers?
[B]
(m) Japan has a ready supply of replacement fighters to compensate for poor results on the CV front. Multiple squadrons are available soon in the game to offset the higher Allied fighter groups.
[/B]
--Pilots?
[B]
I am simply stating that the Allied player does not have the resources to disrupt Japan early in the game. You cannot defend in depth when you have no depth. You have precicely 9 mobile INF units at game start. Thats it! I discount 1 of those because it is already at PM and not likely to leave. You have tranports ONLY in brisbane where 3 of the remaining 8 are. 2 of the remaining 5 are located within Japan torpedo bomber range. I doubt there is anyone who has played UV who didn't get a convoy creamed at Cairns ;)

Each naval loss (troops on transports) due to the large size of Allied INF units represents as much as 1/8th! of their combat power! Sinking the transport itself is totally pointless overall, but the loaded transport is a HUGE shift in Allied power.

Say you are really brave and you think you can hold PM. You load the entire 7th division on transports. Japan sinks them by simply having a naval unit in the PM hex the turn you arrive (which also prevents unloading I might add). That is 3 out of 8 INF units gone, almost 50% !!! of all your troops in one convoy. It is very simple to have rotating bombardment groups deny the port access and once the port is damaged, even if you get there, unload speed is comprimised allowing addtional turns to excert air power losses.

Go ahead, send them to PM if you want. The choice and price is in your hands.

I really don't understand why you seem to be giving imaginary credit and quality to the Allies that simply does not exist in '42. Simply put, they were completely outmatched until the American war machine kicked into production mode (which is what you start to see in '43, ships galore, troops, planes, kitchen sinks, etc)

This in no way implies that the Allies were not good fighters/thinkers/etc, they just didn't have the materials available to fight the war at this time period. Lets not confuse these two things together. If on the other hand, Japan was fuel limited, this would be a no contest debase, but such is not the case. We are talking about UV, not history :D [/B][/QUOTE]

Once again, there are some underlying assumptions that underly your analysis that can be questioned.

You are still assuming you can shut down PM. You have said you can do it with Carriers in the Bismark Sea in combination with Rabaul (As Lae is unusable as an airfield by the second week of May in ANY game I play as the Allies)

I say your carriers cannot stay there on station that long, given that there may be other places they need to be.

And as for the 7th, I usualy do not deploy them to PM. The defense of PM does not lie in the ground forces, but preventing a landing of troops. You don't fight the ground battle. That is how you hold PM.

I also assume that the IJN holds Gili Gili? Sounds silly, but I can be retaken by the Allies in your "84 day window", and can delay an assault on PM.

And I disagree, the USN has forces to disrupt the IJN early. Disrupt is the key word. PROPERLY USED, the allies can create many problems for the IJN.

The important point that seems lost on you is that the commander makes a huge difference in the application of the capabilities and resources. I maintain that I can do it, and would guess that some of the real UV USN heavyweights can do the same.

_____________________________


"Life is tough, it's even tougher when you're stupid" -SGT John M. Stryker, USMC

(in reply to Deban)
Post #: 38
- 3/12/2003 12:24:54 AM   
Full Moon

 

Posts: 201
Joined: 1/25/2003
From: Texas
Status: offline
I think Mr.Frag's advice is intended for average players like me :) not for heavyweight player, and it should be. As for the denisonh's argument, it seems to me that you're assuming IJN player should make mistakes and USN player won't make mistakes, so unless you suggest numerical facts as Mr.Frag did, I'll stick to Mr.Frag's advice. But, your point about IJN pilot loss is right.

_____________________________

"War is a series of catastrophes that results in a victory."
Georges Clemenceau

(in reply to Deban)
Post #: 39
- 3/12/2003 12:53:40 AM   
Mr.Frag


Posts: 13410
Joined: 12/18/2002
From: Purgatory
Status: offline
:D

I find it funny that you agree to almost every single one of my points about Japan's superiority yet continue to maintain that the Allies magically win still.

You do understand that a 2-1 assault difference is all it takes to win correct? Application of 3-1+ odds which Japan has available results in trivial losses to Japan.

You seem to give magic credit to Allied air power in closing Lae? I'd love to know how you accomplish this task with your bombers flying from Cooktown with skill levels in the 50's. The ONLY bombers that start the game with skills at a level worth using are the 4 B-17 groups that (a) need to transfer increasing their fatigue and then (b) fly extremely long missions non-stop.

The B-25/B-26's just don't have the legs to hit Lae from Cooktown with skill levels in the 50's and massive operational losses coupled with losses due to AA and fighters. You may have lots of them, but they will not last a week at that tempo.

The Hudsons at PM can't fly without a runway, so we'll assume you transfer them to Cooktown also (range becomes a factor again)

The A-24's, well, we'll just not talk about them. All they provide is comic relief to any fighters. ;)

The P-39D's are almost useful as bombers, but you need them for CAP duties.

You can shuffle in more fighters from Townsville (1 turn) and Brisbase -> Townsville (2 turns), but if you fly them after an extreme range transfer, they will all die.

Your air power cannot BOTH suppress Lae and bomb the Japan navy. You must choose which you want to do. Due to Lae's small size, it repairs much quicker then PM. Remember it takes longer to damage bigger bases, but once damaged, they take MUCH longer to repair.

Am I missing some magic aircraft that you have hidden away? For each pilot killed during this, the Army pilot pool shifts closer towards giving out skill 30's pilots which are not even worth putting in planes.

At the same time, PM is being harrassed, which means that each unit is becoming fatigued then disabled, which erodes the base unit and engineers at a constant rate which (a) reduces repairs and (b) reduces the number of air support.

Yep, you can race a base unit up to try and help counter this problem, but thats using transport abilities for non-combat troops which in the long run makes you weaker, not stronger.

You make a comment about Gili Gili ... makes me wonder. Why on earth would Japan waste troops and resources on Gili Gili (giving you a nice training target) when the goal is PM. Gili Gili can be taken and built AFTER PM has been taken. Placing troops their or Buin prior to PM is simply a total waste of resources. As long as PM exists, these are death traps and training spots for Allied aircraft.

Best thing for GG is to drop both ML's worth of mines there on turn 2 just to make yourself not get any silly ideas about taking it ;)

Japan's engineers are far to slow in building bases to use them for that purpose early in the opening moves. They are better used in attack, reducing fortifications to allow better combat odds.

You mention how long Japan's CV's can remain on station. Japan has 2 5k Tankers at game start. Japan has fuel stock in Lae. A skilled Japan player can even use his CL's as tankers to bring fuel from Rabaul to the CV's. I don't see a fuel problem at all which means the CV's can stay on station as long as needed. Japan also gets a huge influx of tankers/oilers very early in the game which resolves this situation. (personally, I'd love to see supplies/fuel player controllable as I do not agree with levels in the game at ALL. It is the ONLY reason that Japan can actually pull this off!)

Your final comment: Which I love ;)

[QUOTE]The important point that seems lost on you is that the commander makes a huge difference in the application of the capabilities and resources. I maintain that I can do it, and would guess that some of the real UV USN heavyweights can do the same.[/QUOTE]

Mathematics is an exact science (also known as logistics in military games). Individual results may vary due to local effects, but correct operational planning allows for these varied results which removes them from the equation.

Application of these Mathematics (logistics) = player skill.

Wars are won by logistics not individual tactics. If you need an object lesson, the Ardennes or poor Rommel (Africa) are great examples of fantastic tactics without logistics. They will achieve short term gains, but suffer long term losses.

Holding PM is a very short term gain. I am not advocating giving it away free of charge, I simply maintain that you can not hold it in an equal skill match. Since recon missions tell me exactly how many units (INF) you have committed to defend PM, it also tells me exactly how many INF units you have committed elsewhere as they are a very small FINITE number and take a minimum of 2 transports (normally 3) transports to relocate and transports move at a FINITE speed. You can perform a single air transport (INF) during this phase of the game and you can perform 2 at best fast transport (INF). This means that you can worse case for Japan move 3 units that could offer any form of surprise.

BTW:

Just as an aside, the new 2.30 rules for base units results in it now taking 9 ships in fast transport mode to swipe Efate. It can still be done easy enough ( funny enough that Rabaul starts with 9 CL/DD :D )

As I do not want to get these kinds of shocks, I test these things out extensively.

Japan still has the ability to take Luganville and Efate for shock value (killing two high value! base units and isolating Noumea)

This of course is one of those naughty things that can be done while you attempt to prevent PM's fall with your Navy. As with all things, you cannot be in both places at once.

(in reply to Deban)
Post #: 40
completely different approach - 3/12/2003 1:18:18 AM   
elcid

 

Posts: 226
Joined: 11/20/2002
From: Lakewood Washington
Status: offline
I too am a Japan specialist, but that means I know Japan's weaknesses well.

Japan has little infantry at first - one regiment in fact - plus some SNLF battalions and base defense forces (some of which are de facto regiments). It has no meaningful armor, and only the 2nd Division has a baby armor unit early. There is no medium arty at all. This is enough, given naval and air superiority, but the contest is decided by land units - which fight for bases.

The critical base is Gili Gili - and it is NOT a base at all to start. But it IS in Allied hands. Use that to your advantage. Fly troops in on PBYs. Gili-Gili matters a lot to Japan. If he is not very aggressive you can have it. If he is very aggressive you can make him pay to take it from you.


Port Moresby is ANYTHING but a lost cause. But holding it is not easy. Gili Gili is a big factor there. Make him fight hard for it and he will have too little to go for PM soon. Make him fight for Buna too - fly in troops and supplies. Build up Lea Lea next to Port MOresby so you have mutual supporting air bases and he has no free place to land and consolodate forces and supplies. PM can be the key to a New Guinea offensive. The Allies do not need carriers at all if they have enough bases on New Guinea. And PM is in good bomber range of Rabaul. You can make him pay for almost everything if you use it as an offensive base. So NEVER give up PM for free and try to hold it for your later offensives. The key to holding PM is attrition. And the attrition that matters is merchant ships!!!!! Kill them before they land, with troops on board, and you win twice. Kill them at any time, and they are not available for the next offensive. Make him fight several battles - Gili Gili - Buna - PM - in sequence, getting weaker all the time - and you may just do it!

Japan has few land based tactical bombers. It pretty well needs to commit the carriers to do a good job. If you combine carriers and land based air, you have a fighting chance to hurt his ships.

(in reply to Deban)
Post #: 41
- 3/12/2003 1:58:30 AM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline
What would be considered a good time line for taking PM as Japan? in SC 17?

Has anyone successfully used Lae as a staging base? My only experience (granted only one so far in PBEM) thus far was for Aussie and PM based tac and heavy bombers to make the base unusuable in an amazingly short period of time owing to the ease right now in which airfields can be completely knocked out. Playing against a human is certainly night and day different from playing the AI which essentially just sits there waiting for you to make a move.

IIRC Mogami once suggested you needed to take at least several months to build up your power base at Rabaul before jumping in on New Gunieau Japan certainly starts off weak in both 17 and 19, a crucial hindsight factor known to the Allied player. I'm in late June now and havn't taken the plunge yet, though part of that was due to a crackpot diversionary tactic i tried at game start which cost me a CVL (thank god for 2.30's new sub routines) ;) but also due to lack of force levels as well.

Gett'in Beefy now though, but i had to wonder if i wasn't being too cautious in my planning giving that evil-dooer Cap and Gown more time to formulate mischief against the invincible Imperial will

Its truely awesome when a wargame can perfectly recreate that uncertainy in one's plans and overall strategy...complete with the fear of losing precious assets and losing that "window of opportunity" :)

(in reply to Deban)
Post #: 42
- 3/12/2003 2:21:48 AM   
Full Moon

 

Posts: 201
Joined: 1/25/2003
From: Texas
Status: offline
Advice for IJN player.
If Allied player is using PM as a major airbase, I'd say take PM ASAP. As Mr. Frag said IJN player can shut PM down anytime using bombardment TF and CVs. IJN has enouhg troops and APs in Rabaul and Truk as early as May, 1942 to take PM. Lae can be used as a major airbase as it starts with level 4 airbfield. But supplying Lae is not easy, if Allied player has enouhg medium bombers in PM. It's important to take Gili Gili or at least deny Allied occupying Gili Gili if IJN player's trying to take PM early. Also Take Buna early and develop it into at least level 3 port for supplying PM after take it. Do not supply PM directly. Allied bombers from Australia will cream your ships.
If Allied player is abandoning PM, you can take time.;)

_____________________________

"War is a series of catastrophes that results in a victory."
Georges Clemenceau

(in reply to Deban)
Post #: 43
- 3/12/2003 2:31:53 AM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline
speaking of build-up. Thats another problem. Japan sorely lacks in this dept and it is well represented in the game. I have few ENG units, how can one be quick when one has so few support units needed to build up the infrastructure.

This is one thing i'd like adj for WitP.....the fact that it takes a dedicated ENG unit for an infantry presence to build any sort of fortificaitons. I do have both Buin and Gili Gili in my posession, but the lack of ENG's either force one to lengthen their build times or focus on one base and leave the others vulnerable to counter-attack. Lae is a good example. Already has 30 ENG units (before Malaria starts to impact) They were unable to keep up with the damage being caused by ridiculously small #'s of allied tac bombers. (lack of bulldozers hurt too) To counter one must send add'l ENG units that might be needed elsewhere. A quandry to be sure

It would be nice if an INF could build at least limited fort levels in the meantime, say a max of level 2 or 3 entrenchement without ENG aid

(in reply to Deban)
Post #: 44
- 3/12/2003 3:06:09 AM   
HawaiiFive-O

 

Posts: 295
Joined: 12/21/2002
From: USA
Status: offline
According to the manual, page 50, non-engineer units should be able to increase the fortification level.

"Although fortifications can be built by units without the help of engineers, the work will proceed very slowly."

In practice, I've never seen it. So maybe the manual is inaccurate. Or maybe it takes so long as to be pointless.

(in reply to Deban)
Post #: 45
- 3/12/2003 4:05:49 AM   
denisonh


Posts: 2194
Joined: 12/21/2001
From: Upstate SC
Status: offline
Mr Frag,

Analysis is a tool to assist in the planning and execution of a campaign. Simple overwhelming advantages in numbers do not equate to success in combat.

[QUOTE]Mathematics is an exact science (also known as logistics in military games). Individual results may vary due to local effects, but correct operational planning allows for these varied results which removes them from the equation.

Application of these Mathematics (logistics) = player skill.
[/QUOTE]

To beat a dead horse, it is the application of those forces which makes the difference. Operational warfare is an art.

[QUOTE]Wars are won by logistics not individual tactics. If you need an object lesson, the Ardennes or poor Rommel (Africa) are great examples of fantastic tactics without logistics. They will achieve short term gains, but suffer long term losses.[/QUOTE]

Planning and execution of the campaign is a function of logisitics, and that is where you are right on the money.

PM is an operational objective, and taking it is not a direct function of mathmatics, as the variability of combat makes the outcome far less certain than you portray. The variability in large part is a function of the actions of the commanders. Those actions have a strong relationship to achieving operational objectives.

The campaign objectives are more of a function of numbers, as time and number of operations smooth out the variability. The effect of variability on the "median outcome" is more prononounced on a smaller scale, such as operational vs Campaign/theater level.

You are again making many assumptions, particularly with regards to PM. How many PBEM games have you played as the IJN? Curious as to how successful you have been in keeping Lae operational.

Please relate experiences as the IJN in a PBEM as data points for a basis for this "walk in the park".

I have found ways to get PM's level of operations up to 200+ aircraft by the second week of May, and have been able to conduct my operations from there.

With the US carriers operating in the area, it complicates things further for the IJN.

Your detailing of the numbers is a testimony to your attention to detail, and illustrates the POTENTIAL for the IJN to take PM early.

[I]potential, a. and n. Possible as opposed to actual; existing in posse or in a latent or undeveloped state, capable of coming into being or action; latent. [/I]

_____________________________


"Life is tough, it's even tougher when you're stupid" -SGT John M. Stryker, USMC

(in reply to Deban)
Post #: 46
- 3/12/2003 4:11:32 AM   
Mr.Frag


Posts: 13410
Joined: 12/18/2002
From: Purgatory
Status: offline
[QUOTE]speaking of build-up. Thats another problem. Japan sorely lacks in this dept and it is well represented in the game. I have few ENG units, how can one be quick when one has so few support units needed to build up the infrastructure.[/QUOTE]

That is one of the key things to understand when playing Japan.

Japan's engineers are better employed reducing fortifications during attacks then attempting to build bases in unsecured areas. They simply do not repair damage quickly enough to have any resource time left to actually build anything.

Once you understand the fact that combat odds are 2 to 1 + FORTIFICATION, you clearly understand what you need to use your engineers for (reducing fortifications). Sending troops into PM without this huge reduction means you must have 6 to 1 odds to capture the base.

(in reply to Deban)
Post #: 47
- 3/12/2003 4:51:38 AM   
Mr.Frag


Posts: 13410
Joined: 12/18/2002
From: Purgatory
Status: offline
Denisonh,

Committing base units to fast transport or air transport to bring PM's air capacity up quicker accomplishes very little except giving Japan more targets to destroy on the runways.

Everyone who has played this game knows just how simple it is to destroy an airfield to 100% levels through CV airpower. It is child's play. There is no defence (the 2.20 defence was to park your CV in PM but you can't do that in 2.30) against this fact. The game mechanics punish you for using LRCAP, flying a high number of aircraft with high fatigue incurred. This has an additional side effect. LRCAP from your CV's are NOT protecting your CV's and I am sure everyone has had the pleasure at least once of having their CV's sacked while they reacted out of the hex where their LRCAP was flying. You have 2 CV airgroups. Japan has 3 (4 if they swipe F1 from Rabaul). Aircraft being roughly equal at this starting phase, Japan will win a CV battle. Japan gets additional CV's released and can bring them into play shortly before USA gets their 2. This very short term advantage can have dramatic effects.

Moving additional air support into PM when the base itself is bombed out of existance on turn 5 of the game (which you have absolutely no ability whatsoever to prevent!) accomplishes exactly what Japan wants. You have used your logistics arm to move resources for a *possible* Japan attack.

In none of this rather long thread have I ever said that PM is a goal of the Japan player. I am simply pointing out what exactly the forces involved are capable of doing.

You continue to debate the capabilities of the assets in the game by involving player skill factors.

I don't care about player skill. I care about precisely what a unit is capable of doing. I continue to point out to you that you are mixing skill into the discussion of an operational target that has nothing at all to do with the logistics of moving units around the map nor does it have any impact whatsoever as to the individual units capabilities.

For some reason you see this as me offering up a challenge to you. I am simply stating the facts that exist within the game we play. I didn't make up these facts, I have no emotion invested in proving these facts. This whole thread started as a Allied player asking what he should do in a PBEM game, to which I have responded with the factual data involved and how they *can* be used.

You are trying to bring tactics into the discussion. I am trying to avoid tactics except to show what can be done by a unit. Tactics are better left in the hands of the individual players. Logistics are the reality of the game. It does not change based on who is playing it and I have attempted to provide as detailed a description as one can draw from what is visible to us without looking at the formulas embedded in the code.

I am not trying to prove any strategy here, I simply seek to educate those who have not the time to get into the details.

Anyone can hit the I key and look at the arrival dates of all units and sum up the assault strengths and do the same for the other side and compair the values.

Anyone can look at the skills of pilots and air squadrons and test results of how they perform at the various skill levels.

The changes we are seeing in 2.30 (not me seeing, everyone seeing) is that land based bombing has been seriously reduced against naval units until pilot skills are improved. All Allied land based bombers that used to be used in 2.20 games (except for very few: B17/Hudson) have been reduced in effectiveness to a level where the 2.20 TACTICS of carpet bombing the planet as the Allies and mass naval sinkings with these same planes have been toned down dramatically.

These *tactics* have allowed the Allies to hold on to PM in previous versions because they denied Japan's ability to land troops without heavy losses. 2.30 Land based airpower changes the balance. Now the Allies are forced to commit Naval Airpower to attempt to defend PM because the land based bombers no longer have the stopping power of previous versions.

We can debate tactics till the cows come home ... logistics do not change. They are facts. A 1500 AK carries 1500 supply. It doesn't carry 1800 because you have more skill ;)

(in reply to Deban)
Post #: 48
- 3/12/2003 4:53:35 AM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline
I guess i did not notice, i take it multiple ENG units will reduce fortifications at a greater rate during an assault? I do have a couple combat ENG units reserved for my future assault but was also trying to think of the 'greater picture' after the (hopefully) successful conclusion of my PM campaign.

For that i want to explore how well Japan might do were she not to be overextended and if her bases were properly prepared and supported. Right now the outer bases are almost more liability than asset, even Lae with it's big airfield (too **** easy to knock out......need to hire more laborers to fill in the potholes ) :)

(in reply to Deban)
Post #: 49
- 3/12/2003 5:05:30 AM   
CapAndGown


Posts: 3206
Joined: 3/6/2001
From: Virginia, USA
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Nikademus
[B] I do have a couple combat ENG units reserved for my future assault but was also trying to think of the 'greater picture' after the (hopefully) successful conclusion of my PM campaign.
[/B][/QUOTE]

Hope on, Your Most High and Flatulent Imperial Incompetence. :D

(in reply to Deban)
Post #: 50
- 3/12/2003 5:11:43 AM   
Mr.Frag


Posts: 13410
Joined: 12/18/2002
From: Purgatory
Status: offline
The reduction in fortification is directly related to the odds of the attack.

a 1 - 1 will reduce it 1
a 2 - 1 will reduce it 2
a 3 - 1 will reduce it 3
etc...

This ONLY applies to combat engineers (the ones that have infantry squads attached). They have to take part in the attack to gain this result.

I've never actually tested move vs less engineers, but you do raise an interesting question. Do more help? I'll have to try that one out when I get home.

The manual seems to imply that one would do ... why ship stuff you don't have too eh?

(in reply to Deban)
Post #: 51
- 3/12/2003 5:20:36 AM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by cap_and_gown
[B]Hope on, Your Most High and Flatulent Imperial Incompetence. :D [/B][/QUOTE]

shudup fathead.

You will become one with the Borg.

(in reply to Deban)
Post #: 52
- 3/12/2003 6:23:38 AM   
Yamamoto

 

Posts: 743
Joined: 11/21/2001
From: Miami, Fl. U.S.A.
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by denisonh
[B]

You are again making many assumptions, particularly with regards to PM. How many PBEM games have you played as the IJN? Curious as to how successful you have been in keeping Lae operational.

Please relate experiences as the IJN in a PBEM as data points for a basis for this "walk in the park".

[/QUOTE][/B]

I’ve played more than 10 games PBEM where I’ve been able to take Port Moresby by the 15th of May. That's not a credit to my skill or a commet on my opponents' skill, it's just something the Japanese can do early on in the war. It's not hard. Only once did I fail and that was because of the uber-bombers which don’t exist anymore.

[QUOTE][B]
I have found ways to get PM's level of operations up to 200+ aircraft by the second week of May, and have been able to conduct my operations from there. [/I] [/B][/QUOTE]

Super. The more aircraft I can catch on the ground the better. I recently played a PBEM game where I took PM on the 14th of May, having kept it closed since about the 9th or so, and destroyed 180+ planes on the ground.

The Japanese player doesn’t need Lae if he is willing to wait and start his air attacks on PM just as the invasion TF sails. It’s not worth the fatigue to do attacks before then. Just use your bombers for recon and naval attack until the lat minute. Your bombardment group will be the one to close down PM anyway— the planes just help keep it suppressed.

Yamamoto

(in reply to Deban)
Post #: 53
- 3/12/2003 7:35:31 AM   
denisonh


Posts: 2194
Joined: 12/21/2001
From: Upstate SC
Status: offline
Mr Frag,

I think that what you have laid down in terms of IJN capability is very appropriate in giving the Allied player some idea of what problems he confronts.

I also believe that the IJN player can take PM, assuming that he doen't shoot himself in the foot (with USN player help, of course).

My main exception is attaching the phrase "walk in the park". I think that giving the impression that it is foregone conclusion PM will fall is too strong of an assumption. My point is that the USN player can make it a difficult proposition for the IJN.

I also beleive player skill has a great deal in effecting the outcome. If it didn't why play? A player can hurt himself badly, and effectively cripple his capability to sustain the offensive (lose 2 IJN CVs without damaging a USN carrier for example). In those cases, the nature of the early conflict can change.

Not every IJN player will exersize the prudence or forethought to ensure that the invasion of PM is a success. It is no different for the USN player. That is the variability to which I have referenced. Player skill is paramount to effectively mount an operation of the nature of taking PM in May.

Maybe I haven't been playing the right IJN players, and have missed the lesson that Yamamoto has given to a multitude of others.

_____________________________


"Life is tough, it's even tougher when you're stupid" -SGT John M. Stryker, USMC

(in reply to Deban)
Post #: 54
- 3/12/2003 7:50:31 AM   
Mr.Frag


Posts: 13410
Joined: 12/18/2002
From: Purgatory
Status: offline
I get a kick out of all these "'m gonna close Lae"comments that always seem to pop up in discussions.

It takes exactly 2 turns of the game to have every single AA unit Japan owns moved to Lae by fast transport. Go right ahead and paste Lae with your entire air force, the gunners love the practice!

I suggest you try this one yourself instead of listening to me. You will find your ability to close Lae non-existant on the 3rd turn of the game even without putting ANY cap there.

Closing Lae against the AI is easy. Closing it against someone who knows you are going to try and close it is a COMPLETELY different story. ;)

(in reply to Deban)
Post #: 55
- 3/12/2003 8:00:23 AM   
denisonh


Posts: 2194
Joined: 12/21/2001
From: Upstate SC
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mr.Frag
[B]I get a kick out of all these "'m gonna close Lae"comments that always seem to pop up in discussions.

It takes exactly 2 turns of the game to have every single AA unit Japan owns moved to Lae by fast transport. Go right ahead and paste Lae with your entire air force, the gunners love the practice!

I suggest you try this one yourself instead of listening to me. You will find your ability to close Lae non-existant on the 3rd turn of the game even without putting ANY cap there.

Closing Lae against the AI is easy. Closing it against someone who knows you are going to try and close it is a COMPLETELY different story. ;) [/B][/QUOTE]

I have done it in all 10 PBEM games I have played as the Allies. AA gunners still have to get supplies, and without supplies, they don't operate very well.

Like I said, maybe I have not been playing the right opponents, and have been lulled into a false sense of security.

_____________________________


"Life is tough, it's even tougher when you're stupid" -SGT John M. Stryker, USMC

(in reply to Deban)
Post #: 56
- 3/12/2003 8:04:51 AM   
Mr.Frag


Posts: 13410
Joined: 12/18/2002
From: Purgatory
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Not every IJN player will exersize the prudence or forethought to ensure that the invasion of PM is a success. It is no different for the USN player. That is the variability to which I have referenced. Player skill is paramount to effectively mount an operation of the nature of taking PM in May.[/QUOTE]

That says it all. Both sides can make silly mistakes, play too agressively, etc.

Prior to turn 75, the Allied player absolutely must operate under the principals of extreme restraint because a single wrong move at this stage of the game can very well end the game.

Turn 75 add 3.5 regiments at Noumea. Turn 85 & 90 add 8 regiments at Brisbane. The pressure has been completely lifted off the Allied player now. :D

(in reply to Deban)
Post #: 57
- 3/12/2003 8:06:56 AM   
denisonh


Posts: 2194
Joined: 12/21/2001
From: Upstate SC
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mr.Frag
[B]That says it all. Both sides can make silly mistakes, play too agressively, etc.

Prior to turn 75, the Allied player absolutely must operate under the principals of extreme restraint because a single wrong move at this stage of the game can very well end the game.

Turn 75 add 3.5 regiments at Noumea. Turn 85 & 90 add 8 regiments at Brisbane. The pressure has been completely lifted off the Allied player now. :D [/B][/QUOTE]

Or play too conservatively.......

_____________________________


"Life is tough, it's even tougher when you're stupid" -SGT John M. Stryker, USMC

(in reply to Deban)
Post #: 58
- 3/12/2003 8:15:16 AM   
HawaiiFive-O

 

Posts: 295
Joined: 12/21/2002
From: USA
Status: offline
Mr. Frag, I take it you don't play with Variable or Very Variable reinforcements, do you?

Luck of the draw can often dictate if an early PM operation is possible, if you play Variable.

Not arguing either way, just pointing out that hard and fast statements of the Allies get X on such and such date and the IJN get Y on such and such have little bearing when dates can slip +15/-15 with Variable, +60/-60 with Very Variable.

Personally, this fogginess is essential to my enjoyment of the game, and I wouldn't play it any other way.

(in reply to Deban)
Post #: 59
- 3/12/2003 8:57:29 AM   
Mr.Frag


Posts: 13410
Joined: 12/18/2002
From: Purgatory
Status: offline
[QUOTE]I have done it in all 10 PBEM games I have played as the Allies. AA gunners still have to get supplies, and without supplies, they don't operate very well.[/QUOTE]

Seriously, give it a try. You will be shocked completely as you will have lost your entire airforce trying to close Lae. Try different heights, whatever you want. Give it a try in a H2H game against yourself. You will find that the amount of supplies at Lae is more then enough for you to seriously maul your bombers. The AA guns will become disrupted before the base runs out of supplies.

33 bombers gone for Lae in 6 days of bombardment to temporarly close it. This is with B-25D/B-26B/Havoc/Hudson/B-17E all committed to closing it presuming no attacks on PM at all (which will reduce the damage to Lae & increase losses to Allied bombers. The Hudsons & B-17E are flying out of Cooktown)

Replacement rate/losses:

Hudson 10 lost 4
B-25D 20 lost 8
B-26B 10 lost 15
Havoc 10 lost 5
B-17E 0 lost 6

(includes the 11 operational losses, they are NOT from transfers).

Fatigue was allowed to completely clear before starting bombing just to make it completely unbiased. In reality, this is NEVER going to happen this well. This is with NO cap at all on Lae, letting you come throw yourself on the AA guns free of charge.

I was actually surprised that they did this good, but these are highly unrealistic tests with everything in the Allies favour.

(in reply to Deban)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific >> Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   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

2.719