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: Notes from a Small Island

 
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: Notes from a Small Island Page: <<   < prev  19 20 [21] 22 23   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Notes from a Small Island - 4/8/2018 1:49:44 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline 		With 900 Resources at Sapporo, destroying 12 or so will not hurt him - there is beaucoup excess stockpiled on Hokkaido. You get the points for damaging industry but wouldn't it be more productive to hit HI or LI ? The resources are only useful if they get shipped to Honshu, and I expect it is too risky for ships to make that short hop right now.

The Judys at Ketoi-Jima are there to interdict any supply convoys you might have coming through the Kuriles barrier without a carrier escort.

I like your overall plan to suppress a big chunk of the Kuriles airfields. He won't know whether to guard against another big invasion in the north or a move elsewhere once your carriers are repaired. Keeping his attention fixed is one of the great things you do.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 601
RE: Notes from a Small Island - 4/8/2018 5:57:26 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		It's a bit easier/more efficient to target Resources, I think. I'm guessing here, but I think it's easier for bombers to hit Manpower and Resources than to hit "smaller," more specific targets like aircraft factories, light industry, heavy industry, refineries, etc.

The targeting at this point is more about sending little messages to Eric than the actual effect on his economy. That will change when Allied fighters take control of the air - at that point, bombing for points and to reduce specific key industries will become paramount.

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 602
RE: Notes from a Small Island - 4/10/2018 8:18:18 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		8/19/44

Air Losses: A tough day in the air for the Allies. Erik has a strong contingent of fighters over Kushiro to meet waves of good Corsairs on sweep missions. The sweeps do fairly well but plenty of CAP remains to take on the escorts and 4EB. The result is a substantial number of hits against Kurshiro resources, but the Allies lose too many Corsairs, too many Superforts, and too many decent fighters relegated to sub-optimal escort roles.

I think Erik has changed tactics, basing a lot of his fighters at Ominato, set to LRCAP range sufficient to cover Sapporo and Kushiro.

I don't think he had any fighters based at Sapporo today. Since LRCAP doesn't work at night, I'll try another B-29 raid, this one at night against Sapporo.

I'll modify my tactics again, resuming mostly good fighter sweeps and limiting good fighters in escort roles.

Whittling away Erik's good fighter numbers remains a priority, both to limit his land-based air power and to (eventually) aid the strategic bombing mission. But in the medium term the most important objective is to work towards the eventual battle that will take place in and around the Kuriles.

Over at Rangoon, a mishmash of second-tier Allied fighters did a good job against a dwindling number of enemy fighters. Erik may reinforce at any moment, but right now he's down to about 38 fighters from a high of 325. He can't leave Rangood undefended or Allied 4EB will strike there and against his field armies. He's probably juggling between Rangoon and the Home Islands. He'll probably reinforce. But there's no doubt he's feeling a bit stretched.

But, then, I am too.





Attachment (1)

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 603
RE: Notes from a Small Island - 4/12/2018 1:34:19 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		8/20/44

Air Wars: The war's focus continues to be the air campaign. Eric brought in 300+ fighters to Sapporo. I shifted some B-29s from Kushiro to Sapporo but changed them to night mission. They encountered about 25 Irvings and Nates. Five Superforts were downed in exchange for setting about 30,000 fires. At Rangoon, Erik withdrew all fighters for the first time. I won't bite yet - tomorrow, more fighters will sweep (eventually, a host of 4EB will target this key airfield). In the Kuriles, B-24s and PBY Liberators in numbers hit Onnekotan Jima airfield, doing considerably damage.

Tomorrow, the Superforts stand down with a lot of topnotch fighters to sweep Sapporo. The B-24s will hit Uruppu Jima. Fighters, as stated, will sweep Rangoon.

This air war is important in its own right, but it's building towards a larger plan to be implement in late September.

I keep forgetting to see what the production/replacement rate is for the F4U1-D that comes online 9/1/44. That's a key upgrade, mainly due to the numbers. The F4U1-A just gets three planes a day. I think the 1-D is higher.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 604
RE: Notes from a Small Island - 4/12/2018 7:09:47 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		8/21/44

Air Wars: Weather prevents massed sweeps of Sapporo; B-24s strike Uruppu Jima effectively; no enemy CAP over Rangoon again.

Recon finds KB at Sendai and Iwaki - a tip-off from yet another SigInt report that an IJN CV (Akagi, in this case) was bound for Sendai.

Allied carrier repairs continuing.

Tomorrow, massed sweep of Sapporo scheduled while the B-24s are to hit Ketoi Jima.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 605
RE: Notes from a Small Island - 4/12/2018 8:48:34 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline 		Sendai/Iwaki are 7/8 hexes from Sapporo. I think he might plan on LRCAPing Sapporo with Sams from KB (although I don't know the range of a Sam).

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 606
RE: Notes from a Small Island - 4/12/2018 9:30:59 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		Recon with high detections indicates he might've stripped all of his fighters and many of his bombers off his carriers. He might be using some of them for defense or he might be concentrating on training. Right now he has 300+ fighters at Sapporo, about 180 at Kushiro, about 300 at Ominato, about 400 at Tokyo, and hundreds more at Yokohama and Osaka. That might explain why he pulled the 300+ that had been at Rangoon, although I could be wrong about that. As usual, I have a poor feel for just exactly how many fighters a Japanese player can accumulate and operate.

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 607
RE: Notes from a Small Island - 4/12/2018 10:02:50 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		8/21/44

Air War: Here's the location of KB and strong land-based CAP. Lots of fighters here, which is probably good. And I think Allied sweeps have got Erik's full attention.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 608
RE: Notes from a Small Island - 4/13/2018 6:18:28 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		8/22/44

Air Wars: Massed Allied sweep of Sapporo meets large number of enemy fighters on CAP, resulting in another good Allied victory. The combat animation/report showed 4:1 Allied victory (48 enemy planes downed to 12 Allied). But the actual number was more like 2.5 to 1, the difference being (I think) that some dmaaged Allied planes crashed before making it home.

Evey Corsair-heavy sweep is prevailing at around 2:1 or 3:1 now, and even some of the "lesser" fighters (P-38s, P-47s) score well.

Is this math sustainable? I'm losing 15-20 Corsairs a day against 3 replacements. That's not sustainable long term. But Erik's losing 50-100 good fighters each day. He seems to be "flinching" - standing down his fighters sometimes, moving them around, etc. So is the math working against him fast than its working again me, or am I deluding myself? Are Japanese losses sustainable into perpetuity? Surely not. I'm going to try to keep things up another week or so, until the F4U-1D begins production, and then re-evaluate based on it's production/replacement numbers.

At Rangoon, still no enemy fighters. Tomorrow, the 4EB will target the airfield at 14k - I think Erik has tons of flak there.

In the Kuriles, 4EB did good work on Ketoi Jima. So the four or five fields from Onnekton down to Uruppu have been heavily damaged, most of them repeatedly so over the past few weeks. I haven't targeted Paramushiro Jima yet.

KB, which was at Sendai yesterday, has moved away - I think to the east, into the Pacific, based upon an icon I saw early in the replay sequence.

In Oz, an Aussie RCT is about four days out of Darwin, which is lightly held.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 609
RE: Notes from a Small Island - 4/14/2018 3:59:57 AM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline 		AFAIK many of Japan's fighters have higher service levels than Allied planes. He might stand down squadrons just to get them ready in sufficient numbers to fight better instead of being torn up in smaller packets every day. I don't know enough to speculate if his production can sustain those losses or not.

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/view/staffmonkeys/home

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 610
RE: Notes from a Small Island - 4/14/2018 3:45:39 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		8/23/44

Air Wars

Sapporo: Massed Allied sweeps meet massed CAP, with the results down around 1:1, which isn't satisfactory. I'm not sure if the better IJ performance was due to some lower quality in the Allied fighters or better enemy fighters or luck or some new tactic. I'm thinking it over.

Kuriles: For the first time in more than a month, Erik employed CAP over a Kuriles base. The target was Shimishura Jima. The B-24s performed pretty well with a few escorts, but the RAF Liberators got chewed up (that's on me - I keep forgetting many of the RAF models are configured for nighttime missions). A decent strike on the airfield.

Rangoon: No enemy CAP, and massed Allied 4EB hit the airfield. Erik can reinsert CAP here. The question is: Does he have to reinsert CAP or withdraw his army? IE, can he sustain an army in Burma if his main supply depot is undefended and regularly pounded?

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 611
RE: Notes from a Small Island - 4/14/2018 4:46:11 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
Is this math sustainable? I'm losing 15-20 Corsairs a day against 3 replacements. That's not sustainable long term. But Erik's losing 50-100 good fighters each day. He seems to be "flinching" - standing down his fighters sometimes, moving them around, etc. So is the math working against him fast than its working again me, or am I deluding myself? Are Japanese losses sustainable into perpetuity? Surely not.


Not indefinitely, but the timeline devil is in the details. Akin to the Allied penchant for spreading out fighter losses among airframe types, is he spreading out his losses 'equally' between IJAAF and IJNAF production? Is he rotating in good-very good fighters with lesser airframes? Is he balancing his '1' SR fighters with his '2' or '3' level SR fighters? There's considerable flexibility in spreading out the losses if one can mete out acceptable punishment across the board.

Having rail access on Honshu is extremely valuable to him as a means of pulling whole air groups out of the front lines and rebuilding them further from the front lines. You've got the Japanese logistics tiger by the tail while relying on 2 land bases-his ability to rotate and renew fighter groups exceeds yours in my estimation.

_____________________________


(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 612
RE: Notes from a Small Island - 4/14/2018 5:10:20 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		Another important factor is that the air war wasn't bloody before I recently stepped things up. Losses on both sides were low, so both sides should have deep pools to fight with.

On the plus side, the Allies have achieved a key position from which to prosecute the war - the Sikhalin Island bases are big and secure and close to Erik's major bases. He has to defend.

But I need to take more bases - the Kuriles, to begin with. And then, eventually, bringing my ships to bear in reducing his Hokkaido bases.

By taking Sikhalin, I grabbed a tiger by the short hairs. He's aroused and fighting hard and is very dangerous. I've gotta hold on until he begins to tire or until I can bring greater force to bear efficiently.

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 613
RE: Notes from a Small Island - 4/14/2018 6:06:54 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		The F4U-1D comes online 9/1/44 at 158 per month. The really good news is that the F4U-1A, at 78 per month, also continues production. So, the production of quality Corsairs goes from 78 per month to 236 per month, starting in about a week.

The P-51D comes online with 120 per month 11/44, so still two months away. I have plenty of P-47D25 and P-38L to bridge the gap until then.

As for quality pilots, my reserves look pretty good, especially the Army fighter pilots. I think the Navy reserves are sufficient.


(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 614
RE: Notes from a Small Island - 4/14/2018 7:55:16 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

The F4U-1D comes online 9/1/44 at 158 per month. The really good news is that the F4U-1A, at 78 per month, also continues production. So, the production of quality Corsairs goes from 78 per month to 236 per month, starting in about a week.

The P-51D comes online with 120 per month 11/44, so still two months away. I have plenty of P-47D25 and P-38L to bridge the gap until then.

As for quality pilots, my reserves look pretty good, especially the Army fighter pilots. I think the Navy reserves are sufficient.



Am only passingly familiar with the Allied OOB in 1944. Do the Corsairs come in at 158/month ad infinitum or is there a relatively short window of replenishment like with other Allied models?

_____________________________


(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 615
RE: Notes from a Small Island - 4/14/2018 7:59:30 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline 		I suspect that the difference in performance is attributable to fatigue. It doesn't take much fatigue to affect a fighter pilot's performance, and as others have noted he may have brought in fresh groups to challenge your pilots.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 616
RE: Notes from a Small Island - 4/14/2018 9:01:51 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		Chickenboy: Both Corsair models are in production until July 1945.

BBfanboy: I'm giving considerable attention to rotating squadrons, but I probably could do even better. I don't always pay enough attention to morale, sometimes letting squadrons with morale of 60 or so fly.

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 617
RE: Notes from a Small Island - 4/14/2018 11:22:08 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		KB is sliding NE, where it can interpose CAP over the Kuriles. My B-24s have fairly high fatigue, and the RAF 4EBs will need weeks to recover, so I'm going to stand down all 4EB tomorrow. But the fighters will continue to sweep Sapporo, at least for one more turn.

The flurry of Allied activity around the Kuriles, and the time that has elapsed since the naval battle, could have tickled Erik's suspicions that action is imminent. It isn't, only because my damage carriers need another three weeks in the yards. Given that, it makes sense to upgrade CVEs, which can be done on 9/1. Those upgrades will take 21 days and double CVE AA. That's worthwhile.

Nearly all CVE fighter squadrons are upgraded now - mostly to the F4F-3 Hellcat. Since the naval battle, many reinforcing carriers have arrived, including one USN CV, two RN CVs, one USN CVL, and a bunch of CVEs.


(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 618
RE: Notes from a Small Island - 4/15/2018 4:06:03 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline 		I would not be all that reluctant to engage 4EBs, especially B-24s of which you have had ample chance to stockpile production (not sure of your pools; Navy Liberators in particular are easy to stockpile). The Zero drops pretty reliably against the 4EB defensive fire. The Sam may not drop as well and may shoot down more bombers, but at this stage every pilot of his is worth 2 of yours, IMO - almost regardless of the circumstances. The only exception would be your carrier fighter pilots and your Army sweepers (Jugs now, Mustangs and Jugs later). Bombers? Your pilot pools should be enormous and in my experience you don't need bomber pilots in 4EBs to be terribly well-trained. In 1945, your replacement pilots come in with skills averaging in the 40s (as well as many groups coming in with average skill level of 60), so if you can make it that far on the pilots you have now then you'll be fine.

I'm hesitant to guess his pool status, but I'll take a stab anyway. Of the planes he's lost a lot of in that most recent day of action (your screenshot), I notice that they're all planes he should have had in production for quite some time. The fact that there were some Frank-a is interesting, but it's entirely possible that the group flying those was one of those that arrives with Frank-a and he never upgraded them to Frank-r (I've done that; no point spending the supplies - I'll just lose those Frank-a's first and then upgrade). I didn't see any Tojo or George-2 or Jack factories in your industry screenshots, so can't guess his production level... but even if he was building only 30 per month of George-2 and Jack (which seems low by a factor of 2 at least)... the total losses for George-2 and Tojo-IIc look to be about a year's worth of production for those planes. How many years have they been in production at this point, 2? So he's probably got 1000 more Tojos between his pools and his units, and maybe another 700 Georges...

*shrug*

In short, I think this is hurting him but he's probably fine continuing this level of trade for a time. A factor you may not have considered, beyond the pilots/planes/VPs/your pools/your pilots/etc., is that every fighter you shoot down also costs him 12 supplies to replace. Supply on Hokkaido must be shipped in, it is not self-sufficient at this stage of the war with anything more than a minimal garrison.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 619
RE: Notes from a Small Island - 4/15/2018 6:57:20 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		Thanks, Loka, for sharing your thoughts.

Erik has stuffed Hokkaido and the Kuriles with troops. He's lost the resources production on Sikhalin Island and more than half from Kushiro, along with some of the light industry at Sapporo. And Allied 4EB have been scoring supply hits during the Kuriles bombing missions.

I'll give more thought to how to use my B-24s.

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 620
RE: Notes from a Small Island - 4/18/2018 2:22:24 AM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		8/24/44 and 8/25/44

Air Wars: The past two days, the Allies have lost a huge number of 2EB and 4EB, trying various strategies that proved unfruitful. The first buzz saw was against an IJ army with uber AA in the Burma jungle. I learned that 10k is too low. The second buzz saw was at Sapporo, where I was trying out a strategy that Loka and I discussed above - using durable B-24Js to help whittle Erik's fighters. The combined sweeps, escorts and bombers did okay but not great. I think the altitude was 14k. Perhaps I need to try something like 25k, with fighters set just above. Underlying the huge bomber losses (something like 70 B-24Js and probably more B-25s, but no B-29s) was the continued effective performance of Allied fighters against enemy fighters. The ratio of fighters lost was pretty good in favor of the Allies.

Erik used some night bombers and a few daytime fighters on sweep to test Shikuka's defenses. He may figure that my fighter are tuckered out of weeks of campaigning. They're not - the squadrons are in good shape, as are most of the pilots. But I'll switch over to defense for a few turns, just in case he tries a massed attack.

Sub Wars: A Glen-equipped sub has been in place south of Kodiak for weeks - Erik trying to keep tabs on traffic without getting too close to Allied LBA. My ASW TFs have been hunting this sub for weeks and found it today. The sub sank an AM while undergoing a mostly ineffective attack. Allied ASW will close in. I don't want subs sniffing around in this area.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Canoerebel -- 4/18/2018 2:50:51 AM >

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 621
RE: Notes from a Small Island - 4/19/2018 12:52:56 AM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		8/26/44

Death of I-21: The little campaign to find, pinpoint and destroy I-21 took two weeks.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 622
RE: Notes from a Small Island - 4/19/2018 1:03:04 AM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		8/26/44

NoPac: Here KB be; I think Erik may strike Shikuka in strength. I hope he will, so he probably won't.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 623
RE: Notes from a Small Island - 4/19/2018 2:18:50 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		In about a month, a decisive carrier battle should take place. If the Allies win, the outcome of the war should be secured. If they lose, everything will be a grind until the end or very late.

You'll recall that in the previous carrier battle, near Paramushiro Jima, my fleet carrier TFs reacted while my CVEs did not. So I'm wrestling with how to address that - how to maximize the chances that all of my carriers will be available for the decisive battle.

I do not have confidence in the usual tactics, such as using TF commanders with low aggression ratings, setting the TFs not to react, and having the carrier TFs following a non-carrier TF. I may have to use one or more or all of those tactics, but they don't make me rest easy.

The one sure thing would be to create hybrid carrier TFs - TFs with both fleet carriers and escort carriers. There is, of course, a major downside: the CVEs have speeds of 18 to 21 knots. This slows down all the ships in the TF, including the valuable fleet carriers, making them more vulnerable to the enemy air raids (and in surface clashes, I presume).

The advantage is that this tactic would keep all my carriers together, ensuring that the host of fighters aboard CVEs - probably something like 750 fighters - would be available for defense.

I think the consensus of the experienced Forumites is: "Don't do it!" I'm not so sure.

What do you think?

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 624
RE: Notes from a Small Island - 4/19/2018 2:52:17 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline 		Don't do it!

_____________________________


(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 625
RE: Notes from a Small Island - 4/19/2018 3:02:58 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		Thanks, Andre. I figure that'll be the Forum consensus. But I want to weigh it carefully.

Is dropping the "flank speed" of a carrier TF from 28 (fast BBs) to 19 or 21 (CVEs) a big enough liability to overcome the additional 750 (or it may be more) fighters on CAP?

All ships will be fully upgraded, so AA should be robust.

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 626
RE: Notes from a Small Island - 4/19/2018 3:04:30 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline 		I think you're making a potential strategic blunder accepting a naval battle on terms entirely favoring your enemy.

Assuming that the battle takes place to the east of the Kuriles (the only logical place for him to initiate contact), your festung Sakhalin will be entirely out of the action and unable to render meaningful assistance due to range. In the meantime, he will have 7-10 bases within range of the action that can provide naval search and even IJAAF coverage. I know, reliance on army fighters during a carrier battle is prone to disappointment, but 7-10 modestly supportive bases is certainly better than none.

Your ingress route is a known entity within a couple hexes. Your arrival will be marked by early recon days in advance. You must cut through an increasingly tenacious Kurile cordon since you elected to leave that island chain intact earlier.

I see limited upside here to a Allied-instituted bare knuckle brawl.

_____________________________


(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 627
RE: Notes from a Small Island - 4/19/2018 3:04:31 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline 		I think the key to getting both CVs, CVLs and CVEs into the same fight is to close the distance to the enemy in a manner that will ensure the CVEs are in range without relying on a reaction to get them into range.

I have never seen a CVE TF react.

I never mix types within TFs. I use the "gaggle" of TFs all following a leader technique I mentioned in another thread to create a DS.

They key in my mind is to get the gaggle within 4-5 hexes of the enemy CVs.

Can't recall off the top of my head what ranges cause reaction, but you want to end the turn inside of that range.

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 628
RE: Notes from a Small Island - 4/19/2018 3:09:41 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		Andre, what about the specific CVE/CV mixing? That's the info I need more than anything else at the moment (the choosing of the location of the pending battle is critical but not the question of the moment).

Hans, there's much uncertainty in avoiding reaction, even under the conditions you mention. I think the reaction takes place between 6-9 hexes, or thereabouts. So if I could reliably close to 4 or 5 hexes, I'd be find. But that's going to amount to some luck and uncertainty. So I'm looking the CVEs as a possible work-around. It probably isn't, but I won't dismiss it until I'm reasonably sure the risks aren't worth the possible benefits.

< Message edited by Canoerebel -- 4/19/2018 3:10:06 PM >

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 629
RE: Notes from a Small Island - 4/19/2018 3:19:37 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Thanks, Andre. I figure that'll be the Forum consensus. But I want to weigh it carefully.

Is dropping the "flank speed" of a carrier TF from 28 (fast BBs) to 19 or 21 (CVEs) a big enough liability to overcome the additional 750 (or it may be more) fighters on CAP?

All ships will be fully upgraded, so AA should be robust.

I think the supposition that the fleet carriers will be slowed during action to the speed of the CVEs is not correct. During Naval Movement phase, sure. But during actual combat each ship goes to flank speed and attacks on individual ships are resolved using the speed of that ship, not the TF speed. For evidence there is the observation that during SCTF battles the slowest ship in the enemy column gets most of the action, rather than all the enemy ships being targeted because they are at the same speed.

I think one of your considerations should be whether you have bled the KB squadrons enough to lower the pilot quality (and look to your own pilot quality).
I think your strategy of "strike where they ain't" that you used against John 3rd is safest, but I am not sure of your long range strategy to approach closer to Japan. Are there any other avenues feasible?

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 630
Page:   <<   < prev  19 20 [21] 22 23   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Notes from a Small Island Page: <<   < prev  19 20 [21] 22 23   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

4.141