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: Miller (J) vs Mr Kane (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: Miller (J) vs Mr Kane (A) Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Miller (J) vs Mr Kane (A) - 4/15/2018 3:45:33 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: durnedwolf

At Changsha he has the Heavy Urban terrain advantage too, which has a defensive value of x4... From page 195: "Fortifications enhance the defensive fire of ground units and also make defenders harder to hit; therefore, defenders are given some advantages in combat."

Some of the formites seem to think that just means you have to have four times the AV value in your stack. I think you still want more AV (I always like to have the biggest hammer) but you can suppress some of that terrain advantage by using bombardment, recon, and air support. Or you can try to surround the hex and starve them out but that takes forever and a day. In looking at the combat it looks like you have no tanks in your stack?

Umm - I wanted to add - if you attack the enemy airfields it causes damage and fixing the damage eats up supplies.

I had thought so but (IIRC) that is wrong as was somewhat recently clarified by Alfred. It is still important to do for two other reasons: a) a base must be at 0 damage before fortification building can be done, so keeping the base damaged will prevent forts being repaired, and b) some hits are 'airbase/port supply hits' and destroy a variable amount of supply directly. Attacking the airfield at Changsha every turn is a good idea.

_____________________________


(in reply to durnedwolf)
Post #: 121
RE: Miller (J) vs Mr Kane (A) - 4/15/2018 3:47:38 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
Tanks are good at knocking down fortifications and should help as mentioned. Also, can you get more artillery in there? Massed artillery might help as it will suppress defenders during your assault.

_____________________________


(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 122
RE: Miller (J) vs Mr Kane (A) - 4/15/2018 4:57:14 PM   
Miller


Posts: 2226
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline
26th-28th Feb 42

Nothing of any real note over this period, so onto the main event, CHANGSHA.

I now have 3200AV there (300 of it tanks) enough HQ support and art units. The majority of the divs are 100% prepped with 0 disruption. He has no forts left and I have been bombing the airfield daily with 150 2E a/c to keep it that way. He has about 2200AV in place. Deliberate attack set for next turn and all 2E a/c switched to ground unit bombing to hopefully get some disruption up among them. I have made sure all my ground units leaders are the best I could find. If this does not take the base then I'm going to cry. Fingers crossed

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 123
RE: Miller (J) vs Mr Kane (A) - 4/15/2018 5:20:36 PM   
durnedwolf


Posts: 885
Joined: 5/23/2005
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs


quote:

ORIGINAL: durnedwolf

At Changsha he has the Heavy Urban terrain advantage too, which has a defensive value of x4... From page 195: "Fortifications enhance the defensive fire of ground units and also make defenders harder to hit; therefore, defenders are given some advantages in combat."

Some of the formites seem to think that just means you have to have four times the AV value in your stack. I think you still want more AV (I always like to have the biggest hammer) but you can suppress some of that terrain advantage by using bombardment, recon, and air support. Or you can try to surround the hex and starve them out but that takes forever and a day. In looking at the combat it looks like you have no tanks in your stack?

Umm - I wanted to add - if you attack the enemy airfields it causes damage and fixing the damage eats up supplies.

I had thought so but (IIRC) that is wrong as was somewhat recently clarified by Alfred. It is still important to do for two other reasons: a) a base must be at 0 damage before fortification building can be done, so keeping the base damaged will prevent forts being repaired, and b) some hits are 'airbase/port supply hits' and destroy a variable amount of supply directly. Attacking the airfield at Changsha every turn is a good idea.


Really? Section 9.4.2 (page 215) says that "Construction work consumes supplies, and if a base is low on supplies, construction effort will slow accordingly." Can you toss me a link to Alfred's post? Alfred is normally spot on so I'd definitely like to read his thoughts on this subject.

Are you referring to this thread? http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=3805270 (I so hate this search engine... )


< Message edited by durnedwolf -- 4/15/2018 5:27:38 PM >


_____________________________


DW

I try to live by two words - tenacity and gratitude. Tenacity gets me where I want to go and gratitude ensures I'm not angry along the way. - Henry Winkler.

The great aim of education is not knowledge but action. - Herbert Spencer

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 124
RE: Miller (J) vs Mr Kane (A) - 4/15/2018 5:27:40 PM   
BBfanboy


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: durnedwolf


quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs


quote:

ORIGINAL: durnedwolf

At Changsha he has the Heavy Urban terrain advantage too, which has a defensive value of x4... From page 195: "Fortifications enhance the defensive fire of ground units and also make defenders harder to hit; therefore, defenders are given some advantages in combat."

Some of the formites seem to think that just means you have to have four times the AV value in your stack. I think you still want more AV (I always like to have the biggest hammer) but you can suppress some of that terrain advantage by using bombardment, recon, and air support. Or you can try to surround the hex and starve them out but that takes forever and a day. In looking at the combat it looks like you have no tanks in your stack?

Umm - I wanted to add - if you attack the enemy airfields it causes damage and fixing the damage eats up supplies.

I had thought so but (IIRC) that is wrong as was somewhat recently clarified by Alfred. It is still important to do for two other reasons: a) a base must be at 0 damage before fortification building can be done, so keeping the base damaged will prevent forts being repaired, and b) some hits are 'airbase/port supply hits' and destroy a variable amount of supply directly. Attacking the airfield at Changsha every turn is a good idea.


Really? Section 9.4.2 (page 215) says that "Construction work consumes supplies, and if a base is low on supplies, construction effort will slow accordingly." Can you toss me a link to Alfred's post? Alfred is normally spot on so I'd definitely like to read his thoughts on this subject.

Construction work is not repair work.

_____________________________

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 durnedwolf)
Post #: 125
RE: Miller (J) vs Mr Kane (A) - 4/15/2018 5:30:52 PM   
durnedwolf


Posts: 885
Joined: 5/23/2005
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: durnedwolf


quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs


quote:

ORIGINAL: durnedwolf

At Changsha he has the Heavy Urban terrain advantage too, which has a defensive value of x4... From page 195: "Fortifications enhance the defensive fire of ground units and also make defenders harder to hit; therefore, defenders are given some advantages in combat."

Some of the formites seem to think that just means you have to have four times the AV value in your stack. I think you still want more AV (I always like to have the biggest hammer) but you can suppress some of that terrain advantage by using bombardment, recon, and air support. Or you can try to surround the hex and starve them out but that takes forever and a day. In looking at the combat it looks like you have no tanks in your stack?

Umm - I wanted to add - if you attack the enemy airfields it causes damage and fixing the damage eats up supplies.

I had thought so but (IIRC) that is wrong as was somewhat recently clarified by Alfred. It is still important to do for two other reasons: a) a base must be at 0 damage before fortification building can be done, so keeping the base damaged will prevent forts being repaired, and b) some hits are 'airbase/port supply hits' and destroy a variable amount of supply directly. Attacking the airfield at Changsha every turn is a good idea.


Really? Section 9.4.2 (page 215) says that "Construction work consumes supplies, and if a base is low on supplies, construction effort will slow accordingly." Can you toss me a link to Alfred's post? Alfred is normally spot on so I'd definitely like to read his thoughts on this subject.

Construction work is not repair work.


True but Section 9.4.2 is called "Base Construction and Repair" and it states clearly in that section that engineers are used both for construction and repair. I'm not trying to be a dick; If I'm wrong I just want to know the correct process.


_____________________________


DW

I try to live by two words - tenacity and gratitude. Tenacity gets me where I want to go and gratitude ensures I'm not angry along the way. - Henry Winkler.

The great aim of education is not knowledge but action. - Herbert Spencer

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 126
RE: Miller (J) vs Mr Kane (A) - 4/15/2018 5:32:51 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: durnedwolf

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs


quote:

ORIGINAL: durnedwolf

At Changsha he has the Heavy Urban terrain advantage too, which has a defensive value of x4... From page 195: "Fortifications enhance the defensive fire of ground units and also make defenders harder to hit; therefore, defenders are given some advantages in combat."

Some of the formites seem to think that just means you have to have four times the AV value in your stack. I think you still want more AV (I always like to have the biggest hammer) but you can suppress some of that terrain advantage by using bombardment, recon, and air support. Or you can try to surround the hex and starve them out but that takes forever and a day. In looking at the combat it looks like you have no tanks in your stack?

Umm - I wanted to add - if you attack the enemy airfields it causes damage and fixing the damage eats up supplies.

I had thought so but (IIRC) that is wrong as was somewhat recently clarified by Alfred. It is still important to do for two other reasons: a) a base must be at 0 damage before fortification building can be done, so keeping the base damaged will prevent forts being repaired, and b) some hits are 'airbase/port supply hits' and destroy a variable amount of supply directly. Attacking the airfield at Changsha every turn is a good idea.


Really? Section 9.4.2 (page 215) says that "Construction work consumes supplies, and if a base is low on supplies, construction effort will slow accordingly." Can you toss me a link to Alfred's post? Alfred is normally spot on so I'd definitely like to read his thoughts on this subject.

Are you referring to this thread? http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=3805270 (I so hate this search engine... )


"Construction" yes, but not repair.

I don't think that's the thread, feels like it was more recent. It's one of those cases where I had it wrong basically forever, maybe because I feel repairs should consume supply. Sorry I don't have a link, I would have to search.

_____________________________


(in reply to durnedwolf)
Post #: 127
RE: Miller (J) vs Mr Kane (A) - 4/15/2018 5:40:44 PM   
Miller


Posts: 2226
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline
1st Mar 42

Well, I'm crying:

Ground combat at Changsha (82,52)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 104446 troops, 1070 guns, 767 vehicles, Assault Value = 3237

Defending force 83956 troops, 447 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 2153

Japanese adjusted assault: 3351

Allied adjusted defense: 3377

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 2 (fort level 0)

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), leaders(+)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
9079 casualties reported
Squads: 106 destroyed, 572 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 63 disabled
Engineers: 2 destroyed, 122 disabled
Guns lost 72 (2 destroyed, 70 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
7791 casualties reported
Squads: 237 destroyed, 250 disabled
Non Combat: 13 destroyed, 179 disabled
Engineers: 15 destroyed, 55 disabled
Guns lost 47 (1 destroyed, 46 disabled)

Assaulting units:
3rd Division
40th Division
9th Tank Regiment
10th Tank Regiment
23rd Tank Regiment
13th Division
6th Division
32nd Division
36th Division
58th Division
15th Division
8th Division
11th Tank Regiment
12th Army
15th Ind.Medium Field Artillery Regiment
14th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
2nd Ind. Mountain Gun Regiment
51st Ind.Mtn.Gun Battalion
11th Army
52nd Ind.Mtn.Gun Battalion

Defending units:
53rd Chinese Corps
10th Chinese Corps
87th Chinese Corps
99th Chinese Corps
74th Chinese Corps
20th Chinese Corps
72nd Chinese Corps
6th Construction Regiment
79th Chinese Corps
59th Chinese Corps
5th Construction Regiment
19th Group Army
17th Chinese Base Force
27th Group Army
6th War Area
9th War Area
29th Group Army
18th Chinese Base Force

I'm running out of ideas now. I notice my tank units take no losses, perhaps I should just attack with them to get his disruption up then attack with the rest the day after? Opinions?

Elsewhere in Java I take Surabaya and Malang with a split up division then order the div to reform and move back up to Batavia to assist in taking Bandoeng. I've ordered another deliberate attack there this turn I just hope it does not turn into another Changsha. I have less than one month of the amphibious bonus left and I still have to take eastern Borneo, the Celebes, Timor and PNG, then begin the tedious task of back filling all the southern PI bases...

(in reply to Miller)
Post #: 128
RE: Miller (J) vs Mr Kane (A) - 4/15/2018 5:51:54 PM   
durnedwolf


Posts: 885
Joined: 5/23/2005
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs


quote:

ORIGINAL: durnedwolf

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs


quote:

ORIGINAL: durnedwolf

At Changsha he has the Heavy Urban terrain advantage too, which has a defensive value of x4... From page 195: "Fortifications enhance the defensive fire of ground units and also make defenders harder to hit; therefore, defenders are given some advantages in combat."

Some of the formites seem to think that just means you have to have four times the AV value in your stack. I think you still want more AV (I always like to have the biggest hammer) but you can suppress some of that terrain advantage by using bombardment, recon, and air support. Or you can try to surround the hex and starve them out but that takes forever and a day. In looking at the combat it looks like you have no tanks in your stack?

Umm - I wanted to add - if you attack the enemy airfields it causes damage and fixing the damage eats up supplies.

I had thought so but (IIRC) that is wrong as was somewhat recently clarified by Alfred. It is still important to do for two other reasons: a) a base must be at 0 damage before fortification building can be done, so keeping the base damaged will prevent forts being repaired, and b) some hits are 'airbase/port supply hits' and destroy a variable amount of supply directly. Attacking the airfield at Changsha every turn is a good idea.


Really? Section 9.4.2 (page 215) says that "Construction work consumes supplies, and if a base is low on supplies, construction effort will slow accordingly." Can you toss me a link to Alfred's post? Alfred is normally spot on so I'd definitely like to read his thoughts on this subject.

Are you referring to this thread? http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=3805270 (I so hate this search engine... )


"Construction" yes, but not repair.

I don't think that's the thread, feels like it was more recent. It's one of those cases where I had it wrong basically forever, maybe because I feel repairs should consume supply. Sorry I don't have a link, I would have to search.


I found what you are talking about from his Logistics paper. Thanks for the heads up; I've been wrong for a long time and that's just not right... lol

(D.5) Base facilities

The repair of base facilities (airfield and port) does not cost supply. However the construction of base facilities (airfield, port and forts) does consume supply. The supply is not actually consumed by the facility but by the engineers engaged in the construction work.

Engineers must be in combat mode to build base facilities. Whilst working, each engineer (an engineer vehicle = 5 engineers) consumes 1 supply point each 12 hours. Hence if a player has 100 engineers building, they will consume 200 supply points daily, an amount which is equivalent to approximately 4 infantry divisions.

Here's the link: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=2878790



_____________________________


DW

I try to live by two words - tenacity and gratitude. Tenacity gets me where I want to go and gratitude ensures I'm not angry along the way. - Henry Winkler.

The great aim of education is not knowledge but action. - Herbert Spencer

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 129
RE: Miller (J) vs Mr Kane (A) - 4/15/2018 5:59:11 PM   
durnedwolf


Posts: 885
Joined: 5/23/2005
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller

1st Mar 42

Well, I'm crying:

Ground combat at Changsha (82,52)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 104446 troops, 1070 guns, 767 vehicles, Assault Value = 3237

Defending force 83956 troops, 447 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 2153

Japanese adjusted assault: 3351

Allied adjusted defense: 3377

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 2 (fort level 0)

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), leaders(+)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
9079 casualties reported
Squads: 106 destroyed, 572 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 63 disabled
Engineers: 2 destroyed, 122 disabled
Guns lost 72 (2 destroyed, 70 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
7791 casualties reported
Squads: 237 destroyed, 250 disabled
Non Combat: 13 destroyed, 179 disabled
Engineers: 15 destroyed, 55 disabled
Guns lost 47 (1 destroyed, 46 disabled)

Assaulting units:
3rd Division
40th Division
9th Tank Regiment
10th Tank Regiment
23rd Tank Regiment
13th Division
6th Division
32nd Division
36th Division
58th Division
15th Division
8th Division
11th Tank Regiment
12th Army
15th Ind.Medium Field Artillery Regiment
14th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
2nd Ind. Mountain Gun Regiment
51st Ind.Mtn.Gun Battalion
11th Army
52nd Ind.Mtn.Gun Battalion

Defending units:
53rd Chinese Corps
10th Chinese Corps
87th Chinese Corps
99th Chinese Corps
74th Chinese Corps
20th Chinese Corps
72nd Chinese Corps
6th Construction Regiment
79th Chinese Corps
59th Chinese Corps
5th Construction Regiment
19th Group Army
17th Chinese Base Force
27th Group Army
6th War Area
9th War Area
29th Group Army
18th Chinese Base Force

I'm running out of ideas now. I notice my tank units take no losses, perhaps I should just attack with them to get his disruption up then attack with the rest the day after? Opinions?

Elsewhere in Java I take Surabaya and Malang with a split up division then order the div to reform and move back up to Batavia to assist in taking Bandoeng. I've ordered another deliberate attack there this turn I just hope it does not turn into another Changsha. I have less than one month of the amphibious bonus left and I still have to take eastern Borneo, the Celebes, Timor and PNG, then begin the tedious task of back filling all the southern PI bases...


Any bonuses from HQ planning? How are supplies for your stack? You can fly in extra supplies with Transports.

_____________________________


DW

I try to live by two words - tenacity and gratitude. Tenacity gets me where I want to go and gratitude ensures I'm not angry along the way. - Henry Winkler.

The great aim of education is not knowledge but action. - Herbert Spencer

(in reply to Miller)
Post #: 130
RE: Miller (J) vs Mr Kane (A) - 4/15/2018 6:05:55 PM   
fabertong


Posts: 4546
Joined: 2/25/2004
From: Bristol, England, U.K.
Status: offline
I'm not sure you should be crying......

You missed 1-1 by a hair...

In China if the allies defend in Cities...... I'm always happy.

Japan has supply and air power......and time....don't worry about false deadlines.

Train air groups and kill Chinese.....

(in reply to durnedwolf)
Post #: 131
RE: Miller (J) vs Mr Kane (A) - 4/15/2018 6:15:31 PM   
durnedwolf


Posts: 885
Joined: 5/23/2005
From: USA
Status: offline
Mmmm - Fabertong is right. If you had done a shock attack you'd have probably taken the hex. And you killed better than 2:1 his squads. I'd rest a bit, make sure supplies are good and disruption drops down. and then give it a shock attack.

_____________________________


DW

I try to live by two words - tenacity and gratitude. Tenacity gets me where I want to go and gratitude ensures I'm not angry along the way. - Henry Winkler.

The great aim of education is not knowledge but action. - Herbert Spencer

(in reply to Miller)
Post #: 132
RE: Miller (J) vs Mr Kane (A) - 4/15/2018 6:51:41 PM   
Miller


Posts: 2226
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: fabertong

I'm not sure you should be crying......

You missed 1-1 by a hair...

In China if the allies defend in Cities...... I'm always happy.

Japan has supply and air power......and time....don't worry about false deadlines.

Train air groups and kill Chinese.....


Hi David hope you are well. Would 1:1 have made any difference? I thought I would need 2:1 to kick him out? And with this being scn 1 with pdu off I don't have that much air power at the moment, about 80% of my army 2E are employed in China.

(in reply to fabertong)
Post #: 133
RE: Miller (J) vs Mr Kane (A) - 4/15/2018 6:54:48 PM   
Miller


Posts: 2226
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline
2nd Mar 42

My attack at Bandoeng fails but he is showing (-) for supply so that siege should end soon. As an experiment I have ordered an attack there with just the tank unit present to see how it plays out, if its favourable it might be worth trying it at Changsha...

(in reply to Miller)
Post #: 134
RE: Miller (J) vs Mr Kane (A) - 4/15/2018 6:59:26 PM   
Mike McCreery


Posts: 4232
Joined: 6/29/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller

2nd Mar 42

My attack at Bandoeng fails but he is showing (-) for supply so that siege should end soon. As an experiment I have ordered an attack there with just the tank unit present to see how it plays out, if its favourable it might be worth trying it at Changsha...


In China there is no defense against Japanese tanks. On the flip side, there is not much defense on the Japanese side either.

_____________________________


(in reply to Miller)
Post #: 135
RE: Miller (J) vs Mr Kane (A) - 4/15/2018 7:18:29 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: durnedwolf


quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs


quote:

ORIGINAL: durnedwolf

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs


quote:

ORIGINAL: durnedwolf

At Changsha he has the Heavy Urban terrain advantage too, which has a defensive value of x4... From page 195: "Fortifications enhance the defensive fire of ground units and also make defenders harder to hit; therefore, defenders are given some advantages in combat."

Some of the formites seem to think that just means you have to have four times the AV value in your stack. I think you still want more AV (I always like to have the biggest hammer) but you can suppress some of that terrain advantage by using bombardment, recon, and air support. Or you can try to surround the hex and starve them out but that takes forever and a day. In looking at the combat it looks like you have no tanks in your stack?

Umm - I wanted to add - if you attack the enemy airfields it causes damage and fixing the damage eats up supplies.

I had thought so but (IIRC) that is wrong as was somewhat recently clarified by Alfred. It is still important to do for two other reasons: a) a base must be at 0 damage before fortification building can be done, so keeping the base damaged will prevent forts being repaired, and b) some hits are 'airbase/port supply hits' and destroy a variable amount of supply directly. Attacking the airfield at Changsha every turn is a good idea.


Really? Section 9.4.2 (page 215) says that "Construction work consumes supplies, and if a base is low on supplies, construction effort will slow accordingly." Can you toss me a link to Alfred's post? Alfred is normally spot on so I'd definitely like to read his thoughts on this subject.

Are you referring to this thread? http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=3805270 (I so hate this search engine... )


"Construction" yes, but not repair.

I don't think that's the thread, feels like it was more recent. It's one of those cases where I had it wrong basically forever, maybe because I feel repairs should consume supply. Sorry I don't have a link, I would have to search.


I found what you are talking about from his Logistics paper. Thanks for the heads up; I've been wrong for a long time and that's just not right... lol

(D.5) Base facilities

The repair of base facilities (airfield and port) does not cost supply. However the construction of base facilities (airfield, port and forts) does consume supply. The supply is not actually consumed by the facility but by the engineers engaged in the construction work.

Engineers must be in combat mode to build base facilities. Whilst working, each engineer (an engineer vehicle = 5 engineers) consumes 1 supply point each 12 hours. Hence if a player has 100 engineers building, they will consume 200 supply points daily, an amount which is equivalent to approximately 4 infantry divisions.

Here's the link: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=2878790



Thanks. Alfred obviously linked to that in the thread where he noted my mistaken impression, but I finally bookmarked that thing.

_____________________________


(in reply to durnedwolf)
Post #: 136
RE: Miller (J) vs Mr Kane (A) - 4/16/2018 8:47:49 AM   
adarbrauner

 

Posts: 1496
Joined: 11/3/2016
From: Zichron Yaaqov, Israel; Before, Treviso, Italy
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: durnedwolf



I found what you are talking about from his Logistics paper. Thanks for the heads up; I've been wrong for a long time and that's just not right... lol

(D.5) Base facilities

The repair of base facilities (airfield and port) does not cost supply. However the construction of base facilities (airfield, port and forts) does consume supply. The supply is not actually consumed by the facility but by the engineers engaged in the construction work.

Engineers must be in combat mode to build base facilities. Whilst working, each engineer (an engineer vehicle = 5 engineers) consumes 1 supply point each 12 hours. Hence if a player has 100 engineers building, they will consume 200 supply points daily, an amount which is equivalent to approximately 4 infantry divisions.

Here's the link: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=2878790





In my experience, the type of terrain influences, as it should be, the construction process, meaning a more difficult terrain, and maybe even extreme weather conditions, slow the construction pace - thus indirectly the supply consumption I guess;

(in reply to durnedwolf)
Post #: 137
RE: Miller (J) vs Mr Kane (A) - 4/16/2018 4:34:50 PM   
zuluhour


Posts: 5244
Joined: 1/20/2011
From: Maryland
Status: offline
I see this as a Japanese victory, a battle won. While your disablements are high, you can rotate
fresh troops in and out. I doubt China can. For me the measure of victory was in squads destroyed.
Winning ain't always cheap.

(in reply to Miller)
Post #: 138
RE: Miller (J) vs Mr Kane (A) - 4/16/2018 5:33:23 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
If you do attack with tanks only, make sure all your units bombard to support the attack.

Another option is to shock with tanks, deliberate attack with infantry, bombard with artillery. Keep bombing and bombarding to keep the Chinese disrupted and forts suppressed. This would most likely be my choice after resting for 2-3 days.

Important information not included is your disruption and fatigue and unit disablements so YMMV.

PS: I doublechecked and my version of stock, latest beta, doesn't include Symons air mod.





< Message edited by Lowpe -- 4/16/2018 5:34:02 PM >

(in reply to zuluhour)
Post #: 139
RE: Miller (J) vs Mr Kane (A) - 4/16/2018 6:36:53 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline
I consider that to be a very good and acceptable Japanese attack. Without forts and his low experience and poor leadership, he will crack in a few turns and when he does crack and retreat his casualties will be very severe. This is how Japan wins in China. Once the Chinese start to crack their units do not recover and they have no ability to replace the massive guns and devices that they lose after a retreat. If the Japanese do it right by 1943 Chinese troops can't even benefit from the ample supply of infantry replacements as there is usually not enough supply anywhere to take replacements. As the Allies, I just hate playing the Chinese. Any good Japanese player is going to eat them for lunch.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 140
RE: Miller (J) vs Mr Kane (A) - 4/16/2018 6:37:52 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline
Nice to see you active and doing an AAR.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 141
RE: Miller (J) vs Mr Kane (A) - 4/16/2018 7:10:51 PM   
Miller


Posts: 2226
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline
3rd-6th Mar 42

Thanks for the input guys, keep it coming.

I try the tanks attack one turn, infantry the next at Changsha and get 1:1 odds but shreds a couple of my tank units in the process. He seems to be rotating in fresh corps to keep his AV up but surely he has to be running out of them soon?? Up in the north in Sian he now has 35 units there. I've moved my stack to the hex NE of there and am sending a low value art unit over the river on a kamikaze recon mission (yes it's rather cheesy but he will no doubt be doing the same later in the game).

In Java Bandoeng is clinging on but the next attack should finish the Dutch off. Elsewhere a nice little kill for I-15 one hex off San Francisco:

Sub attack near San Francisco at 217,71

Japanese Ships
SS I-15

Allied Ships
BB Arizona, Torpedo hits 3, on fire, heavy damage
BB Tennessee
BB California
DMS Zane
DMS Long
DMS Perry
DMS Dorsey
DMS Lamberton

Down she goes, although I think this is the only PH BB to go under so far....

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 142
RE: Miller (J) vs Mr Kane (A) - 4/17/2018 6:11:36 PM   
Miller


Posts: 2226
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline
7th-10th Mar 42

BANZAI

Ground combat at Changsha (82,52)

Japanese Shock attack

Attacking force 98269 troops, 982 guns, 808 vehicles, Assault Value = 2999

Defending force 77144 troops, 508 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 1640

Japanese adjusted assault: 5795

Allied adjusted defense: 1421

Japanese assault odds: 4 to 1 (fort level 0)

Japanese forces CAPTURE Changsha !!!

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

Japanese ground losses:
10586 casualties reported
Squads: 112 destroyed, 381 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 91 disabled
Engineers: 3 destroyed, 59 disabled
Guns lost 61 (1 destroyed, 60 disabled)
Vehicles lost 51 (1 destroyed, 50 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
22967 casualties reported
Squads: 1483 destroyed, 28 disabled
Non Combat: 1185 destroyed, 146 disabled
Engineers: 179 destroyed, 7 disabled
Guns lost 111 (79 destroyed, 32 disabled)
Units retreated 21

As an added bonus all his units retreat west into the clear hex of Siangtan rather than into the wood to the north west. My tanks are in pursuit and should cross the river next turn whilst his troops are hit from the air by 200 Sally's and Lilly's. This should also make his position untenable anywhere to the west and south and he will be forced to withdraw north. Meanwhile in the north at Sian the art unit crosses the river, does a bombardment that reveals an AV of 2600 there then retreats back out without a scratch! I have virtually the same AV in my stack to the NE so I think I will just wait it out for now and see how he reacts to the developments in the south.


BANZAI(2)

Ground combat at Bandoeng (50,100)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 65137 troops, 708 guns, 456 vehicles, Assault Value = 2093

Defending force 26874 troops, 333 guns, 164 vehicles, Assault Value = 440

Japanese adjusted assault: 2480

Allied adjusted defense: 787

Japanese assault odds: 3 to 1 (fort level 0)

Japanese forces CAPTURE Bandoeng !!!

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

Japanese ground losses:
1349 casualties reported
Squads: 6 destroyed, 136 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 16 disabled
Engineers: 2 destroyed, 27 disabled

Allied ground losses:
37841 casualties reported
Squads: 553 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 2291 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 206 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 449 (449 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Vehicles lost 239 (239 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Units destroyed 20

Four divisions are marching back to Batavia and will be re-assigned to my Borneo/Celebes/Timor invasions. I'm also going to take Darwin as well simply to deny it to him for as long as possible. With a bit of luck I should accomplish all this just before the amphibious bonus expires at the end of March.

Elsewhere in the PI my bombers are doing good work in keeping the airfield damaged at Clark and it looks like the 3 divs I have here already should be enough given time. I land another SNLF at Rabual to tip the balance and it falls. No sign of his navy or air force at all for a few weeks now.



< Message edited by Miller -- 4/17/2018 7:00:53 PM >

(in reply to Miller)
Post #: 143
RE: Miller (J) vs Mr Kane (A) - 4/17/2018 6:43:14 PM   
Lowpe


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

(in reply to Miller)
Post #: 144
RE: Miller (J) vs Mr Kane (A) - 4/17/2018 6:52:23 PM   
pws1225

 

Posts: 1166
Joined: 8/9/2010
From: Tate's Hell, Florida
Status: offline
Very nice!

(in reply to Miller)
Post #: 145
RE: Miller (J) vs Mr Kane (A) - 4/17/2018 7:00:10 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline
I used to play Miller when we were young and innocent. I don't believe he's quite so innocent these days.

(in reply to pws1225)
Post #: 146
RE: Miller (J) vs Mr Kane (A) - 4/17/2018 7:36:32 PM   
Miller


Posts: 2226
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I used to play Miller when we were young and innocent. I don't believe he's quite so innocent these days.


Or young

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 147
RE: Miller (J) vs Mr Kane (A) - 4/17/2018 7:41:50 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline
But we're still supple, right?

(in reply to Miller)
Post #: 148
RE: Miller (J) vs Mr Kane (A) - 4/17/2018 8:03:32 PM   
zuluhour


Posts: 5244
Joined: 1/20/2011
From: Maryland
Status: offline
I would suggest the gentleman from Georgia keep his hands to himself.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 149
RE: Miller (J) vs Mr Kane (A) - 4/17/2018 8:15:31 PM   
Miller


Posts: 2226
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

But we're still supple, right?



Wrong I would guess

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 150
Page:   <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Miller (J) vs Mr Kane (A) Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   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

1.594