Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alamander


New Zealand has major advantages and major disadvantages to a move on Australia or India. The major disadvantages are that the allies get the 2nd New Zealand divion with a convoy of replacements for the division. The other disadvantage is the fuel cost. Moving a large force that far south is hard on fuel reserves.

The major advantage is that it is very doable and will net a good VP tally in destroyed devices even if no U.S. reinforcements are there. What is more, the major base, Auckland is a clear terrain hex, so no major siege and the consequent supply drain is needed. The other major advantage is that the Pacific is now completely cutoff. In my game, Mike has only been able to move 2 or 3 convoys across the Pacific since early February, and I have spotted them all, mostly with subs south of New Zealand. Now even that will be near impossible without air cover. I have a search-plane net that runs from the Kuriles to the southern edge of the map without interruption. Such a blockade is the most that can be done to force the allies to deploy their CVs during the window when Japan can fight a naval air battle with the hope of inflicting more damage than they receive.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alamander

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesertWolf101


Remind me again Alamander, are you playing Scenrio 1 or 2?

DBB-B, a scenario 1 variant, designed to be slightly more historically accurate and to slow down the pace of the game. There major reductions to naval and air support and engineers: especially the Japanese support units. The IJN is also less effective, losing many of their dual-purpose guns on DDs and elsewhere for YT guns, but several plane types are advanced a couple months to the date when the prototypes were completed instead of when the planes entered mass production. So, I am playing with the same constraints you are along with some additional constraints on base construction and support. In fact, support has been the thing that has slowed me down more than anything.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alamander


New Zealand has major advantages and major disadvantages to a move on Australia or India. The major disadvantages are that the allies get the 2nd New Zealand divion with a convoy of replacements for the division. The other disadvantage is the fuel cost. Moving a large force that far south is hard on fuel reserves.

The major advantage is that it is very doable and will net a good VP tally in destroyed devices even if no U.S. reinforcements are there. What is more, the major base, Auckland is a clear terrain hex, so no major siege and the consequent supply drain is needed. The other major advantage is that the Pacific is now completely cutoff. In my game, Mike has only been able to move 2 or 3 convoys across the Pacific since early February, and I have spotted them all, mostly with subs south of New Zealand. Now even that will be near impossible without air cover. I have a search-plane net that runs from the Kuriles to the southern edge of the map without interruption. Such a blockade is the most that can be done to force the allies to deploy their CVs during the window when Japan can fight a naval air battle with the hope of inflicting more damage than they receive.

In what you describe there will be absolutely no fuel in NZ.

It makes great sense in an AV game and is very well thought out. If you can't get AV, I think you are seriously over extended, especially if the Allies go for the throat. But you are significantly better off than when I went for San Diego.

How are you covering Perth and southern Oz ports from Capetown? Perth can usually be handled, but all those southern ports are tougher.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

In what you describe there will be absolutely no fuel in NZ.

It makes great sense in an AV game and is very well thought out. If you can't get AV, I think you are seriously over extended, especially if the Allies go for the throat. But you are significantly better off than when I went for San Diego.

How are you covering Perth and southern Oz ports from Capetown? Perth can usually be handled, but all those southern ports are tougher.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesertWolf101

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alamander


New Zealand has major advantages and major disadvantages to a move on Australia or India. The major disadvantages are that the allies get the 2nd New Zealand divion with a convoy of replacements for the division. The other disadvantage is the fuel cost. Moving a large force that far south is hard on fuel reserves.

The major advantage is that it is very doable and will net a good VP tally in destroyed devices even if no U.S. reinforcements are there. What is more, the major base, Auckland is a clear terrain hex, so no major siege and the consequent supply drain is needed. The other major advantage is that the Pacific is now completely cutoff. In my game, Mike has only been able to move 2 or 3 convoys across the Pacific since early February, and I have spotted them all, mostly with subs south of New Zealand. Now even that will be near impossible without air cover. I have a search-plane net that runs from the Kuriles to the southern edge of the map without interruption. Such a blockade is the most that can be done to force the allies to deploy their CVs during the window when Japan can fight a naval air battle with the hope of inflicting more damage than they receive.

In what you describe there will be absolutely no fuel in NZ.

It makes great sense in an AV game and is very well thought out. If you can't get AV, I think you are seriously over extended, especially if the Allies go for the throat. But you are significantly better off than when I went for San Diego.

How are you covering Perth and southern Oz ports from Capetown? Perth can usually be handled, but all those southern ports are tougher.

You went for San Diego??? Is there an AAR about that?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesertWolf101

You should do an AAR so I can follow along with your progress. I think I am only a few months behind your game.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alamander

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesertWolf101

You should do an AAR so I can follow along with your progress. I think I am only a few months behind your game.

Mike and I are flipping 3 turns a day, so I don't have time to do an AAR. We are in early June. I will keep you posted on the major events in our game that may be pertinent to your thinking and your game in your AAR, so that you can benefit from whatever experience I gain using a similar strategy.

For the moment, the best that I can suggest is to be prepared for a major battle for air superiority over Burma. Any advance there is difficult and costly without air superiority, and Mike is really pressing me there with massive 200+ plane fighter sweeps and 150 bombers hitting any target of opportunity and making the development of airfields north of Mandalay difficult.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Careful with those mixed class battleship bombardments. They tend to dither if you aren't careful.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesertWolf101


Thanks, will do. Does that happen even when they have the same max/cruise speed?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alamander

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesertWolf101


Thanks, will do. Does that happen even when they have the same max/cruise speed?

I don't think it has much to do with the class of ship as it does with TF commander aggressiveness and with air superiority. Every turn, at the beginning of the resolution, you will see a phase in which the computer "checks for air superiority." It determines air superiority for various regions of the map (how this works I am not sure), but this seems to affect TF behavior and sometimes the behavior of your air groups. TFs tend to reroute if given discretion to do so (on "safe" or "safer" routing), bombardment TFs tend to stop short of their targets, and your bombers, if in groups with less agressive commanders, tend not to fly unless well escorted. The best practice for bombardment groups operating near a heavy enemy air presence is to set them to the "absolute" threshold for threat and to "direct" for routing.

Of course, care must be taken, because these settings will also leave them vulnerable to enemy surface groups that may engage them after the bombardment run or to bombers coming from a vector and base that you did not anticipate but that the AI commander may have anticipated with less aggressive settings.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alamander

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesertWolf101


Thanks, will do. Does that happen even when they have the same max/cruise speed?

I don't think it has much to do with the class of ship as it does with TF commander aggressiveness and with air superiority. Every turn, at the beginning of the resolution, you will see a phase in which the computer "checks for air superiority." It determines air superiority for various regions of the map (how this works I am not sure), but this seems to affect TF behavior and sometimes the behavior of your air groups. TFs tend to reroute if given discretion to do so (on "safe" or "safer" routing), bombardment TFs tend to stop short of their targets, and your bombers, if in groups with less agressive commanders, tend not to fly unless well escorted. The best practice for bombardment groups operating near a heavy enemy air presence is to set them to the "absolute" threshold for threat and to "direct" for routing.

Of course, care must be taken, because these settings will also leave them vulnerable to enemy surface groups that may engage them after the bombardment run or to bombers coming from a vector and base that you did not anticipate but that the AI commander may have anticipated with less aggressive settings.

Yes, all that is important, but I kind of assumed most of that is being done....there is a wide variance in IJN battleship fuel usage per hex (been a long time since I looked at it) & that is multiplied because the bombardment task forces will jump to flank speed -- and depending where you set your home port and your fuel stocks is I think a prime hidden reason why bombardment fleets dither even with aggressive leaders, direct absolute engaged.

BTW, it is not just perceived aerial threats that cause a variance in task force routing (depending upon tf settings).

PS: Just looked it up, they range from 16.5 fuel/hex per day to 31.34. See 6.2.13 the last paragraph spells it out in the manual -- basically fuel concerns over ride all Task Force switches.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesertWolf101

February 14, 1942

Northern Australia

The Japanese battleship force sprinted towards Townsville, arriving in the hex and setting up for a daytime bombardment. Before they opened up with their guns however, waves of escorted Banshee bombers came in over the force. During the morning and afternoon, the dive-bombers carried out 71 attacks, dropping their payloads on the mighty ships and scoring 14 1,000-pound bomb hits in the process.

Fortunately, the giants’ deck armor was strong enough to handle the American semi-armor piercing bombs, none of which penetrated the battleships. The most badly hit, BB Nagato, had only 10 system damage, and that included wear and tear from the sprint towards Townsville.

Furious over being subjected to the aerial storm, the Japanese warships opened up at Townsville at the end of the turn with a devastating barrage, destroying over 50 Allied aircraft including some 20 P-40E fighters, around 10 of the Banshees that just attacked them, approximately 15 Catalinas, and almost ten Wirraways.

China

Japanese troops storm and take Hengyang, further tightening the cordon around Changsha.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesertWolf101

February 14, 1942

Northern Australia

The Japanese battleship force sprinted towards Townsville, arriving in the hex and setting up for a daytime bombardment. Before they opened up with their guns however, waves of escorted Banshee bombers came in over the force. During the morning and afternoon, the dive-bombers carried out 71 attacks, dropping their payloads on the mighty ships and scoring 14 1,000-pound bomb hits in the process.

Fortunately, the giants’ deck armor was strong enough to handle the American semi-armor piercing bombs, none of which penetrated the battleships. The most badly hit, BB Nagato, had only 10 system damage, and that included wear and tear from the sprint towards Townsville.

Furious over being subjected to the aerial storm, the Japanese warships opened up at Townsville at the end of the turn with a devastating barrage, destroying over 50 Allied aircraft including some 20 P-40E fighters, around 10 of the Banshees that just attacked them, approximately 15 Catalinas, and almost ten Wirraways.

China

Japanese troops storm and take Hengyang, further tightening the cordon around Changsha.

Yikes. The Bashees can be fearful if the Allies can get some decent trained pilots in them quickly. Even so, 17 hits is impressive.

I'd check the weapons on those BB's just to be sure. There might be a main gun or (more likely) some secondaries and AA that might need glued back on!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Curious did you have remain on station selected for the bombardment TF? Did I miss that?

Did you have daytime recon from the bombardment TF?