modrow
Posts: 1100
Joined: 8/27/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Alfred
quote:
ORIGINAL: hartwig.modrow
quote:
ORIGINAL: witpqs
I disagree with your point that non-base/dot landings are bad. There are significant penalties to the landings units and as a result they are rarely done. I do suppose they (like anything) could be abused if tiny fractional units were used for them, but that would be a different issue on it's own. Obviously YMMV.
I think I recall testing this. Problem is that the penalties do not apply while invasion bonus is on IIRC.
Hartwig
hartwig.modrow,
You are considering only the irrelevant "penalties" and overlooking the relevant penalties. The Japanese unloading bonus is not dependent on location of the "beach".
1. Different unloading rates apply depending on whether one is unloading at
(a) an owned port, or
(b) elsewhere
In the case of (a) further differentiation is made on the basis of the Amphibious TF being either docked or undocked, with additional factors coming into consideration.
In the case of (b) the unloading rate is not dependent on the factors which affect unloading under (a). In general terms the unloading rate under (b) is primarily dependent on the type of ship and is faster than that achieved by the same ship type under (a).
2. The Japanese early war unloading bonus only applies to (1)(b) operations. As such there is no distinction made between landing at an Allied built up base, or an Allied dot base, or just an empty piece of real estate. The bonus provides a boost of 2x or 4.8x (dependent on the particular ship type involved) over the equivalent Allied ship type.
The real benefit derived by the Japanese player from the early war unloading bonus (which exists for only a limited time) is that Japan's historical shortage of real attack amphibious ships is temporarily rectified. Without this benefit the AI would not be able to come close to achieving the historical Japanese conquests and if truth be told many a human Japanese player would similarly fail with the consequential adverse impact on the chances of the game lasting much into 1943.
It is important to recognise that the Japanese early war unloading bonus falls far short of what is achievable permanently by the Allied player once the arrival of real attack amphibious ships starts in earnest in 1943.
3. Unloading rates from an Amphibious TF are never a relevant malus which needs to be taken into account when structuring a (1)(b) operation.
4. For (1)(b) operations, the relevant pros and cons of landing at an empty piece of real estate instead of landing at an enemy built up base/ dot base are
Pros
- can avoid immediate contact with enemy LCUs. In particular enemy static CD units which can separately inflict serious losses on both ships and the invading LCUs
- exposure to enemy minefields can be minimised both because the landing site probably does not have a sown minefield and if it does have one it will naturally decay much faster than one sown at an enemy base
Cons
- not all empty real estate allows the landing of LCUs
- depending on the terrain itself, the movement from the landing site to the actual enemy base allows for significant enemy reinforcements (both land and air units, and if necessary supply too) to be rushed to the target before the invaders arrive
- in many instances the presence of friendly LBA assets to support the marching LCUs will be limited or even non existent. In particular friendly land based fighters to provide CAP may be totally lacking. The only certain friendly air cover will be that from carriers and this in itself creates a problem for it ties friendly carriers down to the invasion location perhaps for weeks thereby exposing them to enemy LBA and naval air attack/naval combat plus the opportunity cost
- the overland march will subject the marchers to post landing additional fatigue and disruption. This is independent of any increase resulting from enemy air/naval bombardment. If marching through a malarial jungle this malus can become quite substantial, to the point that once they arrive at their destination they may require additional days to recover before attacking
- the initial organic supply landed with the LCUs will not cover the total time spent in marching to the destination. This means that the ships carrying supply must remain to regularly unload supply. They are therefore exposed to extended enemy action plus the opportunity cost. The additional fuel consumption is a particular concern to Japan.
- it will always take longer to conclude an invasion when the landing is adjacent to an enemy base rather than landing directly on the base. By the time the Allied player is in a position to regain territory, time is of the essence. For Japan the entire initial offensive is a race against time
Once the pros and cons are factored into the planning, it will be a rare situation where the ROI of landing at an empty piece of real estate is better than that from landing directly at the enemy base.
Alfred
Alfred,
thank you for the extensive analysis. As always, great stuff to read and think about - and for me also to test before I respond without knowing the facts for sure. I always appreciate your comments and learning from your pointing out my mistakes.
I did not do any in-depth analysis so far, because I am quite impartial to the subject (tit for tat + I agree it is not a wonderweapon, but still can be put to use effectively in the right circumstances) but have been at the receiving end of it in Fiji (133,160) and New Caledonia (113,157) (which may be some of the best places on map to pull this off for Japan, but which have not been on my invasion menu in the few instances I have played PBEM as Japan), and in both cases my impression (no doubt distorted by being at the receiving end rather than an impartial objective observer) was that it gave my opponent a better result than a direct invasion would have.
Also, I have no late war PBEM experience, so I did not consider such invasions as Allied so far. The example hex I chose is clearly not a suitable hex, but it is very convenient to set up the test for this hex with very little modification. On the other hand, hexes with major road to target in 1 hex distance may, especially where target is not connected to a rail system, be worth closer analysis.
Still, please allow me to mention two aspects to be factored into the equation (without intending to say it changes the outcome necessarily, but to be included in an anlysis IMHO):
1) the power of embedded supply should not be underestimated (Allied hit and run island invasions often rely on it quite successfully). If I unload one more day in the example I provided above (with adjusted date so invasion bonus with 1200 unload rate over beach [=2x AK/AP unload rate over beach or 4x AK/AP unload rate docked in a friendly port <4, and no port size restrictions apply], but indeed much smaller than 3000 of attack shipping; but compare both to port unload rates), you have 18k supplies embedded with (and marching automatically along with) the troops. As a matter of fact, the staying time of the amphib TF at a base and at a hex worth closer analysis as defined above is probably not that much different.
2) The main reason my impression when being at the receiving end of the non-base-invasion was that my opponents profited from the approach was that enemy avoided damage to his transports. This allowed my opponents to land, take the base, and moved on using essentially the same ships, or in other words, a much higher capability of predicting what shipping will be available for the follow-on invasion. I agree completely that IJ expansion is about quick expansion; thus an improved planning capability will help tremendously. Still said differently, quoting Moltke the Elder"no battle plan ever survives contact with the enemy" - so conversely avoiding contact with the enemy by landing where he is not helps planning and, accordingly, contribute to a smoother expanison.
You are definitely right in that there are many factors to be considered for a proper analysis when and where a non-base invasion leads to an adavantage and there are many many situations where it does not. But my current impression is that there are occasions/locations/situations where it does.
Just my 2cts - feel free to criticize, it is beneficial.
Hartwig
|
Printable Version
RE: Invasion USA!! Dontra85 (J) vs NY59Giants (A) - 
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